National Academies Press: OpenBook
Page i
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Multimodal Level of Service Analysis for Urban Streets. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14175.
×
Page R1
Page ii
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Multimodal Level of Service Analysis for Urban Streets. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14175.
×
Page R2
Page iii
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Multimodal Level of Service Analysis for Urban Streets. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14175.
×
Page R3
Page iv
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Multimodal Level of Service Analysis for Urban Streets. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14175.
×
Page R4
Page v
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Multimodal Level of Service Analysis for Urban Streets. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14175.
×
Page R5
Page vi
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Multimodal Level of Service Analysis for Urban Streets. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14175.
×
Page R6
Page vii
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Multimodal Level of Service Analysis for Urban Streets. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14175.
×
Page R7
Page viii
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Multimodal Level of Service Analysis for Urban Streets. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14175.
×
Page R8
Page ix
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2008. Multimodal Level of Service Analysis for Urban Streets. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14175.
×
Page R9

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

TRANSPORTAT ION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2008 www.TRB.org N A T I O N A L C O O P E R A T I V E H I G H W A Y R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M NCHRP REPORT 616 Subject Areas Planning and Administration • Highway and Facility Design • Highway Operations, Capacity, and Traffic Control Multimodal Level of Service Analysis for Urban Streets Richard Dowling and David Reinke DOWLING ASSOCIATES, INC. Oakland, CA Aimee Flannery GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY Fairfax, VA Paul Ryus and Mark Vandehey KITTELSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Portland, OR Theo Petritsch and Bruce Landis SPRINKLE CONSULTING, INC. Lutz, FL Nagui Rouphail INSTITUTE FOR TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND EDUCATION (ITRE) Raleigh, NC James Bonneson TEXAS A & M RESEARCH PROGRAM College Station, TX Research sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration

NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Systematic, well-designed research provides the most effective approach to the solution of many problems facing highway administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local interest and can best be studied by highway departments individually or in cooperation with their state universities and others. However, the accelerating growth of highway transportation develops increasingly complex problems of wide interest to highway authorities. These problems are best studied through a coordinated program of cooperative research. In recognition of these needs, the highway administrators of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials initiated in 1962 an objective national highway research program employing modern scientific techniques. This program is supported on a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of the Association and it receives the full cooperation and support of the Federal Highway Administration, United States Department of Transportation. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies was requested by the Association to administer the research program because of the Board’s recognized objectivity and understanding of modern research practices. The Board is uniquely suited for this purpose as it maintains an extensive committee structure from which authorities on any highway transportation subject may be drawn; it possesses avenues of communications and cooperation with federal, state and local governmental agencies, universities, and industry; its relationship to the National Research Council is an insurance of objectivity; it maintains a full-time research correlation staff of specialists in highway transportation matters to bring the findings of research directly to those who are in a position to use them. The program is developed on the basis of research needs identified by chief administrators of the highway and transportation departments and by committees of AASHTO. Each year, specific areas of research needs to be included in the program are proposed to the National Research Council and the Board by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Research projects to fulfill these needs are defined by the Board, and qualified research agencies are selected from those that have submitted proposals. Administration and surveillance of research contracts are the responsibilities of the National Research Council and the Transportation Research Board. The needs for highway research are many, and the National Cooperative Highway Research Program can make significant contributions to the solution of highway transportation problems of mutual concern to many responsible groups. The program, however, is intended to complement rather than to substitute for or duplicate other highway research programs. Published reports of the NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from: Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet at: http://www.national-academies.org/trb/bookstore Printed in the United States of America NCHRP REPORT 616 Project 3-70 ISSN 0077-5614 ISBN: 978-0-309-11742-5 Library of Congress Control Number 2008905870 © 2008 Transportation Research Board COPYRIGHT PERMISSION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FMCSA, FTA, or Transit Development Corporation endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. NOTICE The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of the Governing Board of the National Research Council. Such approval reflects the Governing Board’s judgment that the program concerned is of national importance and appropriate with respect to both the purposes and resources of the National Research Council. The members of the technical committee selected to monitor this project and to review this report were chosen for recognized scholarly competence and with due consideration for the balance of disciplines appropriate to the project. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied are those of the research agency that performed the research, and, while they have been accepted as appropriate by the technical committee, they are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, or the Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation. Each report is reviewed and accepted for publication by the technical committee according to procedures established and monitored by the Transportation Research Board Executive Committee and the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research Council, the Federal Highway Administration, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, and the individual states participating in the National Cooperative Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of this report.

CRP STAFF FOR NCHRP REPORT 616 Christopher W. Jenks, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Crawford F. Jencks, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs Dianne Schwager, Senior Program Officer Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Hilary Freer, Senior Editor NCHRP PROJECT 3-70 PANEL Field of Traffic—Area of Operations and Control Douglas S. McLeod, Florida DOT, Tallahassee, FL (Chair) Ghassan Abu-Lebdeh, American University–Sharjah, Sharjah, UAE F. Thomas Creasey, American Consulting Engineers, PLC, Lexington, KY Thomas Huber, Wisconsin DOT, Madison, WI James M. Okazaki, Los Angeles DOT, Los Angeles, CA Elena Prassas, Polytechnic University of New York, Brooklyn, NY Juan Robles, Colorado DOT, Denver, CO Kevin St. Jacques, Wilbur Smith Associates, Dallas, TX Stan Teply, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB John Halkias, FHWA Liaison Richard A. Cunard, TRB Liaison C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M S

NCHRP Report 616: Multimodal Level of Service Analysis for Urban Streets will be of inter- est to public agencies responsible for the planning, design, and operation of urban streets. This report provides a method for assessing how well an urban street serves the needs of all of its users: auto drivers, transit passengers, bicycle riders, and pedestrians. NCHRP Project 3-70 developed and calibrated a method for evaluating the multimodal level of service (MMLOS) provided by different urban street designs and operations. This MMLOS method is designed for evaluating “complete streets,” context-sensitive design alternatives, and smart growth from the perspective of all users of the street. The analyst can use the MMLOS method to evaluate the tradeoffs of various street designs in terms of their effects on the auto driver’s, transit passenger’s, bicyclist’s, and pedestrian’s perceptions of the quality of service provided by the street. The MMLOS method is described in the user’s guide appendix to this final report (pub- lished as NCHRP Web-Only Document 128). It can be implemented in a simple spreadsheet. The MMLOS method estimates the auto, bus, bicycle, and pedestrian level of service on an urban street using a combination of readily available data and data normally gathered by an agency to assess auto and transit level of service. The data requirements of the MMLOS method include geometric cross-section, signal timing, the posted speed limit, bus head- ways, traffic volumes, transit patronage, and pedestrian volumes. The NCHRP Project 3-70 MMLOS method also enables agencies to balance the level of service needs of auto drivers, transit riders, bicycle riders, and pedestrians in their street designs by providing agencies with a tool for testing different allocations of scarce street right-of-way to the different modes using the street. F O R E W O R D By Dianne Schwager Staff Officer Transportation Research Board

C O N T E N T S 1 Summary 3 Chapter 1 Introduction 3 1.1 Research Objective and Scope 3 1.2 The Research Plan 4 1.3 This Report 5 Chapter 2 State of the Practice 5 2.1 State of the Practice Survey 5 Highway Capacity Manual 6 Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual 9 Florida Quality/Level of Service Handbook 11 2.2 Evaluation Against NCHRP 3-70 Framework Objectives 11 Highway Capacity Manual 13 Transit TCQSM Critique 14 Florida DOT Q/LOS Handbook 15 2.3 Conclusions 15 Current Agency Practices 15 The Major Level of Service Manuals 16 Implications for Research Project 17 Chapter 3 Literature Review 17 3.1 Auto Driver Perception of LOS 17 Urban Street LOS 18 Intersection LOS Research 21 Use of Fuzzy Logic for LOS Modeling 21 Rural Road Research 22 3.2 Transit Passenger Perception of LOS 22 A Handbook for Measuring Customer Satisfaction 23 A Guidebook for Developing Transit Performance Measurement System 23 Application of Transit QOS Measures in Florida 23 3.3 Bicyclist Perceptions of LOS 24 An Arterial LOS Model Based on Field Surveys and Video Lab 24 Segment LOS Models Based on Field Surveys or Video Lab 26 Measuring LOS Through Route Choice 26 Models of Rural Road Bicycle LOS 27 3.4 Pedestrian Perception of LOS 27 Intersection Crossing LOS Studies 28 Sidewalk and Path LOS Studies 29 Use of Visual Simulation 29 Midblock Crossing LOS Studies 30 3.5 Multimodal LOS Research

32 Chapter 4 Data Collection 32 4.1 Selection of QOS Survey Method 35 4.2 Phase I Data Collection (Pilot Studies) 35 4.3 Development of Video Clips 35 Auto Video Clips 36 Bicycle Video Clips 38 Pedestrian Video Clips 42 Development of Master DVDs 46 4.4 Video Lab Protocol 46 Selection of Video Lab Cities 47 IRB Review 47 Recruitment 50 Validity of Video Lab Respondent Sample 50 Survey Instrument 50 Pilot Tests 50 Video Lab Sessions 51 4.5 Effects of Demographics on LOS 52 Effects of Demographics on Auto LOS Ratings 53 Effects of Demographics on Bicycle LOS Ratings 53 Effects of Demographics on Pedestrian LOS Ratings 54 4.6 Transit On-Board Surveys 54 Agency Coordination 54 Field Data Collection 55 Survey Form Development 57 Survey Distribution 58 Route Characteristics 60 4.7 Representation of Survey Results by a Single LOS Grade 62 Chapter 5 Auto LOS Model 62 5.1 Model Development 62 Identification of Key Variables 62 Linear Regression Tests 64 Limitations of Linear Regression Modeling 65 Cumulative Logistic Regression 65 Best Candidate Auto LOS Models 65 Performance of Candidates 69 5.2 Recommended Auto LOS Model 71 5.3 Performance of Auto LOS Models 72 Chapter 6 Transit LOS Model 72 6.1 Model Development 72 Selection of Explanatory Variables for LOS 74 Proposed General Model Form for Transit LOS 74 Elasticity Concept 77 Reliability 78 Crowding 78 6.2 Recommended Transit LOS Model 79 Estimation of the Pedestrian LOS 79 Estimation of the Transit Wait Ride Score 81 6.3 Performance of Transit LOS Model

82 Chapter 7 Bicycle LOS Model 82 7.1 Development 82 7.2 Recommended Bicycle LOS Model 83 Bicycle Segment LOS 83 Bicycle Intersection LOS 84 7.3 Performance of Bicycle LOS Model on Video Clips 86 Chapter 8 Pedestrian LOS Model 86 8.1 Model Development 87 8.2 Recommended Pedestrian LOS Model 87 Overall Pedestrian LOS Model 87 Pedestrian Density LOS Model for Sidewalks, Walkways, Street Corners 87 Pedestrian Other LOS Model 88 Pedestrian Segment LOS 88 Pedestrian Intersection LOS 88 Pedestrian Midblock Crossing Factor 91 8.3 Performance Evaluation of Pedestrian LOS Model 92 Chapter 9 Integrated Multimodal LOS Framework 92 9.1 The Framework 92 9.2 The Integrated LOS Modeling System 92 Input Variable Interactions Among Modes 95 Interactions Among Modal LOS Results 96 Chapter 10 Accomplishment of Research Objectives 98 References 102 Appendix A Subject Data Collection Forms 105 Appendix B Study Protocol 110 Appendix C Example Recruitment Flyer/Poster

AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The research reported herein was performed under NCHRP Project 3-70 by Dowling Associates, Inc., Oakland, California. Dr. Aimee Flannery of George Mason University and Dr. Nagui Rouphail of the Institute for Trans- portation Research and Education (ITRE) developed the recommended auto level of service model. Dr. Flannery developed the auto video clips and conducted the auto, bicycle, and pedestrian video labo- ratories around the United States. Dr. Flannery developed the linear and non-linear regression models and conducted the initial statistical analysis for the auto LOS models. Dr. Kathryn Wochinger assisted in the design of the video laboratory survey instruments and protocol. Dr. Rouphail and Laureano Rangel led the statistical development of the ordered logistic auto LOS model. Mr. Paul Ryus of Kittelson Associates developed the transit LOS model and conducted the Phase 1 tran- sit data collection effort. Mr. David Reinke of Dowling Associates led the Phase 2 transit data collection effort and performed various statistical analyses in support of the auto and transit model developments. Mr. Chris Ferrell of Dowling Associates updated the literature review. Mr. Bruce Landis, Mr. Theo Petritsch, and Dr. Herman Huang of Sprinkle Consulting, Inc., developed the pedestrian and bicycle LOS models and performed the statistical analyses associated with that effort. They also shot the video clips for the bicycle and pedestrian portions of the video laboratories. Mr. Mark Vandehey of Kittelson Associates and Dr. James Bonneson of Texas A & M coordinated the subject research with the ongoing NCHRP 3-79 project and provided Highway Capacity Committee per- spectives on the research. The authors would like to thank the management of Tri-Met (Portland, OR), Broward County Tran- sit (Ft. Lauderdale, FL), Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (Washington, DC), AC Tran- sit (Oakland, CA) and Muni (San Francisco, CA) for their permission and support to conduct on-board transit surveys on selected routes.

Next: Summary »
Multimodal Level of Service Analysis for Urban Streets Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 616: Multimodal Level of Service Analysis for Urban Streets explores a method for assessing how well an urban street serves the needs of all of its users. The method for evaluating the multimodal level of service (MMLOS) estimates the auto, bus, bicycle, and pedestrian level of service on an urban street using a combination of readily available data and data normally gathered by an agency to assess auto and transit level of service. The MMLOS user’s guide was published as NCHRP Web-Only Document 128.

Errata

In the printed version of the report, equations 36 (pedestrian segment LOS) and 37 (pedestrian LOS for signalized intersections) on page 88 have been revised and are available online. The equations in the electronic (dpf) version of the report are correct.

In June 2010, TRB released NCHRP Web-Only Document 158: Field Test Results of the Multimodal Level of Service Analysis for Urban Streets (MMLOS) that explores the result of a field test of the MMLOS in 10 metropolitan areas in the United States.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!