EPA-450/3-74-003-g
VEHICLE BEHAVIOR
IN AND AROUN )
COMPLEX SOURCES
AND RELATED COMPLEX
SOURCE CHARACTERISTICS
VOLUME VII
RECREATIONAL AREAS
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Water Programs
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
-------
EPA-450/3-74-003-g
VEHICLE BEHAVIOR
IN AND AROUND
COMPLEX SOURCES
AND RELATED COMPLEX
SOURCE CHARACTERISTICS
VOLUME VII
RECREATIONAL AREAS
by
Scott D. Thayer
Geomet, Inc.
50 Monroe Street
Rockville, Maryland 20850
Contract No. 68-02-1094
Task Order No. 3
EPA Project Officer: Edwin Meyer
Prepared for
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Air and Water Programs
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Research Triangle Park, N. C. 27711
November 1973
-------
This report is issued by the Environmental Protection Agency to report
technical data of interest to a limited number of readers. Copies are
available free of charge to Federal employees, current contractors and
grantees, and nonprofit organizations - as supplies permit - from the
Air Pollution Technical Information Center, Environmental Protection
Agency, Research Triangle Park , North Carolina 27711, or from the
National Technical Information Service, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield,
Virginia 22151.
This report was furnished to the Environmental Protection Agency by
Geomet, Inc. , 50 Monroe Street, Rockville, Maryland, in fulfillment
of Contract No. 68-02-1094. The contents of this report are reproduced
herein as received from Geomet, Inc. , The opinions, findings, and conclus
elusions expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those
of the Environmental Protection Agency. Mention of company or product
names is not to be considered as an endorsement by the Environmental
Protection Agency.
Publication No. EPA-450/3-74-003-g
li
-------
CONTENTS
Page
List of Figures iv
List of Tables v
Sections
I Conclusions 1
II Recommendations 2
III Introduction 3
IV Characteristics of Recreational Areas 7
V Recreational Area Parameters 15
VI Traffic Parameters 27
VII Analysis 33
VIII Results 37
IX References and General Information Sources 49
APPENDIX A A-l
APPENDIX B B-l
iii
-------
FIGURES
No. Page
1 Generalized Methodology 38
2 Generalized Methodology Applied to Recreational Areas 40
3 Isopleths (m sec"^) of Mean Summer Wind Speed Averaged 44
through Afternoon Mixing Layer
2
4 Isopleths (m x 10 ) of Mean Summer Afternoon Mixing Heights 45
iv
-------
No
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
TABLES
Paae
National Parks Listed in Rank Order of Total Attendance 9
for 1972
All Types of Areas Administered by the National Park System 10
(Including National Parks - Table 1) Listed in Rank Order of
Attendance for 1972 (The Highest 37 out of 248 Reporting)
The Top Fifteen State Park Systems Ranked by Total 12
Attendance for 1970
For the Five States With the Highest Annual Recreational 13
Attendance, the Ranking of all Recreational Areas with
Attendance over One Million in Calendar 1972 (Ohio Data For
Fiscal 1973)
Average Monthly Visitation Pattern, National Park Service, 17
1972
Load Factors and Average Visits Per Day in Peak Visitation 18
Month 1961, 1970, and 1971
Hourly Distribution by Percent of Total Weekend Trips to all 20
State Parks
Vehicle Exhaust Emissions at Idle in Grams Per Minute 29
Example Queue Calculation when Gate Capacity is Exceeded 35
Key to Stability Categories (after Turner 1970) 42
v
-------
SECTION I
CONCLUSIONS
1. A general methodology has been developed which permits relating
parameters descriptive of traffic behavior associated with developments
(complex sources) to the available descriptive characteristics of the
complexes themselves. These relationships are subsequently to be used by
the sponsor to develop guidance for relating the complex's characteristics
to air quality.
2. The methodology has been successfully applied to the last (recreational
areas) of seven types of complexes, with quantitative results presented
in this task report.
-1-
-------
SECTION II
RECOMMENDATIONS
It is recommended that, as planned, the project officer employ this
methodology to develop guidance for relating the traffic characteristics
of recreational areas to typical and peak air pollution concentrations.
-2-
-------
SECTION III
INTRODUCTION
OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE
The ability to estimate traffic characteristics for proposed developments
and the resulting effects on air quality is an important prerequisite for
promulgating State Implementation Plans which adequately address themselves
to the maintenance of NAAQS. Prior to estimating the impact of a develop-
ment (complex source) on air quality, it is necessary that traffic charac-
teristics associated with the source be identified and related to parameters
of the development which can be readily identified by the developer a priori.
The purpose of this study is to identify traffic characteristics associated
with specified varieties of complex sources and to relate these characteristics
to readily identifiable parameters of the complexes. The end product of
this task will then be used to develop an Air Pollution Technical Document
which will provide guidance to enable control agencies to relate readily
identifiable characteristics of complex sources to air quality.
The work is being performed in seven sub-tasks. Each sub-task is devoted
to examining vehicle behavior and its relationship to readily obtainable
parameters associated with a different variety of complex source. The
seven categories of complex sources are:
1. Shopping centers (Report EF-263)
2. Sports complexes (stadiums) (Report EF-265)
3. Amusement parks (Report EF-268)
4. Major highways (Report EF-267)
5. Recreational areas (e.g., State and National Parks) - The present report
6. Parking lots (e.g., Municipal) (Report EF-266)
7. Airports (Report EF-264)
-3-
-------
This, the seventh task report, describes the methodology developed, and
the analysis and results of its application to recreational areas.
APPROACH
Due to internal constraints, the sponsor has been forced to impose a tight
schedule on this project, permitting only two to three weeks for the
analysis and reporting of each sub-task. Accordingly, the employment of
readily available traffic design information for each type of complex has
been suggested as the general approach.
The approach was designed to permit the development of answers to the
following questions posed by the sponsor, using available traffic design
and behavior data, and available data on parameters of the complex:
1. How much area is allotted or occupied by a single motor vehicle?
2. How much or what percentage of the land occupied by the complex
source (and the source's parking facilities) can potentially be occupied
by vehicles? What is the usual percentage?
3. What portion of the vehicles within the complex are likely to be
running at any given time during a 1-hour period? During an 8-hour
period? We are interested in both peak and typical circumstances here.
4. What is the typical and worst case (slowest) vehicle speed over
1-hour and 8-hour periods?
5. How are moving and parked vehicles distributed within the complex
property? (e.g., uniformly?)
6. What are the design parameters for each type of complex which are
likely to be known by the prospective developer beforehand?
7. Which ones of the design parameters in number 6 can be most success-
fully related to traffic and emissions generated by the complex? What is
the best estimate for relationships between readily obtainable parameters
and emissions?
8. What are the relationships of parking "lot" design to parking densities
and vehicle circulation? What represents a typical design and/or a design
which has highest parking densities, lowest vehicle speeds, longest vehicle
operating times?
9. What meteorological conditions (i.e., atmospheric dilutive capacity) are
likely to occur during periods of peak use? What use level is likely to occur
during periods of worst meteorology (i.e., atmospheric dilutive capacity?).
-4-
-------
The technical approach developed and implemented in this report consists of
first structuring a methodology for describing engine operating modes which
considers both the principal modes in automobile operation in and around
complexes, and the emission significance of each mode. In our analysis this
leads to an important emphasis on engine operating time, with only secondary
significance attached to operating speed and distance.
For the complex being studied, an analysis is made of the typical movements
of vehicles, and their movements under conditions of congestion, caused by
peak traffic loads or by awkward design elements of the complex, or both.
This highlights the traffic operational modes which have greatest effect
on running times, and assists in defining the elements or parameters of
the complex which influence these running times most.
The running times in critical modes are found to be dependent on the usage
rate of the complex as a percent of capacity. In addition, absolute values
of usage as a function of time are needed as direct input for estimating
emissions. Therefore, data on usage patterns of the complex by season,
day of the week, and hour of the day are collected and related to capacity
parameters. The results are- used in two important ways:
1. To develop quantitative relationships between running times and
various percent-usage parameters; and
2. To provide general usage patterns from which the usage pattern for
a complex of interest can be inferred, if no measured data are available.
Basic parametric values are then derived which define typical base line
running times and use rates; these are used both to provide a point of
departure for the peak case calculations, and as input to the estimate
of typical conditions.
For any parameter of capacity (e.g., parking, entrance, exit), resulting
increases in running time for each mode are estimated as they may be functions
of the exceedance of that capacity. The base running time is then used
in conjunction with typical use rates to generate typical combinations of
running times and numbers of vehicles running. Finally, peak (1-hour and
8-hour) use rates are compared to capacities in order to calculate, using
the above derived functionalities, the associated peak values of number of
vehicles running, and running times.
-5-
-------
It may often be possible, in addition, to develop and provide qualitative
guidelines which can provide further insight into factors which may aggravate
or alleviate congestion. These are provided separately from the quantitative
relationships.
Finally, the meteorological conditions associated with the occurrence of
the peak "(vehicle number) (running time)" values are defined; in addition,
periods of the most adverse meteorological conditions are determined, and
the use rate data examined to determine associated use rates and running
times.
The methodology described above is considered to be completely general,
and to apply to all the complex sources of concern here, with the exception
of "major highway" case cited in Section III titled Objective and Scope.
That special case is recognized in the work statement as an unusual one
requiring different treatment in the context of the other six sources,
and is in fact treated in a totally different manner in that report
(No. EF-267).
The remainder of this report covers special considerations required in
the case of recreational areas, and describes the implementation of this
methodology for these complexes, and the results obtained.
Public recreational areas are the subject of extensive attention by federal,
state and local administration, and are the subject of study and research
by these agencies, and by other professionals in the fields of recreation,
and the associated use rate, traffic and parking problems. Most of the
data analyzed and presented in this study were obtained from the National
Park Service (NPS), the National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA)
(especially its National Conference on State Parks branch), and selected
State Park Departments.
-6-
-------
SECTION IV
CHARACTERISTICS OF RECREATIONAL AREAS
Recreational areas are extremely varied in type, purpose, size, administrative
control source, and degree of patronage (variously called number of visits,
visitations or attendance). A certain amount of sorting has therefore been
done in the available data to attempt to focus on those which appear to
represent the largest degree of automotive traffic annually, and generally
focussed in the smaller sized of total areas. The following material
discusses some of the general aspects of recreational areas which are
relevant to the traffic and parking problems.
Federal departments which are concerned with recreational areas in some
way include Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, HEW, HUD, Interior, Labor,
r
Transportation and Treasury. In addition, eleven independent federal agencies
are concerned, as well as all fifty states (at various levels), and a very
large number of agencies at the local level.
In order to render the problem more manageable, and to attempt to concentrate
on the larger manifestations of the problem, the task statement elaborated
on the term "Recreational Areas" by adding the parenthetical phrase "State
and National Parks". Our analysis has convinced us that this is a proper
approach - that it encompasses the principal area types which should be of
concern, and defines an approach which should be applicable to any type of
recreational area which might require analysis.
As will be seen in Section V on Recreational Area Parameters, the data on
annual attendance represents information which is widely available, has
potential for a variety of uses, and helps define, at least in part, the
magnitude of the potential traffic and parking problem. It is of note to
-7-
-------
add that recreational professionals typically use conversion factors
for going from person-counts to vehicle-counts, and vice versa; for example
a factor frequently encountered in the recreation areas of most importance
here is of the order of 3.5 persons per vehicle. The data which follow are
taken variously from statistics for the calendar and fiscal 1970, 1971 and
1972, selected either from 1970 for completeness for intercomparison, or
from the later years for timeliness. For calendar 1972 there were 297
areas administered by the National Park System; of these, 248 reported
visits totalling 211,621,100. Of the 297 areas, the majority (67%) were
National Monuments (82), National Historical Sites (57), National Parks
(38), and National Memorials (21). The remainder are divided among 19
other categories. The 37 reporting National Parks account for 53,953,900
(25.5%) of the total reported visits. In Tables 1 and 2 are shown the
visitation and acreage data associated with all reporting National Parks
(Table 1), and all reporting areas of any type in the National Park System
(Table 2). In each case the areas are ranked in order of total annual
visitations for 1972. The acreage data are included because, very broadly,
the largest visitations coupled with the smallest areas represent the
potentially more severe problems. The National Park (NP) Data from
Table 1 are repeated in Table 2 in the appropriate ranking (note that
the Great Smoky Mountains NP ranks first in Table 1, and fifth in Table 2).
Fifteen of the Table 1 entries, through Glacier NP, appear in Table 2;
the remainder variously include National Military Parks, Parkways, National
Historical Parks, National Seashores, National Recreation Areas, and the
like. The total of the visits listed in Table 2 represents 66.6% of all
visits reported in the system. It should be noted, however, that the
National Parkways are more appropriately included in the category of Major
Highways, reported in No. EF-267 in this series.
The state park system is easiest considered, at least initially, in the
context of the most complete published data, that compiled by the NPRA
for calendar 1970 (subsequent reference is made to fiscal and calendar
1972 data obtained directly from selected state park departments). For
all fifty states a total attendance of 484,189,207 is reported. The
-8-
-------
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
Table 1. NATIONAL PARKS LISTED IN RANK
ORDER OF TOTAL ATTENDANCE FOR 1972
Name
Acreage
1972 Attendance
Gt. Smoky Mts.
516,626
8,040,600
Piatt
912
4,257,100
Olympi c
896,599
3,031,700
Grand Teton
310,443
3,002,200
Hot Springs
3,535
2,738,300
Grand Canyon
673,575
2,698,300
Acadia
41,642
2,654,400
Rocky Mountain
262,191
2,519,600
Shenandoah
193,537
2,304,100
Yoseraite
761,320
2,266,600
Ye1 lowstone
2,221,773
2,251,700
Mammoth Cave
51,354
1,872,900
Everglades
1,400,533
1 ,773,300
Mt. Rainier
241,992
1,682,400
Glacier
1,013,101
1,392,200
Hawaii Volcanoes
229,616
1,389,100
Petrified Forest
94,189
1,229,000
Kings Canyon
460,331
1,058,000
Wind Cave
28,059
992,900
Zion
147,035
970,200
Sequoia
386,863
869,600
Carlsbad
46,753
856,100
Crater Lake
160,290
594,300
North Cascades
505,000
552,300
Mesa Verde
52,074
547,900
Lassen
106,934
505,900
Mt. McKinley
1,939,493
306,000
Haleakala
27,283
305,500
Big Bend
708,221
290,200
Virgin Islands
14,419
281,600
Capitol Reef
241,671
272,000
Arches
73,234
225,500
Redwood
56,201
104,300
Canyonlands
337,258
60,800
Guadalupe Mts.
81,u,7
39,200
Isle Royal
539,341
16,100
Bryce Canyon
36,010
2,000
53,953,900
-9-
-------
Table 2. ALL TYPES OF AREAS ADMINISTERED BY THE
NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM (INCLUDING NATIONAL PARKS -
TABLE 1) LISTED IN RANK ORDER OF ATTENDANCE FOR
1972 (THE HIGHEST 37 OUT OF 248 REPORTING).
Rank
Name
Acreage
1972 Attendance
1
Chickamauga/Chattanooga NMP
8,113
14,078,700
2
Blue Ridge Parkway
94,749
13,729,700
3
Natchez Trace Parkway
45,298
13,397,800
4
Colonial Nat11. Hist. Park
9,430
8,529,300
5*
Great Smoky Mts. NP
516,626
8,040,600
6
Kennesaw Mt. Nat'l. Satt. Pk.
3,683
6,286,200
7
Cape Cod NS
44,600
4,972,300
8
Lake Mead NRA
1,936,978
4,888,600
9*
Piatt NP
912
4,257,100
10
GW Mem. Parkway
7,142
3,605,300
11
Ozark NSR
72,101
3,289,700
12*
Olympic NP
869,599
3,031,700
13*
Grand Teton NP
310,443
3,002,200
14
Petersburg NB
2,731
2,964,900
15*
Hot Springs NP
3,535
2,738,300
16*
Grand Canyon NP
673,575
2,698,300
17*
Acadia NP
41,642
2,654,400
18
Jefferson NEM NHS
91
2,613,400
19
Gettysburg NC
21
2,609,100
20
Independence NHP
22
2,553,300
21*
Rocky Mt. NP
262,191
2,519,600
22*
Shenandoah NP
193,537
2,304,100
(incl. Skyline Dr.)
23*
Yosemite NP
761,320
2,266,600
24*
Yellowstone NP
2,221,773
2,251 ,700
25
Lincoln Memorial
164
1,989,100
26
Mount Rushmore Nat'l. Mem.
1,278
1,911,600
27*
Mammoth Cave NP
51,354
1,872,900
28
Cape Hatteras NS
28,500
1,783,700
29*
Everglades NP
1,400,533
1,773,300
30
Assateague Island NS
39,630
1,698,600
31*
Mount Rainier NP
241,992
1,682,400
32
Gettysburg NMP
3,409
1,682,300
33
Washington Monument
106
1,613,500
34
Lake Meredith NRA
41,097
1,494,200
35
Cabrillo NM
123
1,422,100
36
White House
18
1,412,800
37*
Glacier NP
1,013,101
1,392,200
* National Park (NP) data repeated from Table 1.
-10-
-------
comparable 1970 figure for the National Park System is 172,004,600. This
comparison of between 2.5 and 3 to one between total state and total
national is reported as characteristic over the years. What must be borne
in mind, however, is that a very much larger number of areas is administered
by the states (3,425 compared to 281 in 1970); the national total acreage
is much larger (8,554,919 for the state park areas in 1970 compared to
30,050,867 for the national system in 1971).
Since our eventual interest is in individual parks with large attendance,
we did an approximate weeding out to identify at least some of these in
the state systems. First the states were ranked by total attendance at
all state parks for 1970 (NRPA), with the results for the top 15 given in
Table 3. The individual state agencies for the top-ranked five were con-
tacted directly, and queried as to the identification and attendance figures
for all recreation areas in their systems having over one million in attendance.
These data are for calendar or fiscal 1972, as indicated, and are given
in Table 4. We thus see that attendance at selected major state recreational
areas rank with the higher attended areas in the national system (Table 2).
The intent of this exercise is to establish the order of magnitude of the
annual attendance data situation for both national and state recreational
areas, and to use this information as a basis for the subsequent analysis.
As part of the general discussion on recreational areas, it is important
to point out some general trends in park planning, especially transportation
systems planning, of which we have been made aware in our discussions with
transportation professionals of the National Park Service. First, there
is a strong awareness within the service of highway access and parking
problems which exist in some of the present park system areas, such as
Mount Rushmore National Memorial and Assateaque Island National Seashore.
Active programs are under way to attempt to relieve these problems by
various remedial measures, such as parking at a distance and busing to
the area.
-11-
-------
Table 3. THE TOP FIFTEEN STATE PARK SYSTEMS
RANKED BY TOTAL ATTENDANCE FOR 1970
Rank
State
Acreage
No. of
Areas
1970 Attendance
1
New York*
2,927,982
258
49,513,173
2
Cal ifornia
762,073
173
43,984,980
3
Ohio
138,020
56
32,626,896
4
Pennsylvania
273,450
202
31,457,581
5
Illinois
280.078
90
24,005,419
6
Kentucky
30,185
40
23,746,795
7
Oregon
80,707
221
22,952,384
8
Michigan
204,991
76
20,492,151
9
Washington
76,514
151
19,641,923
10
Oklahoma
88,224
67
17,659,932
11
Texas
71,433
70
14,721,063
12
Missouri
75,380
55
14,539,415
13
Iowa
34,906
80
11,415,918
14
Tennessee
48,445
29
10,683,096
15
Wisconsin
108,000
60
9,897,559
1
Percent
of Total
for all States:
71.8%
* o New York Office of
Parks and Recreation
247,887
204
45,239,970
New York Department
of Environmental
2,653,095
54
4,273,203
Conservation
(Division of Lands
and Forests)
-12-
-------
Table 4. FOR THE FIVE STATES WITH THE HIGHEST ANNUAL RECREATIONAL
ATTENDANCE, THE RANKING OF ALL RECREATIONAL AREAS WITH ATTENDANCE
OVER ONE MILLION IN CALENDAR 1972 (OHIO DATA FOR FISCAL 1973).
State
Rank
Area
1972 Attendance
New York
1
Jones Beach
12,079,000
2
Niagara Reservation
3,804,000
3
Allegheny State Park
1 ,123,000
California
1
Pismo State Beach
3,224,984
2
San Mateo Coast State Beaches
2,480,764
(seven beach areas)
3
Folsom Lake State Park
1,944,464
4
Bolsa Chica State Park
1,748,021
5
Huntington State Beach
1,567,413
6
Morro Bay State Park
1,488,495
7
Anza-Borrego State Park
1 ,123,262
8
Humboldt Redwoods State Park
1,023,244
Ohio
1
Hues ton Woods State Park
2,681,785
2
Grand Lake St. Mary's State Park
2,227,306
3
Pymatuning State Park
2,056,384
4
Rocky Forks State Park
1,968,755
5
East Harbor State Park
1 ,680,119
6
Salt Forks State Park
1 ,538,178
7
Mohican State Park
1,364,043
8
Mosquito State Park
1,344,798
9
Deer Creek State Park
1 ,331 ,078
10
Delaware State Park
1,301,934
11
Dillon State Park
1,092,529
12
Indian Lake State Park
1,058,832
Penrisyl vania
1
Pymatuning State Park
4,536,778
2
Presque Isle State Park
3,019,298
3
Prince Gallitzin State Park
1,702,292
4
Marine State Park
1 ,330,137
5
Cook Forest State Park
1,113,488
6
Independence Mai 1
1,044,606
11linois
1
Illinois Beach State Park
1,511,164
2
Rock Cut State Park
1 ,202,448
3
Giant City State Park
1,114,963
4
Eldon Hazlett/So. Shore Conser. Area
1,044,735
5
Mississippi Palisades State Park
1,013,479
-13-
-------
In addition, a new Alternate Transportation System Program for the NPS
received an appropriation for studies of various areas of the system
to determine the suitability and feasibility of implementing innovative
approaches to solving transportation problems. Detailed information has
been developed for 21 areas, and studies have been begun on some of them;
additional funds have been appropriated to operate transportation systems
now existing in eleven areas. In general terms the alternate systems
attempt to replace the use of private vehicles with public transportation
of a variety of types; such system development and use would be expected
to include planning study of the air quality impact, which would presumably
be significantly less than that of the replaced vehicles. The one proviso
we would offer is as follows: if the alternate system involves a shift of
the vehicle and parking activity to a place removed from the recreational
area (as some do), then that new site should be examined for its vehicular
pollution potential.
This analyses is addressed to vehicular access to, and use of, the facility
and/or its parking areas, wherever they may be located.
-14-
-------
SECTION V
RECREATIONAL AREA PARAMETERS
The important parameters in characterizing recreational area traffic
patterns are attendance rates and temporal - daily, weekly and seasonal -
variations in attendance. Recreational traffic and parking planners are
urged by specialists in the field to take into account: seasonal weekend
patterns of peak parking; turnover (average time for people to participate
or watch and then leave in their cars); avai labi 1i ty of multiple-use areas
and other parking areas or fields to handle overflow; relationship between
the size and capacity of the recreation facility and of its proposed parking
area(s); any proximity to a large urban center with its attendant demand;
capacity of highway access to the area and peak hours of highway loading;
any available mass transit; 'and employee parking needs.
Quoting further from the NRPA's "Parking for Recreation": "The quantitative
determination of parking needs is rarely a simple matter of finding out how
many drivers will want to park at a proposed facility at a given time.
Building for maximum demand generally results in astronomical waste. Even
in the design of modern expressways which are so vital to the economic life
of our nation, no attempt is made to accommodate the highesi peaks of demand.
Generally, we design to satisfy the traffic that can be expected in the
so-called 30th highest hour of the design year for the road. This means
that for those 29 hours during the year in which traffic is still heavier
than in the 30th highest, congestion of a most uncomfortable nature is
frankly and calmly anticipated and planned for. To do otherwise would
involve construction of the most improbably extravagant scope.
-------
The formulae for fixing recreational parking demand which are given in
this text are empirical and must be applied with due consideration of
local geography, social mores and habits, and economics. Two plus two
do not always equal four. The most careful computation may be provided
by time to have been in error.
If the planner is fated to err, it should be on the side of economy. If
a compelling demand for expansion of facilities is demonstrated, it is
generally feasible to get the funds to satisfy it. On the other hand,
nothing is more embarrasing politically than an underpatronized facility.
Choose a site which will permit expansion, plan so as to be able to
accommodate it, but build conservatively."
Extensive examples of attendance have been given in Section IV for most
of the largest state and national parks (in terms of annual attendance),
and the presumption is made that estimates of these figures will be
generated in the natural course of development of any large new recreational
area (or a significant expansion of an existing area). The opening of
a new section in an existing area is a frequently encountered process of
expansion of a park system to allow for increased use.
SEASONAL ATTENDANCE
Average variation in seasonal attendance in the National Park System is
seen in Table 5. Attendance, or visitation, is concentrated in the
summer months, with June, July and August accounting for 42% of the
total. Adding May and September increases this figure to 61%. The
pattern holds in general for most parks, and is probably a good represen-
tation for state parks as well. However, some significant variations
occur such as certain southern areas (e.g., Everglades NP) or where fall
color tours cause a second peak in October (e.g., Shenandoah NP). Variations
for the National Parks are exemplified in Table 6, which employs the
concept of the monthly peak load factor, which is defined in this case
-16-
-------
as the ratio of the peak to the average attendance. Thus if all twelve
months' visits were identical in number the load factor for each would be
one; if all visits occurred in one month, that month would have the
maximum possible peak value of twelve. Thus, the larger the load factor,
the more concentrated is public use in a short period. The appendix
contains monthly percentage use values for all areas in the National
Park System.
Table 5. AVERAGE MONTHLY VISITATION PATTERN,
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, 1972
Month
Percent of Total Attendance
January
February
March
Apri 1
May
June
3
4
6
8
9
12
16
14
10
8
5
5
July
August
September
October
November
December
-17-
-------
Table 6. LOAD FACTORS AND AVERAGE VISITS PER DAY IN PEAK
VISITATION MONTH 1961, 1970, AND 1971
1961
19 70
1971
Peak
Visitation
Honth
Load
Factor 1/
Average
Dally 2/
Peak
Vlsitation
Month
Load
Factor \J
Ave rage
Dally 2/
Peak
Visitation
Month
toad
Factor 1/
Average
Dally
Acadia
Arches
Big Bead
Bryce Cany mi
July
September
August
July
2.9
i.e
1.7
2.9
12,097
46}
406
2,087
August
June
April
July
2.8
2.5
1.7
2.9
21,231
1,223
f*27
2,723
August
July
April
August
3.1
2.1
1.7
2.6
20,169
1,158
1,189
2,677
Canyonlanda
Capitol Reef
Carlsbad Caverns
Crater Lake
September
July
August
1.7
2.6
3.6
620
4,117
4,007
June
August
July
August
3.1
2.8
2.7
3.6
2SB
1,681
5,258
5,141
April
July
July
August
2.1
2.4
2.7
3.5
326
1,606
5,727
5.227
Everglades
Clacler
Grand Canyon JJ/
Grand Teton
February
July
July
AugU3t
1.5
4.8
2.5
3.6
2,433
9,542
8,482
14,596
January
July
July
July
1.8
4.5
2.5
3.9
6,254
14,991
15,438
35,301
February
August
July
July
1.7
4.1
3.B
3.8
6,413
14,394
15,146
33,816
Cieat Sjnoky Mountains
Guadalupe Mountains
Haleakala
Hawaii Volcanoes
July
August
July
2.7
1.7
1.9
35,068
305
3,838
July
August
September
2.4
1.6
1.5
43.049
865
3.355
July
July
August
August
2.6
2.4
1.7
2.0
49.233
177
1,177
5,319
Hot Springs
Isle Royale
Kings Canyon
Lassen Volcanic
July
August
July
August
2.5
5.2
2.8
3.6
5,920
90
5,722
4,511
July
August
August
August
1.9
5.8
2.8
3.4
10,490
223
7.548
4,231
July
August
August
August
1.7
4.8
2.8
3.3
11,651
205
6,662
4,028
Karaoth Cave
Mesa Verde
Mount HcKlnley 4/
Mount Rainier
August
August
July
July
2.4
3.4
4.6
2.9
3,391
2,096
214
12,409
August
July
July
August
2.3
3.3
5.8
2.B
10,534
4,704
716
14,608
July
August
July
August
1.9
3.3
3.9
3.2
8,825
4,551
609
15,004
Korth Cascades
Olyaplc
Petrified Forest
Piatt
August
July
July
3.3
2.6
2.9
13,524
4,716
9,241
August
August
July
July
2.5
3.0
2.8
2.1
1 .991
18,584
6,665
9,071
August
August
Jul}
June
3.0
2.8
3.0
2.0
1,766
14,113
8,585
22.815
Redwood 5t
Rocky Mountain
Sequoia
Sfc.enandoav
August
July
August
4.4
2.6
2.2
18,009
4,132
11,670
August
August
A"gU3t
3.5
2.8
2.1
22.194
6,587
13,3?2
August
August
July
July
3.4
2.7
2.1
339
22,725
6,410
13,538
Virgin Islands
Wind Cave
Yellowstone
Yosealte
July
July
July
July
1.5
2.6
4.3
2.7
124
4,827
17,777
8 ,75B
March
August
July
August
1.5
2.6
4.0
2.3
524
7,0 50
24,877
13,866
August
August
July
July
1 4
2.7
3.9
2.3
923
7,849
22.3B5
15,263
Zion
August
2.3
3,745
August
2.4
5,815
July
2.4
6.326
(See following page for Footnotes to Table fi)
-------
FOOTNOTES TO TABLE 6
1/ Load factor - Total visits in peak visitation month divided by
average monthly visitation.
2/ Average daily - Average number of visits per day in peak visitation
month.
3/ The 1970 data for Grand Canyon National Park reflect corrections
submitted to the Washington Office in 1971. The corrections are
not reflected in the monthly public use reports for 1970 and 1971.
4/ The completion of the Anchorage-Fairbanks Highway in the Fall of
1971 generated a large increase in off season travel to Mount McKinley
National Park. Consequently, the load factor for 1971 is distorted
and does not necessarily reflect the true seasonal travel pattern
for Mount McKinley National Park.
5/ Redwood National Park began their visitation data series in July 1971
and a load factor could not be calculated on a twelve month base.
-19-
-------
ATTENDANCE BY [ OF WEEK AND HOUR OF DAY
In broad terms, 3 highest values of attendance will occur on weekends,
with a tendency of the maxima to be arrivals by midday Saturday and/or
Sunday, and departures late those same days. This is a broad generality,
however, which applies primarily to day trips to those areas noted for
swimming, picnicking and scenic driving, and to others as well. These
activities are characteristic of many of the highly attended areas. Atten-
dance patterns should be defined for any proposed new or expanded development.
Typical total one day travel trips to park areas, as distributed over a week-
end, are shown in Table 7. Appendix B presents a number of additional data
sets which are considered typical of weekday and hourly traffic for recrea-
tional areas in Missouri. These data may be combined with average expected
durations of stay (4 hours is frequently cited as a typical value), to
convert entrance times (visits or attendance) to exit times to obtain
the combinations of entrances and exits as functions of time of day.
Table 7. HOURLY DISTRIBUTION BY PERCENT
OF TOTAL WEEKEND TRIPS TO ALL STATE PARKS
PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL TRIPS
TIME OF
DAY
' FRIDAY
SATURDAY
SUNDAY
8-9
1 13
0.74
9-10
1.47
2 98-
10-11
2.87
7.22
11-12
2 85
10 86
12-1
2 53
12 57
1-2
2.79
11.11
2-3
2 85
9 98
3-4
2 03
641
4-5
1.15
1.78
4 30
5-6
1.38
1 49
2 22
6-7
1 57
1 36
0 09
7-8
1.59
0 82
0.05
8-9
1 17
0.49
0.02
PARKING FACILITIES
The quotation from "Parking for Recreation" given in the beginning of this
section gives some general principles of parking for recreational areas.
More specific indications are given in the following material, most of
which is extracted from that document.
Depending on the landscaping employed, parking for such areas will usually
consist of from one to a number of separated areas providing space for
cars at the rate of from 110 to 150 cars per acre of parking area.
-20-
-------
There are two basic ways, plus two variations on them, to arrange parking
at a recreation center. Parking may be centralized as in Plan A. It
may be dispersed as in Plan B to provide parking fields at each different
type of recreational facility within the larger recreation center. It
may be handled as a combination of the first two plans as in Plan C,
or it may be dispersed and allowed to overflow as in Plan D.
1
_
¦ . V
1 ;c 'h V/; . ' ;
PLAY
V
4 _ ^
\
/
AREAS
("X
/
/
c 0
L F
P 1 C N 1
C K 1 N G
}>
Plan A
Centralized parking is least costly of all parking
schemes.
. . . . * ." .8 . * .e ; * a . .c; .h . ;
PLAY
A R E A S
P 1 C N 1
P '
/"
GOLF
h
L
n
C K < N G
1¦
Plan B
Parking at each facility is more convenient for
uses but more difficult to operate.
-------
PLAY
AREAS
a. .c-.-h .
/
P 1 C N 1 C K 1 N G
C3
,-s GOLF
Plan C
Parking for one specialized facility is often
necessary.
CO?
LH
Plan D
Adjacent overflow grass or gravel areas will take
care of peak days. It is better to under build
than to over build, particularly if there is more
than average space available.
-22-
-------
Planners of small recreation centers, which often have only one facility,
will have no trouble selecting the right approach to parking; namely, the
centralized parking area that provides all the parking necessary. But in
large recreation centers, parking schemes and parking needs can be complex.
The various alternatives for parking layouts should be studied carefully
before deciding how to arrange the areas and how much of them should be
paved.
A. Centralized Parking
In centralized parking, the overflow of parking traffic from one type
of recreation is absorbed by available parking space allocated to other
types of recreation that are not drawing large crowds at the same time.
This consideration can be very important in construction costs. If the
parking area is to be paved, a central parking field will be a good deal
cheaper than multiple fields because it can be smaller than the sum of the
areas of the multiple fields, when designed for peak capacity.
In a centralized parking lot, serving combined facilities in the recreation
center, all the visitors can park quickly without searching for a parking
area that would otherwise be' serving their particular recreational interest.
But the big central field's drawbacks are: 1) its often forbidding and
awkward appearance in the over-all landscape; and 2) the problem it
presents in moving people from their cars to recreation.
If the distance from car to recreation is long, the walk will be arduous
and will make the recreational facility much less attractive. Solving the
problem by operating buses from parking to recreation at some distance is
an alternative that works in special cases. For instance, buses have been
used in a number of ski areas in the National Park System where parking
fields near the ski lifts were not practical because of the steep and
mountainous terrain. Cut and fill earthwork and blasting bedrock at the
base of the lifts would have been far to expensive. In cases like this,
the facility usually supplies enough buses to handle near-peak capacity
crowds, plus parking space for buses and drivers. Bus fees should ordinarily
pay for their operation.
-23-
-------
B. Total Capacity Paved Parking at Each Facility
In large recreational centers, where activities may be widely separated,
the public will not only appreciate but will pay for the opportunity to
park close to the activity they are interested in. The diagram above (B)
illustrates such an arrangement - a parking field for each facility,
adequate to accomodate peak parking demands.
In a big recreation area, various activities may often be one-half mile
from each other, and separate parking fields are a better answer - for a
number of different activities - than bus service from a central field.
At New York City's Jones' Beach, which stretches along the Atlantic for
six miles, a number of separate parking fields are provided to handle this
great length. The Overlook fields there, right back of the beach and with
a good view of the ocean, fill up first. The larger parking fields which
are considered less desirable because of their distance from the beaches
fill up last. Several small fields are less obtrusive in the landscape
than one large field, but they have three drawbacks: 1) they are harder
to control; 2) they cost more to build; and j) they can make finding a
parking space on a busy day a lot more troublesome for people who are not
familiar with parking patterns at that particular facility. Carrying
picnic baskets and beach chairs and watching youngsters to and from a
large central field is drudgery whether a big distance between car and
recreation is covered by walking or on a crowded bus.
However, as pointed out above, construction, maintenance, and operation
can be much more expensive in multiple parking fields (especially if they
are paved) than they are in a central parking field.
C. Combined Centralized and Single Facility Parking
Only the largest recreation centers will use the huge scope of Plan B,
individual parking fields at each facility; and smaller centers will normally
use the centralized field. Recreation centers in between may combine the
two schemes for the most effective solution to their parking problems. In
this case a central field for most of the facilities will have all the
-24-
-------
advantages mentioned in A. But where one or two facilities, like a golf
course a mile away from the central parking field, need their own space
for parking, they should have them. The extra cost of decentralization
in such instances can easily be offset by parking or other fees paid by
appreciative vis tors who won't have to walk a mile.
D. Overflow Parking at Each Facility
When parking for a big recreation center is clearly handled best by a
number of fields, one at each type of recreation, the planner must decide
whether to provide peak capacity paved parking areas or smaller paved
areas with provision for overflow cars on turf or gravel surfaced fields.
Peak capacity of a parking field is equal to the number of cars bringing
the maximum number of people to the facility on a peak day, at the peak
hour, plus 10%. The 10% will provide space for turnover as visitors come
and go during the peak hour. The field will be filled on only a few days
of the year, so it seldom makes sense to pave all the area. Paved areas
can provide parking for normal days and good level turf or gravel will
handle overflow on peak days.
Overflow areas like this can' cut initial construction costs, but they may
increase maintenance and operating costs since on peak days extra personnel
will have to control and supervise parking in the overflow areas, unless
they are permanently staked out and marked.
Actually, an overflow area need not be turf or gravel, it can be a paved
Softball diamond, for instance, or the winter storage area of a marina
which is almost empty during the sailing season. Multiple use overflow
areas like this, however, are often not very practical; usually, just at
the time that the area is needed for parking, the greatest demand for the
same area for recreation occurs.
-25-
-------
SITE FACTORS
There is an obvious relationship between the parking area and its approaches.
The traffic generated by a recreation area can be determined and roads
designed to move a given number of cars in a given length of time. The
rate of speed at which cars will be going will be low. Tighter curves,
steeper grades, and reduced sight distances, which are not possible on
high-speed roadways, are adequate and satisfactory, at least to a degree.
With such criteria the road can be designed to follow existing terrain
more closely, eliminating excessive cut and fill.
Even though earthmoving on a large scale is one of the least expensive
unit costs in a construction project, the alternatives to extensive grading
should be studied. In rough terrain smaller parking fields arranged on
a series of terraces may be a better solution. It is desirable in parking
design to balance cut and fill and avoid the need to borrow or remove earth,
increasing total cost. However, a balance is rarely struck.
The location of parking areas often has a greater effect on the total
design of the recreation cen.ter than decisions relating to other elements
in the design. A parking site should be evaluated and selected with the
following requirements in mind.
Existing topography must permit construction without excessive difficulty
or cost, still permuting ready access to the recreation area. The parking
area may be the logical place to give visitors a general view of the
entire development. A careful study of topographic maps, aerial photographs,
and reconnaissance on foot are necessary before any decision can be made.
ACCESS
Finally, relative ease of access to and exit from the area and its parking
facilities is as important to recreational areas as it is to all the other
complex sources studied, to prevent congestion and the consequent extensive
idling times which can generate excessive emissions.
-26-
-------
SECTION VI
TRAFFIC PARAMETERS
The methodology for describing traffic movement associated with this complex
source, as outlined in Section VII, requires estimates of the average
running time for the vehicles in the recreational area, arid the volume of
such traffic. Traffic parameters which should be used to develop these
two values are discussed in this section.
PARAMETERS TO ESTABLISH TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Expected annual attendance is a figure to be expected from a developer;
further, the estimated number of persons entering and leaving the recreational
area by hour may be submitted by the developer, or estimated from related
data such as that in this report. This data is converted to hourly traffic
volume by dividing by average vehicle occupancy. Although this procedure
for estimating traffic volume places much emphasis on a traffic parameter
which is not very precise, it is a procedure which is used by recreational
specialists to estimate expected traffic volume for a variety of purposes.
An attempt should certainly be made to obtain an average vehicle occupancy
(A.V.O.) value specifically for each park reviewed, and possibly even
different values for particular times of the day or week.
The figure most commonly used in recreational area statistics is in the
order of 3.5 persons per vehicle, although in special cases the estimate
may deviate significantly from that.
This method of estimating traffic volume assumes that everyone arrives at
the park by automobile. If this assumption is incorrect, the number of
persons using other modes of transportation should be subtracted from the
total attendance before calculating the estimated traffic volumes.
-27-
-------
PARAMETERS TO ESTABLISH RUNNING TIMES
Concept of Emissions per Unit Time
In the immediate vicinity of recreational areas, maximum vehicle speeds
rarely exceed 10 or 15mph, and average speeds are much lower.* The usual
procedure for estimating motor vehicle emissions as a function of vehicle
speed is not very accurate at these low speeds due to:
a. Difficulty in estimating average operating speed; and
b. Variation in observed emission rates per mile with slight change
in average operating speed.
For recreational areas, analysis shows that traffic operations and their
related emissions are better considered in units of time (grams/minute)
rather than units of distance (grams/mile), for the following reasons:
1. The variations in emission per unit time at different speeds are
relatively insignificant at the lowest speeds;** and
2. Traffic movement in the vicinity of a recreational area can be
described more accurately and more easily in terms of minutes of running
time than in terms of average speed, particularly when engine idling can
predominate during congested periods.
Values for automotive pollutant emissions for 1972 in grams/minute at idle
are available from A Study of Emissions from Light Duty Vehicles in Six
Cities. They are summarized in Table 8. These test data compare well
with emission factors calculated from the current edition of AP-42,
when converted to grams/minute at various speeds and then extrapolated
to zero speed.
* If, access roads are up to several miles or more in length, and
relatively uncurved and level, steady-state speeds in those portions
may be higher - see "Approach" and "Departure" discussion.
** Less than 10 percent increase in CO and hydrocarbon emissions per
minute from idle to 15mph.
-28-
-------
Table 8. VEHICLE EXHAUST EMISSIONS AT IDLE IN
GRAMS PER MINUTE*
Pollutant
Emissions, gm/min
Carbon monoxide
16.19
Hydrocarbons
1.34
Oxides of Nitrogen
0.11
* These values do not include emissions due to the cold start of engines
or from evaporation of gasoline at the end of a trip ("hot soak"). If
subsequent investigation of the relative magnitude of these emissions,
compared to the totals generated by the methodology of 'this report,
indicates that they are significant, appropriate values for each cold
start and hot soak can be inserted as the total emissions for the start
and stop modes, respectively. Since data for cold start and hot soak
emissions would be reported per occurrence, there is no need to deter-
mine an associated running time or emission period for the modes.
In applying the recommended procedure of emission estimation, total
emissions from the amusement park at any time would be the product of
the number of vehicles, times average vehicle running time, times the
appropriate emission factor from Table 8.
ETotai = M (RT) w*ere
V = Traffic volume during period of concern
RT = Average running time, minutes
EF = Emission factor, grams/minute.
Operational Modes at Recreational Areas
For purposes of analysis, traffic movement in the vicinity of a recreational
area has been divided into the same eight operational modes that were
specified for shopping centers, airports, and sports stadiums. These are
summarized below. The schematic figures given in Section V show how and
where these modes would apply.
-29-
-------
Approach (A)* - The time or distance along the immediate access road during
which traffic movement is affected by vehicles entering or leaving the park.
Entrance (I) - Waiting and service (entrance) time at the entranceway to
the parking facility.
Movement in (MI) - Driving time or distance to the designated parking space
(with supervised parking). This also includes waiting time in a queue
within the parking area, or driving time to an overflow parking facility.
Stop (S) - Parking of the vehicle and shutoff of the engine.
Start (ST) - Starting of the engine and egress from the parking space.
Movement out (MO) - Driving time or distance from the parking space to
the preferred exitway.
Exit (E) - Movement through the exitway, including waiting time in a queue.
Departure (D)* - The time or distance along the immediate access road that
movement continues to be influenced by traffic from the recreational area.
The average running time in each of these modes can be quantified for a
specific recreational area, or section of a recreational area, as a function
#
of its physical dimensions, geographic layout, traffic control procedures,
and traffic volume.
* For cases where the approach or departure may involve several minutes
at higher steady-state speeds, the following 1972 emissions-per-minute
data may be used:
Emissions per minute (gm/min) at steady-state speeds of:
Pollutant
20mph
30mph
40mph
CO
16
17
18
HC
1.4
1.5
1.9
N0X
0.3
1.0
2.5
-30-
-------
Base Running Time
There is an average minimum vehicle running time for each recreational
area that is associated with periods of low or zero traffic congestion.
This concept of a minimum or base running time is important because it
usually is the most common operating condition at the area and because at
most areas it is expected to be exceeded only during periods of relatively
high traffic volume if at all. The base running time can be estimated from
a plan of the recreational area, its parking facilities, and its access
roads, with an additional knowledge of its traffic control procedures and
probable driving patterns.
Relationship Between Running Time and Traffic Volume
As traffic volume increases, running times may become longer due to
congestion. Some of the constraints to movement that may contribute to
the longer running times are:
o Queues at parking and information booths, in the active
parking area as cars move into their assigned parking
spaces, and at other temporary or permanent traffic
control points.
9 Queues created as vehicles attempt to exit onto access
roads.
Identification of Potential Critical Modes at Recreational Areas
Examination of the eight operational modes that were identified indicates
that running times in some modes should generally be relatively constant,
but that times in others may increase under peak attendance/traffic conditions.
For recreational areas, the three modes whose times may be greatly affected
by traffic congestion, in order of decreasing impact, are:
1. Entrance
2. Exit
3. Movement in
Time in the entrance mode may be affected by the collection of fees and/or
the giving out of brochures as the vehicles enter parking lots at recreational
areas.
-31-
-------
Movement time into a parking space is a function of the maximum parking
rate that can be accomplished by park employees as they direct traffic
within the lot. If traffic flow into the lot is controlled by a ticket
or other gate, running times in the parking lot should not increase much
with increased traffic. However, sizeable queues may form during these
periods in free parking lots. Time in the "movement in" mode expands
incrementally when the main parking lot is filled and incoming traffic
must all drive an additional distance to an overflow lot.
Exit time for a vehicle in a parking lot is a function of the egress
capacity of the lot. As this is approached or exceeded, running time
increases. Waiting times in the resulting queues contribute significantly
to total running times. Exit queue lengths are moderate compared to those
for the entrance mode because of the departure of vehicles over a longer
period of time.
-32-
-------
SECTION VII
ANALYSIS
In this section, three analyses are developed for converting available
data into vehicle running times and numbers of vehicles running. The
final step of combining all these intermediate results into a quantitative
description of recreational area traffic behavior is then treated in
Section VIII, Results.
ENTRANCE OR PARKING TIME
Time spent entering a parking lot or waiting to be directed to a parking
space is a function of the rate at which vehicles are attempting to enter
the lot, the number of entrance lines, and the average time required for
service at the entrance (fee*, brochure). Running time can be quantified
with data on these three parameters by use of a methodology employing
queueing theory. The hourly inflow rate is obtained from the projected
traffic distribution pattern for the area. Average service time per
vehicle ranges from about 0.10 minute, where parking is free or the fee
is collected after the vehicle has parked, to 0.25 minutes in cases where
there may be slow attendants, or a poor entrance configuration. This
value is difficult to predict from design data, since it is much more
closely related to operational features of the parking facility.
Estimates of running times for the entrance mode cannot be precise,
especially considering the available input data. The equations employed
here for waiting time in queue result from assumptions that vehicles are
reaching the gate randomly over the time increment of concern, and are
passing through the gate randomly. Errors in the estimates by use of these
equations are thought to be relatively low.
-33-
-------
For periods when traffic flow is less than gate capacity, the average
running time (in minutes) in a queue is given by the equation:
RT = b i "d' , where
a = utilization factor
= (vehicle inflow rate, veh/min) (b)
(no. of entrance lines)
b = average service time, min.
For these periods when traffic flow exceeds gate capacity (a>1.0), the
queue continues to build during each time increment by the amount that
traffic volume exceeds capacity. Average running time for this situation
can best be estimated by the tabular calculation procedure exemplified
in Table 9. The procedure is illustrated with data for a two-hour peak
traffic period (3:00p.m. - 5:00p.m.) with vehicles existing as shown in
column 2, four entrance lanes, and an average service time of 0.1 minute.
EXIT TIME
Since visitors usually leave the recreational area over a period of a
number of hours, 1t 1s unusual for congestion and excessive queueing
to occur at the parking lot exits or on the access roads. However,
if inadequate exit capacity for peak crowds is expected on special
occasions, the queueing theory equation or tabular method presented above
may also be used to estimate running times in the exit mode.
Generally, it is more direct to describe the exit constraint in terms of
gate capacity rather than average service time. The "b" factor in the
equation can still be easily quantified, since it is the average outflow
time per vehicle or the number of exit gates divided by the total gate
capacity in vehicles per minute.
-34-
-------
Table 9. EXAMPLE QUEUE CALCULATION WHEN GATE CAPACITY IS EXCEEDED
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Time Period
Enteri ng
Traffic
Vehicles
N at End
nav.
Starting
Ending
Volume
Serviced
AN
of Period
RT, Min.
col. 3-
col. 4+
col. 5+col. 5'
(b) (col. 6)
2
Divided by
No. of gates
col. 2
col. 5'
(line above)
2:30
3:00
900
1200
-
-
-
(use equation)
3:00
3:30
1220
1200
+ 20
20
10
.25
3:30
4:00
1400
1200
+ 200
220
120
3.0
4:00
4:30
1600
1200
+ 400
620
420
10.5
4:30
5:00
1400
1200
+ 200
820
720
18.0
5:00
5:30
1100
1200
- 100
720
770
19.25
5:30
6:00
980
1200
- 220
500
610
15.25
6:00
6:30
750
1200
- 440
60
280
7.0
N = queue length, in cars
RT = average running time, in minutes
= (av. inflow time per vehicle, min.) (av. queue length)
-------
"MOVEMENT-IN" TIME
Running time spent in reaching a parking space increases as a function of
the number of vehicles already in the parking area, since the later arrivals
must find their way to the more remote sections of the lot. The average
running time in this mode for a day, then, should be proportional to the
daily attendance. Actual values for a particular recreational area are
estimated from driving distances as determined from a plan of the parking
area.
For parking lots with no entrance booth, a queue may form at the point of
active parking during periods of high inflow, rather than at the entranceway.
However, the same queueing theory equation is still applicable.
The largest increase in running time for the "movement-in" mode occurs when
the capacity of the main parking lot 1s exceeded and incoming cars must
be diverted to an auxiliary or overflow area. Therefore, some quantitative
analysis of number of parking vehicles at any time of the day is desirable.
Vehicle accumulation can be derived from the hourly data on arrival and
departure of visitors, or arrivals plus average stay-times. After these
data have been converted to equivalent inflow/outflow of traffic, the number
of vehicles in the parking lot at any time 1s the cumulative difference
between these two hourly values. At the time of day on a peak attendance
day when the estimated number of vehicles in the parking area exceeds the
primary parking capacity, then running time is Incrementally increased by
an amount that accounts for driving time to the overflow lot, plus any
additional delays associated this movement.
-36-
-------
SECTION VIII
RESULTS
METHODOLOGY
In general terms, the methodology proceeds as described in the next two
paragraphs which follow. It should be emphasized that this description
is of the technique, shown schematically in Figure 1, in its most general
form, which provides the starting for each or the seven types of complexes
investigated. Differences in implementation from this general approach
arose for each of the other six complexes, but the methodology for recrea-
tional areas follows the general approach closely with few exceptions.
Starting from the physical, geographic, and demographic characteristics
of the complex, relationships are established for estimating typical and
peak traffic volumes. The concept of operational traffic modes is used
to generate best estimates of average running times for cars. The typical
traffic volumes and base running times provide the description of typical
conditions.
The parameters of the complex which significantly and adversely impact
traffic behavior are also defined. Quantitative relationships are proposed
or estimated for the controlling parameters of the complex with respect
to excess running times in critical traffic operating modes. These, in
turn, are superimposed on the base running times to generate peak running
times. The peak running times are then associated with peak traffic volumes
to create the required information on peak traffic conditions.
-37-
-------
Exceedance
/Characteristic \
-[ Parameters }-
V of Complex J
Trip
Generation
Analysis
Peak
Trip
generation
Values
Traffic
Modal
Analysis
/ Exceedance ]
V Values J
Exceedance
Depen-
Typical
Trip
Jeneration
Values
Peak Values
of Number of
"*jCars Running, am
Base Running
Time
Peak
Running
Times
Base
Running
Time
/V
eak Values
of Numbers of
pars Running, and|
Peak Running
Times
Typical Valued
of Numbers of
|Cars Running, and]
Base Running
Times
Figure 1. GENERALIZED METHODOLOGY
-38-
-------
In the case of recreational areas, as shown in Figure 2, the methodology
proceeds from basic information about a given area (see Section V), via
traffic behavior data and traffic volume projections (see Section VI),
to generate estimates of peak and typical numbers of vehicles and associated
i
running times by hour of the day. Typical and peak one-hour and eight-hour
periods, required end products, can then be extracted from this information.
The specifics of the procedure are presented below. First, the attendance
patterns associated with typical and peak days at the area are delineated.
These may be provided, or derived using an annual total estimate and the
seasonal, daily and hourly average data of Section V and.the Appendixes.
These are converted into number of vehicles entering and leaving the park
per hour by dividing numbers of visitors by their respective average
vehicle occupancies. Running times in the eight operating modes are then
determined. A schematic diagram similar to those in Section V may be help-
ful in analyzing the operating modes at the area under different traffic
volume situations. If the schematic is approximately to scale for the
parking area and access roads, it enables estimates of the base running
times in each mode to be made.*
»
The access roads to most large recreation areas are on park property, so
running times in the approach and departure modes are influenced only by
traffic to and from the area and by the configuration of the access road.
Running times in the stop and the start modes are probably always very
low--the value of 0.1 minute used in the first task report is still appropriate
here. Running times in the entrance and exit modes are estimated by the
procedures presented in Section VII, as functions of the traffic volume and
entrance and exit gate capacities. Movement into a parking space is primarily
related to the size of the facility until the lot becomes filled. Thus the
traffic volume estimates must be used in conjunction with parking lot capacity
to determine whether capacity is exceeded during peak periods, and hence
the number of vehicles that will have an additional running time to an
overflow parking area. Time for movement out appears to be primarily a
function of parking lot size, and relatively constant for all attendance
rates.
* If a large recreational area is served by widely scattered parking lots
(i.e., is divided into major sections), and served by separated access roads,
then the sections may be analyzed separately, depending on sizes and distances.
-39-
-------
Characteristic
of Recreational
Areas
Traffic
perationa
Mode
Analysis
Base
Running
Time
Parking
Capacity
Analys is
Peak Trip
Generation
Values
Typical
Trip Gen-
eration
ValilPS
Gate
Exceedance
Parking
Lot Gate
Capacity
Peak
Running
Times
Parking
Exceedance
Gate
Capacity
Analysis
Parking
Spaces
Schematic
Layout
Trip
Seneration
Analysis
Exceedance
Analyses
Peak Values of
dumber of Cars
Running and
Running Times
Typical Values
of Number of
Cars Running and
Running Times
Figure 1. GENERALIZED METHODOLOGY APPLIED TO RECREATIONAL AREAS
-40-
-------
The base running time is combined with the typical traffic volume to
provide the required values of total vehicles running and base running
times. For the peak case, diurnal variations of traffic must be examined
to select the peak hour and eight hours.
In summary, the two main concerns for a recreation area are for adequate
parking lot entrance capacity and adequate parking spaces, or an efficient
menas of directing and moving incoming traffic to an overflow parking area.
GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION
Most of the running times, and hence emissions, from a recreational area
can usually be considered as being distributed fairly uniformly over the
parking areas during typical operating periods (base running times). Some
concentration of vehicles may occur in the vicinity of the parking lot
entrance line. The added emissions attributed to this particular line
may be determined from the breakdown of running times by mode for a typical
period. It may also be desirable to simulate access road traffic as a
separate line source, depending on the orientation of the road (especially
if straight away from the area) and the distance of expected effect.
Under peak traffic conditions, the running time in the entrance mode may
be increased, and the need to consider the entrance line as a special
source is accentuated. The area over which the other running times are
distributed may also increase, due to the utilization of secondary parking
areas.
METEOROLOGICAL ASPECTS
The meteorological characteristics which most importantly affect atmospheric
dilutive capacity are mixing height, wind speed and atmospheric stability.
A convenient summary of mixing height and wind speed characteristics which
affect air pollution potential is given in the Office of Air Programs
Publication No. AP-101 (Holzworth 1972). Atmospheric stability may be
determined in terms of cloud cover, solar radiation and wind speed by
a method proposed by Pasquill and shown in Table 10. For ground level
sources, such as automobiles at recreational areas, the ground level con-
centrations, both in the vicinity and downwind of the sources will be
-------
Table 10. KEY TO STABILITY CATEGORIES (after Turner 1970)
Day
Night
Surface Wind
Speed (at 10 m),
m sec"1
Incoming Solar Radiation
Thinly Overcast
or
>_ 4/8 Low Cloud
< 3/8
Cloud
Strong
Moderate
Slight
<2
A
A-B
B
2-3
A-B
B
C
E
F
3-5
B
B-C
C
D
E
5-6
C
C-D
D
D
D
>6
C
C
D
D
D
The neutral class, D, should be assumed for overcast conditions during
day or night.
NOTE: Class A is the most unstable, class F the most stable class. Night
refers to the period from 1-hour before sunset to 1-hour after sunrise.
Note that the neutral class, D, can be assumed for overcast conditions
during day or night, regardless of wind speed.
"Strong" incoming solar radiation corresponds to a solar altitude greater
than 60° with clear skies; ''slight" insolation corresponds to a solar
altitude from 15° to 35° with clear skies. Table 170, Solar Altitude
and Azimuth, in the Smithsonian Meteorological Tables (List 1951) can be
used in determining the solar altitude. Cloudiness will decrease incoming
solar radiation and should be considered along with solar altitude in
determining solar radiation. Incoming radiation that would be strong with
clear skies can be expected to be reduced to moderate with broken (5/8 to
7/8 cloud cover) middle clouds and to slight with broken low clouds.
-42-
-------
inversely proportional to wind speed and mixing height and directly pro-
portional to atmospheric stability (i.e., the more stable the atmosphere,
the higher the concentration).
Peak use of most recreational areas occurs during summer, with the highest
days of the week usually being on the weekend. The peak hour use generally
occurs during the early afternoon (somewhere from noon to 2p.m.). The
peak eight-hour period is generally 11a.m. to 7p.m. Holzworth (1972) has
mixing height and wind speed figures which are directly applicable to
summer afternoon conditions for locations in the contiguous United States,
and these may be used directly (Figures 3 and 4). For the weekend mid-
day peak, atmospheric stability classes B, C, and D may occur with classes
C and D being the most prevalent.
The period when meteorological conditions are least favorable for diluting
pollutants is the period when recreational areas are essentially not in
use, or at least have very little traffic. This would be from very late
in the evening until a few hours after sunrise. It is most often during
this period that mixing heights are lowest, wind speeds are lowest, and
atmospheric stability is greatest.
QUALITATIVE GUIDELINES
In addition to the quantitative guidelines developed above, the review
of recreational areas as complex emission sources should also include the
following considerations which are not presently reducible to quantitative
terms:
1. Since the layouts of recreational areas can frequently be modified
comparatively easily, to accommodate larger crowds or to alleviate traffic
problems, the amount of space available for expansion or modifications
should be defined. Specifically, the ease with which parking capacity
and access roads can be expanded and improved should be established.
2. The appropriate and adequate use of signs and markers to direct
motorists throughout the vehicular areas is important, since many of
the guests are tourists visiting the recreational area for the first
time.
-43-
-------
Figure 3. ISflPLETHS (m sec"1) OF MEAN SUMMER WIND SPEED AVERAGED THROUGH AFTERNOON MIXING LAYER
-------
Figure 4. ISOPLETHS (mxlO2) OF MEAN SUMMER AFTERNOON MIXING HEIGHTS
-------
3. The developer should demonstrate an effort to optimize traffic
circulation patterns in the park by such methods as:
No left turn movements across the main access roads
Maximum use of one-way and divided streets
Markings that separate parking lot entrance lanes from
through traffic lanes, where appropriate
Prohibition of on-street parking within the area.
4. In addition to the employees normally assigned to parking and traffic
control, the area's security personnel should be available to assist in
these areas during peak periods.
THE NINE QUESTIONS
While the specific information called for by the task work statement has
been provided in Sections V through VIII, the nine questions spelled out
as part of the work statement warrant specific response. This is given
here, with the questions abbreviated.
1. Area alloted to or occupied by a single vehicle? 110 to 150 vehicles
per acre of parking lot.
2. Percentage of land and parking spaces potentially occupied by vehicles?
The usual percentage? Varies widely depending on area size, use rate,
and nature of recreation.
3. Typical and peak values (absolute or fractional) of vehicles running
for one- and eight-hour periods? See Section V and Appendixes.
4. Typical and worst case (slowest) vehicle speeds? In the context of
our approach, this question is only relevant to analysis of the "Major
Highway" complex source task. It is dealt with in that task report.
5. Vehicle distribution within the complex? See subheading entitled
Geographic Distribution in Section VIII.
6. Design parameters of the complex likely to be known beforehand?
See Section V, Recreational Area Parameters.
7. Design parameters in question (6) which can be most successfully
related to traffic, and hence emissions? See Sections V through VII.
-46-
-------
8. Relationships of parking lot design to parking densities and vehicle
circulation? What is typical design? Design with highest parking densities,
lowest vehicle speeds, longest vehicle operating times? To the extent
to which these questions are relevant to our methodology, they are answered
in Section V.
9. Methodological conditions likely to occur during peak use? Use level
during periods of worst meteorology? See the subheading entitled Meteorological
Aspects in Section VIII.
-47-
-------
SECTION IX
REFERENCES
and General Information Sources
Compilation of Air Pollution Emission Factors. Environmental Protection
Agency Publication No. AP-42, Second Edition. April 1973.
Automobile Exhaust Emission Surveillance: A Summary. Prepared for EPA
by Calspan Corp. EPA Publication No. APTD-1544. May 1973.
Travel to the National Parks: Statistics on Summer Season and Peak Month
Visition. Special Report No. 1, Office of Long Range Planning and New
Program Development, Statistical Analysis, National Park Service. April 1972.
Public Use of the National Parks: A statistical report, 1960-1970.
Division of Statistical Analysis, National Park Service. September 1971.
Public Use of the National Parks, 1971-1972. Statistical Analysis,
National Park Service, December 1972.
Public Use Load Factors. Branch of Statistics Analysis, National Park
Service. October 1965.
Monthly Percentages of 1966 Visit Totals. Branch of Statistics Analysis,
National Park Service. September 1967,
Public Use of the National Park System: Fiscal Year Report 1973. National
Park Service. July 1973.
National Parks and Landmarks. National Park Service. January 1972.
Recreation and Park Yearbook. National Recreation and Park Association.
1966.
State Park Statistics 1970. National Conference on State Parks, National
Recreation and Park Association. August 1971.
Parking for Recreation. National Recreation and Park Association. May 1965.
-49-
-------
Traffic Attraction of Rural Outdoor Recreation Areas. National Cooperative
Highway Research Program Report 44. Highway Research Board, NRC, NAS-NAE.
1967.
A Logical and Systematic Design Technique for Park Planning. B.J. Niemann, Jr.,
and W.H. Tishler, Parks and Recreation (the Official Publication of the National
Recreation and Park Association). May 1968.
Alternative Transportation Systems Program. National Park Service. October 1973.
Weekend Recreational Travel Patterns. G.E. Maring. Office of Highway Planning,
Federal Highway Administration. 1970.
Personal Communication with the State Park Departments of New York, California,
Ohio, Pennsylvania and Illinois. November 1973.
-50-
-------
Table A-l
CLASSES OF AREAS IN THE NATIONAL
PARK SYSTEM
Code
CL
3CC rtf Al*Q3
No. of Areas
Administered
loo OI Aica
Dec. 1970
Dec. 1960
NB
National
Battlefields
5
1
NBP
National
Battlefield Parks
4
3
NBS
National
Battlefield Sites
3
5
NC
National
Cemeteries
10
10
NHS
National
Historic Sites
52
28
NHP
National
Historical Parks
13
9
NL
National
Lakeshores
4
-
NMera
National
Memorials
19
17
NMemP
National
Memorial Park
1
1
NMP
National
Military Parks
11
11
NM
National
Monuments
85
80
NP
National
Parks
35
30
National
Parkways
5
5
NRA
National
Recreation Areas
13
4
NS
National
Seashores
7
1
NSR
National
Scenic Riverways
3
-
NST
National
Scenic Trails
1
-
National
Scientific Reserve
1
-
Historic
Area
1
-
International Park
1
-
National Capital Parks
1
1
White House
1
1
Parks - Other
5
2
Total
209
A-l
-------
Table A-2. NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM -
Area
J fin Feb
Abraham Lincoln Birthplace NHS 1.1 1.6
Acadia NP .G .6
Adams NHS .1 .1
Andrew Johnson NHS 3*4 4.3
Antietam NBS 2.0 2.6
Appomattox NHP 1.4 1.6
Arches NP 1.4 1.3
Arkansas Post NMem 54.5 6.6
Aztec Ruins NM 1.5 l.G
Badlands NM 1.0 1.1
Bandclier NM .8 2.1
Battleground NC 4.1 4.1
Bent's Old Fort NHS 2.1 3.6
Big Bend NP 6.4 5.6
Big Hole Battlefield NB
Black Canyon NM .5 .4
Blue Ridge Parkway 1.6 .6
Booker T Washington NM 4.0 5.0
Brices Crossroads NBS .4 4.0
Bryce Canyon NP .3 .3
Buck Island Reef NM 7.8 9.1
Cabrillo NM 10.1 7.9
Canyon de Chelly NM 3.0 2.5
'"anyon lands ,NP .4 .2
PERCENTAGE OF 1966 VISIT TOTALS -
War
Apr
Max
Jvm
Jul
2.5
.9
.1
6.0
5.4
3.5
7.1
6.9
8.4
15.7
11.3
15.3
24.5
23.2
20.4
7.1
6.7
4.3
8.7
10.2
8.5
11.8
18.4
9.4
11.4
11.2
13.8
13.4
12.2
19.2
2.4
8.8
2.8
8.1
6.6
5.0
12.1
6.6
6.6
17.1
11.2
16.0
19.5
8.4
25.4
1.5
4.3
8.1
2.1
7.8
8.1
4.8
11.2
13.2
15.7
15.2
14 .2
29. C
17.5
9.5
7.7
6.8
7.3
11.1
12.3
7.6
7.0
12.3
11.8
19.0
18.4
12.8
29.5
1.3
4.0
7.2
2.1
6.3
6.3
5.7
9.0
12.6
14.5
13.2
11.3
29.7
18.9
15.3
8.5
.9
11.6
9.6
2.8
9.9
12.0
6.7
6.8
12.0
20.7
7.8
10.7
27.3
8.6
6.6
3.2
1.8
7.1
8.1
6.6
7.4
10.1
24.0'
7.4
13.5
15.5
11.7
15.8
14.9
Aug
Peo
Oct
Wr»y
25.2
6.9
5.5
n 1
1.8
23.5
12.1
7.9
6.0
1.1
22.9
13.7
14.2
.9
.1
12.0
7.1
9.3
6.0
5.4
11.1
8.1
9.0
6.1
2.3
20.8
8.0
7.7
4.0
1.3
10.0
9.9
5.6
2.3
1.0
5.0
3.2
3.1
3.0
3.3
24.8
8.2
5.4
3.0
1.6
28.0
6.6
4.5
1.9
1.3
21.8
7.7
6.6
3 3
1.6
11.5
7.5
6.8
4.1
8.e
19.4
6.6
3.5
3.6
3.4
12.3
7.9
5.4
7.1
5.1
30.4
13.9
29.0
12.9
4.6
.9
.2
ic.e
9.5
13.7
4.7
2.0
14.3
8.3
8.5
4.3
3.0
13.4
8.0
8.0
8.0
5.3
25.8
9.8
4.2
1.0
.3
8.8
5.9
6.1
8.1
9.5
11.6
7.8
7.0
6.5
8.9
16.5
10.3
6.9
5.4
2.9
13.6
12.3
8.1
2.1
.4
(continued)
-------
Table A-2. NATIONAL P^RK SYSTEM -
Area
Jan
Feb
*Cape Cod NS
1.3
1.6
"Cape Hatteras NS
2.0
2.4
Capitol Reef NM
1.2
1.3
<
Capulin Mountain NM
1.8
1.2
Carlsbad Caverns NP
2.4
2.5
Casa Grande Runins NM
0.1
11.2
Castillo de San Marcos NM
4.2
5.4
Cedar Breaks NM
1.1
1.1
Chaco Canyon NM
4.4
4.3
Chalmette NHP
8.8
5.7
Chickamauga - Chattanooga NMP
4.0
4.0
Chiricahua NM
3.0
4.G
Christiansted NHS
4.4
6.0
City of Refuge NHP
5.6
6.6
Colonial NHP
3.9
5.0
Colorado NM
3.8
3.7
Coronado NMem
6.0
5.9
Coulee Dam NRA
.5
.8
Cowpens NBS
4.2
4.2
Crater Lake NP
.5
.8
Craters of the Moon NM
.1
.5
Cumberland Gap NHP
1.4
2.3
Custer Battlefield NM
.7
1.0
Custis-Lee Mansion
2.2
2.8
PERCENTAGE OF 1966 VISIT TOTALS
Mar Apr
2.2 2.9
3.9 4.7
3.5 5.7
2.4 4.6
3.1 5.0
9.8 11.3
7.8 9.8
- .8 .4
C.6 9.5
.3 8.9
5.6 7.2
7.9 10.7
12.0 ID.3
7.2 4.4
8.2 8.7
3.8 6.5
7.5 10.1
2.4 3.2
4.2 4.2
1.0 2.2
1.1 2.4
3.0 5.4
1.5 2.3
5.2 15.2
Jun
3.9
7.9
8.1
10.7
15.4
24.2
7.5
6.0
5.9
15.8
18.9
6.9
.6.1
2.8
11.0
12.7
15.1
9.7
7.9
8.5
10.0
9.0
12.9
10.7
9.5
7.7
9.6
7.1
0.6
10.2
7.8
10.3
6.6
12.1
8.9
16.1
8.5 0.5
4.8 14.3
5.7 17.0
8.5 15.2
6.9 1G.7
11.2 11.7
Jul Aug
25.1 29.9
22.7 22.1
16.8 15.9
23.6 23.7
24.9 20.9
7.5 8.8
19.0 16.9
26.7 25.2
12.2 1C.0
10.9 10.2
15.6 14.9
14.0 13.2
9.4 9.6
12.9 14.1
10.4 12.1
13.1 15.2
9.6 9.e
30.3 23.7
12.8 12.8
27.1 29.9
23.0 20.1
15.2 22.2
24.8 25.7
15.2 18.3
SfT>
Oct
11.3
8.4
10.5
5.2
5.3
0.3
7.7
6.0
6.3
5.5
3.8
v.e
4.0
15.4
8.3
3.6
10.2
7.5
6.4
8.4
7.7
3.8
7.3
6.4
3.7
8.C
8.9
6.5
8.1
9.4
12.0
9.4
,10.1
11.2
9.1
3.8
12.8
12.9
11.3
12.8
3.7
3.4
9.7
10.7
5.9
10.1
4.2
6.1
N'ov D»c
1.8 1.3
3.2 1.9
2.4 1.9
3.8 2.3
3.2 3.3
8.4 6.2
,4.0 6.5
.6 .2
6.0 4.7
7.8 5.6
6.0 5.6
6.3 4.1
11.3 9.3
7.6 8.2
7.8 5.2
4.5 5.7
7.0 -7.3
1.7 .8
7.7 6.4
1.3 .S
1.2 .4
4.1 2.3
2.6 .3
3.9 1.6
(continued)
-------
Table A-2. NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM - MONTHLY PERCENTAGE OF 1966 VISIT TOTALS -
Area
Jan
Feb
Var
AST
l&L
Jun
Jul
ahs
Sep
Oct
T-'ov
Pre
Death Valley NM
8.1
9.7
10. S
15.5
5.4
4.9
3.4
3.8
4.8
8.2
14.1
11.1
DeSoto NMem
8.9
9.3
22.3
9.0
5.1
7.2
6.0'
5.9
4.3
5.2
7.2
8.2
Devils Postpile NM
12.5
30.4
39.2
17.7
Devi 1 s Tower NM
.6
.2
.9
1.0
5.G
18.5
23.7
29.5
9.3
4.2
1.2
.3
Dinosaur NM
.6
.4
1.0
2.9
7.1
10.4
24.3
27.1
10.4
4.0
1.6
.9
Edison NHS
3.0
7.9
9.3
11.1
10.-1
9.5
11.8
11.2
5.0
7.7
8.5
4.0
Effigy Mounds NM
2.1
2.9
4.2
3.0
9.2
11.2
16.5
19.0
10.7
13.7
1.4
1.0
El Morro NM
1.1
1.6
3.2
8.G
10.8
14.2
17.5
19.7
7.2
8.4
4.8
2.4
Everglades NP
10.2
12.0
12.9
12.7
7.G
6.4
6.8
6.3
4.9
4.7
6.7
9.0
Federal Hall NMem
2.8
7.0
9.1
9.1
9.6
0.4
9.1
12.3
8.9
8.1
8.4
7.0
Flaming Gorge NRA
1.4
1.7
3.0
6.3
14.4
12.9
23.0
15.2
11.7
5.9
3.1
1.3
Fort Caroline NMem
6.G
0.0
11.2
10.4-
7.0
0.4
12.3
7.9
5.8
7.7
6.9
5.S
Fort Clatsop NMem
1.5
2.3
3.0
5.9
8.5
14.5
22.3
25.5
7.0
3.5
3.0
1.5
Fort Davis NHS
4.0
3.7
5.9
7.3
8.7
13.1
16.2
rs.4
0.0
5.9
6.2
5.0
Fort Donelson NC
4.9
5.3
7.3
0.0
9.3
10.7
11.3
9.3
8.8
9.0
7.3
7.2
Fort Frederica NM
3.9
3.0
G.2
0.0
7.4
12.9
17.2
15.4
7.2
6.5
5.C
5.9
Fort Jefferson NM
13.0
17.0
14.0
7.3
6.1
5.0
' 2.8
0.4
2.9
3.3
10.5
13.1
Fort Laramie NHS
1.3
1.2
2.2
3.1
7.2
16.1
23.6
29 .8
7.4
4.3
«.«*!
1.2
Fort Matanzas NM
5.4
5.9
7.6
8.4
7.5
11.3
16.6
14.3
5.9
5.9
5.3
5.5
Fort McHenry NM
4.G
5.1
7.0
9.6
13.5
8.7
12.7
15.2
9.5
5.7
5.1
2.7
Fort Necessity NB
.1
.1
.4
3.2
9.G
12.1
25.5
25.9
10.1
10.7
2.4
n
0.
ort Pulaski NM
4.7
4.8
7.4
9.2
8.5
11.6
13.3
12.2
8.0
7.0
7.5
5.5
ort Raleigh NHS
1.1
1.1
1.1
3.9
4.9
21.9
27.7
22.0
10.7
3.2
1.3
.7
ort Smith NHS
5.0
3.4
5.2
5.2
e.o
16.1
.15.4
17.3
8.0
6.8
5.3
3.3
(continued)
-------
Table A-2. NATIONAL PARK
Area
Jan
Frb
Fort Sumter NM
1.7
2.1
Fort Union NM
2.7
2.9
Fort Vancouver NHS
3.1
3.2
Fredericksburg & Spotsylvania NMP
5.9
4.0
General Grant NMem
1.9
5.0
George Washington Birthplace NM
2.5
2.7
George Washington Carver NM
2.4
2.8
George Washington Parkway
.0
1.8
Gettysburg NMP
.8
1.7
Gila Cliff Dwellings NM
.1
.6
Glacier NP
.1
Glacier Bay NM
1.7
1.4
Glen Canyon NRA
Z.Z
1.7
Gran Quivira NM
2.2
3.8
Grand Canyon NM
T
*»
.3
Grand Canyon NP
1.8
1.3
Grand Portage NM
.1
.1
Grand Teton NP
.1
.2
Great Sand Dunes NM
.4
.4
Great Smoky Mountains NP
1.8
1.4
Guilford Courthouse NMP
4.6
4.6
Haleakala NP
10.3
6.4
Hampton NHS
2.4
4.3
Harpers Ferry NHP
3.4
4.0
MONTHLY PERCENTAGE OF 1966 VISIT TOTALS -
Var Apr
4.6 11.8
4.6 7.5
4.3 9.0
7.7 9.8
5.9 11.3
5.7 9.8
5.5
3.5
3.6
8.1
11.7
10.4
.2
.2
1.2
2.9
.4
1.9
3.4
8.0
9.8
7.3
9.8
9.0
2.9
.1
.3
5.4
1.4
1.5
1.5
2.8
8.3
2.3
5.0
8.2
6.7
6.7
5.7
7.5
12.8
7.9
May Jun
9.7 21.4
9.0 14.0
11.1 7.3
9.8
10.3
9.6
9.9
12.6
13.4
12.9'
11.1
13.5
12.4
10.D
11.3
5.3
4.2
6.3
20.3
12.3
20.9
11.9
8.6
13.2
16.3
13.1
14.6
6.9
5.0
4.9
18.0
11.0
17.5
11.5
7.1
12.5
16.2
14.5
11.8
5.3 10.7
15.0 12.3
11.0 10.5
Jul Aup;
15.4 18.9
10.4 13.3
30.4 8.4
10.6 12.6
15.3 13.3
14.0 14.4
12.5 12.7
11.4 20.2
15.9 19.4
29.5 19.3
30.1 34.1
23.9 20.0
15.7 15.3
15.4 13.1
11.5 16.3
20.3 21.3
23.7 30.4
30.9 23.1
23.3 23.7
22.6 20.3
11.9 12.3
10.5 12.5
7.6 9.5
13.1 12.6
SfO Oct
5.4 3.9
8.0 7.2
4.4 6.S
8.0
7.9
7.7
8.2
8.2
8.3
7.4
16.3
11.2
11.3
3.3
8.5
10.3
4.4
9.1
.3
7.1
.4
10.0
8.1
11.4
6.3
9.0
9.6
11.1
6.0
13.4
* V
10.2
3.7
9.0 3.7
8.6 10.7
6.3 7.0
8.5 7.2
7.0 9.3
9.3 12.6
?.'ov Dec
3.2 1.9
4.6 2.1
o. 3 4. o
6.3 6.4
6.0 3.3
7.8 3.2
4.3 2.0
3.7 1.1
3.7 1.7
4.3 1.3
.1
2.0 1.6
4.9 2.2
5.5 2.2
3.2 3.2
2.3 1.3
.4 .1
2.4 .2
1.5 .3
3.3 1.9
6.3 4.6
7.2 7.0
7.1 5.3
5.7 3.5
(continued)
-------
Table A-2. NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM - MONTHLY PERCENTAGE OF 1966 VISIT TOTALS -
Area
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Juo
Jul
Ml f*
St»o
Oct
ifpy
Hawaii Volcanoes NP
6.5
6.3
6.6
8.3
8.3
8.9
10.6
12.0
8.3
8.1
7.1
e.o
Home of Franklin D. Roosevelt NHS
.9
1.3
2.2
6.8
10.2
11.7
19.7
21.6
10.5
9.7
2.6
1.0
Homestead NM
3.5
3.5
4.7
5.2
11.6
12.5
14.0'
IS.5
10.2
9.4
3.2
3.0
Hopewell Village NHS
.8
.7
2.4
5.1
10.7
8.5
23.3
21.5
9.5
11.0
5.0
1.1
Horseshoe Bend NMP
2.9
4.8
8.3
8.4
10.5
13.5
12.7
13.9
8.6
S. 5
5.5
2.4
Hot Springs NP
4.2
5.0
7.6
8.5
8.4
11.3
13.9
11.8
8.7
8.4
7.0
4.3
House where Lincoln Died
1.7
3.3
4.1
12.5
7.5
10.2
13.7
19.4
7.5
7.1
6.9
5.3
Hovenweep NM
1.0
.4
'1.5
8.1
11.4
15.5
20.2
20.3
10.0
7.0
2.9
.3
Independence NHP
2.3
4.5
5.0
9.0
11.1
11.7
13.5
1G.2
7.2
7.9
6.S
4.3
Isle Royal NP
1.6
12.2
30.2
44.1
3.7
Jefferson National Expansion Memorial
NHS 9.7
6.4
6.9
7.0
11.5
16.1
1G.5
10.3
6.3
5.1
3.1
1.6
Jewel Cave NM
20.6
37.5
30.0
3.3
Joshua Tree NM
8.4
7.3
11.1
21.8
8.6
- 0.0
'1.4
3.7
4.2
5.7
10.2
6.0
Katmai NM
4.0
23.3
32.0
29.1
7.S
3.4
Kennesaw Mountain NBP
4.6
5.6
9.4
9.7 ¦
10.2
14.3
14.1
y.7
4.3
S. 2
5.5
4.0
Kings Canyon IMP
1.5
1.3
l.C
3.5
0.3
13.8
22.1
21.5
12.3
5.9
3.1
4.7
Kings Mountain NMP
2.9
3.5
6.3
9.7
11.1
12.1
15.2
13.2
7.5
9.0
5.4
4.2
Lake Mead NRA
5.0
5.7
7.9
13.6
10.4
12.4
9.9
8.1
7.S
7.2
7.2
4.3
Lassen Volcanic NP
2.1
1.5
1.3
1.7
4.9
14.0
23.3
20.9
13.3
4.3
1.2
2.4
Lava Beds NM
1.4
2.0
2.0
4.2
6.4
11.1
17.4
20.0
15.0
11.4
4.5
3.0
Lehman Caves NM
.3
.4
1.1
7.1
8.5
14.2
20.5
22.0
10.3
5.1
1.9
.5
Lemon NRA
.1
.7
.8
5,5-
9.0
21. S
24.0
23.7
7.8
5.3
1.3
O
*-
1incoln Boyhood NMem
.4
.6
1.3
3.3
8.5
10.9
22.1
30.2
8.3
8.9
3.1
2.5
incoln Memorial
1.0
2.7
4.3
14.7
11.5
12.4
-16.5
16.5
6.9
5.3
5.2
3.0
(continued)
-------
Table A-2. NATIONAL PARK
Area
.Tfln Feb
Mammoth Cave NP 3.3 3.3
Manassas NBP 3.0 3.2
Mesa Verde NP .3 .3
Minute Man NHP 1*5 1.6
Montezuma Castle NM 3.5 4.0
Moore House
Moores Creek NMP 3.3 5.4
Morristown NHP 3.6 4.7
Mound City Group NM 1.3 1.5
Mount McKinley NP ! *1
Mount Rainier NP 1*2 2.0
Mount Rushmore NMem *3 .3
Mui r Woods NM 5.1 5.0
Natchez Trace Parkway 6.0 5.7
National Capital Parks 1.0 1.2
Natural Bridges NM .1 .3
Navajo NM 2.0 1.3
Ocmulgee NM 6.1 7.2
Olympic NP 2.3 3.2
Oregon Caves NM .1 «3
Organ Pipe Cactus NM 9.4 9.3
Padre Island NS 4.0 4.6
Pea Ridge NMP 2.0 2.3
Pecos NM 1.0 1.3
- MONTHLY PERCENTAGE OF 1966 VISIT TOTALS -
?/ar Apr
4.5
7.8
5.0
8.0
.9
2.3
3.2
13.7
6.5
10.8
8.6
7.5
11.6
5.3
7.4
4.1
6.4
.2
.1
1.5
2.9
.6
1.1
6.0
7.7
7.3
8.1
3.0
13.6
1.5
4.9
5.1
9.5
9.1
13.1
4.2
6.7
.4
1.4
8.1
7.3
5.2 C.2
3.4 6.3
2.7 2.5
?'<\y
Jun
7.7
10.7
6.3
10.2
11.3
10.7
8.5
7.7
9.5
11.4
9.9
10.2
15.1
DO.3
13.4
10.6
10.5
11.3
1.3
5.7
4.8
14.9
11.4
18.1
6.9
9.0
10.3
9.7
7.3
13.6
13.6
12.6
10.7
19.4
17.1
10.5
6.2
2.3
9.4
10.9
13.6
8.9
9.0
8.6
6.2
16.5
16.1
14.3
Jul Aug
14.9 21.4
15.7 16.2
26.5 20.7
15.1 19.5
13.7 13.6
10.4 12.1
11.7 0.2
11.7 12.4
15.7 17.8
51.1 27.0
22.1 22.3
30.7 31.0
14.4 15.3
9.9 9.5
17.9 15.5
15.4 13.1
"12.9 11.1
10.1 8.5
17.6 28.2
29.1 30.S
C.5 0.7
14.6 13.1
14.4 17.6
24.4 24.5
Sep Oct
9.9 6.7
3.2 9.0
10.4 Z.5
8.6 10.4
8.9 9.9
8.3
6.3 10.5
0.9 10.3
10.5 11.2
5.0 .2
15.1 7.7
0.7 2.7
9.9 9.3
8.3 9.0
7.9 7.2
13.3 10.2
7.9 7.7
6.6 C.3
11.1 3.6
10.7 2.4
6.2 7.3
10.3 5.4
0.1 13.3
9.0 7.7
T'oy TVc
6.1 3.5
6.4 1.2
1.1 .5
4.7 1.3
6.7 4.0
5.3 3.6
9.9 4.1
3.4 2.2
.1 .1
5.5 2.0
.3 .4
5.4 4.6
S.7 8.1
3.5 5.5
1.9 .9
6.2 3.0
6.5 4.3
3.7 2.3
.5 .1
9.4 8.9
5.4 4.5
5.2 2.3
2.7 3.o
(continued)
-------
Table A-2. NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM -
Area
Jan Feb
Perry's Victory NM
Petersburg NB
4.1
4.9
Petrified Forest NP
2.4
2.2
«
Pinnacles NM
5.5
14.7
Pipe Spring NM
1.7
1.9
Pipestone NM
.3
.3
Piatt NP
2.9
3.2
Point Reyes NS
4.5
6.1
Rainbow Bridge NM
.2
.3
Richmond NBP
4.5
5.0
Rocky Mountain NP
1.3
1.2
Russell Cave NM
1.8
2.9
Sagamore Hill NHS
1.2
3.6
Saguaro NHS
9.3
12.0
Salem Maritime NHS
1.5
2.8
San Juan NHP
8.5
8.8
Sanford NRA
2.0
2.4
Saratoga NHP
.3
.5
Scotts B1uff NM
2.2
2.3
Sequoia NP
2.0
2.0
Shadow Mountain NRA
.2
.1
Shenandoah NP
1.6
1.6
Shiloh NMP
2.G
3.9
Sitka NM
3.3
2.8
PERCENTAGE OF 1966 VISIT TOTALS -
Mar
ajbt
5.4
3.5
.2
8.0
4.8
10.6
3.9
.9
10.3
13.2
2.5
5.4
6.1
1.3
6.7
8.4
13.1
8.7
1.1
5.3
10.6
1.3
8.1
4.1
10.9
3.4
8.2
12. 6
6.8
10.7
G.3
2.5
10.0
8.2
5.1
5.1
2.2
.3
5.0
3.9
1.2
3.0
7.0
3.7
6.0
9.5
10.8
May Jun
4.1 15.3
8.6 12.5
6.0 20.0
13.1 9.7
13.7 13.8
7.5 22.4
13.'3 17.4
9.7 8.2
18.7 10.9
10.3 10.2
3.3 15.5
*10.6 13.9
10 .'3 11.9
6.3 5.7
7.8 9.5
6.8 11.9
14.3 10.3
11.4 14.3
8*4 14.4
7.7 14.1
7.3 14.9
8.6 11.9
13.2 11.G
9.G 13.0
Jul
Aug
30.7
12. 0'
22.9
36.9
11.5
21.4
7.3
14.5
25.5
7.1
17.2
20.2
18.4
12.3
10.4
14.2
9.3
1] .5
11.7
29.3
17.8
13.9
29.3
19.1
15.7
6.9
21.1
16.9
7.4
24.2
9.7
16.1
21.3
8.1
10.2
19.6
10.1
21.1
25.G
20.1
22.4
32.5
17.5
17.7
15.1
17.5
13.1
14.1
Sen
Oct
13 .1
11.9
7.0
1.2
11.8
5.0
6.3
10.0
10.1
5.7
6.1
4.7
7.7
11.1
13.6
4.7
11.0
9.3
7.7
10.5
7.3
7.7
3.7
7.0
8.1
6.5
9.7
9.4
7.1
6.2
4.4
11.4
9.2
6.0
6.4
8.3
9.2
12.0
10.0
7.3
5.1
3.6
9.9
7.1
11.3
16.5
7.8
8.3
Nov Dec
2.9 5.7
2.7 2.0
5.6 2.9
2.2 1.1
3.4 1.7
3.C 2.5
6.9 4.9
2.7 .1
6.1 3.7
1.2 1.4
3.3 l.S
7.9 2.3
7.2 7.6
4.7 1.3
7.2 8.0
6.5 5.5
5.4 .5
3.9 2.8
3.1 3.9
2.0 .7
3.C l.S
4.4 2.1
4.1 3.4
(continued)
-------
Table A-2. NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM - MONTHLY PERCENTAGE OF 1966 VISIT TOTALS -
Area
Jan
Feb
Mar
A^r
' Vay
.
Jul
Oct
?>' r»v
Dec
Statue of Liberty NM
.3
1.5
2.9
9.4
9.9
13.7
19.0
21.0
8.0
6.5
5.0
2.3
Stones River NB
o.G
5.5
4.2
6.3
6.5
12.9
14.6
15.1
9.0
11.3
.6.2
4.4
Sunset Crater NM
2.0
1.8
4.4
e.7
9.4
16.7
19.0
17.6
C.9.
5.2
3.3
2.9
Theodore Roosevelt Memorial NMemP
.7
.0
1.7
3.0
8.4
20.8
30.2
21.2
5.0
3.4
2.8
1.4
Theodore Roosevelt Birthplace NHS
4.3
8.1
13.0
11.7
9.4
8.7
7.6
9.5
4.0
7.6
11.0
4.4
Thomas Jefferson Memorial
1.1
2.0
5.2
23.0
13.0
10.7
11.6
14.7
5.3
6.0
4.7
2.2
Timpanogos Cave NM
1.7
1.9
2.4
3.4
11.1
13.2
20.9
21.1
15.1
6.5
1.2
1.6
Tonto NM
11.1
12.7
1G.8
14.4
6.8
6.8
5.9
4.4
4.2
4.8
5.1
6.2
Tumacacori NM
9.2
11.5
10.7
9.8
5.4
7.6
9.5
8.0
4.4
5«o
7.1
10.7
Tupelo NB
2.5
1.0
4.0
8.9
2.8
10.5
12.5
33.0
7.3
9.2
4.9
2.7
Tuzigoot NM
2.3
2.2
3.5
9.6
9.0
12.3
13.6
15.1
9.7
9.4
7.4
4.3
Vanderbilt Mansion NHS
1.1
i.e
2.1
C.2
10.1
12.7
20.0
19 .7
11.1
10.1
3.5
1.3
Vicksburg NMP
4.9
5.6
0.1
8.0
8.6
11.9
12.7
1G.0
7.2
6.0
5.2
5.o
Virgin Islands NP
7.8
7.7
10.2
8.4
7.0
8.3
3.2
8.4
G.2
9.4
9.4
8.2
Walnut Canyon NM
1.0
1.5
3.4
7.0
7.9
18.4
21.8
10.2
6.1
6.5
3.2
1.6
Whiskeytown NRA
1.7
2.9
2.7
6.5
12.1
21.4
.19.6
15.6
9.0
3.8
2.4
1.7
White House
1.7
2.1
4.8
16.7
12.4
11.7
13.7
14.2
6.9
6.0
4.9
3.4
White Sands NM
3.9
4.4
7.6
12.5
9.4
11.9
14.9
14.0
6.8
5.6
4.4
4.2
Whitman Mission NHS
3.1
4.9
5.9
9.3
12.2
12.5
14.9
12.3
8.6
8.1
4.2
3.4
Wind Cave NP
1.4
1. c
3.0
3.3
5.8
13.4
27.5
24.7
9.7
5.0
2.0
2.0
Wright Brothers NM
.4
.9
1.4
3.6
5.2
10.5
22.3
23.8
6.7
3.9
1.8
1.0
Wupatki NM
2.4
1.9
4.7
9.4
10.2
18.7
17.9
17.2
8.1
3.8
3.1
1.8
Yellowstone NP
.1
.0
.1
.4
3.7
17.6
33.4
31.0
10.6
2.2
r%
.0
Yosemite NP
1.4
1.5
1.4
3.7
8.6
14.3
21.2
20.7
10.7
9.0
4.0
2.8
(continued)
-------
Table A-2. NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM - MONTHLY PERCENTAGE OF 1966 VISIT TOTALS -
Area
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
ahjs
Sen
Oct
N'ov
Dec
Yucca House NM
Zion NP
3.0
1 .G
4.1
1.7
12.3
2.3
13.8
S.O
6.1
9.0
7.1
10.9
13.3
21.6
18.4
20.4
15.3
10.2
3.0
5.0
3.0
2.0
.0
1.5
National Park System
2.7
2.8
4.4
7.8
8.8
13.0
18.1
17.7
8.6
7.4
4.5
3.3
I
O
Note: The sum of monthly percentages may not equal one hundred due to rounding.
(concluded)
-------
100
co
LU
CD
5 75
C£
OC
zs
o
o
o
50
C_J
£ 25
D.
STA. 5120
Near Baenell Dam on
Lake of the Ozarks
(us 5U)
4%
_El*_
14%
s
M T W T F S
DAYS
82%
I
I
I
I.
100
75-
50 -
25 -
STA.8070
At Table Rock Lake
(SR 13)
5% 3% 3%
va* rm+ m
0%
r 2%
1 ET-*
17%
I
60%
P
V
V>
i
V'
M T W T F S S
DAYS
100
CO
LU
O
2 75
en
ce
=>
o
C_3
O
STA. 8130
50 ~
c_>
£ 25
a.
Near Bull Shoals Lake
and Table Rock Lake
(US 65)
7%
I I I I I I
8%
¦ ¦ ^
85%
I
I
M T W T F S S
DAYS
Figure B-l. DAY OF OCCURRENCE OF 100 HIGHEST HOURS OF THE YEAR
B-l
-------
1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Fit
AUG 11
AUG 10
THURS AUG 8
J I I I I I L
J L
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
HOUR
jre B-2. HOURLY TRAFFIC PATTERN FOR TYPICAL SUMMER WEEK STATION 5120 NEAR BAGNELL
(US 54)
-------
400
300
275
250
225
20°
175
150
125
100
75
50
25
0
Fig
AUG 11
- SAT AUG 10
FRI AUG 9
MON AUG 5
TUES AUG 6
WED AUG 7
THURS AUG 8
\v
3*7/;1:
t .'SJ2
i i i i i i i
¦ ' 1 ' ' ' 1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
HOUR
re R-T. HHIIRLY TRAFFIC PATTERN FOR A TYPICAL SUMMER WEEK STA. 8070 AT TABLE ROCK LANE (SR 13)
-------
IIIIMMIHII
SUN
AUG
11
SAT
AUG
10
m
AUG
9
MON
AUG
5
TUES
AUG
6
WED
AUG
7
THURS
AUG
8
\
J 1 I L
' ' L
JL
±
_L
J.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
HOUR
Figure B-4. HOURLY TRAFFIC PATTERN FOR A TYPICAL SUMMER WEEK STA. 8130 SERVES BULL SHOALS AND TABLE
ROCK LAKES (US 65)
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1 REPORT NO 2
EPA-450/3-74-003-g
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSIOI*NO
4 TITLE AND SUBTITLE
i/ehicle Behavior In arid Around Complex Sources and
delated Complex Source Characteristics
Volume VII - Recreational Areas
6 REPORT DATE
November 1973 (Date of issue)
6 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7 AUTHOR(S)
Scott D. Thayer
S PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO
9 PERFORMING ORG'VNIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Geomet, Inc.
50 Monroe Street
Rockville, MD 20850
10 PROGRAM ELEMENT NO
11 CONTRACT/GRANT NO
68-02-1094
12 SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADORESS
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711
13 TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final
14 SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15 SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16 ABSTRACT
A general methodology is presented for relating parameters of traffic
behavior in recreational areas, including vehicle running time and traffic volume,
to more readily available characteristics of the areas, including attendance rates,
temporal variations in attendance and parking capacity and design. Such
relationships are to be used to relate recreational area characteristics to air
nuality.
17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
a DESCRIPTORS
b IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c COSATI Field/Group
Air pollution, parks, urban planning, urban
development, urban transportation, trans-
portation management, transportation models
land use, regional planning, vehicular
traffic, traffic engineering, highway
planning
Indirect sources
Indirect source review
J
13 B
18 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release unlimited
19 SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
Unclassified
21 NO OF PAGES
68
20 SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
Unclassified
22 PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
-B-5-
-------
INSTRUCTIONS
1. REPORT NUMBER
Insert the EPA report number as it appears on the cover of the publication
2. LEAVE BLANK
3. RECIPIENTS ACCESSION NUMBER
Reserved for use by each report recipient
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Title should indicate clearly and briefly the subject coverage of the report, and be displayed prominently. Set subtitle, if used, in smaller
type or otherwise subordinate it to main title When a report is prepared in more than one volume, repeat the primary title, add volume
number and include subtitle for the specific title.
5. REPORT DATE
Each report shall carry a date indicating at least month and year Indicate the basis on which it was selected (e g , date of issue, date of
approvcl, date of preparation, etc j
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
Leave blank
7. AUTHOR(S)
Give name(s) in conventional order (John R Doe, J Robert Doe, etc ) List author's affiliation if it differs from the performing organi-
zation.
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER
Insert if performing organization wishes to assign this number
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND AODRESS
Give name, street, city, state, and ZIP code. List no more than two levels of an organizational hirearchy
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER
Use the program element number under which the report was prepared Subordinate numbers may be included in parentheses
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NUMBER
Insert contract or grant number under which report was prepared
t
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Include ZIP code. - i,
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Indicate interim final, etc , and if applicable, dates covered.
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
Leave blank
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Enter information not included elsewhere but useful, such as Prepared in cooperation with, Translation of, Presented at conference of,
To be published in, Supersedes, Supplements, etc
16. ABSTRACT
Include a brief (200 words or less) factual summary of the most significant information contained in the report If the report contains a
significant bibliography or literature survey, mention it here
17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
(a) DESCRIPTORS - Select from the Thesaurus of Engineering and Scientific Terms the proper authorized terms that identify the major
concept of the research and are sufficiently specific and precise to be used as index entries for cataloging
(b) IDENTIFIERS AND OPEN-ENDED TERMS - Use identifiers for project names, code names, equipment designators, etc Use open-
ended terms written in descriptor form for those subjects for which no descriptor exists
(c) COSATI FIELD GROUP - Field and group assignments are to be taken from the 1965 COSATI Subject Category List Since the ma-
jority of documents are multidisciplinary in nature, the Primary Field/Group assignment(s) will be specific discipline, area of human
endeavor, or type of physical object The application(s) will be cross-referenced with secondary Field/Group assignments that will follow
the primary posting(s)
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Denote releasability to the public or limitation for reasons other than security for example "Release Unlimited." Cite any availability to
the public, with address and price
19. &20. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION
DO NOT submit classified reports to the National Technical Information service
21. NUMBER OF PAGES
Insert the total number of pages, including this one and unnumbered pages, but exclude distribution list, if any
22. PRICE
Insert the price set by the National Technical Information Service or the Government Printing Office, if known
-B-6-
iPA Form 2220-1 (9-73) (Reverse)
------- |