Modeling performed as part of an evaluation of nine ITS implementation projects in San Antonio, Texas indicated that integrating DMS, incident management, and arterial traffic control systems could reduce delay by 5.9 percent.
The evaluation report detailed benefits information regarding the implementation of an incident management program with dynamic message signs (DMS) along a freeway corridor and traffic signal timing control operations along a parallel arterial. Through a modeling effort, the study investigated the impacts of each implementation individually, and also evaluated the combined impact of integrating the DMS with incident management and then integrating both the DMS and incident management with traffic signal timing plan alterations along an alternative arterial route.
Results indicate that the most effective stand-alone implementation is incident management, recording improvements in all impact measures assessed. DMS and arterial traffic signal control can provide additional improvement under many of these areas. For the particular corridor modeled during this study, optimum implementation of the integrated DMS and incident management results in a 5.7 percent decrease in delay. Integrated use of incident management, DMS and arterial traffic control can achieve an benefit of a 5.9 percent reduction in delay.
The evaluation reports contains several conclusions and recommendations drawn from the results above, and discussions with various stakeholders within the projects:
- A successful ITS deployment requires a strong institutional framework.
- The combined benefit of integrated ITS components may not equal the sum of individual implementations, however this integration can offer improved benefits and costs over isolated deployments. For example, the reduction in delay possible along a particular corridor during a major incident was 16.2 percent with and incident management system operating alone, 4.6 percent with only a freeway management system, 2.8 percent with only an arterial management system, and 19.9 percent with all three systems implemented in coordination. It is also important to integrate the three systems described above in a strategic fashion. Applying all three systems to every incident, regardless of severity, can decrease the overall benefit of the systems by encouraging travelers to unnecessarily change their travel plans during minor incidents.
Advanced Warning for Railroad Delays in San Antonio, Lessons Learned from the Metropolitan Model Deployment Initiative,2000.
Author: Carter, M., et al.
Published By: Federal Highway Administration, U.S. DOT
Prepared by SAIC for the U.S. DOT
Source Date: May 2000
EDL Number: 12883
Other Reference Number: Report No. FHWA-OP-00-017URL: http://ntl.bts.gov/lib/jpodocs/repts_te/12883.pdf
Average User Rating
Intelligent Transportation Systems > Traffic Incident Management > Information Dissemination > Dynamic Message Signs
Intelligent Transportation Systems > Traffic Incident Management > Mobilization & Response
Intelligent Transportation Systems > Traffic Incident Management > Surveillance & Detection
Intelligent Transportation Systems > Arterial Management > Traffic Control > Advanced Signal Systems
Intelligent Transportation Systems > Freeway Management > Information Dissemination > Dynamic Message Signs
Related Metropolitan Integration Links
Link 10: Freeway Management to Traveler Information
Link 11: Freeway Management to Arterial Management
Link 13: Freeway Management to Incident Management
Link 14a: Transit Management to Traveler Information
Link 5: Incident Management to Arterial Management
Link 6: Incident Management to Traveler Information
Link 8: Incident Management to Freeway Management
Typical Deployment Locations
DMS, CMS, VMS, Changeable Message Signs, Variable Message Signs, coordinated signals, signal coordination, centralized signal control, signal synchronization, traffic signals, advanced signal control, signal timing optimization, coordinated signal control, advanced signal controller, traffic signal retiming, retiming