Multi-Modal Level of Service Toolkit
Florida DOT MMLOS
Overview Florida DOT (FDOT) developed a multi-modal evaluation tool in 2009 based on the 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual (TCQSM), and the Landis Bicycle and Pedestrian LOS Models. The tool allows for two levels of analysis: generalized planning, appropriate for broad applications such as statewide or regional planning and long range estimates, and preliminary engineering, appropriate for facility designs and alternatives analysis at the project level. Bicycle LOS FDOT uses the Landis Bicycle LOS Model (1997) to calculate bicycle quality/level of service (Q/LOS). This model considers the following variables: Average effective width of the outside through lane Motorized vehicle volumes Motorized vehicle speeds Heavy vehicle (truck) volumes Pavement condition Transit LOS Transit Q/LOS follows the methodologies described in TCRP 100: Transit Capacity and Level of Service (2003). For FDOT’s software, transit Q/LOS is primarily dependent on service frequency, although it also considers pedestrian LOS, roadway crossing difficulty, and obstacles to bus stops. Versatility FDOT’s MMLOS methods are designed for application in rural, suburban and urban settings.
Pedestrian LOS FDOT uses the Landis Pedestrian LOS Model (2001) to calculate pedestrian Q/LOS. This model considers the following variables: Existence of a sidewalk Lateral separation of pedestrians from motorized vehicles Motorized vehicle volumes Motorized vehicle speeds
Auto LOS FDOT uses HCM 2000 standards to measure auto capacity and LOS.
Table 1: Service Frequency and LOS
Figure 1, at right, shows how transit service frequency, the major component of FDOT’s Transit LOS score, directly affects transit riders. Source: 2009 FDOT Quality/Level of Service Handbook
Potential Applications Transportation Master Plans General Plans
Advantages
Strong basis in research Free MMLOS evaluation software (LOSPLAN) Relatively fewer data inputs than HCM 2010 Can be applied in rural, suburban and urban settings
Bicycle/Pedestrian
Master Plans Development Review
Disadvantages
Difficult to compare across modes Requires use of LOSPLAN software
Challenges of Comparing across Modes FDOT has been struggling with the different LOS meaning for different modes. Although each of the methodologies makes use of the LOS A-F scales, the rate of degradation is not consistent across modes. For example, LOS D is may be considered manageable for cars and transit but poor for bicycle and pedestrians. FDOT and its research team considered various methods to make the LOS thresholds more consistent across modes, but found no scientific basis to adjust LOS scales for individual modes. Caution is recommended when comparing the same LOS letter grade across the modes.
Sample Applications FDOT uses its MMLOS standards in the development review process for regionally significant projects. The City of Jacksonville used FDOT MMLOS analysis methods in the development of its 2030 Mobility Plan. Data Requirements Bicycle LOS requires: Peak and daily average volumes for motorized vehicles Presence and width of bicycle lane, outside through lane and shoulder Total number of directional through lanes Speed limit/average running speed of traffic Percentage of heavy vehicles Pavement condition (according to FHWA’s fivepoint rating system) Percentage of segment with occupied on-street parking Pedestrian LOS requires: Width of outside traffic lane, bicycle lane and parking lane Percentage of segment with occupied on-street parking Total number of directional through lanes Speed limit or average running speed of traffic Presence and width of sidewalk Presence and width of buffer between sidewalk and street
Data inputs for Auto LOS and Transit LOS as per HCM 2000 and TCQSM, respectively.
Figure 1: Pedestrian LOS in existing street network, Jacksonville, Florida.
Source: Jacksonville 2030 Mobility Plan