1. HCM Analysis of Active Transportation and Demand Management Strategies Progress Report January 21, 2012 1 Dowling Associates Cambridge Systematics Rick Dowling - rdowling@dowlinginc.com Richard Margiotta - rmargiotta@camsys.com

2. Project Purpose To develop updated methodologies, data sets, and content on the evaluation of active transportation and demand management (ATDM) strategies for the Highway Capacity Manual. Fill out Chapter 35 of Volume 4 with analysis methodologies and example problems. 2

3. Scope & Status (complete) Prepare Draft Methodology Guidebook ◦ May 2011, revised August 2011 Develop Software ◦ FREEVAL-ATDM – Nov. 2011 Present Guide at Workshops ◦ DC, Chicago, San Francisco – complete 3

4. Scope & Status (in progress) Coordinate with SHRP2-L08 Develop New Analysis Methodologies ◦ Work Zone Management Strategies ◦ Incident Management Strategies ◦ Variable Speed Limits Update Software Additional Workshops and Info Briefs Update Chapter 35 4

5. Schedule Methodology development – March 2012 2 nd Round Workshops – April 2012 Draft Final Report – May 2012 Draft Updated Chapter 35 – June 2012 5

6. Workshop Results Chicago & San Francisco ◦ State DOT’s eager for a method to evaluate ATDM strategies. ◦ Some concern over simplifying assumptions employed by method.  Especially modeling incidents. ◦ Software tools are still primitive. 6

7. Overview - ATDM Analysis Method 7 Challenge the System -Special Events, Weather, -Incidents, Work zones The ATDM Plan Responses - Traveler info - Dynamic Lanes/Shoulders - Ramp Metering, Signal Timing Compute Performance -Highway Capacity Manual -Micro/Meso-simulation Feedback

8. The ATDM Analysis Method 8 Performance With ATDM Performance With ATDM Start Compute Reliability Compute Reliability Before Performance Before Performance D/C Scenarios Operations Analysis Operations Analysis ATDM Plan Responses ATDM Plan Responses Before After Feedback

9. The ATDM Analysis Method 9 Performance With ATDM Performance With ATDM Start Compute Reliability Compute Reliability Before Performance Before Performance D/C Scenarios Operations Analysis Operations Analysis ATDM Plan Responses ATDM Plan Responses Before After Feedback

10. Performance Analysis Using Ops Tool Performance Analysis Using Ops Tool Performance Analysis Using Ops Tool Maintenance of Traffic Plans (MOTP) Decision Rules 30+ Scenarios Date Demand Weather Incident Date Demand Weather Incident Date Demand Weather Incident Scenario #V Demand = X Weather = Y Incident = Z 30+ Scenarios Compute Capacity and Speed Reductions Compute Capacity and Speed Reductions Compute Capacity and Speed Reductions Compute Capacity and Speed Adjustments Performance Analysis Using Ops (HCM) Tool Revise WZ/I MOTP’s Decision Rules Input Actions Results Work Zone Characteristics Work Zone & Incident MOTP’s ATDM Response – Work Zone/Incident Management VSL etc.

11. Maintenance of Traffic Plan Construction Approach ◦ Staging, sequencing, lane and ramp closure alternatives, alternative work schedules (night, weekend) Traffic Control Operations ◦ speed limit reductions, truck restrictions, signal timing (coordination and phasing), reversible lanes, physical barriers 11

12. MUTCD Typical Applications 12 Work Within the Traveled Way of a Freeway or Expressway (see Section 6G.14) Lane Shift on a FreewayTA-36 Double Lane Closure on a FreewayTA-37 Interior Lane Closure on a FreewayTA-38 Median Crossover on a FreewayTA-39 Median Crossover for an Entrance RampTA-40 Median Crossover for an Exit RampTA-41 Work in the Vicinity of an Exit RampTA-42 Partial Exit Ramp ClosureTA-43 Work in the Vicinity of an Entrance RampTA-44 Temporary Reversible Lane Using Movable BarriersTA-45

13. MUTCD TA’s – Urban Streets 13 Work Within the Traveled Way of an Urban Street (see Section 6G.11) Lane Closure on a Minor Street TA-18 Detour for One Travel Direction TA-19 Detour for a Closed Street TA-20 Work Within the Traveled Way at an Intersection and on Sidewalks (see Section 6G.13) Lane Closure on the Near Side of an IntersectionTA-21 Right-Hand Lane Closure on the Far Side of an IntersectionTA-22 Left-Hand Lane Closure on the Far Side of an IntersectionTA-23 Half Road Closure on the Far Side of an IntersectionTA-24 Multiple Lane Closures at an IntersectionTA-25 Closure in the Center of an IntersectionTA-26 Closure at the Side of an IntersectionTA-27 Sidewalk Detour or DiversionTA-28 Crosswalk Closures and Pedestrian DetoursTA-29

14. MUTCD Typical Application 14

15. ATDM Aspects of MOTP Public Information ◦ Pre-trip (511, newspapers, meetings, websites, cctv), on-site (VMS, HAR) Incident Management and Enforcement ◦ Incident management plans, traffic management centers, ITS, emergency service patrols, enhanced police enforcement. Travel Demand Management (TDM) ◦ incentives for alternative modes, park and ride. 15

16. ATDM Decision Rules Demand ◦ Peak Hours, cease activity, re-open lanes. ◦ Special event, cease activity, re-open lanes. Weather ◦ Bad weather, cease activity, re-open lanes. Incidents ◦ VSL, pre-positioned FSP, enforcement, etc. 16

17. Capacity Effects of ATDM/MOTP 17

18. HCM 2010 Table – Work Zones Not sensitive to ATDM actions 18

19. Capacity Adjustment (WZ) CAP WZ = N WZ * CPL WZ * g/C * F FFS * F DIS ◦ CAP WZ = Capacity of work zone ◦ N WZ = Number of lanes remaining open ◦ CPL WZ = The adjusted capacity of work zone per lane (From eqns. 10-9, 10-10 of HCM 2010) ◦ g/C = Percent of time lanes open through work zone ◦ F FFS = Change in free-flow speed factor ◦ F DIS = Distractive effects factor 19

20. Distractive Effects of WZ 20 No. of Work Zone Lanes Freeway Multilane Highway 2-Lane Highway Urban Street 179%TBD 281%TBD 383%TBD 485%TBD 5+87%TBD Freeway adapted from Exhibit 10-17, 2010 HCM. TBD = To be determined by further research.

21. Capacity Effects of FFS Reduct. 21 Facility TypeFreeway Multilane Highway 2-Lane Highway Urban Street Capacity Reduction per 5 mph FFS Reduction 2.1%TBD Range of Validity 70 to 55 mph TBD Source: Exh. 11-2 HCM 2010 TBD There is no freeway capacity reduction for speeds between 70 and 75 mph. TBD = To be determined by further research.

22. Enforcement Adjustment Factors to Free-Flow Speed (FFS) Enforcement Measure Enforcement Adjustment Factor (F ENF ) Static Signs 50% Flagmen 70% Dynamic Feedback Signs 80% Visibly Present Enforcement Personnel 90% Feedback Signs plus Visibly Present Enforcement 100% 22 FFS WZ = FFS NWZ + [PSL WZ -PSL NWZ ] * F ENF PSL = posted speed limit

23. Adapting HCM to WZ and Inc. 23

24. Arterial WZ Filtering Effects Check if work zone will: ◦ Filter arrivals at downstream signal ◦ Cause demand starvation at downstream signal Check if work zone queue will impact upstream signal operation Check if downstream signal queue will affect work zone capacity 24

25. 25

26. Traveler Info and TDM Effects 26 T 0 = The “Before” travel time equivalents (min) V 0 =The “Before” demands (veh) T =The “Work Zone” travel time equivalents (min) V =The “Work Zone” demands (veh) β=Beta, travel time elasticity. γ=Gamma, route diversion parameter. MP = Market Penetration (% aware).. R= Resonance of message factor. A= Anticipation factor (advance notice of event). TDM=Expected reduction in demand due to TDM incentives

27. Wrap Up Suggestions/Comments? Comments/Questions to: ◦ Jim Hunt, FHWA, jim.hunt@dot.gov ◦ Rick Dowling, rdowling@dowlinginc.com 27