Application of New Pedestrian Level of Service Measures - sacog

Application of New Pedestrian Level of Service Measures
SACOG
level. Doing so assumes 1) that all roads operating at an automobile LOS A, B, or C are safe
for pedestrian travel or 2) that all high‐volume roads unsuitable for pedestrian travel will
score an automobile LOS D, E, or F.
Buffer vs. Barrier
The PPM model considers any separation (3.5 ft or more) between the roadway and the
pedestrian facility to be a sufficient buffer. The MMLOS model defines a buffer more like a
barrier: a permanent or large structure that effectively blocks vehicular traffic from entering
the pedestrian right of way. Examples of a barrier would be on‐street parking or continuous
street trees.
Consideration of Signal Spacing
The MMLOS model takes into account block length when determining LOS. The PPM model
does not. All else equal, the PPM model would score a well‐connected downtown street
network and a sprawling business park the same, even though a downtown street with
many connected destinations would likely be much more appealing to pedestrians.
Level of Service vs. Walkability
Because both the MMLOS and PPM models are LOS models, they do not take into account
surrounding land uses nor do they assess the “usefulness” of pedestrian facilities. Exemplary
pedestrian facilities will not be useful unless the surrounding land uses support businesses
and services that attract and generate pedestrian traffic. For example, suburban
neighborhoods often have nice pedestrian facilities, but the residential surroundings
generate few trips other than fitness walking. Similarly, pedestrian facilities in areas that are
extremely auto‐dependent would score well in these models but not necessarily be useful
for pedestrians.
One potential source for including a walkability measure in a future analysis is
walkscore.com (described above in Section 3. Literature Review of Existing Analysis Tools).
This website calculates a score (0‐100) of the walkability of an area based on proximity to
amenities, intersection density, and average block length. The amenities considered include
grocery stores, restaurants/bars, shopping, coffee, banks, parks, schools, libraries/book
stores, and entertainment venues. Appendix F contains the walkscore.com methodology.
Walkscore.com does not take into account any of the infrastructure considerations that are
at the heart of the MMLOS and PPM models, but it does provide an interesting perspective
on the usefulness of an area’s pedestrian facilities.
Though not strictly part of this analysis, we evaluated the case study areas using the
walkscore.com methodology. The Woodland case study area averaged a Walk Score in the
mid‐80s, while the Roseville case study area averaged in the mid‐70s. This is a simple
measure that could add a reality check to the LOS models, which are solely based on the
quality of the pedestrian facilities, not the usefulness.
Issue Date: June 2011
30