National Academies Press: OpenBook
Page i
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Evaluating the Performance of Corridors with Roundabouts. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22348.
×
Page R1
Page ii
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Evaluating the Performance of Corridors with Roundabouts. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22348.
×
Page R2
Page iii
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Evaluating the Performance of Corridors with Roundabouts. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22348.
×
Page R3
Page iv
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Evaluating the Performance of Corridors with Roundabouts. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22348.
×
Page R4
Page v
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Evaluating the Performance of Corridors with Roundabouts. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22348.
×
Page R5
Page vi
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Evaluating the Performance of Corridors with Roundabouts. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22348.
×
Page R6
Page vii
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2014. Evaluating the Performance of Corridors with Roundabouts. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/22348.
×
Page R7

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 772 Evaluating the Performance of Corridors with Roundabouts Lee A. Rodegerdts Pete M. Jenior Zachary H. Bugg Brian L. Ray Kittelson & AssociAtes, inc. Portland, OR i n a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h Bastian J. Schroeder institute for trAnsportAtion reseArch And educAtion Raleigh, NC Marcus A. Brewer texAs A&M trAnsportAtion institute College Station, TX Subscriber Categories Highways • Design • Operations and Traffic Management TRANSPORTAT ION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2014 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 Board’s 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 772 Project 03-100 ISSN 0077-5614 ISBN 978-0-309-28414-1 Library of Congress Control Number 2014941494 © 2014 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 manufacturers’ 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. On 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, on its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg 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 Academy’s 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 Board’s 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 CRP STAFF FOR NCHRP REPORT 772 Christopher W. Jenks, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Christopher Hedges, Manager, National Cooperative Highway Research Program Lori L. Sundstrom, Senior Program Officer Megan A. Chamberlain, Senior Program Assistant Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Scott E. Hitchcock, Editor NCHRP PROJECT 03-100 PANEL Field of Traffic—Area of Operations and Control Philip B. Demosthenes, Consultant, Denver, CO (Chair) Stephen A. Bass, Kansas DOT, Topeka, KS Wylie Bearup, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ Sarah Bowman, Coady | Bowman LLC, Anchorage, AK Robert E. Fenton, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH Theron I. “Terry” Knouse, Virginia DOT, Richmond, VA Mark S. Lenters, GHD Inc., Madison, WI Avijit Maji, Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay, Mumbai Dina Maria Swires, Washington State DOT, Burlington, WA Hillary Isebrands, FHWA Liaison Richard A. Cunard, TRB Liaison

F O R E W O R D By Lori L. Sundstrom Staff Officer Transportation Research Board NCHRP Report 772: Evaluating the Performance of Corridors with Roundabouts provides performance measurement and evaluation methods, including a predictive model for travel speed and an overarching comparison framework, for comparing the performance of a corridor with a functionally interdependent series of roundabouts to a corridor with signal- ized intersections in order to arrive at a design solution. For the purposes of this research, a “series of roundabouts” is defined as at least three roundabouts that function interde- pendently on an arterial. These evaluation methods will be of use to traffic engineers and transportation planners. Roundabouts are increasingly recognized as an intersection control strategy that can ful- fill multiple performance goals related to traffic operation and safety, as well as meet soci- etal goals related to sustainability, livability, complete streets, context sensitive design, eco- nomic development, and others. Some transportation agencies have recently constructed or approved the use of a series of roundabouts on an arterial rather than the traditional solution of coordinated signalized intersections. While there are anecdotal reports suggest- ing that functionally interdependent roundabouts on a corridor are successful in meeting performance goals, little research has been conducted to determine objectively the efficacy of this alternative as compared to signalized intersections. The performance of traffic signal systems on arterials is well researched and documented, and methods to predict their performance are well established. Performance measures for isolated roundabouts exist, and safety research has consistently shown that roundabouts have lower fatal and injury crash frequencies when compared to signalized intersections. In contrast, qualitative and quantitative information on the performance of a set of function- ally interdependent roundabouts on arterials is lacking. Under NCHRP Project 03-100, Kittelson & Associates, Inc. of Portland, Oregon, was asked to (1) conduct a literature review and gap analysis, (2) develop proposed perfor- mance measures and evaluation methods and conduct a field demonstration of the sug- gested performance measures and evaluation methods on existing arterials, and (3) sug- gest appropriate performance measures and evaluation methods. The research resulted in the development of a predictive model for travel speed on a roundabout corridor and an overall framework for comparing alternative corridor configurations that acknowledges a wide range of project catalysts that may influence decision making. Appendix A of NCHRP Report 772 contains the “Corridor Comparison Document.” Appendices B through O con- tain data on each of the nine roundabout corridors selected for detailed study; the appendi- ces are available for downloading from the project webpage at http://apps.trb.org/cmsfeed/ TRBNetProjectDisplay.asp?ProjectID=2950.

AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The research reported herein was performed under NCHRP Project 03-100 by Kittelson & Associates, Inc.; Institute for Transportation Research and Education; Texas A&M Transportation Institute; and Write Rhetoric. Kittelson & Associates, Inc., was the Contractor for this study. The work undertaken by other project team members occurred under subcontracts with Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Lee Rodegerdts, P.E., Principal Engineer, Kittelson & Associates, Inc., was the principal investigator. Brian Ray, P.E., Senior Principal Engineer, Kittelson & Associates, Inc., was project principal. The other authors of this report are Pete Jenior, P.E., P.T.O.E., Senior Engineer, Kittelson & Associates, Inc.; Dr. Zachary Bugg, Transportation Analyst, Kittelson & Associates, Inc.; Dr. Bastian Schroeder, Assistant Director, Institute for Transportation Research and Education, North Carolina State University; and Mar- cus Brewer, P.E., Associate Research Engineer, Texas Transportation Institute, Texas A & M University. During the project, Dr. Bugg graduated from North Carolina State University and joined Kittelson & Associates, Inc. The project team acknowledges others who played significant roles in the project. Dr. James Bonneson, Kittelson & Associates, Inc., and Dr. Nagui Rouphail, Institute for Transportation Research and Educa- tion, provided senior review and guidance. Liang Ding and Steven Venglar of Texas A&M Transportation Institute conducted traffic operations analysis. Christopher Vaughn, Michael Corwin, Kyle Hovey, and David Craft of Institute for Transportation Research and Education and Martin Fuest and Christopher White of Texas A&M Transportation Institute assisted with field data collection, processing, and analysis. Ralph Bentley and Jesus Culler of Kittelson & Associates, Inc., developed graphics. Danica Rhodes of Write Rhetoric provided technical editing. Traffic counts were collected by Quality Counts, LLC. The project team acknowledges the contributions of corridor owners who participated in interviews with the authors and provided as-built plans of study roundabouts. These individuals are: Mike Nieder- hauser of Maryland State Highway Administration; Siavash Pazargadi of the City of San Diego; Mike McBride of the City of Carmel; Marcos McGraw of the City of Gig Harbor; Brian Walsh, Dina Swires, and Dustin Terpening of Washington State Department of Transportation; Dan Hartman of the City of Golden; Justin Hildreth of the City of Avon; and Mark Kennedy, James Boni, and Howard McCulloch of New York State Department of Transportation. Finally, the research team also acknowledges the guidance, support, and inspiration provided by the NCHRP Project 03-100 Panel Chair and Panel Members throughout the course of the project and research efforts. These panel members customized and adapted their participation in the research to provide an improved product.

C O N T E N T S Note: Many of the photographs, figures, and tables in this report 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. S-1 Summary 1-1 Chapter 1 Background 1-1 1.1 Problem Statement 1-1 1.2 Research Objective 1-3 1.3 Background and Literature Review 2-1 Chapter 2 Research Approach 2-1 2.1 Corridor Comparison Document 2-2 2.2 Study Site Identification 2-7 2.3 Data Collection Plan 2-17 2.4 Site Characteristics Summary 2-21 2.5 Corridor Owner Interviews 2-34 2.6 Conclusion 3-1 Chapter 3 Modeling 3-1 3.1 Background 3-2 3.2 Modeling Framework 3-17 3.3 Modeling Results 3-39 3.4 Model Validation and Application 3-55 3.5 Equivalent Non-Roundabout Corridors 3-62 3.6 Summary 4-1 Chapter 4 Applications 4-1 4.1 Corridor Comparison Document 4-6 4.2 Predictive Operations Methodology 5-1 Chapter 5 Conclusions and Suggested Research 5-1 5.1 Conclusions 5-4 5.2 Suggested Research R-1 References A-1 Appendix A Corridor Comparison Document

Next: Summary »
Evaluating the Performance of Corridors with Roundabouts Get This Book
×
 Evaluating the Performance of Corridors with Roundabouts
Buy Paperback | $80.00
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 772: Evaluating the Performance of Corridors with Roundabouts provides measurement and evaluation methods for comparing the performance of a corridor with a functionally interdependent series of roundabouts to a corridor with signalized intersections in order to arrive at a design solution.

For the purposes of this research, a “series of roundabouts” is defined as at least three roundabouts that function interdependently on an arterial.

READ FREE ONLINE

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!