The FLOW Congestion Assessment Methodology

Similar documents
Integrated Regional Traffic Management. Michael Aherne Technical Director POLIS Conference 2009

In station areas, new pedestrian links can increase network connectivity and provide direct access to stations.

A Traffic Operations Method for Assessing Automobile and Bicycle Shared Roadways

March Maidstone Integrated Transport Strategy Boxley Parish Council Briefing Note. Context. Author: Parish Clerk 2 March 2016

VILNIUS SUMP. Gintarė Krušinskaitė International project manager place your logo here

Analysing the impact of walking and cycling on urban road performance: a conceptual framework

TRANSPORTATION FACILITY PLANNING Waugh Chapel Road Maytime Drive to New Market Lane

Canada s Capital Region Delegation to the Velo-City Global 2010 Conference

Bellevue Downtown Association Downtown Bike Series

Multi-criteria Evaluation of Traffic Signal Control Manfred Boltze and Wei Jiang 1

Implementing Complete Streets in Ottawa. Project Delivery Process and Tools Complete Streets Forum 2015 October 1, 2015

Integrated Urban Mobility

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF CALEDON TRANSPORTATION NEEDS STUDY

CITY OF VAUGHAN EXTRACT FROM COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF OCTOBER 30, 2012

Subject: Solberg Avenue / I-229 Grade Separation: Traffic Analysis

Developing a Birmingham Transport Space Allocation policy. David Harris Transport Policy Manager Economy Directorate Birmingham City Council

1. Introduction. 2. Survey Method. Volume 6 Issue 5, May Licensed Under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY

Multimodal Analysis in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual

Complete Streets: Policy Framework Complete Streets: Implementation Plans A more Complete Street: Laurier Bike Lane Pilot Project

Gdynia s bicycle model

Young Researchers Seminar 2011

Moving Cambridge. City of Cambridge Transportation Master Plan Public Consultation Centre. March 7, :00 8:00 PM.

Using FLOW s Multimodal Transport Analysis Techniques

Welcome. If you have any questions or comments on the project, please contact:

Corporate. Report COUNCIL DATE: June 26, 2006 NO: C012 COUNCIL-IN-COMMITTEE. TO: Mayor & Council DATE: June 22, 2006

Mobility measures in Vitoria-Gasteiz

MAYFIELD ROAD CORRIDOR MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN. Public Workshop

Performance Criteria for 2035 Long Range Transportation Plan

Multi-modal performance measures: Are we getting an A? Madeline Brozen Herbie Huff UCLA Institute of Transportation Studies Webinar 9/16/14

CITY OF HAMILTON PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Transportation Planning and Parking Division

Regional Bus Priority

City of Ottawa s Complete Streets Approach to Transportation Projects

ONE SIZE DOESN T FIT ALL RECONCILING OVERLAPPING TRANSPORT NETWORKS IN A CONSTRAINED URBAN ENVIRONMENT

KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS FOR URBAN ITS

9. Parking Supporting Statement

Update June 2018 OUR 2017 PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT

HAVE DUTCH CITIES MADE THE TRANSITION TOWARDS NON- MOTORISED TRANSPORT?

Multimodal Arterial Level of Service

Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan for Aberdeen, Scotland. Louise Napier Senior Planner Aberdeen City Council

Comments on the Hailsham to Eastbourne Sustainable Transport Corridor

MONTGOMERY COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT THE MARYLAND-NATIONAL CAPITAL PARK AND PLANNING COMMISSION

APPENDIX 2 LAKESHORE ROAD TRANSPORTATION REVIEW STUDY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

CITY OF COCOA BEACH 2025 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. Section VIII Mobility Element Goals, Objectives, and Policies

2. Context. Existing framework. The context. The challenge. Transport Strategy

Moving Towards Complete Streets MMLOS Applications

DRAFT. Memo. Range of the Alternatives Considered in the EIS

Toronto and East York Community Council. Director, Transportation Services, Toronto and East York District

Capacity and Level of Service LOS

Applying Bi-objective Shortest Path Methods to Model Cycle Route-choice

Green mobility and traffic safety in Copenhagen

Roadways. Roadways III.

University of Victoria Campus Cycling Plan Terms of Reference. 1.0 Project Description

Bicycle Master Plan Goals, Strategies, and Policies

CONDUITS DST-Tel Aviv-Yafo Case Study

Solana Beach Comprehensive Active Transportation Strategy (CATS)

WEST YORKSHIRE LTP CYCLE PROSPECTUS

Draft MOBILITY ELEMENET. Community Meeting May 22, 2013

HIGHBURY AVENUE/HAMILTON ROAD INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE 1 MAY 14, 2015

ATTACHMENT 4 - TDM Checklist. TDM Checklist Overview

Birmingham Connected. Edmund Salt. Transportation Policy Birmingham City Council

PBIC Webinar. How to Create a Bicycle Safety Action Plan: Planning for Safety [IMAGE] Oct. 2, 2014, 2 pm

OTC TRANSPORTATION PLANNING WORKSHOP

Cycle Traffic and The Strategic Road Network. John Parkin and Phil Jones Presenting on behalf of Highways England

MOBILITY CHALLENGES IN HILL CITIES

THE IMPACT OF ROAD IMPROVEMENTS ON ROAD SAFETY AND RELATED CHARACTERISTICS

City of White Rock. Strategic Transportation Plan. May 16, 2005

Oxfordshire Local Transport Plan 4 Science Vale Cycle Network Project Proposal Didcot Ladygrove Link

Living Streets Policy

Complete Street Analysis of a Road Diet: Orange Grove Boulevard, Pasadena, CA

Chapter 5 Future Transportation

Planning Guidance in the 2012 AASHTO Bike Guide

Route 7 Corridor Study

PEDESTRIAN ACTION PLAN

Enabling Automation-Ready Transport Planning

Public Transportation and Bicycle & Pedestrian Stakeholder Webinar. April 11, :30 PM

Conversation of at Grade Signalized Intersection in to Grade Separated Intersection

ABERDEEN: CITY OF THE FUTURE

San Jose Transportation Policy

Toward Zero Deaths. Regional SHSP Road Show Meeting. Virginia Strategic Highway Safety Plan. presented by

Urban Street Design and Development

Sustainable Transportation Initiatives and Plans in Caledon

Performance Metrics: [Making lemonade out of federal and state Requirements]

Baseline Road Rapid Transit: Bayshore Station to Prince of Wales Drive

Purpose and Need. Chapter Introduction. 2.2 Project Purpose and Need Project Purpose Project Need

METHODOLOGY. Signalized Intersection Average Control Delay (sec/veh)

TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS

Cycling and risk. Cycle facilities and risk management

Zlatko Krstulich, P.Eng. City of O9awa

Finding a bicycle route that offers a high Level of Service in Adelaide

Bicycle Facilities Planning

US 41 COMPLETE STREETS CORRIDOR PLANNING STUDY from University Parkway to Whitfield Avenue

Omaha s Complete Streets Policy

International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology. (A High Impact Factor, Monthly, Peer Reviewed Journal)

West Village Mobility & Integration

EFFECTS OF TRANSIT SIGNAL PRIORITY ON BUS RAPID TRANSIT SYSTEM. Sahil Chawla, Shalini Sinha and Khelan Modi

El Paso County 2040 Major Transportation Corridors Plan

2.0 LANE WIDTHS GUIDELINE

Light Rail Transit in North Central Calgary Open House and Workshop Summary. Summer 2013

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... vii 1 STUDY OVERVIEW Study Scope Study Area Study Objectives

MAG Town of Cave Creek Bike Study Task 6 Executive Summary and Regional Significance Report

Transcription:

The FLOW Congestion Assessment Methodology Frederic Rudolph FLOW Webinar 30 th January 2017 Funded by the Horizon 2020 Framework Programme of the European Union

2 Agenda 1 2 3 4 Definition of congestion/transport network performance Operationalisation of definition Selection of KPIs Calculation & Aggregation of KPIs Determination of multimodal congestion threshold 1. Definition of congestion 2. Operationalisation of Definition: Selection of KPIs a) Network level determination b) Priority setting 3. Calculation a) Mode-specific calculation b) Aggregation 4. Determination of multimodal congestion threshold

3 FLOW impact assessment overview Congestio n Mobility Impacts Transport Network Performance Further Impacts Environment Society Private Business Public Financing Infrastructure, Maintenance, Operation Socio-Economic Impacts

4 Multimodal definition of congestion Definition of congestion/transport network performance Operationalisation of definition Selection of KPIs Aggregation Calculation & Aggregation of KPIs Determination of multimodal congestion threshold Congestion is a state of traffic affecting all modes on a multimodal transport network (e.g. road, cycle facilities, pavements, bus lane) characterised by high densities and overused infrastructure compared to an acceptable state across all modes against previously-agreed targets and thereby leads to (perceived or actual) delay. Both motorised and non-motorised modes Demand and capacity Adaptability to local circumstances The user perspective

5 Operationalisation of definition Definition of congestion/transport network performance Operationalisation of definition Selection of KPIs Aggregation Calculation & Aggregation of KPIs Determination of multimodal congestion threshold Technical basis for operationalisation Definition & KPI selection was based on: Literature review Recommendation of technical guidelines Expert survey

6 Selection of KPI Definition of congestion/transport network performance Operationalisation of definition Selection of KPIs Aggregation Calculation & Aggregation of KPIs Determination of multimodal congestion threshold Delay is the additional time experienced by a traffic participant as compared to the minimum travel time Density is a measure of the number of persons or vehicles using a given space Travel time related: Delay Demand oriented: Density Service quality related LOS LOS reflects the quality of service experienced by traffic participants under different levels of use of infrastructure (free flow/free movement breakdown, congestion)

7 Operationalisation of definition Network level determination: Depending on scope of walking & cycling measure Priority setting: Determined by city based on own objectives (numbers below are exemplary) Measure Affected network element Transport mode Weighting factor prioritisation of cycling: construction of a new cycling lane separate cycle lane (extension) lanes for motorised traffic (reduced width) car 1 public transport 1 cyclist 3 pedestrian 1

8 Calculation and aggregation Definition of congestion/transport network performance Operationalisation of definition Selection of KPIs Aggregation Calculation & Aggregation of KPIs Determination of multimodal congestion threshold Delay Density Level of Service

9 Delay Mean delay on turning movement per transport mode (s/pers) Mean delay per transport mode as difference between actual and minimal travel time (s/pers)

10 Density Density by transport mode (veh/km; pers/m 2 pers/km)

11 Level of Service (LOS) Junction (from delay) Segment (from density) Corridor (from delay) Junction: based on mean delay per transport mode Segment: based on mean density (e.g. DR, speed index) per transport mode

12 LOS thresholds car public transit cycle pedestrian LOS car mean delay (s/veh) PT mean delay (s/veh) cycle max.delay (s/veh) pedestrian max. delay (s/ped) utility points range of utility points Delay A 20 5 30 30 110 101-120 B 35 15 40 40 90 81-100 C 50 25 55 55 70 61-80 D 70 40 70 70 50 41-60 E >70 60 85 85 30 21-40 F - >60 >85 >85 10 1-20 Density LOS car public transport cycle pedestrian car density (veh/km) PuT travel speed index (-) cycle disturbance rate DR unidirect. traffic (D/cycle/km) pedestrian density (pers/m 2 ) utility points range of utility points A 7 2,00 <1 0,10 110 101-120 B 14 1,50 <3 0,25 90 81-100 C 23 1,25 <5 0,60 70 61-80 D 34 1,00 <10 1,30 50 41-60 E 45 0,75 >10 1,90 30 21-40 F >45 <0,75 - >1,90 10 1-20

13 Aggregation from KPI to MPI key performance indicator multimodal performance index Calculation of mode-specific variables in own units (density: veh/km; pers/m 2 ; delay: s/veh, s/pers; LOS: A-F) Transformation of mode-specific variables into the same unit (LOS: utility points) Aggregation of transformed values into one multimodal index (2 weighting factors) traffic volumes (pers/h) priority factor (set by the city)

Multimodal LOS: Aggregation LOS utility points range of utility points A 110 101-120 B 90 81-100 C 70 61-80 D 50 41-60 E 30 21-40 LOS E+F are usually considered as undesired and congested F 10 1-20

Multimodal LOS: Aggregation example 140 140 140 120 120 120 Utility points [-] Utility points 100 80 60 Utility points [-] Utility points 100 80 60 Utility points [-] Utility points 100 80 60 40 40 40 20 A B C D E-F 20 A B C D E-F 20 A B C D E-F 0 0 0 0 15 30 35 40 48 55 63 70 78 85 88 90 Density 0 15 30 35 40 48 55 63 Density 70 78 85 88 90 0 15 30 35 40 48 55 63 70 Disturbance rate (DR) 78 85 88 90 Delay [s] Delay [s] Delay [s] Utility points = 50 Utility points = 70 Utility points = 70 Weighting = 1 Weighting = 1 Weighting = 3 Traffic volume (pers/h) = 2000 Traffic volume (pers/h) = 1000 Traffic volume (pers/h) = 300 MPI = 60 (D) Slide based on: Nora Szabo, PTV

16 Achievements The proposed methodology consists of: calculating the performance and capacity of each transport mode independently the KPI delay is evaluated on a person basis rather than a vehicle basis (following the premise of moving people, as opposed to vehicles) offering an aggregation procedure to create a multimodal performance index providing the option to apply a weighting in the aggregation process so that the index can be adjusted to reflect the strategic priorities of a city taking into account the user perspective ( minimum / acceptable travel time)

17 Thank you! frederic rudolph@wupperinst.org +49-202-2494-230