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

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)

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

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)

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. http://www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/sm/los/default.htm

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.

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

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

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

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

Transportation Impact Handbook FDOTTransportationImpactHandbook.com

Screen for impacts of Development

Screen for impacts of Development

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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

Demonstration Of LOSPLAN

LOS Planning/Preliminary Engineering Tools will be updated in 2012 www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/sm/los/

Highway Capacity Manual Transition

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

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

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

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

“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

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

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

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

QUESTIONS?

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.

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