Evaluation of Signage Alternatives for Express Lane Facilities Contract # DTRT12GUTC12 with USDOT Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology (OST-R) Final Report January 2017 Principal Investigator: Albert Gan, Ph.D. National Center for Transportation Systems Productivity and Management O. Lamar Allen Sustainable Education Building 788 Atlantic Drive, Atlanta, GA 30332-0355 P: 404-894-2236 F: 404-894-2278 [email protected] nctspm.gatech.edu DISCLAIMER The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the information presented herein. This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation’s University Transportation Centers Program, in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the contents or use thereof. METRIC CONVERSION TABLE U.S. CUSTOMARY UNITS TO SI* (MODERN METRIC) UNITS LENGTH SYMBOL WHEN YOU KNOW MULTIPLY BY TO FIND SYMBOL in inches 25.400 millimeters mm ft feet 0.305 meters m yd yards 0.914 meters m mi miles 1.610 kilometers km mm millimeters 0.039 inches in m meters 3.280 feet ft m meters 1.090 yards yd km kilometers 0.621 miles mi AREA SYMBOL WHEN YOU KNOW MULTIPLY BY TO FIND SYMBOL in2 square inches 645.200 square millimeters mm2 ft2 square feet 0.093 square meters m2 yd2 square yards 0.836 square meters m2 ac acres 0.405 hectares ha mi2 square miles 2.590 square kilometers km2 mm2 square millimeters 0.0016 square inches in2 m2 square meters 10.764 square feet ft2 m2 square meters 1.195 square yards yd2 ha hectares 2.470 acres ac km2 square kilometers 0.386 square miles mi2 VOLUME SYMBOL WHEN YOU KNOW MULTIPLY BY TO FIND SYMBOL fl oz fluid ounces 29.570 milliliters mL gal gallons 3.785 liters L ft3 cubic feet 0.028 cubic meters m3 yd3 cubic yards 0.765 cubic meters m3 mL milliliters 0.034 fluid ounces fl oz L liters 0.264 gallons gal m3 cubic meters 35.314 cubic feet ft3 m3 cubic meters 1.307 cubic yards yd3 NOTE: volumes greater than 1,000 L shall be shown in m3. *SI is the symbol for the International System of Units. Appropriate rounding should be made to comply with Section 4 of ASTM E380. iii Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient′s Catalog No. 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date January 2017 Evaluation of Signage Alternatives for Express Lane Facilities 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Priyanka Alluri, Albert Gan, Dibakar Saha, Luis Fernandez, and Eazaz Sadeghvaziri 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Lehman Center for Transportation Research Florida International University 11. Contract or Grant No. 10555 West Flagler Street, EC 3680, Miami, FL 33174 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered The National Center for Transportation Systems Productivity and Management Final Report (NCTSPM) January 2014 – January 2017 Lamar Allen Sustainable Education Building 14. Sponsoring Agency Code 788 Atlantic Drive, Atlanta, GA 30332-0355 15. Supplementary Notes 16. Abstract Express lanes are usually tolled freeway lanes that are separated from general-purpose lanes to provide a higher level of mobility. Guide signs upstream of express lanes are especially crucial as drivers have to read these signs and then comprehend and react to them accordingly while traveling at high speeds. This report presents a focus group study to obtain drivers’ feedback on different express lane sign design alternatives, with a special focus on signs near the entrance of express lane facilities. It also includes a review of the current standards in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) for express lane signs and the use of signs on existing express lane facilities from across the country. The provisions of regulatory signs, guide signs, and tolling agency’s pictograph on express lanes are provided in Chapter 2E: Toll Road Signs and Chapter 2G: Preferential and Managed Lane Signs of the MUTCD. However, many existing express lane signs have not been updated to meet the current MUTCD standards for express lane signs. The existing express lane signs were found to vary not only in the types of information they display, but also in color, size, layout, and number of sign panels used. The signs were found to generally display information on toll amounts and accessibility status, and none were found to display comparative travel times on express lanes vs. general-purpose lanes. A focus group study involving 49 participants was conducted to assess drivers’ understandings, preferences, and opinions toward the guide signs at the entrance of express lanes. Sign design alternatives as they relate to the following categories were evaluated: (1) sign legend preference for toll-exempt vehicles in Florida; (2) display of travel time; (3) display of average speed in lieu of travel time; (4) preference for travel time vs. average speed; (5) display of comparative travel times on express lanes vs. general-purpose lanes; (6) preference of comparative travel times vs. comparative average speeds; (7) display of comparative travel times and toll amounts on express lanes and general-purpose lanes; and (8) interpretation of high toll amount on express lanes signs. Additional real-time information on travel time and average speed on express lanes and general-purpose lanes were found to help drivers decide if they want to use express lanes. However, focus group participants found both travel time and speed information to be ambiguous. It is recommended to educate drivers about these measures so that drivers correctly interpret this information. Although this additional information is useful to drivers, care needs to be taken to not overload drivers with too much information. It is imperative to consider the other existing signs and the fact that drivers need to comprehend this information while driving at high speeds. 17. Key Word 18. Distribution Statement Express Lanes, Focus Group Study, Guide Signs, Information Display, No restrictions. Travel Time, Average Speed, Congestion Pricing. 19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price Unclassified Unclassified 85 Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This research was funded by the National Center for Transportation Systems Productivity and Management (NCTSPM) University Transportation Center (UTC). The authors thank Mr. Carlton Ng, Mr. Md Asif Raihan, and Ms. Maria Fernandez, students at Florida International University (FIU), for their assistance in conducting the focus group meetings. The contribution from the 49 focus group study participants is gratefully acknowledged. v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Express lanes are usually tolled freeway lanes that are separated from general-purpose lanes to provide a higher level of mobility for vehicles using the facilities (Collier and Goodin, 2004). Depending on its pricing scheme, an express lane facility can require significantly more information to be communicated to drivers than other traditional lane management strategies, such as high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes. Guide signs in advance of express lanes are crucial as drivers have to read these signs and then comprehend and react to them accordingly while traveling at high speeds. As such, the objective of this research was to determine the optimal amount and type of information to display and the manner in which the information is communicated to drivers. A focus group study was conducted to assess drivers’ understandings, preferences, and opinions toward the guide signs upstream of express lanes. A total of five focus groups involving 49 participants of different age, gender, and ethnic groups were conducted. The following eight potential sign designs and alternatives were evaluated: 1. Sign legend preference for toll-exempt vehicles in Florida 2. Display of travel time 3. Display of average speed in lieu of travel time 4. Preferences for travel time vs. average speed 5. Display of comparative travel times on express lanes vs. general-purpose lanes 6. Preference for comparative travel times vs. comparative average speeds 7. Display of comparative travel times and toll amounts on express lanes and general-purpose lanes 8. Interpretation of high toll amount on express lanes sign The focus group participants were shown the sign alternatives using PowerPoint slides. The slides primarily included the proposed signs and their alternatives, typical layouts, and digitally edited photographs. For each scenario, a set of questions was asked to capture the participants’ understanding of the signs. Some of the key observations are discussed below. Sign Legend Preference Express lanes are usually open to all drivers who choose to pay a toll to use the facility. However, a few vehicles qualify to ride for free on almost all express lane facilities. For example, motorcycles and registered buses and car pools can use express lanes for free on 95 Express in Miami-Dade County, Florida. Since toll-exempt vehicles vary by jurisdiction, displaying this information is helpful for drivers. Two sign alternatives, one displaying toll-exempt vehicles using words alone, and the other displaying the same information using words and symbols, were provided to the participants. A slight majority (51%) of the participants preferred to have the information on toll-exempt vehicles in both symbols and words. However, these results could be biased toward the alternative that uses only words to display toll-exempt vehicles since this sign is currently used on 95 Express in Miami-Dade County and participants are familiar with it. vi Measures of Traffic Conditions on Express Lane Facility Travel time and average speed are good measures of traffic conditions on a facility. However, since these are rarely displayed on the signs, several participants misinterpreted this information.