NCHRP Project Production of a Major Update to the Highway Capacity Manual 2010

Transcription

1 NCHRP Project Production of a Major Update to the Highway Capacity Manual 2010 Working Paper #3 HCM 2010 Update Audience, Purpose, and Need Prepared by: Wayne Kittelson Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Prepared for: National Cooperative Highway Research Program Transportation Research Board National Research Council Transportation Research Board NAS-NRC LIMITED USE DOCUMENT This report, not released for publication, is furnished only for to members of, or participants in the work of, the National Cooperative Highway Research Program. It is to be regarded as fully privileged, and dissemination of the information included herein must be approved by the NCHRP. December 13, 2013 Kittelson & Associates, Inc. ITRE at North Carolina State University McTrans Center University of Florida Dr. Roger Roess Strong Concepts Write Rhetoric

2 Table of Contents Table of Contents 1. Introduction HCM User Feedback Results Findings and Conclusion... 4 i

3 Introduction 1. Introduction The vision for the HCM was extensively examined, discussed, and documented in the work leading up to the production of the HCM The vision that resulted from this effort is articulated in Volume 1 of the Manual in the form of statements describing the Manual s purpose and objectives; its intended use; and its target users: Purpose and Objectives: The purpose of the HCM is to provide a set of methodologies, and associated application procedures, for evaluating the multimodal performance of highway and street facilities in terms of operational measures and one or more quality-of-service indicators. The objectives of the HCM are to 1. Define performance measures and describe survey methods for key traffic characteristics, 2. Provide methodologies for estimating and predicting performance measures, and 3. Explain methodologies at a level of detail that allows readers to understand the factors affecting multimodal operation. The HCM 2010 presents the best available techniques at the time of publishing for determining capacity and LOS. However, it does not establish a legal standard for highway design or construction. Intended Use: The HCM is intended to be used primarily for the analysis areas listed below, to the extent that they are supported by the individual analysis methodologies. Levels of analysis: operations, design, preliminary engineering, and planning. Travel modes: automobile (and other motorized vehicles), pedestrian, and bicycle, plus transit when it is part of a multimodal urban street facility. Spatial coverage: points, segments, and facilities. Temporal coverage: undersaturated and oversaturated conditions. Target Users: The HCM is prepared for use by (a) engineers who work in the field of traffic operations or highway geometric design and (b) transportation planners who work in the field of transportation system management. To use the manual effectively and to apply its methodologies, some technical background is desirable typically university-level training or technical work in a public agency or consulting firm. The HCM is also useful to management personnel, educators, air quality specialists, noise specialists, elected officials, regional land use planners, and interest groups representing special users. 1

4 Introduction This working paper assesses whether the audience, purpose, and/or need associated with HCM 2010 have changed sufficiently since its publishing that modifications are now appropriate. This assessment relies on the results of a recent and extensive HCM user survey, which have been previously documented in Working Paper 2.1, HCM 2010 User Feedback. 2

5 HCM User Feedback Results 2. HCM User Feedback Results User feedback on HCM 2010 was collected and assessed from several different sources, including: McTrans staff interactions within the context of technical support communications; Google Analytics data collected whenever users access HCM Volume 4; Interpretation Requests received since HCM 2010 was published; and A user survey conducted as part of NCHRP and in conjunction with preparation of Working Paper 2.1, HCM 2010 User Feedback. Results from these activities, as they relate to the HCM 2010 vision statements, are generally summarized as follows: Users are currently employing the HCM for its intended purposes and objectives. Most of the current HCM use centers around the application and understanding of methodologies specific to the users immediate (short-term) needs. The HCM is used by some to define performance measures and to assist in establishing and conducting survey methods, but these uses are not as prevalent as those noted above. The vast majority (80 percent) of users does not believe there has been a significant change in the HCM s purpose, intended use, or audience relative to what is already stated in HCM Modifications recommended for the HCM s purpose, intended use, and audiences are actually commentary about the relative importance or prioritization of categories already included in HCM 2010; they do not recommend additions or deletions to the categories already identified in the current HCM 2010 vision statement. A relatively small percent (14%) of current users support the importance of incorporating travel time reliability, ATDM and/or MAP-21 performance measures into an updated HCM. Most current users seem to agree that travel time reliability and ATDM are more appropriate for inclusion within the HCM than MAP-21 performance measures, which they believe are still in a state of flux. 3

6 Findings and Conclusion 3. Findings and Conclusion There is no immediate and compelling need to add, delete, or modify any statement contained within the HCM 2010 s current characterization of its purpose and scope. The large majority of HCM users is still in an active stage of familiarizing themselves with the contents of HCM 2010 and is focused upon its applicability to the immediate problem(s) they face. They have not identified any critical limitations in the Manual s current scope, nor do they argue that the current scope is too inclusive. They do have suggestions regarding points of emphasis and priority but these suggestions do not translate into any recommendation for change in the overall vision being addressed by the Manual. Therefore it is concluded that the vision as articulated in Chapter 1 of HCM 2010 is still valid and appropriate for use without change in the HCM update currently underway. 4