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.
2018 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 RESEARCH REPORT 900 Guide for the Analysis of Multimodal Corridor Access Management Marc Butorac James Bonneson Kristine Connolly Paul Ryus Bastian Schroeder Kittelson & AssociAtes, inc. Portland, OR Kristine Williams Zhenyu Wang Seckin Ozkul center for UrbAn trAnsportAtion reseArch University of soUth floridA Tampa, FL Jerome Gluck AecoM, inc. New York, NY Subscriber Categories Pedestrians and Bicyclists â¢ Operations and Traffic 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, and implementable research is the most effective way to solve many problems facing state departments of transportation (DOTs) administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local interest and can best be studied by state DOTs individually or in cooperation with their state universities and others. However, the accelerating growth of highway transportation results in increasingly complex problems of wide interest to highway authorities. These problems are best studied through a coordinated program of cooperative research. Recognizing this need, the leadership of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) in 1962 ini- tiated an objective national highway research program using modern scientific techniquesâthe National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP). NCHRP is supported on a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of AASHTO and receives the full cooperation and support of the Federal Highway Administration, United States Department of Transportation. The Transportation Research Board (TRB) of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine was requested by AASHTO to administer the research program because of TRBâs recognized objectivity and understanding of modern research practices. TRB is uniquely suited for this purpose for many reasons: TRB maintains an extensive com- mittee structure from which authorities on any highway transportation subject may be drawn; TRB possesses avenues of communications and cooperation with federal, state, and local governmental agencies, univer- sities, and industry; TRBâs relationship to the National Academies is an insurance of objectivity; and TRB maintains a full-time staff of special- ists in highway transportation matters to bring the findings of research directly to those in a position to use them. The program is developed on the basis of research needs identified by chief administrators and other staff of the highway and transportation departments, by committees of AASHTO, and by the Federal Highway Administration. Topics of the highest merit are selected by the AASHTO Special Committee on Research and Innovation (R&I), and each year R&Iâs recommendations are proposed to the AASHTO Board of Direc- tors and the National Academies. Research projects to address these topics are defined by NCHRP, and qualified research agencies are selected from submitted proposals. Administration and surveillance of research contracts are the responsibilities of the National Academies and TRB. The needs for highway research are many, and NCHRP can make significant contributions to solving 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 research 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 by going to http://www.national-academies.org and then searching for TRB Printed in the United States of America NCHRP RESEARCH REPORT 900 Project 03-120 ISSN 2572-3766 (Print) ISSN 2572-3774 (Online) ISBN 978-0-309-48003-1 Library of Congress Control Number 2018964970 Â© 2018 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION 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, FRA, FTA, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, PHMSA, or TDC 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 research report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; and the sponsors of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturersâ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report.
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, non- governmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president. The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president. The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine. Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.national-academies.org. The Transportation Research Board is one of seven major programs of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to increase the benefits that transportation contributes to society by providing leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Boardâs varied committees, task forces, and panels annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. Learn more about the Transportation Research Board at www.TRB.org.
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 AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The research reported herein was performed under NCHRP Project 03-120, âAssessing Interactions Between Access Management Treatments and Multimodal Usersâ. Kittelson & Associates, Inc. (KAI) was the contractor for this study. The Center for Urban Transportation Research, University of South Florida (CUTR), and AECOM, Inc. were subcontractors. Authors of this report are Marc Butorac, James Bonneson, Kristine Connolly, Paul Ryus, and Bastian Schroeder (KAI); Kristine Williams, Zhenyu Wang, and Seckin Ozkul (CUTR); and Jerome Gluck (AECOM, Inc.). Mr. Butorac served as the principal investigator for this project. The authors acknowledge the assistance and support of key staff members for their significant contribu- tions to the data collection and traffic simulation tasks. The KAI staff members include Elizabeth Connell, Chelsea Farnsworth, Ellen Moshier, Clarissa Dougherty, Miranda Barrus, and Lake Trask. The CUTR graduate research assistants and staff members include Dharmin Kukadia, Teerapat Charukitpaisarn, Abhijit Vasili, Rama Durga Tammayya Naidu Kolla, and Ashok Sampath. The AECOM, Inc. staff mem- bers include Jacquilyn Coelho, Gabriel Kleinfeld, Jeffrey Sandberg, and Chaithra Jagadish. The authors extend special thanks to the agency staff who provided assistance during the data collection tasks. Those individuals include Ping P. Hsu and Richard Napora (Florida Department of Transportation, District 7) and Norman D. Jester (Pinellas County, Florida). The authors also acknowledge Li Zhang and Xiang Li from New Global Systems for technical support in implementing the Surrogate Safety Assessment Model (version 3.0) and express sincere thanks to the members of the project panel, who provided extremely helpful guidance and feedback on the many documents they were asked to review. CRP STAFF FOR NCHRP RESEARCH REPORT 900 Christopher J. Hedges, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Lori L. Sundstrom, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs Waseem Dekelbab, Senior Program Officer Megan A. Chamberlain, Senior Program Assistant Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Natalie Barnes, Associate Director of Publications Linda A. Dziobek, Senior Editor NCHRP PROJECT 03-120 PANEL Field of TrafficâOperations and Control James L. Gattis, University of Arkansas, Springfield, MO (Chair) Barbara J. De Saint Croix, Washington State DOT, Olympia, WA Gina Bonyani, Florida DOT, Tallahassee, FL Philip B. Demosthenes, Philip B. Demosthenes, LLC, Denver, CO Robert Dunphy, Arlington, VA Brian K. Gage, Minnesota DOT, Saint Paul, MN Alan Ginder, The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, New York, NY Chris W. Huffman, Huffman Corridor Consulting, LLC, Topeka, KS Jean Lionel Lucien, Massachusetts DOT, Boston, MA Jeffrey B. Shaw, FHWA Liaison Richard A. Cunard, TRB Liaison
NCHRP Research Report 900 will assist in the selection of alternative access management techniques based on the safety and operation performance of each affected travel mode. The guide documents operational and safety relationships between access management techniques and the automobile, pedestrian, bicycle, public transit, and truck modes. The analyses in the guide generally reflect a suburban and urban land use context. This report will be of immediate interest to practitioners involved in how to weigh, evaluate, and under- stand the effects and trade-offs when implementing access management techniques in a multimodal corridor. The roadway system must accommodate many types of usersâbicyclists, passenger cars, pedestrians, transit, and trucks. Increasingly, stakeholders are recognizing that there should be an appropriate balance between the various modes. Access connections to the roadway are a part of the system, and there is increasing recognition that the location and design of access to and from roadways affect all transportation modes. There is a need to understand better the interactions between multimodal operations and access management techniques and treatments, and the trade-off decisions that are necessary. In addition, suburban and urban land uses continually change, and access management planning for retrofitting corridors should consider the multimodal needs as well as the need to upgrade arterial performance. Past studies have shown that arterial roadway characteristics such as turning movements, unsignalized and signalized access density, median type, turn lanes, sidewalks, bike lanes, and bus turnouts can all affect corridor operations. Studies have also shown that effective access management treatments reduce conflict points along roadways, leading to reductions in delays and crashes. However, there has been limited understanding of the effects of access management treatments on multimodal operations, and vice versa, particularly treatments in combination. As a result, quantitative relationships to assess measures of effectiveness of access management techniques and multimodal interactions for, but not limited to, average travel speed, travel time reliability, and capacity preservation are needed. Under NCHRP Project 03-120, âAssessing Interactions Between Access Management Treatments and Multimodal Users,â Kittelson & Associates, Inc., was asked to identify and determine unknown relationship definitions between access management techniques and the various users and modes along multimodal corridors. Performance relationships and priorities may differ under a central business district context, and the guide does not supersede engineering judgment by the knowledgeable design professional. Specific com- binations of characteristics in other environments may produce outcomes that differ from those presented herein. The fact that new operational and safety performance relationships F O R E W O R D By Waseem Dekelbab Staff Officer Transportation Research Board
are presented does not imply that existing roadways or highways are unsafe nor does it mandate the initiation of improvement projects. The research agencyâs final report, which documents the entire research effort, is available for download from TRBâs website at www.trb.org by searching NCHRP Web- Only Document 256: Assessing Interactions Between Access Management Treatments and Multimodal Users.
1 Summary 6 Chapter 1 Restrict Left-Turn Movements at an Access Point 6 Description 6 Quantitative Analysis Methods 8 Additional Information 9 References 10 Chapter 2 Non-Traversable Medians 10 Description 10 Quantitative Analysis Methods 14 Additional Information 15 References 16 Chapter 3 Continuous Two-Way Left-Turn Lanes 16 Description 16 Quantitative Analysis Methods 19 Additional Information 19 References 21 Chapter 4 Frontage and Service Roads 21 Description 21 Quantitative Analysis Methods 25 Additional Information 25 References 26 Chapter 5 Unsignalized Median Openings 26 Description 26 Quantitative Analysis Methods 28 Additional Information 29 References 30 Chapter 6 Traffic Signal Spacing 30 Description 30 Quantitative Analysis Methods 34 Additional Information 34 References 35 Chapter 7 Number and Spacing of Unsignalized Access Points 35 Description 35 Quantitative Analysis Methods 39 Additional Information 39 References C O N T E N T S
41 Chapter 8 Interchange Areas 41 Description 41 Quantitative Analysis Methods 43 Additional Information 43 References 44 Chapter 9 Left-Turn Lanes 44 Description 44 Quantitative Analysis Methods 48 Additional Information 48 References 50 Chapter 10 Right-Turn Lanes 50 Description 50 Quantitative Analysis Methods 54 Additional Information 55 References 56 Chapter 11 Driveway Channelization 56 Description 56 Quantitative Analysis Methods 58 Additional Information 58 References 59 Chapter 12 Alternative Intersections and Interchanges 59 Description 59 Quantitative Analysis Methods 63 Additional Information 63 References 64 Chapter 13 Parking and Stopping Restrictions 64 Description 64 Quantitative Analysis Methods 66 Additional Information 66 References 67 Chapter 14 Roundabouts 67 Description 67 Quantitative Analysis Methods 69 Additional Information 69 References 70 Chapter 15 Driveway Sight Distance 70 Description 70 Quantitative Analysis Methods 72 Additional Information 72 References 73 Chapter 16 One-Way Driveways 73 Description 73 Quantitative Analysis Methods 75 Additional Information 75 References
76 Chapter 17 Driveway Width 76 Description 76 Quantitative Analysis Methods 79 Additional Information 79 References 80 Chapter 18 Driveway Vertical Geometry 80 Description 80 Quantitative Analysis Methods 82 Additional Information 82 References 83 Chapter 19 Driveway Throat Length 83 Description 83 Quantitative Analysis Methods 84 Additional Information 84 References 85 Appendix Applications Guidance for Selected Quantitative Analysis Methods 85 Introduction 85 Methods Described in this Appendix 86 HCM6 Intersection Delay Methods 88 HCM6 Arterial Travel Speed Methods 93 Queue Estimation Methods in the HCM6 94 Multimodal Level of Service Methods in the HCM6 106 Pedestrian and Bicycle Delay Methods in the HCM6 107 Truck Level of Service 109 Crash Modification Factors 109 Bowman et al. Vehicle and Pedestrian Crash Models by Median Type 111 Potts et al. Pedestrian Crash Model for Right-Turn Lanes 112 Carter et al. Pedestrian and Bicycle Intersection Safety Indices 114 References Note: Photographs, figures, and tables in this report may have been converted from color to grayscale for printing. The electronic version of the report (posted on the web at www.trb.org) retains the color versions.