Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
N A T I O N A L C O O P E R A T I V E H I G H W A Y R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M NCHRP REPORT 803 Pedestrian and Bicycle Transportation Along Existing RoadsâActiveTrans Priority Tool Guidebook Peter A. Lagerwey Michael J. Hintze James B. Elliott Jennifer L. Toole Toole Design group Silver Spring, MD Robert J. Schneider universiTy of WisconsinâMilWaukee Milwaukee, WI i n a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Reston, VA Subscriber Categories Pedestrians and Bicyclists â¢ Administration and Management â¢ Planning and Forecasting TRANSPORTAT ION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2015 www.TRB.org Research sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration
NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Systematic, well-designed research provides the most effective approach to the solution of many problems facing highway administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local interest and can best be studied by highway departments individually or in cooperation with their state universities and others. However, the accelerating growth of highway transportation develops increasingly complex problems of wide interest to highway authorities. These problems are best studied through a coordinated program of cooperative research. In recognition of these needs, the highway administrators of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials initiated in 1962 an objective national highway research program employing modern scientific techniques. This program is supported on a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of the Association and it receives the full cooperation and support of the Federal Highway Administration, United States Department of Transportation. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies was requested by the Association to administer the research program because of the Boardâs recognized objectivity and understanding of modern research practices. The Board is uniquely suited for this purpose as it maintains an extensive committee structure from which authorities on any highway transportation subject may be drawn; it possesses avenues of communications and cooperation with federal, state and local governmental agencies, universities, and industry; its relationship to the National Research Council is an insurance of objectivity; it maintains a full-time research correlation staff of specialists in highway transportation matters to bring the findings of research directly to those who are in a position to use them. The program is developed on the basis of research needs identified by chief administrators of the highway and transportation departments and by committees of AASHTO. Each year, specific areas of research needs to be included in the program are proposed to the National Research Council and the Board by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Research projects to fulfill these needs are defined by the Board, and qualified research agencies are selected from those that have submitted proposals. Administration and surveillance of research contracts are the responsibilities of the National Research Council and the Transportation Research Board. The needs for highway research are many, and the National Cooperative Highway Research Program can make significant contributions to the solution of highway transportation problems of mutual concern to many responsible groups. The program, however, is intended to complement rather than to substitute for or duplicate other highway research programs. Published reports of the NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from: Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet at: http://www.national-academies.org/trb/bookstore Printed in the United States of America NCHRP REPORT 803 Project 07-17 ISSN 0077-5614 ISBN 978-0-309-30854-0 Library of Congress Control Number 2015934797 Â© 2015 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FMCSA, FTA, or Transit Development Corporation endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. NOTICE The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program, conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The members of the technical panel selected to monitor this project and to review this report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance. The report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research Council, and the sponsors of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturersâ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report.
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academyâs purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board is one of six major divisions of the National Research Council. The mission of the Transporta- tion Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Boardâs varied activities annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individu- als interested in the development of transportation. www.TRB.org www.national-academies.org
C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M S AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This guidebook was prepared under NCHRP Project 07-17 by Toole Design Group, LLC. Peter Lagerwey was the Principal Investigator. Robert Schneider, Ph.D., Assistant Professor University of Wisconsinâ Milwaukee served as the Co-Principal Investigator. In addition to Mr. Lagerwey and Dr. Schneider, primary authors of this report included Michael Hintze, AICP, LEEDÂ® AP; James Elliott, AICP; and Jennifer Toole, AICP, ASLA of Toole Design Group. Contributing authors included Karla Kingsley; Matt Bell; Joe Bessman, P.E., P.T.O.E.; Erin Ferguson, P.E.; and Jessica Horning of Kittelson & Associates, Inc., as well as Benjamin Sigrist (Toole Design Group), Daniel Goodman, AICP (when with Toole Design Group) and Jamie Parks (when with Kittelson & Associates). CRP STAFF FOR NCHRP REPORT 803 Christopher W. Jenks, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Christopher J. Hedges, Manager, National Cooperative Highway Research Program Sheila A. Moore, Program Associate Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Scott E. Hitchcock, Editor NCHRP PROJECT 07-17 PANEL Field of TrafficâArea of Traffic Planning J. Michael Y. Ereti, Gunda Corporation, Houston, TX (Chair) Ilona Ottilia Kastenhofer, Virginia DOT, Charlottesville, VA Melissa A. Anderson, US Access Board, Washington, DC Catherine Lynn Cagle, Waltham, MA Frederick C. Dock, City of Pasadena DOT, Pasadena, CA Margaret M. âPeggyâ Gibbs, Insurance Corporation of British Columbia, North Vancouver, BC Sarah W. OâBrien, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC Christopher B. Douwes, FHWA Liaison Matthew Lesh, FTA Liaison Jameelah Hayes, AASHTO Liaison Bernardo Kleiner, TRB Liaison
This guidebook presents the âActiveTrans Priority Tool (APT),â a step-by-step method- ology for prioritizing improvements to pedestrian and bicycle facilities, either separately or together as part of a âcomplete streetsâ evaluation approach. The methodology is flexible, allowing the user to assign goals and values that reflect those of the agency and the commu- nity. It is also transparent, breaking down the process into a series of discrete steps that can be easily documented and communicated to the public. The guidebook is supplemented by a CD that contains a programmed spreadsheet to facilitate implementation of the ActiveTrans methodology, as well as a final report that documents the research approach, findings, and conclusions.* The guidebook will be very useful to planners and other staff responsible for the most effective allocation of scarce resources to where they will provide the most benefit. Conditions for pedestrians along existing roads and bridges have wide-ranging impacts on whether public transportation services are used, whether students walk to school, whether people walk to local services, and whether people walk for general health. Over the years, sidewalks have not been included on many arterial, collector, or even local roads and bridges on the United States road network. Where sidewalk segments do exist along roadways, they are often not connected, leaving the sidewalk networks fragmented. The accessibility of the road system for pedestrians is inhibited not only by the lack of sidewalks, but also on other missing facilities such as safe crossing areas and waiting areas for transit services. The lack of adequate bicycle facilities has also been an issue. While bicyclists can take advantage of the existing roadway system, there are situations in which improved facilities would be particularly beneficial. These situations may involve younger and inexperienced riders or areas where there are large differentials in speed between bicycle and vehicular traffic (e.g., high-speed rural roads and freeways). When needs are addressed with limited resources, the basic steps to fulfilling these needs include identifying the problem, quantifying the problem, identifying cost-effective solu- tions, prioritizing needs, securing funding, and ensuring implementation. These steps are well established for new highway projects at the federal, state, and local levels, where well- developed methodologies, processes, and dedicated funding sources exist to improve con- ditions for vehicular traffic. However, such processes are rarely in place to add or improve F O R E W O R D By Christopher J. Hedges Staff Officer Transportation Research Board *Notice to readers regarding the CD accompanying this report, CRP-CD-163: the CD menu will only open in Silverlight-compatible browsers. If your browser does not have the Silverlight plugin installed, you will be prompted to install or activate the plugin. See the readme file on the disk for further information.
pedestrian or bicycle facilities to the existing roadway network. In fact, the number of pedestrian and bicyclist facilities that would benefit from retrofitting is largely unknown. Furthermore, walking and biking needs are often considered jointly within an organization, although the needs of each may be quite different. Under NCHRP Project 07-17, a research team led by the Toole Design Group developed ActiveTrans, a prioritization tool and guidebook based on an extensive review of research and in-depth interviews. ActiveTrans takes the user through a prioritization process using 10 essential steps: defining the purpose of the prioritization exercise, selecting factors that reflect agency and community objectives, assigning weights to the various factors, select- ing variables that can be measured, assessing available data, assessing available technical resources, setting up the tool, measuring and inputting data, scaling the variables to ensure they are comparable, and creating a list of projects in priority ranking. The draft methodol- ogy was pilot tested in 11 separate agencies, and the feedback acquired was used to enhance and refine the final version.
Note: Photographs, figures, and tables in this report may have been converted from color to grayscale for printing. The electronic version of the report (posted on the web at www.trb.org) retains the color versions. 1 ActiveTrans Priority Tool Overview 1 How the ActiveTrans Priority Tool May Be Used 2 Key Terms 3 Phase I: Scoping 4 Phase II: Prioritization 5 ActiveTrans Priority Tool Phase I: Scoping 5 Step 1: Define Purpose 5 Step 2: Select Factors 9 Step 3: Establish Factor Weights 11 Step 4: Select Variables 20 Step 5: Assess Data 32 Step 6: Assess Technical Resources 38 Phase I: Conclusion 39 ActiveTrans Priority Tool Phase II: Prioritization 39 Step 7: Set Up Prioritization Tool 40 Step 8: Measure and Input Data 41 Step 9: Scale Variables 47 Step 10: Create Ranked List 51 Conclusion 52 Appendix A Programmed Spreadsheet User Guide 52 Introduction 52 Step 1: Define Purpose 55 Step 2: Select Factors 55 Step 3: Establish Factor Weights 56 Step 4: Select Variables 58 Step 5: Assess Data 58 Step 6: Assess Technical Resources 59 Step 7: Set Up Prioritization Tool 59 Step 8: Measure and Input Data 60 Step 9: Scale Variables 67 Step 10: Create Ranked List 70 Appendix B Guidance for Utilizing GIS with the ActiveTrans Priority Tool 77 Appendix C Existing Condition and Demand Variable References 83 Appendix D Guidebook References and Resources C O N T E N T S