ICM Minnesota – Interstate 394 Brian Kary, Minnesota Department of Transportation
Operational – Why our Site needs ICM Locations of Recurring Congestion
Operational – Why Are Site Needs ICM I-394 Travel Times Eastbound Westbound PM PEAK
Operational – Why our Site needs ICM • Gaps in Coordination Between Traffic and Transit Management Centers • During Normal Conditions • During Incident Conditions • Gaps in Incident Data On Arterial Network • State Patrol Response • Local PD Response
Operational – Why our Site needs ICM • Lack of Traveler Information for Arterials and Transit • Comparative Travel Times • Park and Ride Availability • Planning for Special Event Congestion • Future Minnesota Twins Stadium • Existing Minnesota Timberwolves Stadium
Operational – How ICM will help our Site • Provide Traveler Information Across All Networks and Modes • Freeway Travel Times • Transit Travel Times • Arterial Travel Times • Park and Ride Availability • Improved Agency Communication and Coordination • Improved Incident Management and Detection on Arterials • Coordinated Incident Signal Timing Plans • Transit Rerouting During Incidents • Reduce Congestion and Improve Trip Reliability
Institutional – Who are our ICM Stakeholders • Mn/DOT (Freeway, Arterials, MnPASS) • Hennepin County (Traffic, EMS dispatch) • City of Minneapolis (Traffic, EMS dispatch) • Transit Agencies (Metro Transit, SW Transit, Plymouth Transit) • Minnesota State Patrol
Institutional – How our Site defined Roles and achieved Buy-in among ICM Stakeholders • Mn/DOT Lead Role • Consultant Hired to Write ConOps and SRS • Steering Committee and Working Group Meetings • Stakeholder Workshop • Individual Stakeholder Meetings • Project Management Team
Technical – What our proposed ICMS will look like • Connection of Existing Systems • Add-ons to Existing Systems • ICMS Data Hub
Technical – What our proposed ICMS will look like Logistical Diagram of Metro Transit Control Center
Technical – What our proposed ICMS will look like Functional Diagram of Metro Transit Control Center
Technical – What our proposed ICMS will look like Logistical Diagram of Mn/DOT Traffic Operations
Technical – What our proposed ICMS will look like • Planned Instrumentation of Hwy 55 and Hwy 7 with CMAQ Funds • Gaps in Providing Arterial Travel Time Gaps • Jointly Developed Incident Signal Timing Plans
Technical – What our proposed ICMS will look like • Existing AVL System on Metro Transit • Plymouth Metrolinks and Southwest Currently Do Not Have AVL Systems • Challenge in Providing Accurate Park and Ride Lot Vehicle Counts • Comparative Travel Times Between Transit and Freeway • Historical Data Vs. Real-time Data • Planned UPA Transit Travel Time Comparison Project
Lessons Learned – Operational • Difficult Not to Focus on Technology • Use of Operational Scenarios to Engage Stakeholders • Recommend Developing Operational Scenarios First • Assumed Connectivity or Coordination Between Centers • Recognized New Partners During Discussions • Near Term Strategies to Achieve Benefits of ICM Sooner
Lessons Learned - Operational • Incident Data Sharing Example • Near Term Strategy • Manual sharing of incident data via email, phone or radio. • Long Term Strategy • Automated sharing of incident data via integrated CAD/AVL systems. • Came From Meetings with Stakeholders! • Either: • Require Basic Agreements / Procedural Changes • Already Existing or Funded Development in process
Lessons Learned – Operational I-35W Bridge Collapse • Improved Coordination and Communications Between Stakeholders in Responding to Changing Traffic Conditions • Weekly Traffic Operations Meetings Including Freeway, Arterials, and Transit Staff – likely to continue as biannual meetings.
Lessons Learned – Operational I-35W Urban Partnership Agreement • Conversion of I-35W HOV Lanes to MnPass HOT Lanes • Arterial Traffic Management on Hwy 13 • Transit Traveler Information • Park and Ride Lot Availability • Next Bus Arrival Times • Travel Time Comparisons • Improved Traveler Information Across All Networks and Modes.
Lessons Learned – Institutional Stakeholder Concerns of Usefulness of ICM • Lack of Spare Capacity on Alternate Routes • Focus More on Incident Management and Buffer Time Index • Overcoming the Legacy of Past Project Failures
Lessons Learned – Institutional Ownership, Maintenance, Operations • Legal Issues Allowing Joint Control Equipment • Assigning Agency Responsibility – eliminate wish list • Virtual System – Enhancements to existing systems
Lessons Learned – Institutional Maintaining Stakeholder Interest in ICM • Making ICM a Priority • What’s in it for me? • Major Incident Debriefing Related to ICM
Occurred at 9:10 AM Tanker carrying 8,000 gallons of fuel Interchange of I-94 and I-394 Multi-agency response Minneapolis Police and Fire State Patrol Mn/DOT HazMat Ambulance Minneapolis Traffic Transit Lessons Learned – InstitutionalJanuary 9th Tanker Rollover
Lessons Learned – Technical • Develop Functional Diagrams and Logistical Diagrams Early • Defining Requirements for New Techniques • TT calculation frequency • How often do you really need it? • Storage of data? Associated cost?