DOCSLIB.ORG

User Preferences of Bicycle Infrastructure

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
User Preferences of Bicycle Infrastructure USER PREFERENCES OF BICYCLE INFRASTRUCTURE A Dissertation Presented to The Academic Faculty by Calvin Clark In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science in the School of Civil and Environmental Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology August 2018 COPYRIGHT © 2018 BY CALVIN CLARK USER PREFERENCES OF BICYCLE INFRASTRUCTURE Approved by: Dr. Kari Watkins, Advisor School of Civil and Environmental Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. Patricia Mokhtarian School of Civil and Environmental Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. Giovanni Circella School of Civil and Environmental Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology Date Approved: July 27, 2018 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my entire Georgia Tech community for making my work possible. I would also like to thank my mother, for regularly asking me “when is that thesis going to be done?” and my father, for never asking that. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii LIST OF TABLES vi LIST OF FIGURES x LIST OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS xi SUMMARY xii CHAPTER 1. Introduction 14 1.1 Background 14 1.2 Study Objectives 15 1.3 Selection of Communities 16 1.4 Research Approach 22 1.4.1 Focus Group Methods 23 1.4.2 Survey Data Collection Methods 23 1.5 Outline of the Thesis 24 CHAPTER 2. Literature Review 26 2.1 Research Design 26 2.2 Data Sources 29 2.3 Types of Cycling Infrastructure 31 2.3.1 Route Choice 34 2.4 Individual Factors 37 2.5 Trip Purpose 40 2.6 Environmental Factors 41 2.7 Policy and Cultural Factors 43 CHAPTER 3. Focus Groups 46 3.1 Methodology 46 3.1.1 Focus Group Recruitment 46 3.1.2 Focus Group Content 47 3.2 Infrastructure Findings and discussion 51 3.2.1 Differences in Comfort for Various Levels of Infrastructure 51 3.2.2 Impact of Curbside Parking on Cyclist Comfort 53 3.2.3 Role of a Physical Barrier versus Buffered Lanes 55 3.2.4 Concerns at Introducing Protected Bicycle Lanes and New Intersection Treatments 56 3.2.5 Impact of Number of Automobile Lanes 57 3.2.6 Other Infrastructure Factors 58 3.3 Cycling Comfort Findings and Discussion 59 3.3.1 Concerns about Drivers 60 3.3.2 Strength in Numbers 61 iv 3.3.3 Children and Cycling 61 3.4 Summary 62 CHAPTER 4. First Wave Survey Description 64 4.1 Survey Method 64 4.2 Survey Design 65 4.3 Survey Response 70 4.4 Data Cleaning 71 4.5 Combined Study Area Statistics 72 4.6 Summary Statistics Separated by Study Area 79 4.7 Summary Statistics Segmented by Rider Status 90 4.8 Summary 96 CHAPTER 5. User Preference Analysis 97 5.1 Infrastructure Images 97 5.2 Image Response Results 101 5.2.1 Frequency 114 5.3 User Preference Models 116 5.3.1 Infrastructure and Roadway Trait Models 120 5.3.2 Alternatives to Regression 125 5.3.3 Additional Influence of Sociodemographic Traits 127 5.3.4 Segmented Models: Ridership Status 130 5.4 Summary 136 CHAPTER 6. Conclusions 137 6.1 Focus Groups 137 6.2 Survey Description 138 6.3 User Preference Analysis 139 6.4 Further Work 140 APPENDIX A. Survey Instrument 141 REFERENCES 159 v LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Sociodemographics for Treatment and Control Neighborhoods 22 Table 2 Sociodemographics for Treatment and Control Neighborhoods 22 Table 3 Summary of Demographic Information of Focus Group Participants 46 Table 4 Raw Survey Response Count by Area 70 Table 5 Raw Survey Response Count by Version (N=1,221) 71 Table 6 Survey Respondents’ and Study Area Population Household Income 73 (N=1,146, P<0.001*) Table 7 Survey Respondents’ and Study Area Population Household Sizes 73 (N=1,178, P<0.001) Table 8 Survey Respondents' Residence Types (N=1,174) 74 Table 9 Survey Respondents' Genders (N=1,149, P<0.001) 75 Table 10 Survey Respondents' Ages (N=1,113, P<0.001) 75 Table 11 Survey Respondents' Races (N=1,145, P<0.001) 76 Table 12 Survey Respondents' Employment Status (N=1144) 77 Table 13 Number of Vehicles and Bikes Owned by Survey Respondents 78 (N=1159) Table 14 Respondents’ Stated Bike Confidence Level (N=1113) 78 Table 15 Respondents’ Monthly and Daily Mode Usage (N=1,178) 79 Table 16 Household Incomes Separated by Study Area 80 Table 17 Household Sizes by Study Area 81 Table 18 Residence Types by Study Area 82 Table 19 Gender by Study Area 83 Table 20 Age Distribution by Study Area 84 Table 21 Race Distribution by Study Area 85 vi Table 22 Employment Status by Study Area 87 Table 23 Number of Vehicles and Bikes Owned by Study Area 88 Table 24 Number of Vehicles and Bikes Owned by Study Area 89 Table 25 Respondents’ Stated Bike Confidence Level by Study Area 90 Table 26 Household Income Distribution by Rider Status 91 Table 27 Household Size Distribution by Rider Status 92 Table 28 Residence Type Distribution by Rider Status 92 Table 29 Gender Distribution by Rider Status 93 Table 30 Age Distribution by Rider Status 93 Table 31 Race Distribution by Rider Status 94 Table 32 Employment Status Distribution by Rider Status 94 Table 33 Number of Vehicles and Bikes Owned by Rider Status 95 Table 34 Respondent's Stated Level of Bike Confidence by Rider Status 96 Table 35 Responses for Perceived Comfort, Safety, and Willingness to Try, 101 Averaged across Infrastructure Types Table 36 Responses for Perceived Comfort, Safety, and Willingness to Try 102 Multi-use Path Table 37 Responses for Perceived Comfort, Safety, and Willingness to Try 103 Two-way Cycletrack on Two-lane Road with Parking Table 38 Responses for Perceived Comfort, Safety, and Willingness to Try 103 One-way Cycletrack on Two-lane Road without Parking Table 39 Responses for Perceived Comfort, Safety, and Willingness to Try 103 One-way Cycletrack on Four-lane Road with Parking Table 40 Responses for Perceived Comfort, Safety, and Willingness to Try 104 Two-way Cycletrack on Four-lane Road without Parking Table 41 Responses for Perceived Comfort, Safety, and Willingness to Try 104 Buffered Bike Lane on Two-lane Road without Parking vii Table 42 Responses for Perceived Comfort, Safety, and Willingness to Try 105 Bike Lane on Four-lane Road without Parking Table 43 Responses for Perceived Comfort, Safety, and Willingness to Try 105 Bike Lane on Two-lane Road without Parking Table 44 Responses for Perceived Comfort, Safety, and Willingness to Try 106 Buffered Bike Lane on Four-lane Road without Parking Table 45 Responses for Perceived Comfort, Safety, and Willingness to Try 106 Sharrow on Two-lane Road without Parking Table 46 Responses for Perceived Comfort, Safety, and Willingness to Try 107 Sharrow on Two-lane Road with Parking Table 47 Responses for Perceived Comfort, Safety, and Willingness to Try 107 Sharrow on Four-lane Road without Parking Table 48 Responses for Perceived Comfort, Safety, and Willingness to Try 107 Sharrow on Four-lane Road with Parking Table 49 Responses for Perceived Comfort, Safety, and Willingness to Try 108 Buffered Bike Lane on Four-lane Road with Parking Table 50 Responses for Perceived Comfort, Safety, and Willingness to Try 109 Bike Lane on Four-lane Road with Parking Table 51 Responses for Perceived Comfort, Safety, and Willingness to Try 109 Buffered Bike Lane on Two-lane Road with Parking Table 52 Responses for Perceived Comfort, Safety, and Willingness to Try 109 Bike Lane on Two-lane Road with Parking Table 53 Self-Reported Frequency of Use for Multi-use Paths 114 Table 54 Self-Reported Frequency of Use for Each Infrastructure Type for 115 Two-lane Roads without Parking Table 55 Self-Reported Frequency of Use for Each Infrastructure Type for 115 Two-lane Roads with Parking Table 56 Self-Reported Frequency of Use for Each Infrastructure Type for 115 Four-lane Roads without Parking Table 57 Self-Reported Frequency of Use for Each Infrastructure Type for 116 Four-lane Roads with Parking viii Table 58 Average Ratings for Comfort, Safety, and Willingness to Try for 120 Protected Bike Lanes and Multi-Use Paths Table 59 Linear Regression for Expressed Comfort, Safety, and Willingness to 123 Try by Infrastructure Characteristics Table 60 Ordered Logistic Regression for Expressed Comfort, Safety, and 126 Willingness to Try by Infrastructure Characteristics Table 61 Brant Parallel Line Test Results for Ordered Logistic Regression 127 models for Comfort, Safety, and Willingness to Try Table 62 Linear Regression for Expressed Comfort, Safety, and Willingness to 129 Try by Infrastructure and Individual Characteristics Table 63 Linear Regression for Expressed Comfort by Infrastructure and 133 Individual Characteristics, Segmented by Rider Type (6038 Responses, R2=0.212, Adj R2=0.210) Table 64 Linear Regression for Expressed Safety by Infrastructure and 134 Individual Characteristics, Segmented by Rider Type (5982 Responses, R2=0.268, Adj R2=0.265) Table 65 Linear Regression for Expressed Willingness to Try by Infrastructure 135 and Individual Characteristics, Segmented by Rider Type (5966 Responses, R2=0.206, Adj R2=0.203) ix LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Map of treatment neighborhoods (black) and their control 21 neighborhood pairs (red). Figure 2 Combinations of on-street bicycle infrastructure used in focus groups 49 Figure 3 Combinations of physically separated bicycle infrastructure used in 50 focus groups (shared use path image courtesy of Atlanta Beltline Inc.). Figure 4 Image for Multi-use Paths Used in Survey 67 Figure 5 Images of Infrastructure Configurations for Different Roadway 69 Layouts Used in Survey. Figure 6 Combinations of bicycle infrastructure used in survey versions 1 and 99 2.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chapter 3 Review Questions
    Chapter 3 - Learning to Drive PA Driver’s Manual CHAPTER 3 REVIEW QUESTIONS 1. TEENAGE DRIVERS ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE INVOLVED IN A CRASH WHEN: A. They are driving with their pet as a passenger B. They are driving with adult passengers C. They are driving with teenage passengers D. They are driving without any passengers 2. DRIVERS WHO EAT AND DRINK WHILE DRIVING: A. Have no driving errors B. Have trouble driving slow C. Are better drivers because they are not hungry D. Have trouble controlling their vehicles 3. PREPARING TO SMOKE AND SMOKING WHILE DRIVING: A. Do not affect driving abilities B. Help maintain driver alertness C. Are distracting activities D. Are not distracting activities 4. THE TOP MAJOR CRASH TYPE FOR 16 YEAR OLD DRIVERS IN PENNSYLVANIA IS: A. Single vehicle/run-off-the-road B. Being sideswiped on an interstate C. Driving in reverse on a side street D. Driving on the shoulder of a highway 5. WHEN PASSING A BICYCLIST, YOU SHOULD: A. Blast your horn to alert the bicyclist B. Move as far left as possible C. Remain in the center of the lane D. Put on your four-way flashers 6. WHEN YOU DRIVE THROUGH AN AREA WHERE CHILDREN ARE PLAYING, YOU SHOULD EXPECT THEM: A. To know when it is safe to cross B. To stop at the curb before crossing the street C. To run out in front of you without looking D. Not to cross unless they are with an adult 7. IF YOU ARE DRIVING BEHIND A MOTORCYCLE, YOU MUST: A.
    [Show full text]
  • High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Detection System Testing
    High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Detection System Testing Project #: RES2016-05 Final Report Submitted to Tennessee Department of Transportation Principal Investigator (PI) Deo Chimba, PhD., P.E., PTOE. Tennessee State University Phone: 615-963-5430 Email: [email protected] Co-Principal Investigator (Co-PI) Janey Camp, PhD., P.E., GISP, CFM Vanderbilt University Phone: 615-322-6013 Email: [email protected] July 10, 2018 DISCLAIMER This research was funded through the State Research and Planning (SPR) Program by the Tennessee Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration under RES2016-05: High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Detection System Testing. This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Tennessee Department of Transportation and the United States Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The State of Tennessee and the United States Government assume no liability of its contents or use thereof. The contents of this report reflect the views of the author(s), who are solely responsible for the facts and accuracy of the material presented. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views of the Tennessee Department of Transportation or the United States Department of Transportation. ii Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. RES2016-05 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date: March 2018 High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Detection System Testing 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Deo Chimba and Janey Camp TDOT PROJECT # RES2016-05 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Department of Civil and Architectural Engineering; Tennessee State University 11.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding Intersections –– Stopping at Intersections Are Places Where a Number of Road Users Cross Intersections Paths
    4 rules of the road Chapter 3, signs, signals and road markings, gave you some in this chapter information about the most common signs, signals and road markings you will see when driving. This chapter gives • Understanding you the information you’ll need to help you drive safely at intersections intersections, use lanes correctly and park legally. – signalling – types of intersections Understanding intersections – stopping at Intersections are places where a number of road users cross intersections paths. There is often a lot of activity in intersections, so it’s – right‑of‑way at important to be alert. Remember that other road users may be intersections in a hurry, and may want to move into the same space that you • Using lanes are planning on moving into. correctly – which lane Signalling should you use Signals are important — they let other traffic know what you are – lane tracking intending to do. You should signal when you’re preparing to: – turning lanes – reserved lanes • turn left or right – pulling into a • change lanes lane • park – passing – merging • move toward, or away from, the side of the road. – highway or freeway Types of intersections entrances and exits Controlled intersections – cul‑de‑sacs A controlled intersection is one that has signs or traffic lights – turning around telling you what to do. To drive safely in these intersections, you • Parking tips and need to know what the signals and signs mean, and also the rules right‑of‑way rules. But always be cautious. Other drivers may not be paying attention to the signs and signals. Uncontrolled intersections Uncontrolled intersections have no signs or traffic lights.
    [Show full text]
  • Indiana Drivers Manual: Ch. 7
    CHAPTER 7 | Safe Vehicle Operation CHAPTER SEVEN | SAFE VEHICLE OPERATION Even the most experienced drivers can be distracted while driving. A defensive driver looks out for the actions of other drivers and anticipates potential problems. LANE MARKINGS Lane markings separate traffic and alert drivers when it is permissible to pass other vehicles. Yellow Lane Markings Yellow lane markings separate multiple lanes of traffic going in opposite directions. You may cross a broken yellow line to pass another vehicle when it is safe, but you should not cross a solid yellow line except to turn. Two-lane road with a solid yellow line Two-lane road with a broken Four-lane road with a solid yellow line yellow line White Lane Markings White lane markings separate multiple lanes of traffic going in the same direction. Most roads with more than two lanes have broken white lines to separate the lanes. You may cross a broken white line when it is safe to change lanes, but you should not cross a solid white line. Three lanes of traffic with broken white lines CHANGING LANES AND PASSING OTHER VEHICLES Change only one lane at a time. When changing lanes to prepare for a turn, you must signal your intention to do so at least 200 feet prior to changing lanes or turning. Your signal distance must be at least 300 feet before the turn if you are operating a vehicle in a speed zone of at least 50 miles per hour. Do not weave in and out of lanes, which will greatly increase your risk of an accident.
    [Show full text]
  • Preferential Lane Use for Heavy Trucks Final Report
    Preferential Lane Use for Heavy Trucks Final report PRC 15-39 F Preferential Lane Use for Heavy Trucks Texas A&M Transportation Institute PRC 15-39 F July 2016 Author Susan T. Chrysler, Ph.D. 2 Table of Contents List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ 4 List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. 4 Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................... 5 Benefits of Managed Lanes ......................................................................................................... 5 Introduction and Background ..................................................................................................... 8 Current Practice in Truck Access to Managed Lanes ............................................................. 11 Facilities Where Trucks Are Allowed ....................................................................................... 13 Minneapolis–St. Paul ................................................................................................................ 13 Fort Lauderdale ......................................................................................................................... 14 Houston ....................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Keep Right Traffic Laws in All 50 States
    MATTHIESEN, WICKERT & LEHRER, S.C. Hartford, WI ❖ New Orleans, LA ❖ Orange County, CA ❖ Austin, TX ❖ Jacksonville, FL Phone: (800) 637-9176 [email protected] www.mwl-law.com SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT: A Summary of “Keep Right” Traffic Laws in All 50 States It is the universal trigger and a pet peeve of millions of drivers. You’re making good time traveling 75 MPH in the left lane of a freeway with a 70 MPH posted speed limit. You tap your brakes, turning off the cruise control, because a midnight blue 2012 Buick Regal is firmly ensconced in the left passing lane, traveling at 65 MPH and staying abreast of a Kenworth tractor pulling a 53-foot trailer. Fifteen minutes later traffic is bumper to bumper behind you as far as you can see, and you resort to flashing your lights, to no avail. The driver of the Buick Regal believes that traveling at or near the speed limit in the fast lane is acceptable—and that they are teaching the impatient drivers behind them a valuable lesson in driving safety. In a perfect world, a sheriff’s deputy would suddenly appear and pull the Buick Regal over for unsafe driving and violation of state driving statutes. Far too often, however, instant karma doesn’t occur, but an accident does. All states allow drivers to use the left lane (when there is more than one in the same direction) to pass. Most states restrict use of the left lane by slow-moving traffic that is not passing. A few states restrict the left lane only for passing or turning left.
    [Show full text]
  • Modot Practical Design Guidance
    Implementation Meeting Our Customers’ Needs Practical Design Missouri Department of Transportation Missouri Department of Transportation Contents Introduction Type of Facility Facility Selection 1 At-Grade Intersections 3 Interchanges 4 Typical Section Elements Lane Width 5 Shoulder Width 6 Median Width 7 Inslope Grade 8 Backslope Grade 9 Roadside Ditches 10 Horizontal & Vertical Alignment Horizontal Alignment 11 Vertical Alignment 12 Pavements Paved Shoulders 13 Bridge Approach Slabs 14 Pavement 15 Structures/Hydraulics Bridge Width 17 Bridge and Culvert Hydraulic Design 18 Seismic Design 20 Roadside Safety Rumble Strips 21 Guardrail 22 Incidental/Misc. Disposition of Routes 23 Bicycle Facilities 24 Pedestrian Facilities 25 Embankment Protection 26 Borrow and Excess Earthwork 27 Minimum Right of Way Width 28 Design Exception 29 Introduction Practical Design challenges traditional standards to develop These policies will form the foundation of a new guidance efficient solutions to solve today’s project needs. MoDOT’s document that will go into effect in the near future. This goal of Practical Design is to build “good” projects, not guidance document, in electronic format, will describe engi- “great” projects, to achieve a great system. Innovation and neering policies throughout MoDOT. It will be the “one-stop creativity are necessary for us to accomplish Practical Design. shop” for design, right of way, bridge, construction, traffic, This document was prepared to effectively begin implement- and maintenance activities. It will represent completion of ing Practical Design. It is purposely written to allow flexibility the next step in our Practical Design effort. for project specific locations. These new policies will guide the project decisions we all To accomplish Practical Design, we must properly define must make.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 2 Signs
    Chapter 2 Signs 2-1 General Effective signing is the primary method to provide regulatory, warning, and guidance information to transportation system users (motorized vehicles, pedestrians, and bicyclists). Signing that is clear, concise, and accurate supports safe behaviors and safe operation, legal, and orderly travel on public roadways and transportation facilities. Sign use must be limited and conservative since signs can lose their effectiveness when used to excess. Signs are not typically used to confirm Rules of the Road. This chapter contains information about signing on the state highway system and is intended for persons involved in traffic operations or traffic design. Specific policies and guidelines are included that clarify the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) information. Situations not addressed in this chapter or the MUTCD may need to be determined on a case-by-case basis using engineering judgment. Where a change to the current sign installation is indicated by information in this chapter, replace as the current sign’s service life is reached. For MUTCD Target Compliance Dates, see page I-4, Table I-2 for required sign replacements. State law requires the department to adopt uniform standards for traffic control devices, including signs, along public roadways. WAC 468-95 adopts the MUTCD and Washington State Modifications to the MUTCD as these standards. The MUTCD and WSDOT modifications provide guidance on the intended use and placement of regulatory, warning, guide, and motorist information signs, as well as specific information on sizes and installation. This chapter supplements the MUTCD and WSDOT modifications with specific interpretations and unique applications for signs on the state highway system.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 6. Bicycling Infrastructure for Mass Cycling: a Transatlantic Comparison
    Chapter 6. Bicycling Infrastructure for Mass Cycling: A Transatlantic Comparison Peter G. Furth Introduction For the bicycle to be useful for transportation, bicyclists need adequate route infrastructure – roads and paths on which to get places. In the 1890’s, when bicycling first became popular, bicyclists’ chief need was better paved roads. In the present era, however, it is not poor pavement but fast and heavy motor traffic that restricts cyclists’ ability to get places safely (Jacobsen 2009), as discussed in chapter 7. European and American policy has strongly diverged on how to address this challenge. In many European countries including the Netherlands, Germany, Denmark, and Sweden, cyclists’ need for separation from fast, heavy traffic is considered a fundamental principle of road safety. This has led to systematic traffic calming on local streets and, along busier streets, the provision of a vast network of “cycle tracks” – bicycle paths that are physically separated from motor traffic and distinct from the sidewalk. Cycle tracks (see Figures 6.1-6.3) may be at street level, separated from moving traffic by a raised median, a parking lane, or candlestick bollards; at sidewalk level, separated from the sidewalk by vertical elements (e.g., light poles), hardscape, a change in pavement or a painted line; or at an intermediate level, a curb step above the street, but also s small curb step below the sidewalk. [Figure 6.1 here] [Figure 6.2 here] [Figure 6.3 goes here] The success of this combination of traffic calming and cycle tracks has been well documented; for example, chapter 2 shows that the percentage of trips taken by bicycle, while less than one percent in the U.S., exceeds 10 percent in several European countries, reaching 27% in the Netherlands, while at the same time their bicycling fatality rate (fatalities per 1,000,000 km of bicycling) is several times less than in the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Investigation of Performance and Lane Utilization Within A
    Symposium Celebrating 50 Years of Traffic Flow Theory Portland, Oregon August 11-13, 2014 INVESTIGATION OF PERFORMANCE AND LANE UTILIZATION WITHIN A PASSING LANE ON A TWO LANE RURAL HIGHWAY Zachary Freedman & Ahmed Al-Kaisy Zachary Freedman, Traffic Engineer Sabra, Wang & Associates 701 Cathedral St #71 Baltimore, MD 21201 Phone: (443) 741-3724 Email: [email protected] Ahmed Al-Kaisy, Ph.D. P.E. Professor, Civil Engineering Department Montana State University PO Box 174250 Bozeman, MT 59717 Phone: (406) 994-6116 [email protected] Freedman & Al-Kaisy 2 ABSTRACT An investigation into platooning and passing maneuvers within a passing lane section on a rural two-lane, two-way highway is presented in this study. The study site is located on US Highway 287 between the town of Townsend and the City of Helena in the state of Montana. Traffic volumes at study site, while considered relatively low, are typical on two-lane highways in many rural states. Per-lane analysis of performance measures and lane utilization (volume split) were used to indirectly examine passing maneuvers and lane changing at successive locations within the passing lane section. For the case study site, it was evident that traffic performance became relatively stable beyond half a mile into the passing lane for the traffic volumes investigated. Therefore, results strongly suggest that most passing maneuvers already took place before the 0.5-mile station and that the actual passing lane length is well beyond the optimal length required for breaking up platoons and improving performance. Keywords: platooning, passing lanes, two-lane highways, performance Freedman & Al-Kaisy 3 INTRODUCTION Two-lane highways constitute the vast majority of highway facilities particularly in states where most vehicular travel takes place in rural areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Rules of the Road
    Rules of the Road The 2017 State of Wyoming DRIVER LICENSE MANUAL - 1 - Table of contents RULES OF THE ROAD ..........................................36 Speed ................................................................ 36 CUSTOMER SERVICE GUIDE ................................ 3 Legal speed limits (All unless otherwise posted) .......................................................36 Driver licensing .................................................. 3 Adjust speed for road conditions...........................................................................36 REQUIREMENTS TO DRIVE ..........................................................................................3 Adjust speed for traffic conditions .........................................................................36 THOSE WHO DO NOT NEED A WYOMING DRIVER LICENSE.....................................3 Adjust speed for light conditions...........................................................................37 WHO CANNOT GET A WYOMING DRIVER LICENSE...................................................3 Right of way ...........................................................................................................37 YOUR WYOMING LICENSE..........................................................................................4 Roundabouts..........................................................................................................40 Driver license classes ................................................................................................4
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1270 Auxiliary Lanes
    Chapter 1270 Auxiliary Lanes 1270.01 General Exhibit 1270-3 Speed Reduction Warrant Example 1270.02 Climbing Lanes Exhibit 1270-4 Auxiliary Climbing Lane 1270.03 Passing Lanes Exhibit 1270-5 Passing Lane Example 1270.04 Slow-Moving Vehicle Turnouts Exhibit 1270-6 5 Length of Passing Lanes 1270.05 Shoulder Driving for Slow Vehicles Exhibit 1270-7 Passing Lane Configurations 1270.06 Emergency Escape Ramps Exhibit 1270-8 Buffer Between Opposing Passing Lanes 1270.07 Documentation Exhibit 1270-9 Auxiliary Passing Lane 1270.08 References Exhibit 1270-10 Emergency Escape Ramp Example Exhibit 1270-11 Emergency Escape Ramp Length Exhibit 1270-1 Climbing Lane Example Exhibit 1270-12 Rolling Resistance (R) Exhibit 1270-2 Speed Reduction Warrant: Performance for Exhibit 1270-13 Typical Emergency Escape Ramp Trucks 1270.01 General Auxiliary lanes are used to comply with capacity demand; maintain lane balance; accommodate speed change, weaving, and maneuvering for entering and exiting traffic; and encourage carpools, vanpools, and the use of transit. For signing and delineation of auxiliary lanes, see the Standard Plans, the Traffic Manual, and the MUTCD. Contact the region Traffic Engineer for guidance. Although slow-moving vehicle turnouts and shoulder driving for slow vehicles are not auxiliary lanes, they are covered in this chapter because they perform a similar function. For additional information, see the following: Chapter 1103 Design controls, including speed Chapter 1230 Geometric cross section components Chapter 1310 Turn lanes Chapter 1310 Speed change lanes at intersections Chapter 1360 Collector-distributor roads Chapter 1360 Weaving lanes Chapter 1410 High-occupancy vehicle lanes 1270.02 Climbing Lanes 1270.02(1) General Climbing lanes (see Exhibit 1270-1) are normally associated with truck traffic, but they may also be considered in recreational or other areas that are subject to slow-moving traffic.
    [Show full text]