The purpose of comparing and contrasting Google’s Bike-There feature with other online bike mapping applications is to provide an exhaustive overview of the bike mapping options available online, and hopefully generate ideas and comments that will help improve those applications.   In general, the overall purpose of our bike mapping component of Utility Cycling is to help you find better ways to commute by bike, run errands by bike, get around by bike, and generally utilize your bike.  And why do all of this?  Well, it is imperative that people who take up cycling for commuting or other utility cycling practices know where they are going.  People often fear cycling because they fear the unknown (especially the unknown of not knowing where you are going when you don’t have a good map or route).  Therefore, since we want more people to take up cycling for various utility purposes, we are going to have to show them where to go.  Literally.  So bike mapping will continue to be a growing area for many years to come. (Header image credit: NYC Bike Maps).

Ride the City

Ride the City is an online mapping application – much like GoogleMaps or MapQuest – that helps you find a good route from point A to point B.  The main difference from most online route mapping tools is that Ride the City thinks like a cyclist and generates a route for you that avoids highways, busy streets, and other situations that are not conducive to bike riding.  Much like Google’s Bike-There, Ride the City sends its users on routes that are bike-friendly with bike lanes, paths, and other bike infrastructure.

When you enter your from destination and your to destination into Ride the City, you are given the option to select from three different route types: safer route, safe route, and direct route.  I must admit that I am hung up a little on their choice of the words safer, safe, and direct, as I don’t necessarily think that a direct route can’t also be a safe route, depending on where you are, of course, but that’s a minor detail on the verbiage.  It’s not that they are implying that the direct routes they tool generates are not safe, they just have less bike infrastructure, but it still gives a user some sense of risk (possible false, as there can be risks on bike paths and regular roads alike) when he or she chooses direct over one of the safe or safer options.  How about most bike infrastructure, more bike infrastructure, and some bike infrastructure?  Wow…that’s a mouthful…perhaps not.

Anyhow, verbiage aside, the route that is generated is really helpful.  I was recently in San Diego ogling over pedicabs, among other things, and I did a fair bit of riding while I was there.  I used Ride the City to generate a route from my hotel to the convention center.  The route that it generated was very helpful, as I found San Diego to be a rather confusing city to navigate.  Although San Diego has a great Regional Bike Map, it can be difficult to choose a good route using a static map, so it was very convenient to have some input as to the best route from a dynamic system.

The dynamic nature of Ride the City is not too much different from Google’s Bike-There feature in the sense that it provides a bike friendly route using a variety of input data sources and a general paradigm of what makes a good bike route built into the algorithm that generates the route.  However, Ride the City has some cool features that Google’s Bike-There does not.  One thing I really liked was the route summary.  Not only do you get the total distance, time estimate, and elevation gain, but you also get step-by-step directions with information about the bike infrastructure (ie. this is a bike path or this has a bike lane or a caution sign on bad roads that the route could not avoid).

With Google’s Bike-There route, you get three different options, as well (although they are not classed in any way other than total distance and estimated time), but the route summary looks the same as the driving directions with no special information about the kind of road or path you might be on at a given time.

When you create an account with Ride the City you are given the option to set a default city, which I’d imagine is quite useful if you live and work in one of the cities that the tool is available for.  However, it’s very easy to change between cities, as well.  You can also save routes and preferences in your account, as well as rate routes and provide input on the routes that the tool generates.  As with Google’s Bike-There feature and Open Street Maps, it seems that user input is one of the best ways to improve the system.

Ride the City is currently only offered in Austin, Boston, Chicago, DC Metro, Louisville, New York City, San Diego, San Francisco, Seattle, and Toronto.  However, according to their FAQ, they have plans to expand to other cities as quickly as possible.  If you have a burning desire to have Ride the City in your town, they encourage you to contact them.

In general, I found Ride the City more enjoyable to use than Google’s Bike-There, mainly because it is specifically tailored to cycling, whereas with Google’s Bike-There, cycling is one component of a larger Google Map system and not their entire focus.  What does seem to be conclusive between all three applications reviewed thus far – Google’s Bike-There, Open Street Map, and Ride the City – is that user input is key to improving these systems.  Local riding knowledge (let’s call it LRK) is really important in the world of bike mapping.  So please share your input whenever you can!

Nonetheless, the purpose of this series is to discuss some of the advantages and disadvantages of Google’s current Bike-There feature; to compare and contrast Google’s feature with other online bike mapping tools; and to help you find the best options for getting around by bike.  Therefore, today’s post will compare and contrast the Google Bike-There feature with OpenStreetMap, which is an open-source, free, editable online mapping service.  Future posts in this series will compare and contrast Google’s Bike-There feature with other online bike mapping tools, for example Ride the City and others.  Finally, I will do a test run with the different options to find a route in the same city to compare and contrast the results.  In the end, we hope to have provided a comprehensive overview of your online bike mapping options.

Online Bike Mapping Options

First, a bit about online bike mapping.  Not all online bike mapping tools are created equal.  Some sites allow you to add and edit your own data, as well as view other users’ data, while other sites spit out routes for you based on your to and from locations.  Additionally, some sites have more of a sport or recreational cycling focus, such as MapMyRide, giving you information about popular routes for training, while others are more neutral in terms of the route options.

Thus far, Google’s new Bike-There feature is definitely one of the most comprehensive options available online, as many of the online bike mapping sites are only available in very limited places.  At the same time, many city or county governments in the U.S. have GIS (geographic information system) divisions who have developed bike route layers and maps for the local area, which can provide great insight at the local level, as well.  For example, Tucson, Arizona, has a great local bike map.  With all of the options from local government to Google, it is possible to piece together information about what routes to take by bike, but wouldn’t it be great if you had all of that useful information in one place?

OpenStreetMap

OpenStreetMap solves the problem of having to look in multiple places for route information – to some degree.  OpenStreetMap is a free, editable map of the entire world.  What separates OpenStreetMap from Google Maps, MapQuest, or other similar online mapping tools is that it is dynamic, user-oriented, and transparent.  Perhaps the OpenStreetMap Wiki sums it up best:

OpenStreetMap creates and provides free geographic data such as street maps to anyone who wants them.  The project was started because most maps you think of as free actually have legal or technical restrictions on their use, holding back people from using them in creative, productive, or unexpected ways.

The basic problem that OpenStreeMap is trying to overcome is the capitalist one.  Yes, it seems like knowledge about where things are, where roads go, etc. should be free and available to all, but it’s not.  This kind of knowledge is owned by someone, licensed by someone, etc., including all of the maps you get from Google.  Therefore, OpenStreetMap is open source, wiki-style project that is owned by everyone.  Yes, this does mean that there may be accuracy issues, but hopefully I am not the first person to tell you that all maps have accuracy issues.  And some maps even have errors placed in them on purpose.  Maps are indeed human constructions and therefore, can lie and mislead.

OpenStreetMap gets some of its map data from free government resources, such as TIGER, in the U.S.  The rest of the map data comes from users around the world who contribute to the database through a variety of different methods.  You can learn more about where OpenStreetMap gets their data, their views on mapping, and much, much more at their FAQ.

With regard to cycling, OpenStreetMap allows each individual cyclist to edit or view data based on his or her riding preferences.  One is not limited to avoiding major intersections, like Google’s current Bike-There feature does, for example, and instead, one can choose a route based more on personal preferences.  This is limited however, by lack of elevation and terrain information, as this kind of map data is often expensive to obtain or copyrighted, and thus, doesn’t really fit with the OpenStreetMap model.  Nonetheless, the bike routes that one gets from OpenStreetMap are not inherently limited by the algorithm that generates them, rather, they are limited by the users.  There are indeed trade-offs to both.

Additionally, a useful cycling-focused spin-off of OpenStreetMap is OpenCycleMap, which is somewhat limited in scope at this time.

In general, OpenStreetMap is a great open source option, which allows for much greater flexibility and transparency than Google’s Bike-There feature.  At the same time, Google’s feature does allow for very quick generation of routes when you really need to know how to get somewhere by bicycle quickly.

Behind the Scenes – How Google’s Bike Maps Work

The push to get Google to incorporate bike directions into Google Maps has been going strong for quite some time now, but Google reports that adding such directions presented quite the engineering challenge.  Google uses a few key features to develop the algorithm that generates a bike route, using the already-existing network of streets in their mapping system, which are summarized below.

1. Bike Trails – These show in dark green when you generate a Bike-There map.  Google worked directly with the Rails-to-Trails Conservancy to find as many trails to incorporate as possible.  The algorithm is weighted to send cyclists on trails as much as possible, as long as it doesn’t send them too far out of the way.
2. Bike Lanes – Google has information about dedicated bike lanes for 150 U.S. cities, which they used to build into the algorithm.  Bike lanes appear on a Bike-There map in bright green, and they are also weighted as a priority in the algorithm.
3. Recommended Routes – These are routes from cities that have information about other good roads for cycling, which may not have an official bike lane.  These roads are indicated by a dashed green line in the Bike-There map.
4. Uphill Slopes – In order to avoid hills (because, according to Google, nobody likes riding up hills… though I beg to differ…), Google developed a model that takes into account power (exerted by the cyclist), the slope of the road, wind-resistance, and speed.  If the model shows that a given route requires an inordinate amount of exertion (aka too much power required) and will be too slow for time efficiency, Google will send you on an alternate route that avoids the climb.  I could not find out what Google defines as “too slow” or “unreasonable degree of exertion”.
5. Downhill slopes – The model will also help cyclists avoid roads with too much downhill or descending, which can be tiring  or disconcerting due to the unnecessary amount of braking required.
6. Busy roads – In order to keep cyclists off busy roads, the algorithm basically uses the inverse of the Drive-There algorithm in order to avoid arterials and freeways.
7. Intersections – Lastly, the algorithm avoids busy intersections with heavy traffic (car) and long waits.

If you want to read this information directly from the horse’s mouth – click here.  It is important to note that this system is still in beta, and Google is continuing to add and update their maps using feedback from users.  So if you found an issue, make sure to notify them.

Review of Google’s Bike-There Features

I must admit, I have a few opinions on the underlying principles that Google used to develop their algorithm.  However, I am certainly not an expert in building such algorithms, and I realize the inherent limitations and difficulties of undertaking such an engineering project.  Nonetheless, there are some underlying biases and (possible) misconceptions about cycling built into the algorithm, which make the Bike-There feature unappealing to me in some ways.

Google Maps Bike Routes around University of AZ

First, I am curious about Google’s decision to avoid major intersections.  When I experimented with numerous routes that I use in Tucson, I discovered that Google’s directions, do indeed, avoid major intersections.  However, in doing so, the directions take a route that requires crossing major roads without the benefit of a traffic signal found at an intersection.  Sure, the directions managed to avoid the major intersections, but it’s not always the best riding habit to avoid such areas, which, at least in Tucson, often have infrastructure in place for cyclists to trigger the traffic lights and cross safely when the light is green instead of darting across four, fast lanes of traffic.  How do you feel about the avoidance of major intersections where you live?

Second, I have a little trouble with the prioritization of bike trails over established bike lanes (and/or recommended routes).  According to Elaine Filadelfo, a Google Maps spokeswoman:

It’s a pretty complex algorithm that looks at all of the variables [including hills, traffic, road type and many others] and tries to come up with the most efficient final route. For example, it will prioritise putting you on a trail or a road with a bike lane and weigh that against how far out of your way it might send you or how hilly that terrain might be. We look at all of the variables in conjunction, but I would say the strongest factor we look for is to put you on a bike trail. (via Bike Radar)

At least in Tucson, the official bike trails are often quite congested with pedestrian traffic (usually of the recreational nature), which can make commuting somewhat more time consuming, as one has to ride slower.  Given that a city like Tucson covers a large area (as do many U.S. cities), efficiency in bicycling can be quite important, so prioritizing bike trails over bike lanes can be somewhat problematic, especially in circumstances where bike trails are congested or out of the way.

Finally, I would love to know more about Google’s model to avoid uphill slopes.  If anyone knows of any additional information, I’d appreciate your insight.

In general, and despite my criticisms, I think Google is off to a great start.  In fact, it’s quite incredible that Google has finally incorporated bicycle directions, and I am looking forward to the impending improvements.  I completely agree with Peter at GoogleMapsBikeThere, that because almighty Google has acknowledged the importance of bicycling directions, more and more influential groups and people are going to take note.  So, thanks, Google!

Next up, we will review other bike route mapping tools, as a matter of practicality.  What’s the best way to get from point A to point Z by bike?

]]> http://www.utilitycycling.org/2010/04/analysis-of-googles-bike-there-feature-part-i/feed/ 11 http://www.utilitycycling.org/2010/03/google-bike-there-directions/ http://www.utilitycycling.org/2010/03/google-bike-there-directions/#comments Wed, 10 Mar 2010 21:18:58 +0000 Josh Lipton http://www.utilitycycling.org/?p=2231 Last night Google made a “game changing” announcement at the national bike summit in Washington DC.  The long awaited “Bike There” option has been added to their options for route types.  The dropdown next to Google Maps “Get Directions” button now has “Bicycling” as the fourth option following “By car”, “By public transit” and”Walking”.

We are very excited to hear this long awaited announcement.  The implication of Google’s map update to the world of cycling are enormous. UtilityCycling.org has long been advocates of bicycle mapping as a way to improve cyclists knowledge and access to routes.  With Google now fully entrenched in supporting cyclists through Google Maps, we now have very high hopes for a  continued growth in bike commuting and bike touring in the US.

As we know all to well, putting bicycling infrastructure into place in the US is a serious uphill challenge.  Even with recognizable momentum in places like Portland and New York City, the ability to offer cycling infrastructure throughout the US seems like a Eutopian dream.  But utilizing mapping technology, Google offers cyclist a glimmer of hope.  Google’s bicycling directions offers up a tool that will have both an immediate impact as a tool that that provides immediate results and a pathway towards long term integration of bicycling into the US transportation infrastructure.  Google’s bike map’s will only encourage increased number of cyclists to go out on bikes.  With more cyclists out, a demand for better cycling infrastructure will follow.  A correlating growth of cycling infrastructure and the improvement of Google’s bike mapping capabilities can potentially compound eachothers impact.  This could play out with first, more cyclist hitting the streets using Google’s cycling directions, second, greater cycling infrastructure being put into place to meet this demand, and third, Google integrating the new cycling data into their maps.  This back and forth interaction could unleash an exponential growth of cycling as an integral part of our transportation solutions.

The potential for Google cycling map to help push forward strong growth in cycling infrastructure is partially reliant on Google’s continued focus and dedication to improving their bike map route creation technologies.  Having briefly reviewed the Google’s methods for generating their bicycling directions, it appears that they’ve definitely gotten started in a good direction.  Google has leveraged a variety of types of data to recommend their routes, including available information about bike trails, bike lanes, recommended routes, uphill and downhill routes, busy roads and busy intersections.

To get an understanding of the accuracy of Google’s bicycling maps, I quickly mapped a regular bicycle trip that I make here in Flagstaff, Arizona from our offices at BikeShopHub.com back to my house.  I noted that the route comes close to following my preferred route however misses a few nuances that I use for safety and efficiency.  The route swings me through a high traffic underpass while I prefer to take a bike path that goes along the railroad tracks and through downtown.  It was also interesting to note that when I reversed my route, half of the route was no longer along the safe and efficient side streets that were given in the opposite direction.

That being said, I quickly noticed Google’s statement:
“Bicycling directions are in beta. Use caution and please report unmapped bike routes, streets that aren’t suited for cycling, and other problems here.”
Clicking on the “here” button offers a variety of options to report on and critique the route.

Google’s opportunity to harvest user generated data, is one of the best opportunities for Google to fine tune their bike mapping directions.   Google’s bike mapping success will be directly linked to their ability to harvest user generated route data.  Google already has a significant database of user generated bike routes.  Google’s ability to continue to reach out to a broader spectrum of active cyclists and cycling organizations who can help fine tune their map data will be critical to the overall improvement of the routes.

Beyond harvesting user generated data, Google will need to balance a variety of data types to continue to fine-tune their routes.  Possibilities for relevant data that can be more automated than relying on user support include finding ways to harvest cyclist’s GPS signals and analyzing GIS data to draw intelligent conclusions about recommended routes.  As all of this information comes into play, Google’s challenge may be in properly balancing all these different forms of data to generate the best overall bike route recommendations.

By titling this post, “Are Google Map’s Bicycling Directions a Game Changer?” I was interested in starting a conversation about the potential for growth in our cycling infrastructure that could be possible through the wide use, adoption, integration and improvement of Google maps for bicycling routes.  Please let us know your thoughts.

The first announcement – made on Google’s Lat Long blog – is a major step forward for cycling enthusiasts.  The announcement was cleverly hidden within a long post about new data sources that Google has been integrating into their map of the United States.  Google quietly stated:

The best part about this new dataset is that we’ve been able to add a lot of new, detailed information to Google Maps – information that helps people better explore and get around the real world. For example, college students will be pleased to see maps of many campuses; and cyclists will now find many more trails and paths to explore. Soon we even plan on providing you with biking directions to take advantage of this new data. Of course, in the true Google spirit of “launch and iterate,” we plan to work with more data sources to add new features in the map.

This announcement came shortly on the heels of the 50,000th signature on the Google Maps Bike There Petition (which if you haven’t signed, you should).  The group advocating Google to add the Bike There feature was quite excited, but what remains to be see is the method Google uses to obtain and integrate this new data and when it will actually be available.

The second bicycle-related announcement from Google is a call for suggestions as to where Google should send their new Street View Trike.  The Street View Trike idea came about when one of Google’s Street View mechanical engineers was mountain biking.  He realize that collecting imagery for Google Street View could be done via bicycle – or tricycle – and the street view trike was born.

Google is asking for suggestions, and I highly recommend going to their site and contributing your thoughts.

Here are the categories that Google is looking for:

• Parks & Trails
• University Campuses
• Pedestrian Malls (e.g., outdoor shopping areas, boardwalks)
• Theme Parks & Zoos
• Landmarks
• Sports Venues (e.g., golf courses, racing tracks, stadium grounds)

Nominations will be open until October 28. We’ll then comb through all of the suggestions and let all of you cast your final votes on a winner from each category for the Street View trike to visit. For any privately-owned or operated location, like a campus or theme park, we’ll work directly with the relevant organization prior to collecting the imagery.

These two announcements have not been directly related to each other (to my knowledge, anyhow), but I am suspicious that they may, in fact, be related.  My main question is whether the new Street View photos will constitute Google’s foray into the bicycle mapping world?  This is definitely an important first step, but certainly not the “Bike-There” option that is currently available on Google Maps for walking, driving, and public transit.  In order to have a successful “Bike-There” option, Google is going to need to communicate with cycling organizations in every city in order to determine which routes are bikeable.  Roads throughout the U.S. are already mapped, it is just a matter of determining which ones are the most bike friendly.

What suggestions do you have for a Google Bike-There option?  Google is clearly open to suggestions for new data to incorporate, but what is the best way to get comprehensive and accurate bike route information?  It appears that Google is starting by incorporating bike path information, which is a huge step in the right direction, but there is much more work to be done.  Let me know what your thoughts and suggestions, and I will write an open letter to Google!

Oh and P.S. – Google, if your employees get tired riding that trike around, I’m available to provide some pedal power!

I have studied geography in school for many, many years now.  I have been a cyclist for…well, most of my life, I suppose,  However,  declaring that I am a geographer or declaring that I am a cyclist doesn’t actually mean much, as there are many different types of both “geographer” and “cyclist.”  As far as geographers are concerned, what does matter is that all proper geographers are fond of maps and space (no, not outer space), rather the three dimensional space in which things occur.  As for cyclists, they are a bit like geographers in that they are all connected in some way or another by the bicycle.  And much like maps, there are many kinds of bicycles.  And of course, there is nothing wrong with appreciating more than one kind of map or more than one kind of bicycle.

Anyways, you may have guessed that since I am a geographer of sorts and a cyclist of sorts, I am interested in bicycle mapping.  The main point of going on this little tangent is to say that I plan to devote a good deal of time and energy on UtilityCycling.org to researching, experimenting with, and consequently, writing about bicycle mapping.  As always, I welcome your comments, tips, experiences, stories, photos, maps, and whatnot.  And for the introductory post, I plan to broadly review the field of bicycle mapping to introduce the topic.

What Is Bicycle Mapping?

Well, first off, bicycle mapping is basically a term that I just threw out there to describe any kind of mapping exercise that is focused around the bicycle.   At the moment, when most people talk about “bicycle mapping”, what they are referring to is route-finding and navigation.  However, there are many other types of interesting bicycle mapping activities going on all the time.

For example, if your local government has recently expressed an interest in counting the number of bicyclists at certain key places throughout the city (as mine has), then they are most likely going to develop some maps associated with the data they collect that might show information about bike trends, crash statistics, density of cyclists on certain routes, bicycle infrastructure conditions, the need for better conditions and so on.  In addition to statistics and route finding, it is usually nice to know a bit about the infrastructure of a place, so some bicycle mapping exercises might refer to collecting data about bike racks, bike shops, etc. with a GPS.  Bicycle mapping could also refer to the practice of mapping and taking measurements via bicycle, but not necessarily about bicycles.  For example, in Europe, researchers used a cargo bike to ride around two cities taking climate measurements.  Not to mention, Google employees have been spotted using a tricycle to take photos for Google Maps.  Of course, there are many other types of bicycle mapping possibilities, so really, the opportunities to talk about “bicycle mapping” are quite vast.

This map is from a research project I did using spatial statistics to try to analyze if US counties that had high bicycle use were more likely to be located nearby other US counties with high bicycle use.  There were lots of problems with my research.  To name one, for example, the scale of a US county is quite too large to analyze bicycle use (which doesn’t really occur at the county level), though that was the only data I could get at the time.  Nonetheless, this map shows bicycle use/ population for the East Coast using data from the 2000 Census of the US.  Light -> dark means low -> high use.

Here is a map of Tucson, Arizona, from the Pima Association of Goverments that shows the density of cyclists at the bike count points around the city.

A Bit About Navigation and Route Finding

As far as navigation is concerned, I can’t even begin to emphasize how important it is, especially to a cyclist.  When you arrive in an unknown place, it is always somewhat challenging to navigate that place.  For some, it is even more challenging to navigate a strange place on bicycle, because not only are you out of your comfort zone (simply by being in a strange place), you are also likely to feel more exposed and vulnerable (no matter what mode of transport you choose), though this feeling is often magnified when you are on a bike.  The same concept also applies when you change your standard mode of transportation in a place that is familiar to you.  There is always an initial learning curve to be expected as you figure out the in’s and out’s of a new way of navigating through space, and this time during the learning curve can be somewhat scary, and oftentimes, exhilarating.

Therefore, it is always nice to have a good map handy.  However, the majority of maps online or available in print are made for the purpose of navigating an automobile, not a bicycle.  Nonetheless, this is changing as of late, as local governments, mapping organizations, and bicycle advocates and organizations are advocating for more bicycle-focused mapping and established bike route systems in the US.  Indeed, it is always a bit of a shock to me when I get in my car and drive  someplace to which I typically ride my bike, and discover that I can’t go the same way in a car that I can in a bike.  So it is really nice to have a map that shows all of the little tricks and shortcuts you can take on a bike that aren’t going to appear on a map made for a motorist and to help you avoid roads or situations that might make you uncomfortable.

Many cities have bicycle route maps available, which are often free and can usually be found at bike shops.  These maps are great as they usually show which roads have designated bicycle routes.  Check with your local government to see if your city has such a map.  Here is a PDF of my city’s bike routes.

What is Already Available?

Well, bike mapping is a rapidly growing field, but what’s already out there, you might wonder.

• The folks over at Bike Hacks have a great post that lists over 50 free bike route mapping tools.
• Bike Commuters also has a good post on route finding tools.
• Commute by Bike has a really useful post on how to use Google Maps online to make a great bike route.
• And of course, there is a petition out there to get Google to include a “Bike There” option for Google Maps.  Go sign it!
• One of the best online programs I found was created by the GIS division of the City of Boulder.  It’s called Go Bike Boulder, and it will create routes for you depending on specifications.  Log in as a guest to try it.  I’m a bit of GIS nerd, so I really like this one.

Do you know of others?  Let us know!

Note: the header image I found here, where there is also a nice discussion about route-finding in a strange place.