Cover Image

Not for Sale



View/Hide Left Panel
Click for next page ( 10


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 9
9 than, the HCM pedestrian measures, as the TCQSM meas- Exhibit 16. Bus Span ures are intended for transit facilities, while the HCM meas- of Service Adjustment Factors ures are intended for sidewalks. However, the TCQSM's for Bus LOS (SpanAdj). pedestrian waiting area measure would be applicable to bus Daily Hours of Service SpanAdj stops along arterial streets. 19 24 1.15 17 18 1.05 14 16 1.00 12 13 0.90 Florida Quality/Level of Service Handbook 4 11 0.75 03 0.55 The Florida Q/LOS Handbook provides LOS measures, thresholds, and estimation methodologies for auto, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian modes. (see Exhibit 17), and the difficulty of walking the length of the street segment (see Exhibit 18). ASF = SF * PLOSAdj * CrossAdj * SpanAdj (Eq. 2) Auto LOS Where The FDOT handbook uses the urban street LOS criteria ASF = Adjusted Service Frequency (vph) and thresholds contained in the Urban Streets chapter of the SF = Actual Service Frequency (vph) Highway Capacity Manual. Various default values are pro- PLOSAdj = Adjustment factor for pedestrian LOS vided for some of the more difficult to obtain input data. CrossAdj = Adjustment factor for street crossing difficulty for pedestrians SpanAdj = Adjustment factor for daily hours of bus service. Transit LOS The FDOT Q/LOS Handbook uses the HCM LOS criteria The transit level of service method and thresholds in the and thresholds for urban streets for the automobile level of FDOT handbook are designed to be applied only to fixed- service. route, fixed-schedule bus service. The bus LOS thresholds are The Handbook provides two LOS estimation procedures keyed to the adjusted service frequency (see Exhibit 15). for planning level analyses: Generalized Planning Analysis, The actual service frequency is reduced (or increased) and Conceptual Planning Analysis. Generalized planning depending on the hours of daily operation of the bus service analysis is a "broad type of planning application such as (see Exhibit 16), the difficulty of crossing the street on foot statewide analyses, initial problem identification, and future year analyses." Conceptual planning is a "preliminary engi- Exhibit 15. FDOT Bus LOS Thresholds. neering application detailed enough to reach a decision on LOS Adjusted Service Frequency design concept and scope." (vehicles per hour) Generalized planning analysis consists of look-up tables of A > 6.0 maximum service volumes for auto LOS by facility type, area B 4.01 to 6.0 C 3.0 to 4.0 type, number of lanes, and median type. The bicycle and D 2.0 to 2.99 pedestrian LOS look-up tables provide maximum auto ser- E 1.0 to 1.99 vice volumes according to the percentage of sidewalk and F < 1.0 bicycle lane coverage on the road segment. Exhibit 17. Roadway Crossing Adjustment Factors for Bus LOS (CrossAdj). Conditions that must be met Arterial Class Median Mid-Block Through Auto LOS CrossAdj Lanes I All situations 2 A or B 1.05 II All situations 2 A, B, or C 1.05 III All situations 4 A or B 1.05 IV All situations 4 All LOS 1.05 I None or non-restrictive 4 B-F 0.80 I Restrictive 8 All LOS 0.80 II None or non-restrictive 4 C-F 0.80 II Restrictive 8 All LOS 0.80 III None or non-restrictive 4 D-F 0.80 III Restrictive 8 All LOS 0.80 All cases not included above = 1.00

OCR for page 9
10 Exhibit 18. Pedestrian LOS Exhibit 19. FDOT Adjustment Factors for Bicycle and Pedestrian Bus LOS (PLOSAdj). LOS Score Thresholds. Pedestrian LOS Adjustment Factor LOS Score A 1.15 A < 1.5 B 1.10 B > 1.5 and < 2.5 C 1.05 C > 2.5 and < 3.5 D 1.00 D > 3.5 and < 4.5 E 0.80 E > 4.5 and < 5.5 F 0.55 F > 5.5 Conceptual planning analysis evaluates urban street facility equivalent letter grade LOS is reported according to level of service on a segment by segment basis. The segment lev- Exhibit 19. els of service for auto and bus are averaged (weighted by length) to obtain a facility LOS for each mode. For pedestrians and BLOS = 0.507 ln (Vol15/L) + 0.199SPt(1 + 10.38HV)2 bicycles, the facility LOS is the average of the segment LOS for + 7.066(1/PR5)2 - 0.005(We)2 + 0.760 (Eq. 3) the single worst segment of the facility and the length weighted Where average segment LOSs for all of the other segments of the facil- BLOS = Bicycle level of service score ity. The level of service at points (intersections) within the facil- ln = Natural log ity is not taken into account in the estimation of facility LOS. Vol15 = Directional motorized vehicle count in the peak 15 minute time period Bicycle LOS L = Total number of directional through lanes SPt = Effective speed factor = 1.1199 Ln(SPp - 20) + 0.8103 Florida's quality of service perspective is based on the SPp = Posted speed limit (a surrogate for average running bicyclists' perspective of the safety of sharing the roadway en- speed) vironment with motor vehicle traffic. This is based on the HV = Percentage of heavy vehicles Bicycle LOS Model, originally developed by Sprinkle Con- PR5 = FHWA's five point pavement surface condition rating sulting Inc. (SCI), and which has been applied to more than We = Average effective width of outside through lane 200,000 miles of roadways in the United States (including throughout Florida) and Canada. In the Bicycle LOS Model, Many of the factors in the Bicycle LOS Model equation are bicycle levels of service are based on five variables with rela- also used to determine automobile LOS in the HCM2000 tive importance ordered (according to relative absolute value methodology and are either logarithmic or exponential of "t" statistics) in the following list: functions. Logarithmic and exponential functions make the importance of the variables differ significantly depending on Average effective width of the outside through lane, the precise value. For example, the bicycle LOS drops dra- Motorized vehicle volumes, matically as motorized vehicle volumes initially rise, but then Motorized vehicle speeds, tends to deteriorate more slowly at higher volumes. Another Heavy vehicle (truck) volumes, and example is the effect of motorized vehicle speed. At low Pavement condition. speeds, the variable is not as significant in determining bicy- cle LOS, but at higher speeds it plays an ever-increasing role. Average effective width is largely determined by the width of the outside travel lane and [any attendant bicycle lane] Pedestrian LOS striping, but also includes other factors such as the effects of on-street parking and drainage grates. Each of the variables is The pedestrian LOS model was developed for FDOT in a weighted by coefficients derived by stepwise regression mod- manner similar to that for the bicycle model. The pedestrian eling. A numerical LOS score, generally ranging from 0.5 to LOS model reflects the perspective of pedestrians sharing the 6.5, is determined and stratified to a LOS letter grade. roadside environment with motor vehicles and has been ap- Thus, unlike the determination of automobile LOS in the plied to cities in Florida and elsewhere in the United States. HCM2000, in which there is usually only one service measure Pedestrian levels of service are based on four variables in the (e.g., average travel speed), bicycle LOS is determined based following list: on multiple factors. The facility segment bicycle LOS score (BLOS) is Existence of a sidewalk, estimated according to the following equation and the Lateral separation of pedestrians from motorized vehicles,