1 / 33

ITS Sketch Plans

ITS Sketch Plans. Best Practice – National Scan. presented to Wisconsin Department of Transportation Name presented by Christopher Hedden and Kenny Voorhies Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 10/30/06. Goals of Environmental Scan National Best Practices in Traffic Operations Sketch Planning.

mahala
Télécharger la présentation

ITS Sketch Plans

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ITS Sketch Plans Best Practice – National Scan presented toWisconsin Department of TransportationName presented byChristopher Hedden and Kenny VoorhiesCambridge Systematics, Inc. 10/30/06

  2. Goals of Environmental ScanNational Best Practices in Traffic Operations Sketch Planning • Obtain information from agencies conducting Operations Planning on: • Methodologies used for Traffic Operations Sketch Planning • Tools used in Traffic Operations Sketch Planning • Lessons Learned, successes, failures

  3. Approach to Scan • Developed list of interview questions • Developed list of potential interviewees • Based on reputation for Operations Planning • Input from FHWA, AASHTO SSOM • Initial list of 13 DOTs and 6 MPOs • Contacted each interviewee to set up interview • Some agencies declined or did not respond • Obtained information from 14 DOTs and 5 MPOs

  4. Responding Agencies • DOTs • Arizona, California, Illinois, Kansas, Maryland, Michigan, Missouri, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Utah, Tennessee, Virginia, Washington • MPOS • Hampton Roads Regional Planning District, • Maricopa Association of Governments, • Mid-America Regional Council, • Portland Metro, • Southeast Michigan Council of Governments

  5. FindingsOrganization and Project Development Processes • Most DOTs conduct Operations Planning in Central Office, usually Traffic Operations Division • MPOs usually have one staff handle Operations • Five centralized DOTs, nine decentralized • Decentralized DOTs typically hand off design/construction to Districts/Regions • Planning Divisions usually don’t track projects after funding

  6. FindingsOrganization and Project Development Processes • Most states and regions have an active an Operations/ITS Committee • Considered to a valuable resource • Champion for continued support • Facilitator of coordinated activities • Assist planners in obtaining funds • Several models for committee composition and structure

  7. FindingsPerformance Data • All DOTs interviewed collect some operations data • Most states collect incident duration, TMC activity and traveler information data • Four states collect and archive travel time/speed data • Two states regularly collect customer satisfaction data • Eight states use performance data for planning • Mostly congestion data to ID problems and solutions

  8. FindingsLong-Range Planning Process • All states have Long-Range Plans that state the need for efficient operations • Three states have specific operations targets or goals • Maryland and Washington State have specific incident clearance goals

  9. FindingsSketch Planning Tools Microsimulation – 31% IDAS – 25% PeMS/ITMS – 6% Manual – 38% • CalTrans developed in-house tools (PeMS and ITMS) • Many states have used microsimulation for projects • Several states have used IDAS for projects • No formal adoption of tools found

  10. FindingsSketch Planning Tools • Satisfaction with tools varies widely • Most states not using tools are not planning on adopting the use of tools • Most states had no opinion on the use of improved existing tools vs. new tools

  11. FindingsBarriers to Sketch Planning • No consensus on barriers to operations planning • Most common responses: • Lack of an operations culture within the agency • Agencies are unable to articulate the benefits of operations projects • Lack of trained operations personnel • Lack of experience in using analytical tools • Best methods for obtaining information on tools: • In-person training • Peer-to-peer meetings • Webcasts

  12. Conclusions • Review Operations Committee (Tech Advisory Committee) composition and structure, meet regularly • Start collecting and reporting available operations data • Calculate benefits from performance data • Include operations in long and short range plan goals • Use appropriate tools for the appropriate type of project

  13. ITS Sketch Plans Planning/Programming/Budget Scans presented toWisconsin Department of TransportationName presented byChristopher Hedden and Kenny VoorhiesCambridge Systematics, Inc. 10/30/06

  14. GoalPlanning/Programming/Budget Scan • Capture current WisDOT planning procedures • Meta • Current project evaluation methodology and criteria • Capture history and current program status • Central Office and Region focus Develop internal WisDOT awareness, build momentum, and lead to internal buy-in by key decision/policy makers for BHO related projects.

  15. Wisconsin Department of Transportation Organizational Structure Budget and Planning Bureau of Equity and Environment Services Bureau of Project Development Bureau of Highway Operations Bureau of Structures Southeast Freeways Advisory Team Southwest Region Southeast Region Northeast Region North Central Region Northwest Region Division of Transportation Investment Management Bureau of Planning and Economic Development Bureau of State Highway Programs Bureau of Transit, Local Roads, Rails, and Harbors Bureau of Aeronautics Bureau of Technical Services Statewide Bureaus Division of Transportation System Development Regional Offices

  16. Wisconsin Department of Transportation Organizational Structure Budget and Planning Bureau of Equity and Environment Services Bureau of Project Development Bureau of Highway Operations Bureau of Structures Southeast Freeways Advisory Team Division of Transportation Investment Management Bureau of Planning and Economic Development Bureau of State Highway Programs Bureau of Transit, Local Roads, Rails, and Harbors Bureau of Aeronautics Bureau of Technical Services Statewide Bureaus Division of Transportation System Development Regional Offices Southwest Region Southeast Region Northwest Region

  17. DTIM Mark Wolfgram Southeast Donna Brown Bob Anderson Southwest John Vesperman Dan Pruess Northwest Gary Bruner Planning Aileen Switzer Jennifer Murphy Budget Casey Newman Karl Kuecker Interviews

  18. Initial Findings • Strong support for Operations/ITS • Criteria development seen as most critical step • Statewide • Unanimous support for a mechanism by which Operations/ITS needs can be identified across the state • Prioritized list • Guidelines for design (field device density) • Operations/ITS needs to be reflected at the policy level • System Preservation Theme • Need to address ongoing M&O costs

  19. Where could Operations/ITS plug in? • Development Review Teams • Majors only • Needs Identification Teams • Improvement $ • Last two years of the planning window • Corridor Management • ACTT • VE Process for Majors • Freeway System Operations Analysis (FSOA) • Microsimulation based (PARAMICS)

  20. Corridor Management Process • Change from a project only perspective to one that provides “vision” of a corridor • Coordinated approach to planning, development and operations that considers the system from a “corridor” perspective. • Include a consistent and coordinated application of various activities, strategies and tools to achieve a certain corridor management vision. • Intended as the “umbrella” process under which decisions are made

  21. Corridor Management Process (cont.) • Consideration of facilities in its context • Surrounding land uses • Access management • Need for or condition of adjacent facilities, etc. • A long-term perspective (Up to 30 years) • A multi-modal approach • Focus on preserving as well as improving the functionality • Intergovernmental and community coordination • Support and incorporation of the approach in the state’s long-range transportation plans.

  22. Identify Statewide Significant Corridors (Connections 2030, SAMP) Outside of Corridor Management Workgroup Identify District Priority Management Corridors for further developing a Corridor Management Vision (Quantitative and Qualitative) Develop a Corridor Management Vision In creation of a vision, the same “factors” are used, however District Information will account for more details and regional/local issues. Community involvement would be part of thisstep. Identify and select Strategies and Tools to achieve the Corridor Management Vision Restart Process Implement the Corridor Management Vision Update and revise the Corridor Management Vision and Implementation Strategies as needed.

  23. Identify Statewide Significant Corridors (Connections 2030, SAMP) Identify District Priority Management Corridors for further developing a Corridor Management Vision (Quantitative and Qualitative) Develop a Corridor Management Vision In creation of a vision, the same “factors” are used, however District Information will account for more details and regional/local issues. Community involvement would be part of thisstep. Identify and select Strategies and Tools to achieve the Corridor Management Vision Implement the Corridor Management Vision Update and revise the Corridor Management Vision and Implementation Strategies as needed.

  24. Two Stages Qualitative & Quantitative Identify Statewide Significant Corridors (Connections 2030, SAMP) Identify District Priority Management Corridors for further developing a Corridor Management Vision (Quantitative and Qualitative) Develop a Corridor Management Vision In creation of a vision, the same “factors” are used, however District Information will account for more details and regional/local issues. Community involvement would be part of thisstep. Identify and select Strategies and Tools to achieve the Corridor Management Vision Implement the Corridor Management Vision Update and revise the Corridor Management Vision and Implementation Strategies as needed.

  25. Stage One Factors (Quant) Mobility Functional Class/Corridor 2020 Designation Year 2030 LOS Truck ADT Recreation Factor Group Safety Crash Rate Crash Severity Development Pressure Population Projections by CVT to 2020 Land Conversion Rate by CVT from Ag/Vacant to Residential, Commercial, Manufacturing, 1990-2000 Identify Statewide Significant Corridors (Connections 2030, SAMP) Identify District Priority Management Corridors for further developing a Corridor Management Vision (Quantitative and Qualitative) Develop a Corridor Management Vision In creation of a vision, the same “factors” are used, however District Information will account for more details and regional/local issues. Community involvement would be part of thisstep. Identify and select Strategies and Tools to achieve the Corridor Management Vision Implement the Corridor Management Vision Update and revise the Corridor Management Vision and Implementation Strategies as needed.

  26. Stage Two Factors (Qual) Development Pressure Regional/Statewide Significance of the Corridor Community Issues Planned Improvements Identify Statewide Significant Corridors (Connections 2030, SAMP) Identify District Priority Management Corridors for further developing a Corridor Management Vision (Quantitative and Qualitative) Develop a Corridor Management Vision In creation of a vision, the same “factors” are used, however District Information will account for more details and regional/local issues. Community involvement would be part of thisstep. Identify and select Strategies and Tools to achieve the Corridor Management Vision Implement the Corridor Management Vision Update and revise the Corridor Management Vision and Implementation Strategies as needed.

  27. Five Steps Compile data and information about corridor Create supporting documents and maps Hold internal visioning meeting with representatives from various District business areas Set up corridor steering committee Document and distribute the corridor management vision Identify Statewide Significant Corridors (Connections 2030, SAMP) Identify District Priority Management Corridors for further developing a Corridor Management Vision (Quantitative and Qualitative) Develop a Corridor Management Vision In creation of a vision, the same “factors” are used, however District Information will account for more details and regional/local issues. Community involvement would be part of thisstep. Identify and select Strategies and Tools to achieve the Corridor Management Vision Implement the Corridor Management Vision Update and revise the Corridor Management Vision and Implementation Strategies as needed.

  28. Five Steps Compile data and information about corridor Create supporting documents and maps Hold internal visioning meeting with representatives from various District business areas Set up corridor steering committee Document and distribute the corridor management vision Identify Statewide Significant Corridors (Connections 2030, SAMP) Identify District Priority Management Corridors for further developing a Corridor Management Vision (Quantitative and Qualitative) Develop a Corridor Management Vision In creation of a vision, the same “factors” are used, however District Information will account for more details and regional/local issues. Community involvement would be part of thisstep. Identify and select Strategies and Tools to achieve the Corridor Management Vision Implement the Corridor Management Vision Update and revise the Corridor Management Vision and Implementation Strategies as needed.

  29. Five Steps Compile data and information about corridor Create supporting documents and maps Hold internal visioning meeting with representatives from various District business areas Set up corridor steering committee Document and distribute the corridor management vision Step One – Compile Data Systems Planning and Operations Traffic Maintenance ITS Project Development Section Technical Services – Real Estate Environmental Section Utilities Identify Statewide Significant Corridors (Connections 2030, SAMP) Identify District Priority Management Corridors for further developing a Corridor Management Vision (Quantitative and Qualitative) Develop a Corridor Management Vision In creation of a vision, the same “factors” are used, however District Information will account for more details and regional/local issues. Community involvement would be part of thisstep. Identify and select Strategies and Tools to achieve the Corridor Management Vision Implement the Corridor Management Vision Update and revise the Corridor Management Vision and Implementation Strategies as needed.

  30. Concept to Integrate ITS Emerging • Including Operations/ITS in the LRTP - vision, corridor identification and analysis • Including Operation/ITS in Meta Manager logic • Strengthen TAC on the planning side • At the region level - use existing groups that combine planning and operations: • Corridor Management • Needs Identification Team • Development Review Team

  31. Corridor Rankings SPT Criteria Data Meta etc. Corridor Mmgt Process FSOA

  32. What should the SPT NOT Do? • Do not create a mechanism which prolongs the project development timeline

More Related