2014Transportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research BoardRequires access

Comparing Measures and Variables in Multimodal Street Performance Calculations

Madeline Brozen, T N Black, Robin Liggett

Open publisher page 1 citations

Abstract

Scholars, municipalities, and federal agencies have proposed new measures for evaluating street performance for nonautomobile modes, including transit service, bicycles, and walking. These changes are in response to the critique that the current street performance measure, traditional level of service (LOS), overemphasizes the free flow of automobile traffic and neglects other users of the transportation system. Although the promise of new metrics has attracted a lot of attention, there is little documented knowledge of how these measures compare with each other. This paper reports the results of an analysis of three new tools: the LOS protocol developed by the City of Charlotte, North Carolina; the Bicycle Environmental Quality and Pedestrian Environmental Quality Indexes (considered as one tool for the purposes of this study) developed by the Department of Public Health of San Francisco, California; and the Highway Capacity Manual 2010 multimodal LOS. Analysis of the scores produced by these tools enabled a comparison of these metrics and revealed that these tools can produce radically different output scores. The contribution of specific variables to the overall score for each measure and mode was examined to explain these scoring differences. Although more research is needed to understand whether these differences always hold true, this paper will help practitioners and the research community better understand the promise of these new measures and the challenges that lie ahead.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Scholars, municipalities, and federal agencies have proposed new measures for evaluating street performance for nonautomobile modes, including transit service, bicycles, and walking. These changes are in response to the critique that the current street performance measure, traditional level of service (LOS), overemphasizes the free flow of automobile traffic and neglects other users of the transportation system. Although the promise of new metrics has attracted a lot of attention, there is little documented knowledge of how these measures compare with each other. This paper reports the results of an analysis of three new tools: the LOS protocol developed by the City of Charlotte, North Carolina; the Bicycle Environmental Quality and Pedestrian Environmental Quality Indexes (considered as one tool for the purposes of this study) developed by the Department of Public Health of San Francisco, California; and the Highway Capacity Manual 2010 multimodal LOS. Analysis of the scores produced by these tools enabled a comparison of these metrics and revealed that these tools can produce radically different output scores. The contribution of specific variables to the overall score for each measure and mode was examined to explain these scoring differences. Although more research is needed to understand whether these differences always hold true, this paper will help practitioners and the research community better understand the promise of these new measures and the challenges that lie ahead.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Scholars, municipalities, and federal agencies have proposed new measures for evaluating street performance for nonautomobile modes, including transit service, bicycles, and walking. These changes are in response to the critique that the current street performance measure, traditional level of service (LOS), overemphasizes the free flow of automobile traffic and neglects other users of the transportation system. Although the promise of new metrics has attracted a lot of attention, there is little documented knowledge of how these measures compare with each other. This paper reports the results of an analysis of three new tools: the LOS protocol developed by the City of Charlotte, North Carolina; the Bicycle Environmental Quality and Pedestrian Environmental Quality Indexes (considered as one tool for the purposes of this study) developed by the Department of Public Health of San Francisco, California; and the Highway Capacity Manual 2010 multimodal LOS. Analysis of the scores produced by these tools enabled a comparison of these metrics and revealed that these tools can produce radically different output scores. The contribution of specific variables to the overall score for each measure and mode was examined to explain these scoring differences. Although more research is needed to understand whether these differences always hold true, this paper will help practitioners and the research community better understand the promise of these new measures and the challenges that lie ahead.

Key concepts: Pedestrian, Transport engineering, Quality (philosophy), Measure (data warehouse), Public transport, Level of service, Highway Capacity Manual, Service (business)

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparing Measures and Variables in Multimodal Street Performance Calculations — Research Paper | ScholarLens