ITS Sketch Planning Tool Webinar 2:00 – 4:00 PM January 8, 2009

Value and Impacts of ITS Important element of the decision making process ITS planning and programming Choice between ITS and other alternatives Understanding the impacts/quantifying the benefits Optimizing existing system operation and design

Evaluation Tool Purpose Provides long-range assessment of the benefits and costs associated with implementing ITS in a region Allows the users to assess deployment options within the framework of the MPO adopted FSUTMS models Accumulates the benefits and costs over the life- cycle duration of each of the improvement types selected by the user Allows ranking of alternative improvements

Evaluation Approaches “Goal ‑ based” approach Does not compare expected benefit to the expected cost dollar values “Economic approach” Does not account for non-quantifiable measures Combination of approaches

IDAS Powerful tool and used as a basis and a starting point for this development Evaluate a large number of ITS deployments Limitations Not consistent with the Florida calibrated models Requires manipulation of FSUTMS output files for use as inputs to the tool Software design and GUI needs improvements Methods and some parameters need to be updated Not flexible to allow evaluating new ITS elements and components, performance measures, etc.

FDOT Project Develop a tool and methods to perform ITS sketch planning evaluations as part of the FSUTMS/Cube environment No need for file conversion Use calibrated regional models Flexible and extendable evaluation environment Up to date methods and parameters Powerful data handling and modeling capabilities. State-of-the-art user interface A joint FDOT System Planning Office and FDOT ITS Section effort.

Evaluated ITS Deployment Ramp Metering Incident Management Systems Highway Advisory Radio (HAR) and Dynamic Message Signs (DMS) Advanced Travel Information Systems HOT Lanes Signal Control Transit Vehicle Signal Priority Emergency Vehicle Signal Priority Monitoring and Management of Fixed Route Transit Transit Information Systems Transit Security systems Transit electronic payment systems Smart work zones Road Weather Information Systems

Evaluation Tool

Example Combined Incident Management and DMS/HAR Evaluation

IM Evaluation Queuing analysis is used to calculate incident delays; taking incident frequency, duration, lane blockage, and traffic demand variations into consideration Queuing theory equations implemented for different periods of the day Shift of fatalities to injuries as well as secondary incident savings Evaluation of emission and fuel consumption benefits based on saving in vehicle-miles traveled in queues rather than on default reduction factors

4-11 Evaluation Methodology  Total delay for all the vehicles during one given type of incident is determined by queuing analysis  Multiplying the total delay per incident with number of incidents yields the total annual incident delay  The deployment of incident management reduces the incident duration. The default value is based on I-95, I- 595, and I-75 in FDOT District 4. Incident Type Incident Rate (No. of Incidents per MVMT) Incident Duration (Minutes) Shoulder Blockage Lane Blockage Lane Blockage Lane Blockage or More-Lane Blockage

4-12 Evaluation Methodology Safety  21% of fatalities is assumed to be shifted to injuries with incident management, which is similar to IDAS  2.8% reduction in total crash rate due to the reduction in secondary incidents based on the study by Mitertek Systems in San Antonio, Texas

4-13 Evaluation Methodology Fuel Consumption and Emissions  The calculation for scenarios with and without incident management is based on the speeds of queued and non-queued vehicles and the vehicle-miles in queue  The average queue length is obtained by using the queuing equation, which in turn is used to determine vehicle-miles in queue

DMS/HAR Evaluation  The evaluation of DMS and HAR is combined with incident management instead of evaluating them separately  The activation of DMS and HAR causes route diversions, which reduces the traffic volume on mainline  The increase in travel time for diverted vehicles is determined by the difference in average travel time along the mainline and that on alternative route(s) taking into consideration the average v/c ratio on alternative route and type of alternative route

4-15 Diversion Rate  Stated preference up to 60 percent of the freeway traffic to exit the freeway ahead of the bottleneck  Lower values for revealed preference  Function of a number of factors  “Boundedly Rational” switching behavior  Relationship used by Huchingson and Dudek Diversion Rate Studies Diversion Rate Used in Evaluation

Evaluation Methodology Road Ranger Service Patrol  The savings are total annual costs of the services provided by road ranger service patrol IndexServiceCOST per Activity Activity Number per Vehicle Mile per Year 1Abandoned$ Assist FHP$ Debris$ Diesel$ Directions$ Dispatch Not Found$ Flat Tire$ Gas$ Jump$ Lock Out$ Minor Repair$ …………

Example - Incident Management Cost (1) CCTV cameras 18,000 per assembly and 10,000 per pole installed. One per mile. Covers both direction. 6 year life-time for assembly and 20 year for pole Maintenance $3,500 per camera per year

Example - Incident Management Cost (2) Traffic Detectors $11,000 per location (assuming true-presence microwave). $7,000 for the device (including installation and fine-tuning) and $4,000 for the pole. loop detector capital cost default value of about 5,000 per detection station location per two-lane O&M cost per microwave detector is $400 per year and that of loop detectors is $600 per two lane per location One every half mile – cover one direction only. Detector life is 5 years. Pole life is 10 years. User can specify other detectors but should provide initial and O&M costs and life-time.

Example - Incident Management Cost (3) Service Patrol The number of service patrol vehicles per beat, the area of coverage for each beat, and the number of vehicles in different shifts vary per location in an urban area. Based on data obtained from District 4, the service patrol program in Broward County costs about $2,500,000 per year and cover 57.8 miles of freeways (contracted). Thus, it is estimated that the cost of the service patrol program is about $43,250 per mile per year.

4-20 Model Input ITS Component

4-21 Model Input Alternative Information  Alternative letter  Modeling year  Working directory

4-22 Model Input Parameters from Demand Model  Auto occupancy  Percentage of truck trips in Truck_Taxi trips

4-23 Model Input Input for ITS Applications  Analysis periods, days, and volume factor for each period  Type of incident management (Six combinations for incident management with or without DMS and HAR)

4-24 Model Input  Information type provided by DMS and HAR

4-25 Model Input Deployment Location  Indicate the links within the coverage of incident management by adding one new attribute “IM” and assign the value of 1 to this attribute

4-26 Model Input Analysis parameters  Incident information: frequency, duration, capacity reduction  Accident rate  Truck type and fuel consumption rate  Vehicle class percentage and emission rate for CO, HC, and NOx Notes: Default values are provided, however, user can modify it based on local conditions.

4-27 Model Input Impact factors  Diversion rate due to DMS and HAR  Fatality reduction rate and crash reduction rate

4-28 Model Input Impact factors (Con’t)  Average trip length on the mainline and on the alternative route  Percentage of diverted vehicles using freeway  Road ranger service patrol activities and costs