1. Traffic Analysis Toolbox & Highway Capacity Manual Transition
Tyrone Scorsone
FDOT Systems Planning

2. Transportation Research Board’s (TRB) Highway Capacity Manual (HCM)
Is the nationally recognized document that serves as a foundation for FDOT’s analysis tools
Transportation Research Board’s (TRB) Highway Capacity Manual (HCM)

3. HCM Quality/Level of Service (QLOS) Handbook
The HCM allows for more detailed inputs at a point and segment level.
Whereas the QLOS Handbook is equipped to provide facility level analysis
Analyze the performance (capacity, density, speed, delay, and queuing) for small segments of the transportation system
Facility Level Analysis
Detailed Point &
Segment Analysis

4. Advantages of Analytical/Deterministic Tools
Quickly predict impacts
Widely accepted
Advantages of Analytical/Deterministic Tools
Both HCM and QLOS Handbook can
Quickly predict impacts for an isolated area
Are widely accepted (consensus of expert opinion)

5. LOS Planning/Preliminary Engineering Tools
Generalized
Planning
Tables
Preliminary
Engineering
Software
The entirety of FDOT’s Traffic Analysis Toolbox can be found at the above web address.

6. The LOSPLAN software can be downloaded from Department’s Internet page
The LOSPLAN software can be downloaded from Department’s Internet page. Following completion of download the user becomes part of the larger LOSPLAN user group and automatically receives software updates.

7. Capacity/LOS Analyses and Evaluation Tools
Potential Accuracy
CORSIM
(Microsimulation)
TRANSYT-7F
HCM | TCQSM BLOS | PLOS
(Simple Operational Analysis)
ARTPLAN FREEPLAN HIGHPLAN
(Preliminary Engineering)
Generalized Tables
(Generalized Planning)
Effort/Complexity

8. Exporting Data to Highway Capacity Software (HCS)
When seeking a greater level of precision ARTPLAN input files can be uploaded into the HCS

9. Planning Uses of LOS Techniques
Initial problem identification
Delay calculation
Future year analysis
Conducting alternatives analyses
Assessing development impacts

10. Primary Uses of LOS Techniques
Site Impact
Project Development
Future Year Analysis
Other

11. Transportation Impact Handbook
FDOTTransportationImpactHandbook.com

12. Screen for impacts of Development

13. Screen for impacts of Development

14. The Users Perspective
Q/LOS is a letter grade analysis as perceived by the traveler

15. Automobile LOS A/B C/D E/F On arterials it is the average travel speed
On rural highways it is the percent of time spent following
And on freeways it is density (cars per mile per lane)
E/F

16. Modal LOS Bicycle A/B C/D E/F
Bicycle LOS is the composite of scores based on the following factors:
Traffic volume
Pavement condition
Buffer/Separation widths
Speed of Traffic
E/F

17. Modal LOS Pedestrian A/B C/D E/F
Pedestrian LOS is the composite of scores based on the following factors:
Width of the shoulder/bike lane
Roadway/Sidewalk separation
Roadway /Sidewalk barrier factor
Presence of sidewalk
E/F

18. Modal LOS Bus A/B C/D E/F >4 buses/hour 2 to 4 buses/hour
< 1 bus/hour
>4 buses/hour
A/B
C/D
Modal LOS Bus
Bus LOS is the composite of scores based on the following factors:
Obstacles to the bus stop
Bus Frequency
Bus span of service
E/F

19. Capacity/LOS Analyses and Evaluation Tools
Potential Accuracy
CORSIM
(Microsimulation)
TRANSYT-7F
HCM | TCQSM BLOS | PLOS
(Simple Operational Analysis)
ARTPLAN FREEPLAN HIGHPLAN
(Preliminary Engineering)
Generalized Tables
(Generalized Planning)
Effort/Complexity

20. Generalized Service Volume Tables…
…provide estimates of maximum service volumes for various types of Florida road facilities
…represent average roadway conditions for the state, not representative of any single roadway
…allow analysts to quickly and easily compare volumes to estimate LOS.

21. Peak Hour Peak Direction
Types of Tables
(mostly used in planning)
Daily Two-Way
Urbanized
Transitioning/Urban
Rural
(However, all are based on a peak hour peak direction analysis)
Peak Hour Two-Way
Urbanized
Transitioning/Urban
Rural
Peak Hour Peak Direction
Urbanized
Transitioning/Urban
Rural

22. Service Volume Tables In General
Used in at least 10 states
Florida has been using for over 20 years
Half the states have inquired about Florida's SVTs
General sense that most transportation professionals in favor

23. Potential Applications
Quick estimate of LOS
Is there a problem?
System adequacy
Travel demand models
Roadway quick sizing
Quick estimate of LOS
Is there a problem?
System adequacy
State's highway system
NHS status (potentially more effective than HPMS)
Travel demand models
Roadway quick sizing
Segment lane determination
Intersection configuration

24. Multimodal Quality of Service
3/31/2017
Determine the maximum service volumes
In terms of annual average daily traffic (AADT) volume
In an urbanized area
For a freeway with:
6 lanes
Table Exercise 1
95,400
LOS=C
122,700
LOS=E

25. Capacity/LOS Analyses and Evaluation Tools
Potential Accuracy
CORSIM
(Microsimulation)
TRANSYT-7F
HCM | TCQSM BLOS | PLOS
(Simple Operational Analysis)
ARTPLAN FREEPLAN HIGHPLAN
(Preliminary Engineering)
Generalized Tables
(Generalized Planning)
Effort/Complexity

26. Demonstration Of LOSPLAN

27. LOS Planning/Preliminary Engineering Tools will be updated in 2012

28. Highway Capacity Manual Transition

29. Presentation Purposes
Highway Capacity Manual
Past, Present & Future
Adopting the 2010 HCM
What Has To Change
Implementing the 2010 HCM
How Long Will It Take

30. Integrated Multimodal Perspective
HCM/LOS History
1985:
Refined
LOS Direction
1965:
LOS Concept
LOS has been the dominate tool for highway improvements since the 1965 HCM
FDOT adopted LOS rule in 1992 with latest update in 2006
One of Department’s most used and referenced inside and outside the Department
Issues associated with the K factor (ratio of analysis hour volume to AADT)
2010:
Integrated Multimodal Perspective

31. 2010 Highway Capacity Manual
2010 HCM
To be published this month
Replaces 2000 HCM
Significant changes
New arterial performance measure
Multimodal
When to phase in?
Receiving implementation inquiries

32. 2010 HCM Implementation Issues
Why Not Transition Immediately?
LOS
Technical
Impacts
Consistency
“Standard K” Factors
Rule Update
Arterials
Freeways
Rules
Policies
Procedures
Need for
State-wide Consistent Response to
Phasing in of 2010 HCM

33. “K” Factor: Ratio of peak hour traffic to AADT
What is “Standard K”?
Rather than having “K” be a traffic variable, make it a fixed parameter based on:
Area Type
Facility Type
A K factor is the proportion of
Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) occurring in an hour
“K” Factor: Ratio of peak hour traffic to AADT

34. Importance of LOS Standards and K Factor
Time and cost savings to FDOT
Update to latest research
Promotes Better Transportation
Within Department
Throughout development community
Simple to understand
Consistency: Planning Through Design
Positive for Development
Supportive of Growth Management
Sensible Approach
Promotes better transportation policies and projects
Time and cost savings to FDOT
Updates to latest state and national research
Consistency in guidance and approach from planning through design
Within Department
Throughout development community
Simple to understand
Politically marketable
No cost to tax payers
Supportive of growth management concepts
Generally positive for development interests

35. 2 Arterial Classes
The 2010 HCM will not differentiate arterials based on signal density
Florida DOT is conducting research to implement 2 arterial classes 1 2

36. Implementation Schedule
July ‘11
January ‘12
July ‘12
December ‘12
Refine HCM Analyses
Implement “Standard K” Factors
Update LOS Standards
Update Procedures & Guidelines
Coordination, Transition & Adoption

37. QUESTIONS?

38. FDOT’s transition plan to the 2010 HCM represents a logical comprehensive process which includes evaluating a few key 2010 HCM changes, possibly implementing technical changes to current practice, possibly updating its level of service standards, and updating its own HCM-based software. FDOT recognizes it cannot require this transition period be applied to outside entities; however, it requests those entities accept this relatively short transition period.
This slide represents the stance the Department is taking regarding implementation of the 2010 HCM and will be left on the screen as I continue to answer questions.

39. Fig 1-2 15 Automobile Bicycle Pedestrian Bus A/B C/D E/F
Level of Service
Automobile
Bicycle
Pedestrian
Bus
A/B
>4 buses/hour
C/D
2 to 4 buses/hour
E/F
< 1 bus/hour