FREEPLAN, ARTPLAN, HIGHPLAN 1

Quality/Level of Service
FDOT’s Traffic Analysis Toolbox:
FREEPLAN,
ARTPLAN,
ARTPLAN
HIGHPLAN
Douglas S. McLeod
Gina Bonyani
FDOT Systems
S t
Planning
Pl
i
1
Quality/Level of Service
HIGHWAY
CAPACITY MANUAL
TRB’
TRB’s High
Highway
Capacity is
“The National
Document”
Document
HCM2010
26
2
Quality/Level of Service
Capacity/LOS Analyses and Evaluation Tools
(Microsimulation)
CORSIM
Po
otential Accuracy
TRANSYT‐7F
HCM | TCQSM (Simple Operational Analysis)
BLOS | PLOS
ARTPLAN FREEPLAN HIGHPLAN
(Preliminary Engineering)
(Generalized Planning)
(Generalized Planning)
G
Generalized Tables
li d T bl
Effort/Complexity
9
3
Quality/Level of Service
HCM/QLOS Handbook Compatibility
Primarily Operational
10
Planning/
Preliminary
Engineering
4
Quality/Level of Service
LOS Planning/Preliminary Engineering Tools
Preliminary
Engineering
Software
Generalized
Planning
Tables
http://www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/sm/los/default.htm
5
Quality/Level of Service
Exporting Data to HCS
6
Quality/Level of Service
Is the purpose of the
roadway to serve
a tomobiles
automobiles
or
people desiring to
travel along it?
7
Quality/Level of Service
Transit Quality of Service
• Availability
A il bilit
(bus frequency)
• Pedestrian LOS (accessibility)
• Hours of service
39
8
Quality/Level of Service
www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/sm/los/
9
Quality/Level of Service
10
Quality/Level of Service
Planning Uses of LOS Techniques
Site
Impact
Future
Year
Analysis
Project
Development
Other
11
Quality/Level of Service
Transportation Impact Handbook
FDOTTransportationImpactHandbook.com
12
Quality/Level of Service
Screen for impacts of
Development
13
Quality/Level of Service
Screen for impacts of
Development
14
Quality/Level of Service
Deficiencies/Priorities
15
Quality/Level of Service
Future year analysis
Roadway variables
Roadway variables
Conditions change Conditions change –
what should we do?
Traffic variables
Good
assumptions
=
Good
results
Control variables
82
16
Quality/Level of Service
Capacity/LOS Analyses and Evaluation Tools
(Microsimulation)
CORSIM
Po
otential Accuracy
TRANSYT‐7F
HCM | TCQSM (Simple Operational Analysis)
BLOS | PLOS
ARTPLAN FREEPLAN HIGHPLAN
(Preliminary Engineering)
(Generalized Planning)
(Generalized Planning)
G
Generalized Tables
li d T bl
Effort/Complexity
9
17
Quality/Level of Service
Generalized Service
Volume Tables…
…provide
provide estimates of
maximum service
volumes for various types
off Florida
Fl id road
d ffacilities
iliti
…represent
represent average roadway
conditions for the state, not
representative of any single
roadway
86
…allow analysts to quickly
and easily compare volumes
to estimate LOS.
18
Quality/Level of Service
Types of Tables
(mostly used
in planning)
Daily TwoTwo-Way
Ub i d
Urbanized
T
Transitioning/Urban
iti i /U b
R l
Rural
(However, all are based on a peak hour peak direction analysis)
Peak Hour TwoTwo-Way
Urbanized
Transitioning/Urban
Rural
Peak Hour Peak Direction
Urbanized
87
Transitioning/Urban
Rural
19
Quality/Level of Service
Service Volume Tables In General
z
z
z
z
Used in at least 10 states
d
l
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
Quality/Level of Service
Potential Applications
z
z
z
z
z
Quick estimate of LOS
Quick
estimate of LOS
Is there a problem?
System adequacy
System adequacy
Travel demand models
R d
Roadway quick sizing
i k ii
Quality/Level of Service
Table Exercise
1
LOS=C
95,400
LOS=E
122,700
• Determine the maximum service volumes
service volumes – In terms of annual average daily traffic (AADT) volume
daily traffic (AADT) volume
– In an urbanized area
– For a freeway with: For a freeway with:
• 6 lanes 22
Quality/Level of Service
2010 HCM Service Volume Tables
z
z
Intent: Develop realistic, usable SVTs
Types (facilities only – broader type of analysis)
z
Freeways
Urban Streets
Two‐Lane Highways
z
Multilane Highways
Multilane Highways
z
z
z
z
3 – 5 key variables for each facility type
Encourages development of local SVTs
Encourages development of local SVTs
z
z
z
Level Terrain
Process for development
Software/computational engines
All
Allows reasonably broad ranges
bl b d
Rolling
g Terrain
Quality/Level of Service
Assumptions include:
• 5% trucks,
• 0% buses,
• 0% RVs,
• 0.95 PHF,
• 3 ramps/mi,
• fp = 1.00,
• 12-ft lanes,
• 6-ft
f lateral
clearance.
Values do not represent
specific segment
characteristics.
24
Quality/Level of Service
Exhibit 10-8 Generalized Daily Service Volumes for
Urban Freeway Facilities (1,000 veh/day)
Quality/Level of Service
Capacity/LOS Analyses and Evaluation Tools
(Microsimulation)
CORSIM
Po
otential Accuracy
TRANSYT‐7F
HCM | TCQSM (Simple Operational Analysis)
BLOS | PLOS
ARTPLAN FREEPLAN HIGHPLAN
(Preliminary Engineering)
(Generalized Planning)
(Generalized Planning)
G
Generalized Tables
li d T bl
Effort/Complexity
9
26
Quality/Level of Service
Demonstration
Of LOSPLAN
95
27
Quality/Level of Service
LOS Planning/Preliminary Engineering Tools
will be updated in 2012
HCM2010
2012
www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/sm/los/
28