Tampa Bay Area integrated transportation information system

Tampa Bay Area integrated transportation information system

Material Information

Tampa Bay Area integrated transportation information system
Florida -- Dept. of Transportation
University of South Florida -- Center for Urban Transportation Research
Place of Publication:
Center for Urban Transportation Research, University of South Florida
Publication Date:
Physical Description:
119, [3] leaves : ill. ; 28 cm.


Subjects / Keywords:
Highway communications -- Florida -- Tampa Metropolitan Area ( lcsh )
Traffic flow -- Florida -- Tampa Metropolitan Area ( lcsh )
Transportation -- Planning -- Florida -- Tampa Metropolitan Area ( lcsh )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent) ( marcgt )
bibliography ( marcgt )
technical report ( marcgt )


Includes bibliographical references (leaves 98-100).
Additional Physical Form:
Also available online.
General Note:
"Prepared for the Florida Department of Transportation."
General Note:
"Final report."
General Note:
"September 1993."
Statement of Responsibility:
prepared by the Center for Urban Transportation Research, University of South Florida.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of South Florida Library
Holding Location:
University of South Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
026091777 ( ALEPH )
39328110 ( OCLC )
C01-00244 ( USFLDC DOI )
c1.244 ( USFLDC Handle )

Postcard Information



This item has the following downloads:

Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8 standalone no
record xmlns http:www.loc.govMARC21slim xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.loc.govstandardsmarcxmlschemaMARC21slim.xsd
leader 00000nas 2200000Ka 4500
controlfield tag 001 026091777
005 20110919132141.0
008 980622s1993 fluab bt s000 0 eng d
datafield ind1 8 ind2 024
subfield code a C01-00244
b T36 1993
0 245
Tampa Bay Area integrated transportation information system /
prepared by the Center for Urban Transportation Research, University of South Florida.
[Tampa] :
Center for Urban Transportation Research, University of South Florida,
119, [3] leaves :
ill. ;
28 cm.
"Prepared for the Florida Department of Transportation."
"Final report."
"September 1993."
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 98-100).
Also available online.
Highway communications
z Florida
Tampa Metropolitan Area.
Traffic flow
Tampa Metropolitan Area.
Tampa Metropolitan Area
x Planning.
1 710
Dept. of Transportation.
University of South Florida.
Center for Urban Transportation Research.
t Center for Urban Transportation Research Publications [USF].
4 856
u http://digital.lib.usf.edu/?c1.244


TAMPA BAY AREA INTEGRATED TRANSPORTATION INFORMATION SYSTEM Final Report Prepared for the Florida Department of Transportation by the Center for Urban Transportation Research University of South Florida September 1993 This report has been prepared In cooperation with the State of Florida Department of Transportation and the U.S. Department of Transportation. The opinions, findings and conclusions expressed In this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Department of Transportation or the U.S. Department of Transportation.


ACKNOW L EDGEMENTS The Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR) would like to recognize and acknowledge several key individuals for their assistance and contribution to this report. Keith Crawford served as project manager for the Florida Department of Transportation (FOOT). The action plan contained here would not have been possible without the active participation of the project Advisory Committee members: Dan Bradley Corp. Buddy Brogdon Jack Brown David Buser Bob DeCarlo David DeFreitas Sharon Dent Serg T. Dioquino Virginia Fouts Robert Grims l ey Michael Halladay Lt. David Hardman Patric i a Harrison Debbie Herrington Jeff Kolb Louis Minardi Douglas Mullis Jacqueline Nipper Bob Oliver Capt. Denny Pedrick Tom Renshaw Dep. Brett Saunders Bill Steele Darryl Tharin A. L Tidwell John Vanacore Pete r Yauch WFLA Channel 8 City of Tampa Police Department Florida DOT Traffic Engineering Tallahassee Aorida DOT D i strict 7 W101 WUSA/ WDAE Bay Area Commuter Services Hillsborough Area Regiona l Transit Pinellas County Sheriff's Off i ce C i ty of St. Petersburg P o lice Department F l orida DOT Maintenance Federal Highway Adm i nistration Washington D.C. City of Clearwater Police Department Federal H i ghway Administrat i on Region IV Atlanta City of Tampa Traffic Engineering Federal Highway Administrat i on Yellow Cab Pinellas County T r affic Engineering Pinellas County Emergency Commun i cations Federal Express Company Flor i da H i ghway Pat r ol City of St. Petersburg Traffic Engineering Hillsbo r ough County Sheriff's Office Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority Metro Traffic Control Aorida DOT D i strict 7 Maintenance Hillsborough County Traffic Engineering C ity of Clearwater Traffic Eng i neering The principal investigator for this project and report was Michael Pietrzyk, Senior Research Associate and IVHS Program Manager at CUTR. Project staff were CUTR Research Associates Patrick Jeffers and Amy Polk. Ms. Polk served as principal author and editor of this report. Undergraduate and graduate assistance was provided by Usa Arlgry, Joseph Hagge and Ray Yettaw. CUTR would like to thank the following individua l s who hosted site vis its of Tampa Bay area t r affic control centers: Pete Yauch and John Amiro of the City of Clearwater Department of Public Works, Tom Renshaw and Jon Stevenson of the City of St.


Petersburg Traffic Engineering Department, Mike Scanlon of the City of Tampa Traffic Engineering Division, John Vanacore of the Hillsborough county Engineering Services Department and Ken Jacobs of the Pinellas County Traffic Engineering Division. In addition, CUTR would like to thank Steve Crosby of SmartRoute Systems, Inc.; Shane Capella of Metro Traffic Control, Melanie Brown of GuideStar and David Roseman for the City of Los Angeles DOT for hosting site visits made by CUTR staff. The coordination and successful completion of this project cen be attributed to the aforementioned Individuals. Their assistance and dedication to this effort has been gratefully appreciated.


Table of Contents Executive Summary I. II. Ill. N. Purpose Introduction Background A. Information Collection Techniques 1. Inductance Detectors 2 Piezoelectric Sensors 3 Roadside Detectors 4. Video-based Surveillance 5. Fleet Vehicles as Probes 6. Aerial Surveillance 7. Citizen CallI n B. Information Dissemination Techniques 1 Broadcast Media 2. I nquiry-based Media 3. Highway-based Media 4. Subscription-based Media C. Traffic Control and Information Centers 1 Tampa Bay Area City and County Owned Centers 2. Other Tampa Bay Area Centers 3. Tampa Bay Interstate Study Master Plan 4 Exlstlng North American Traffic Operations Centers D. Funding Options 1. Federal Funding 2. State and Local Funding 3. Private Funding 4. Case Studies Pubnc Involvement A. Advisory Committee I nput B. Focus Group Sessions 1. Commuter Group 2. Commercial Group Page 1 Page4 Page 5 Page7 Page 7 Page 7 Page 9 Page 10 Page 12 Page 17 Page 19 Page 20 Page 23 Page 23 Page 27 Page 28 Page 32 Page 36 Page 36 Page 45 Page 49 Page 50 Page 61 Page 62 Page 63 Page 64 Page 64 Page 67 Page 67 Page 68 Page 69 Page 74


v. Table of Contents (continued) Recommended System A. System Description 1. Data Collection 2. Center 3. Information Dissemination B. Implementation Staging C. Cost Estimate V I. Conclusion Bibliography Appendix A: Advisory Committee Members Appendix B: Focus Group Participants Appendix C: Focus Group Questionnaires Appendix D: Local Contacts Appendix E: External Contacts Appendix F: Glossary of Abbreviations Appendix G: Infrastructure Inventory Survey Page 79 Page 79 Page 79 Page 84 Page 91 Page 94 Page 95 Page 96 Page 98 Page 101 Page 104 Page 106 Page 110 Page 112 Page 114 Page 119


Ust of Figures Figure 1 Video Surveillance Cameras on the Sunshine Skyway Page 12 Bridge Figure 2. Compressed Vldeo Surveillance Used by the Page 16 Los Angeles DOT Figure 3. HARTline's AVL Control Center Page 18 Figure 4. Metro Traffic Control's Traffic Information Database Page 19 F i gure 5. An Emergency Gall Box on the Sunshine Skyway Br i dge Page 20 Figure 6. Metro Traffic Control's Traffic Congestion Map Page 24 Figure 7A. Variable Message S i gns on the Sunshine Skyway Bridge Page 30 Flip Disk Type Figure 7B. Variable Message Signs on the Sunshine Skyway Bridge Page 31 Figure 8. L ED Type Map of Tampa Bay Area Traffic Control Centers Page 37 Figure 9. Pinellas County Traffic Control Center Page 40 Figure 10. Sunshine Skyway Bridge Surveillance and Control System Page 48 Figure 11. SmartRoute Systems Traffic Operations Center Page 54 Figure 12. Major Congestion Areas as Indicated by Focus Groups Page 78 Figure 13. Schematic Diagram of Recommended System Page 80 Figure 14. Sources of Traffic Information and Page 89 Recommended Locations fo r the TVC


Ust o f Tables T a ble 1. Existing Land Mobile Units Page 17 Table 2. Traff i c Information Collectio n Techniques Page 21 T able 3. Cable Televis i o n Serv i ce Agreements Page 26 Ta b l e 4 Traffic I nformat i on Dissemination Techniques Page 35 T abl e 5. Common Features of Tampa Bay Area Tra ffic Cont r ol Page 36 Ce nters Table 6. Components of the 1982 Howard Frankland Bridge Page 46 I nciden t Detection an d Mana g ement System Ta ble 7. Components of the Existing Sunshine Skyway Bridge P age 47 Incident Detection an d Management System T a ble a Recommendations of the Tam p a Bay A r ea Inte r state P age 50 Master Plan Table 9. Primary Questions for Focus Group I nterviews Page 69 Tab l e 10. Focus Group Perceptions of Existing Traffic Reports Page 70 Tab l e 11. Most Congested A r eas as Ind i ca t ed by Focus Group Page 83 Participants Table 12. Proposed Implementation Stages for the Tampa Bay Page 93 Traffic Vision Center Table 13 Order-of-Mag ni tude Cost Estima t e for the Tampa Bay Page 94 Traffic Vis i on Center


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report gives reco mmendations for a regional real-time traffic information center for the Tampa Bay Area The proposed neme of the center is the "Traffic Vision Center" or 'TVC", thus emphasizing a real time, regional congestion map as one of the center's primary outputs. The center shall have access to every existing source of traffic information in the Tempa Bay area, including: City of Tampa Traffic Control Center Pinellas County Traffic Control Center City of Clearwater Traffic Control Center City of St. Peters burg Traffic Control Center . . Hillsborough County Traffic Control Center Florida Department of Trans porta tion Ror ida Highway Patrol HARTiine Automatic Vehicle Locat ion System Metro Traffic Control Land Mobile Probes Citizen Call -In The TVC will receive traffic Information via coaxial cable from several sources. The information received will be in a standardized form, with each report containing a t i me stemp, location and nature of inci dent o r c ongestion The TVC will compile information from these various sources, disseminat ing its information in two forms: Color video map of Hillsborough and Pinellas Counties showing Interstat es and major arterials. Sections of road will be color coded by degree of congestion (i.e. existing operating speeds) and major incidents will be highlighted. 1


Database of all current locat ions of congestions and incidents for the TVC's coverage area. In keeping with the consensus expressed by the project advisory committee and focus group participants, it is recommended that the TVC be run by a private vendor. One public agency, such as FOOT, will administer a contract with this vendor. Several compan ies should bid competitively for this contract. The contract will address issues of public accountability and accuracy of the traffic infonnation disseminated. A detailed protocol for operations 11nd reporting will be established. It is recommended that the contract be funded by a m ix of federal, state and other funds for an initial period of two years. During the initial period, the vendor must be able to demonstrate the ability to generate revenue from this service. The following additional features of the TVC are recommended: Coverage: In terst ate System and major arterials of Hillsborough and Pinellas counties Operation: fully operational weekdays 6:00a.m. -9:00a.m. and 4:00p.m. 7:00 p.m. and on weekends as required by major special events able to receive data 24-hours a day, seven days a week Staff: one general manager and assistant, plus three eight-hour shifts of (typically) two traffic technicians and one computer operator Space: .1,600 to 2,000 square feet Locat ion: Four alternative locat ions are recommended for the single site: Hardware: Software: Downtown Tampa Fowler /USF Area St. Petersburg/Clearwater Airport Westshore Area personal computers linked by a Wide Area Network a package which extends capabilities of but is still compatible with ttie Urban Traffic Control System 2


Transmission Media: narrow-band for iinks between center and sources narrow-band for transmission of traffic information database wide-band for transmission of color-coded video map The TVC make its traffic informa tion available to: Cable TV stations Me tro Traffic Control Radio and Television stations, either directly or through M8\l'o Traffic Control Bay Area Commuter Services, the primary source of information via telephone GTE MobileNet, using a voice mailbox for cellular phone users Variable message and highway advisory radio operated by FOOT Rnally, the TVC system implementation and completion timeframe staging into five stand alone stages and an order-of-magnitude cost estimate fo r each stage are provided 3


I. PURPOSE The Aorida Department of Transportation entered into a contract with the University of South Florida on behalf of the Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR) to develop an action plan for the Implementation of an Integrated Transportation Information Genter for the Tampa Bay area This report is a compilation of three previous technical memoranda, a summary of focus group interview sessions and feedback from project Advisory Committee members. The first technical memorandum analyzed different methods of gathering real-time traffic information. The second memorandum evaluated methods o f disseminating that information to a variety of audiences: local traffic operations, fleet operators, broadcast media and commuters. The third technical memorandum catalogued existing traffic control centers and other traffic Information resources in the Tampa Bay area. In . addition, the report described other traffic control centers and traffic management projects in North America, as possible models for the recommended system. The focus group sessions, as wen as input from the project advisory committee, were intended to public perceptions about and reaction to a real time regiona l traffic information center. Finally, this report contains the recommendation for the implementation of a regional, real time traffic information center in the Tampa Bay area: geographic coverage, staffing, physical location, hours of operation, system architecture ( hardware and software, transmission media) and organizational structure. A consensus-building process led to CUTR's recommendation. This report contains an estimation of operating costs and describes possible sources of funding. A summary of this report will be published in a brochure format intended for mass distribution to the general public throughout the metropolitan area. 4


II. INTRODUCTION The tenn I ntelligent Vehicle Highway Systems (IVHS) is used to describe projects which apply advanced technologies t o improve the efficiency and capacity of existing transportation systems. Advanced Traffic Management Systems (ATMS) are the application of advanced techno logies to Improve safety and reduce congestion in urban traffic systems. ATMS projects primarily involve coordinating traffic signal timings throughout an urban area so that all cars in the area move as efficiently as possible Advanced Traveler Information Systems (A TIS) are the application of a dvance d technologies to improve the reliabil ity and accuracy of information available to travelers. A TIS projects typically involve providing the traveler with up-to-the-minute information on the locations of severe traffic congestion or directions on how to get to a particular destination Information can be transmitted -through high-tech in-vehicle displays, or through traditional media such as radio and telephone. Passage of the lntermoda l Surface Transportation Effi ciency Act (ISTEA) of 1991, with its emphasis on IVHS, focused national attention on this emerging field. The ISTEA brought more than exposure to IVHS, authorizing $660 million in appropriations through 1997. The IS TEA also formally recognized IVHS America as a utilized federal advisory committee to the USDOT. IVHS America formed In 1990 to promote IVHS in the United States In 1992, The Tampa Bay area was selected by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), along with Louisville, KY and Atlanta, GA as one of three sites In the southeastern U.S. to develop an "eariy deployment p lan for traveler info rmation and traffic management technologies The FHWA seeks early deployment plans to emphasize a strategic plan for implem entation that represents the unified vision of all the local municipalities, and is multi-model in its approach. This report contains a proposed action p lan for a Integrated Transportation Infor mation Center for the Tampa Bay area. The proposed center is "integrated because it involves both traffic management and traveler info rm ation The f ive city and county owned centers 5


in the Tampa Bay area which currently contro l traff i c signal timings will be linked Qn read only" fashion) to the center. (The local centers will retain autonomy over the traffic signal timings in their jurisdictions.) The proposed center will take i nformation from multitude of traffic i nformation sources, integrate the I nformation and cross check conflicting reports for improved accuracy Finally, the proposed center will disseminate this information to the traveling public through a variety of media. If this plan were realized, it would be possible for Tampa Bay area commuters to receive accurate, timely traffic information by listening to the radio, watching television or dialing a toll-free te l ephone number. Focus group interview sessions conducted as part of this project have shown that In the Tampa Bay area there is indeed a market for a regional traffic information center al t hough the public is not willing to pay for it through direct user fees. Tampa Bay area residents currently have access to free traffic information, however this information Is frequently not accurate nor timely enough to fit the publ ic's needs In addition, there is also interest in this proj ect from local agencies and businesses. To solicit public participation and enhance publ i c awareness of a regional traffic information center, CUTR formed an advisory committee cons i sting of intended users of the system. By listening to advisory committee and focus group members, the particular characteristics of the Tampa Bay metropolitan area were brought into each stage of the conceptual design process. 6


Ill. BACKGROUND A. Information Collection Techniques This section examines several methods of collecting traffic information: inductance detectors, piezoelectric sensors, microwave radar sensors, ultrasonic detectors, closed circuit television, machine vision, compressed video surveillance, land-mobile units, automatic vehicle identification and location, aerial surveillance and citizen call-in. Each technique is evaluated using the following criteria: implementation time frame, performance reliability, scale of observation, cost and institutional considerations. Most of these techniques are used to collect traffic information in the Tampa Bay area The results of an Infrastructure Inventory survey among project Advisory Committee members are contained in Appendix G. 1. Inductance Detectors Inductance detectors record the presence or passage of a vehicle and are used for actuated traffic signal controls, freeway data collection and other surveillance tasks. There are three main types of inductance detectors : inductive loop detectors, magnetometers and magnetic detectors. The basic configuration consists of a sensor buried in the roadway, a lead-in cable connecting the sensor to a controller via a pull-box, and an electronic unit housed in the controller. Most detectors have two modes of operation: pulse or presence. Pulse means that the loop generates an electric pulse whenever a vehicle passes over it. This mode Is used primarily for traffic counts. "Presence" means that the l oop generates an output for as long as the vehicle stays within its sphere This mode is used for traffic signal contro l Loop Detectors The most widely known and utilized inductance detector is the i nduct ive loop. The loop is constructed by plac i ng one or more turns of w i re i n a slot cut into the pavement, which 7


is covered with a sealant. The loop system is constructed with electrical characteristics to match that of an oscillator ;amplifier which also serves as the source of energy. A vehicle passing over the loop, or stopping within it, reduces the loop inductance and Increases the frequency of the oscillator. The resu lting change sends an electrical signal to the controller signifying the presence or passage of a vehicle. Hillsborough County, Pinellas County, Tampa, Clearwater and St. Petersburg all maintain extensive networl

All three classes of Inductance detecfors reqiiile some type of In-pavement installation. Apart from the time required for purchasing the necessary hardware and construction materials, and performing other administrative tasks, the only other factor that can affect the Implementation time frame will be the size of installation crew and how it impacts on the time needed for Installation. If the crew is large enough, for example, many of the tasks involved can be performed concurrently in order to minimize delay and inconvenience to motorists. Installing lo o p detectors requires more saw-cutting than for probes, which Implies greater delay. The rate of loop detector failure nationwide has been significant enough to generate concern. However, recent studies have shown that inductance detectors can generally be expected to operate maintenance free for at least two years and as long as seven, and that failure rates can be greatly reduced by improving installation techniques. Magnetic and magnetometric detectors are generally less effective In slow-moving or stationary traffic; hence they are f requ ent ly used in comb i nation with surveillance cameras for Incident management or traffic control systems. On a price-per-unit basis, the cost of loop and magne tic detectors ranges from $400 to $600, including the unit, lead-in cable and controller. Magnetic detectors require less saw-cutting and are therefore less expensive to install. However, the fact that as many as three probes may be required per lane (depending on the vehicle size and required data accuracy) makes them a much more expensive alternative. In addition, probes require the use of a magnetic field analyzer ($1,100) for determining the most effective location site of Installation. 2. Piezoelectric Sensors Saralee Traffic of Sarasota, Florida manufactures a piezoelectric sensor which measure changes In electric polar ity generated when pressure is applied to a crystalline substance. A roadside recorder collects, stores and analyzes data transmitted from piezoelectric sensors installed in the pavement. It allows for the collection of axle weight, vehicle classification and speed data for a maximum of four lanes per machine, either on an 9


aggregate, or lane-by-lane basis. Data is optionally available in real-time using a speclallzed port and an on -site printer or personal computer; remote data retrieval is possible by linking the roadside recorder to a telephone line via a modem. Site Installation is simple and requires no more preparation than is needed for the installation of an inductive loop detector. The system uses telephone lines for remote data transmission. The system Is operable over a wide range of temperature. Saralee Traffic claims that the sensor is accurate to within 1% for weight and speed measurements, and 5% for vehicle classification at ideal temperatures (20' Celsius). Site configuration can be varied from one-lane to four-lane coverage depending on needs. Costs per site installation varies from approximately $6,000 for a one-lane configuration, to $23,000 for a two-lane configuration and $34,000 for a four-lane configuration. An on site controller cabinet will cost an additional $2,500. 3. Roadside Detectors Microwave Radar Sensors In the past, radar detector usage was l imited by such factors as high maintenance costs, high risk of vandalism and the fact that they could only record the passage of vehicles. Recent developments in this f ield, however, have pr oduced detectors capable of recording presence as well as passage. These newer components utilize a low power microwave beam to detect the presence or movement of traffic in one direction and its conical beam can be focused to cover either one or multip le lanes A major advantage of radar sensors over loop detectors is the fact that no pavement cutting is required for in$1allation. The units can be mounted on overhead mast-arms or roadside llght poles. (Optimal performance require s overhead positioning at a height of 14 ft. to 18 ft.) These sensors would be easy and inexpensive to install where such overhead or roa dside fixtures are already in place. 10


Some components carry a range of different operating frequencies and can be adjusted to reduce or eliminate interference between units For small intersec tions, radar sensors are an efficient, low-cost alternative to loop detectors, however, their accuracy diminishes as the complexity of the intersection increases. Unlike loop detectors, since radar sensors do not come into direct physical contact with the observed vehicles, they are far less susceptible to environmental damage. The radar sensors' aluminum housing also reduces the effects of changing weather conditions. According to Microwave Sensors, Inc., Unit cost varies from approximately $500 for a presence detector to $800 for a microprocessor-cont ro lled vehicle detector, not includ ing installation or supporting mast. Ultrasonic Detectors Similar to microwave radar detectors, ultrasonic detectors emit pulses of ultrasonic energy through a transducer. Passage of a vehicle causes these beams to be reflected back to the transducer at a different frequency. When the transducer senses a change in frequency it sends an electrical impulse to the controller recording the vehicle. Ultrasonic detectors were a popular choice for traffic data collection in the United States in the 1950's. However, low reliability caused many agencies to abandon their use. However, recent improvements have led to a resurgence of interest in the technology. Ultrasonic detectors are extensively used In Japan for traffic signal-actuation and the real time collection of traffic data. (Japanese government policy prohibits the cutting of pavements.) With proper positioning ultrasonic detectors can provide simultaneous coverage of up to three lanes. Used in pairs they can provide vehicle classification information as well as speed, occupancy and straight vehicle counts. Unfortunately, no cost information is available at this time. 11


4. Video-Based Surveillance Video Syrvemance Videos cameras, like loop detectors, have been used since the early 1960's for monitoring traffic. When used alongside loop detectors to provide confirmation, it provides one of the major configurations used today for traffic monitor ing. The City of Clearwater, Hillsborough County and Florida DOT all u61ize cameras as part of their traffic surveillance systems. Figure 1 shows a surveillance camera located on the Sunshine Skyway bridge. Sensitivity of the equipment involved implies that most Installations should be considered permanent, thus requiring housing, power, lighting and communications infrastructure. Remote transmission would require the availability of optic -fi ber trunks to handle real-time . . . . .: . . ... ..,: .... .,., . Figure 1. Video Surveillance Cameras on the Sunshine Skyway Bridge 12


video processing. Along with protecting against vandalism, care also must be taken to make the housing weatherproof to protect both the camera and lighting fixtures. These factors would obviously lengthen the implementation period. Shadows created by bright light, even strong sunlight, can compromise the accuracy of the information generated. At night, a reliable light source must be provided. Detailed traffic counting requires one camera per lane. For general freeway surveillance, cameras should be located one half-mile to one mile apart, depending on the degree of coverage required. Cost per camera varies from $10,000 to $50,000, not including fiber-optic trunks and other necessary infrastructure. Machine Vision Systems Machine vision systems use a camera and computer software to perform real-time optical character recognition. The License Plate Reading System (LPRS), available from Computer Recognition Systems, Inc., is capable of reading vehicle li cense plates at speeds in excess of 100 m.p.h. The system is light-sensitive, adjusting as light conditions change, which reduces the problem of shadows in strong sunlight. Each camera monitors a single lane although a system can be configured to handle several cameras. The LPRS system is composed of a camera, lens with control unit, light source, image processor, visual display unit and TV monitor. Each license plate is processed in less than one second and a buffer allows for up to e ight license plates to be acquired concurrently The output can be remote ly transmitted to a computer database via a modem. The albility to read license plates will be useful for specific applications such as origin-destination surveys, police surveillance and electronic toil collection enforcement. As with video surveillance, sensitivity of the equipment involve d implies that most installat ions should be considered permanent, thus requiring housing, power, lighting and communications infrastructure. Along with p rotecting aga inst vandalism, care also must 13


be taken to make the housing weatherproof to protect both the camera and lighting fixtures. The system also requires forced air cooling to be provided to the bottom of the rack at a specified rate. Hence a suitable site plan needs to be prepared for each location. As expected with most high-technology equipment, frequent maintenance checks and servicing will be required to ensure continuous operation The manufacturer claims 70% to 90% accuracy, even at speeds above 100 m p.h. Actual field test results are closer to 50%. This would severely limit the applicability of the LPRS in cases where accurate vehicular counts are needed. However, the method can be used for highway surveillance or In conjunction with loop detectors to verify classification counts. In slow traffic the camera will require the use of a sensor as a triggering mechanism when a vehicle arrives At least one camera is needed per lane at the point of observation; but as many as four cameras per lane could be insta lle d to improve accuracy of coverage In high speed zones. T he field of v i ew of the camera must be carefully set in order to assure maximum resolution and to allow the camera to easily read the p l ates. Artific i al illumination is needed for night operation, either in the form of visible light or infrared, depending on the camera being used. A basic configuration costs approx i mately $25,000 per lane, including one week of training for agency personnel. This estimate does not in clude construction costs, maintenance needs and other i nfrastructu r e considerations. If an automatic system is used to photograph and record the license plate numbers of the individua l vehicles, there is the potential for public concern about privacy violation. Appropriate safeguards and guidelines on the control and use of license plate information must be established to protect the privacy of motorists. The growing use of products such as 'PHOTO COP" to automatically enforce speeding tickets has resulted in privacy protection legislation in some states. (The PHOTO-COP 14


system photographs speeders and sends a pre-printed citation through the mail.) Most states have l egislation requiring that traffic and toll violations be witnessed by a human being for the violations to be prosecutable. However, the law regarding privacy of information collected through electronic means is undergoing rapid change. Illinois is the first state to win conviction of a driver using pictures generated from remote video cameras as evidence. To date, Colorado, New York and Florida have passed legislation allowing automatic video-based enforcement of toll payment violators Compressed Video Surveillance Developed by the Texas Transportation I nstitute for the Texas DOT, compressed v i deo surveillance system operates by first captur ing ("grabbing") a frame from a live video camera. The analog image is then digitized within a fr action of a second, transforming it into a computer readable format. The digitized image is then compressed by a special computer called a dig ital signa l processor and can be transmitted by a high speed modem to a remote monitoring station At the other end of transmission, the process is reversed. A decompression computer passes the image to a digital signal processor, where it is expanded to a full digital image. The digital image is then placed in the memory of a display converter where it is transformed once again to an analog format that can be represented on a video monitor. SmartRoute Systems, I nc., a private company which operates a traffic information center for the Boston Metropolitan area, attributes the low annual operating costs of their system ($3 million, an order of magnitude less than comparable centers) to their extensive use of compressed video surveillance. Figure 2 shows a compressed video surveillance system used by the Los Angeles DOT. An alternative is a wide-band system, such as fiber-optics, coaxial cable and terrestrial microwave. Wide-band systems have a wider transmission channel and do not require compression and decompression of images. Compressed video systems are useful for freeway incident detection monitoring and rapid dispatch of emergency and service vehicles. The system is not as suitable for situations where detailed, accurate traffic data are needed. 15


As expected with most high-technology equipment, frequent maintenance checks and servicing will be required to ensure continuous operation. System developers recommend that one camera be Installed for every mile of freeway, where permanent surveillance stations are desired. However, the system's greatest benefits are realized when its mobility is exploited. Using the high data transmission rate of cellular phones (10,000 bits per second), compressed video surveillance systems can be used on a short-term basis for such situations as accident locati ons or construction sites. For a permanent surveillance station the expected cost is approximately $30,000, although the "per-camera" costs will be reduced with multi-camera units. Figure 2. Compressed Video Surveillance Used by the Los Angeles DOT 16


5. Fleet Vehicles as Probes Land Mobile Units Several businesses In the Tampa Bay area have vehicles which traverse the road network, assist stranded motorists, and serve as a source of in formation on traffic congestion. These businesses usually have a partnership with a local radio station who occasionally broadcasts directly from the probe vehicle, supplementing reports produced by Metro Traffic Control. Some of the existing land mobile units In the Tampa Bay area are shown In Table 1 Table 1 Existing Land Mobile Units SPONSORING BUSINESS RADIO STATION PARTNER Bill Currie Ford WQYK Ernie Haire Ford WRBQ Coca-Cola WFLZ Tyron e lsuzu 'Road Amigo" WDAE Clearwater Nlssan WMTX Automatic Vehicle Identification and Location (AVf/AVL) Automatic Vehicle Identification and Location (A VI/ AVL) takes the probe vehicle concept one step further by automating the p rocess of determining the locat ion of each fleet vehicle and communicating their positions to a central computer. The computer tracks how long each probe vehicle takes to traverse a link In the road network. By comparing the time actually required by each vehicle to traverse its route to the time required under normal traffic conditions, the computer can determine the degree of congestion in the road network. There are several technologies which can be used for determining the location of individual vehicles: on-board odometer ; LORAN-e ground-based signal 17


triangulation, communication beacons placed on signposts, and the satellite-based global positioning system (GPS). Manufacturers of AVL system which use GPS claim that the positioning system has the highest precision and accuracy. However, GPS is also the newest, most unproven and most expensive technology. AWA Traffic Systems America, Inc., manufacturers of a system called Automated Network Travel Time System (ANTIS), recommend a minimum size fleet of 500 vehicles and readers spaced one-half mile apart for metropolitan area the size of the Tampa Bay area. Tag prices vary from $2 to $275 each, and readers cost approximately $3,200 each, including housing and components . Figure 3 shows the Hillsborough Regional Transit Authority (HARTiine)'s AVL control center, with one of the monitored bus routes on the computer screen (front). Figure 3. HARTline's AVL Control Center 18


HARTline is presently installing an AVL (Motorola's sign-post and odometer system) for monitoring their fleet of 172 buses HARtline conducted a performance test of the system on August 9, 1993; the system should be operational by October 1993. These buses can be used as probes for the area's arterial network. Taxi cabs are another possible source lor recru"ment as probes. 6. Aerial Surveillance Aircraft are used to conduct visual, panoramic surveys of the road network. I n the Tampa Bay area, aerial surveillance is conducted by Metro Traffic Control. The company uses two leased Cessna-172's to cover H illsboroug h and Pinellas counties. The planes operate for three hours in the morning and t wo hours in the evening, covering both peak congestion periods. Pilots provide a verbal description of what they are able to observe from the air by radio to their control station. Visibility and distance and general weather conditions affect the reliability of this method. The main benefit of aerial surveillance is the fact that it allows simultaneous coverage of wide areas of the network. Figure 4 is a sample of Metro Traffic Control's traffic info rmat ion database, which is compiled from aerial surveillance, listening to police radio and other sources. MTC INSTATRAK PRINTOUT AT AUG 3(1 1993 12138 PN C12:3B PM1 Bridges BRIDGES ARE UP TO SPEED NO VELAYS AT Al.L C 12 ;37 PN3 Tampa TRAFFIC STEIWY ALONG SOUTHBOUND 27S APPROACHING THE INTERCHANGE, NO BACKUPS. !12:37 PMJ Tampa MINOR ACCIDENT AROUND 78TH AND CAUSENAY 12:37 PNJ Tampa MINOR ACCIDI:NT NE ,AR HIMES AND 1N TAHPA (12:-18 Pf'I::J Pinel110s EXPECT VELAYS DUE TO CONST'RUCfiON AROUND 19 t1ND COUNTRYSJVE. C12t36 PMJ Pinellas ACCIDENT INVOLV 1NG JNJUR 1S 5 AV SO(ffH AND 3 IST STRf:ET lN ST PETE Figure 4. Metro Traffic Control's Traffic Information Database 19


Metro Traffic Control uses wet-leased aircraft ; leaving maintenance operations and other costs to the lessor. Actual purchasing of aircraft would make this method a considerably less attractive, high-cost alternative, considering the sizeable Initial capital outlay that would be required to house, maintain and operate an airplane. 7. Citizen Call-In : CB Radios, Cellular Telephones, Emergency Call Boxes Figure 5. An Emergency Call Box on the Sunshine Skyway Bridge Citizens Band (CB) rad i os and cellular phones are readily available sources of information that can be easily integrated into the system at marginal cost. Emergency call boxes are standard freeway fixtures that can also provide information. Figure 5 illustrates a call box in used in the Tampa Bay area. 20


CB radio users are requi r ed by protocol to keep Channel9 open for emergency use. Th i s channel is monito r ed by the H ighway Patrol and other emergency services. Call boxes along the freeways are provided for a similar purpose An 800" emergency number can easily be made available for use by travellers wishing to report in c idents via cellular phones. For emergency call boxes, implementation will largely depend on the t i me it would take to install the necessary infrastructure, such as tel ephone lines, housing and sources Verbal subjective reports based on human observations may not always be first hand or accurate However, giving the opportun i ty for citizens to report on traff i c conditions has an unseen civic benefit. Individuals who ca ll in gai n a feeling that they have made an altruistic contribution. New York City's Metro Traffic Contro l receives calls from motorists, but never uses them as a source o f Information until the report has been confirmed by another method: aerial surveillance, police radio, probe vehicle, etc. Although exact figures are not available, the cost of m o n i t o ring CB channels or establishing a telephone line for cellular phones is marginal. Emergency call boxes will require s i gn i ficant capital investment if not already in place. F l orida DOT is p l anning to install a network of 200 emergency call boxes along 1-75 and along 1 -275 in sparse l y populated areas. T able 2 lists the basic cha r acteristics fo r each information collection technique noted above. Table 2. T raffic Information Collection Techniques COLLECTION GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS TECHNIQUE Inductance Extensive networks already exist Detectors lnpavement installation required Rate of failure has been significant Generally less effective in slowmoving o r stat ionary t raffic Per costs range from $400-$1,100. depending on vehicle s ize and required accuracy 21


COLLECTION GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS TECHNIQUE Piezoelectric Remote data retrieval Is possible with telep hone lines Sensors Operable over a wide range of temperatures 1 % accuracy lor weight, 5% accuracy lor vehicle classification Costs per site vary from $6,000 (1-lane) to $34,000 (4-lane) Roadside Recent techno logy improvements In microwave and u l trasonic detectors now Detectors permn recording of vehicle presence as well as passage, and have imp roved low rellabBny of the past No pavement cuts are required lor I nstallation, typically Installed on overhaad mast arms o r light poles Far less suscepllble to damage compared to I nductance detectors No cost avaSabl e lor uftrasonlc, microwave detecto r s vary from $500-$800 Video-Based Frequent maintenance checks and servicing will be required to ensur e continuous Surveillance operation Machine vision systems (one required per lar>e) are 70%% accurate even at 1 oo mph, and cost about $25,000 Compressed video systems are useful lor Incident detection where rapid dispatch Is required (high data transmission rate), not useful where accurate traffic data are needed Per camer a costs lor compressed video surveillance Is approximately $30,000 Aeet Vehi c les Partnerships exist be tween several local businesses and local radio stations in as Probes Tampa Bay to have vehicles that assist motorists and traverse the road networ1< On-board odometer, LORANC groundbesed signal triangulation, communication beacons on signposts, and satellite-based g lobe! position ing systems a r e the technologies available in vehicle fleet monnorlng Automatic vehicle locating (AVL) system is being imp lemented by HARTline (Motorola s l gnpost and odometer system) Electronic license plates (transponders) range In price !rom $2 to $275, and readers cost about $3,200 each Aerial Metro Traffic Control leases two Cessn a -172's to cover Hillsborough and Pinellas Surveillance counties, operating three h ours In A.M. rush and two hours In P.M. rush Allows simultaneous coverage of wide areas of the roadway network Actual purchasing of aircraft would make this method cost proh i b itive Citizen CB radi os cellular phones, and emergency call boxes are readily avaaabl e and Call-In easily Integrated at marginal cost Typically used lor on-sne verification olln cidentsfcongestlon FOOT currendy planning to Install 200 emergency call boxes along 1-75 and 1-275 22


B. Information Dissemination Techniques This section examines several method of disseminating traffic information: radio and television spot traffic announcements, dedicated radio frequency, cable television, telephone information seNice, highway advisory radio, variable message signs, facsimile, electronic mail and realtime access by modem. Each technique is evaluated using the following criteria: feasibility of implementation, ut i lity of information, size of potential customer base, cost and Institutional considerations. 1. Broadcast Media Radio and Television Spot Traffic Announcements Most radio and TV stations in metropolitan areas already broadcast traffic reports at various inteNais during the morning and evening rush hours. Stations either collect their own traffic information or contract with other organ izations Here in the Tampa Bay area, 21 of the 25 major radio stations and 3 of the 4 major television stations contract with Metro Traffic Control (MTC), a private company which monitors the area traffic conditions from helicopter and police radio. MTC feeds the live broadcasts directly to stations. Figure 6 shows Metro Traffic Control's traffic congestion map displayed In the WTVT Channel 13 (CBS aff iliate) studio. Their revenue comes from sponsors whose advertisements accompany each traffic announcement. The arrangement between the stations and Metro Traffic Control demonstrates that spot traffic announcements are a valuable seNice for radio and TV audiences. There are several ways to Improve the arrangement between stations and MTC. By becoming a partner to regional traffic information Interchange, MTC could have access to more detailed and more frequently updated reports. An advantages of these media is that the infrastructure needed to support them is already In place. Routing traffic data either directly to radio and TV stations from the traffic information center or through Metro Traffic Control involves almost no cost to the project. In addition, there is a demonstrated market for these media, and the devices needed to 23


receive traffic data are widespread in Tampa Bay homes and vehicles. Ninety-eight percent (98%) of U.S. households have at least one television; 85% have an AM/FM radio available for use in the home; 94.5% of all vehicle owners have an AM radio in their cars; and 81.3% have an AM/FM radio In their cars. Metro Traffic Control is the only private agency in the area to operate its own aircraft for aerial trafflc surveillance, although some television and rad io reports make it appear that the aerial surveillance is being conducted by the station's own traffic reporter. A handful of local radio and lV stations use probe vehicles on the ground to investigate major traffic problems. Figure 6. Metro Traffic Control's Traffic Congestion Map 24


Dedicated Radio Station In the 1970's, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) designated the two frequencies adjacent to the standard AM band (520 kHz and 1610 k Hz) for broadcast of local traveler information. These frequencies are most often used for low power, short range radio transmissions called highway advisory radio (HAR) Drivers must turn their radios to this frequency to receive the messages, but no special equipment is required HAR systems have been set up in dozens of areas around the country, both for urban traffic congestion information and rural weather advisory warnings. A few metropolitan areas are planning to incorporate HAR into advanced traffic management/trave ler info rmation projects and coordinated incident management plans. There Is currently a HAR system operating at Tampa International Airport, which uses the 1610kHz frequency. However, operating a full-ti me rad io station can be quite expensive. WUSF, a non-commercial radio station affiliated with the University of South F lo rida reports that its operating expenses are $250,000 per year, not including program content. It Is also important to consider the market appeal of such systems. When traffic information is integrated into the standard rush hour radio broadcast, no special demands are placed on the driver to receive the traffic updates. A dedicated radio channel which broadcasts only traffic information may not hold a driver's interest As part of the ADVANCE Traveler Information project in Chicago the local HAR system continually broadcasts estimated travel times for specHic road segments Private ownership of a dedicated traffic channel would disqualify the station from using the 520kHz and 1610kHz frequencies. Applying t o the FCC f o r an operating license on an existing radio frequency is a time consuming and expensive process. Cable TV As proscribed by the 1986 Cable Broadcasting Act, local governments enter into agreements with cable companies to p rovi de cable services to res idents. The four major local government agencies in the Tampa Bay area which supervise cable television are 25


listed in Table 3, along with their current cable TV vendors. Note that the companies with which the agencies do business could change at any time. Table 3. Cable Television Service Agreements LOCAL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES VENDORS Ctty of Tampa Jones lntercable Hillsborough County (not including Tampa) Paragon Cable Ctty of Clearwater Vision Cable Ctty of St. Petersburg Paragon Cable If the Traffic Information Center was a publicly-owned entity, then traffic information could be broadcast over public access cable channe ls. Also proscribed In the Cable Broadcasting Act, cable companies are required to include public info rmation, such as C-Span, the weather channel and city council meet ings in the basic package of cable services. Every cable subscriber (50"..6 of Tampa Bay households) has access to these broadcasts. For traffic information to be broadcast on a dedicated channel, or during dedicated time slots during the morning and evening rush hours, the Traffic Information Center would have to negotiate an agreement with each of the various local government cable offices. Representatives at the Tampa Cable Office indicate a dedicated time slot or channel is highly possible. Their only concern is that the visual informat i on is ready for broadcast from the Center and requ ires no p re -p rocessing by the city office or the local public access studio. If the Center chos e to make graphic information available, these graphics could be fed directly to the cable broadcasts. Tampa Bay would not be the first area to set up a transportation-related cable channel. The transit systems of Ann Arbor, Michigan and Champaign-Urbana, Illinois are experimenting with the use of public access cable TV to provide estimated arrival times of buses. Minneapolis-St. Paul utilizes part of the screen of a general Information cable 26


channel to show realtime video from several surveillance cameras in the metropolitan area. SmartRoute Systems, Inc. of Boston advocates that traffic information be broadcast over a dedicated cab l e station, not part of the basic cable package (Since SmartRoute Systems is a private company, it is not allowed to broadcast via pub lic access channe l s ) SmartRoute Systems predicts that the quality of their traffic information broadcasts will be of such high quality that cable subscribers will be willing to pay for the service. In the Tampa Bay area, broadcasiing traffic data over a non-public access, dedicated cable channel would require negotiation with the cable companies In each area, I.e Jones lntercable, Paragon Cable and Vision Cable. 2. Inquiry-Based Media Telephone Information Service In a few metropolitan areas aroun d the count r y, ca ll ers can receive recorded messages about traffic conditions over the telephone. In the San Francisco Bay area, callers receive general traffic information p lus transit schedules. h i Boston, callers use a touch-tone menu to receive traffic information for specific routes. In both the Boston and San Francisco projects, the services are supported with public funds and inquiries are free. Many transit agencies in North America provide schedule and route information through a local telephone number. Telephone menu systems are contro ll ed by a computerized router called an "Automated Attendant. The device Is available from GTE for about $3,000. Remember that such an automated attendant system can only answer as many simultaneous calls as there are dedicated phone lines. The cost of leasing a business l ine from GTE is $47.23 per month. A system that automatically forwards calls to the next available phone line costs from $40,000 to $50,000. Although still a small percentage (3.0"k) of the telephone market, cellular phones provide an Increasingly popular method of gettlng real-time traffic information to the traveler duri ng 27


his/her trip. In Boston, the cellular phone company NYNEX pays SmartRou t e a set fee so that NYNEX can offe r real-time traffic information as a d i scount serv i ce to Its cellu l ar phone customers. Here in t he Tampa Bay a rea, Metro Traffic Control feeds their traffic announcements to a voice mailbox, whi ch GTE Mobilnet's cellular phone customers can access at discounted phone rates. I n Boston, public reaction to SmartRoute System s telephone Information service has been extremely positive. SmartRoute System receives an average of 2,000 inquirie s per day a l though the daily volume of calls varies grea tly depending on weather conditions The office stayed open over the weekend during the March 1993 "Storm of the Century," and call volume was triple that of the norma l weekday rush hour The free telephone service Is becoming so popular that Smart Route may become a v i ctim of its own success. Subscript i ons to SmartRoute's profit-generating subscr i ption-based media, such as f acsimile and e -mail, have l eve l ed off since introduction of the free t e l ephone service in . January 1993. Whether the telephone Information sys t em is pub li cly owned (as i n San Francisco) or private l y owned (as in Boston), i t is also important to cons i de r whether or not callers shou l d pay f o r the service. Because pay per-minute calling services suffer from a bad reputation sett ing up a "900 numbe r i s a time-consuming and expensive process A $2, 000 depos i t is requi r ed and the long distance company must see samp l es of advertisements for the service. In c o ntrast toll free 800" numbers are comparable in cost to a normal business line and can be set up In l ess than 24 hours. 3 High way-Based Media Highway advisory r adio transmitters and changeab l e message signs both require roadside Installation. I n addition to the cost of the uni t s themse l ves the labor required fo r hardware procurement, administrat i ve project management and insta ll ation will affect the cost and imp l ementation t i me frame of these systems 28


Highway Advisory Radio As discussed previously, highway advisory radio transmits localized traffic advisory messages via either of two frequencies adjacent to the standard AM broadcast band (520 kHz and 1610 kHz}. Low power radio transmitters are installed along the roadside and broadcast messages specific to a small segment of the road ("Bridge may be Icy." or 'Congestion next 5 miles."). Drivers must turn their radios to this frequency to receive the messages, but no special in-vehicle equipment Is required. The Los Angeles Smart Corridor project completed testing of this technology in March 1993. The low power transmitters use the 530 kHz AM radio frequency. It has been reported that the HAR performed well during the test. Transmitter range was adequate for their purposes, and the system did not suffer interference from local power sources or cellular phones. The Minnesota GuldeStar project Is experimenting with FM subcarrier transmissions, using a frequency licensed by the Minneapolis public school system. (FM radio stations use only a small fraction of the spectrum space for which they are licensed. Stations usually sell the remaining space to telephone paging companies.) These systems transmit text through the unused spectrum space, and require specialized equipment to receive the messages. Such systems are popular in Europe; most radios sold in Europe today come with subcarrier receivers. However, the system remains experimental in the United States. The DIRECT project in Detroit, Michigan, will be testing low-powe r radio messages, FM subcarrier transmissions and a new type of transmitter which automatically interrupts radio broadcasts. Testing should begin in July 1993. In an early test of HAR for rural traveler advisory warnings in Iowa, 5% to 10% of travelers regularly listened to the HAR broadcasts; the listening audience increased to 20% during adverse weather conditions. The Colorado DOT reports that their fixed HAR transmitters cost around $14,000, the portable HAR unit cost $12,000. As mentioned previously, private ownership would disqualify the HAR system from using the 520 kHz and 1610 kHz frequencies. 29


Yadable Message Signs Traffic management agencies across the country have been using variable message signs (VMS) for years to warn drivers about road construction, weather conditions, traffic congestion and high occupancy vehicle (HOY) restrictions In T ampa, a flip-disc VMS system exists on 1 -275 westbound near Dale Mabry, but is not currently working because of maintenance problems. Drivers provide a captive audience for Information transmittal, however variable message signs are expensive to purchase install and maintain. An Arizona State University study estimated that a VMS based on fiber optic technology would cost $118,000 to purchase and $20,000 per year to operate and maintain; a light emitting diode (LED) VMS would cost $141,000 to purchase and $25,000 per year to operate and maintain These costs do not include the foundation and structure on which Figure 7A. Variable Message Signs on the Sunshine Skyway Bridge Flip-Disc Type 30


Figure 78. Variable Message Signs on the Sunshine Skyway Bridge LED Type the VMS must be installed. Variable message signs based on the simpler fl ip-disc technology are less expensive. The Colorado DOT reports that their portable flip-disc VMS costs about $22,000. Since road signs have traditionally been owned and operated by public transportation agencies, and since it is unlikely that this medium will produce self-sustaining revenue, variable message signs are well suited to continue under public ownership. Figures 7 A and 76 show variable message signs located on the Sunshine Skyway Bridge, both flip disk and LED types. 31


4. Subscription-Based Media All of the information dissemination media discussed previously are services the Traffic Information Center could easily provide free to the general public. Access to subscription based media, in contrast, requires the customer to have specialized equipment and to sign-up before receiving the service. The Center would then send out traffic reports to Its list of subscribers through various media. The advantage of private ownership of subscription-based media is that the public sector would not have the responsibility of marketing this service. Competition among different information brokers would lead, theoretically, to increased quality and decreased costs. However, the Traffic Information Center would no longer have control over a crucial step In the traffic information dissemination process. Facsimile Facsimile is a major part of SmartRoute System's traffic information dissemination. Customers can sign up for three levels of service, depending on how often they wish to receive traffic reports "Sunrise Reports" send out messages every l'(lorning and are intended for commuters. 'Flash Fax' send out immediate reports of emergencies and incidents whenever they occur throughout the day. ''Traffic Fax" sends a report on roadway conditions every 30 minutes during business hours. These two levels of service are intended for fleet operators. In the Tampa Bay area, Metro Traffic Control sends its traffic reports .via fax once per rush hour to a local Spanish-language radio station. There is also the possibility that customers who are primarily interested in traffic during their home-work-home commute could receive locat ion-specific informat ion. Customers would inform the Center of their commute destinat ions when they sign up for the service. Most plain paper fax machines on the market today (average price $1 ,200} have a "broadcast" mode, in which the same message can be sent to numerous telephone numbers. Some can even store fax mailing lists of up to 200 numbers in the machine's memory. 32


A more sophisticated method of broadcast taxing is to control the process with a computer and internal fax modem. The computer's information processing capabilities would also enable the Center to send graphic and s itespecific traffic informat ion The cost of such a system would entail a personal computer (average price $1 ,200) and fax modem (average price $200). Software would have to be specially written for this purpose. The Greater Tampa Chamber of Commerce estimates that 90% of its membership have fax machines. A small (1.1%) but growing number of peop le also use fax machines in their homes. Electronic Mail Receiving traffic reports by electronic mail requires a telephone line, personal computer, modem, modem-controlling software and electronic mail account. The customer must log onto his account to re ad the repo rts. Because it is cumbersome to receive more messages than one can easily read and digest, it i s important to let the customer determine how often he would like to receive traffic reports via e-mail. Numerous IVHS projects across the country are considering giving commuters access to traffic information via modem, however such p ro jects rema in in the experimental or concept design stage. The California Smart Traveler project intends to use modem communications to give riders access to real-time ride-matching services. SmartRoute Systems In Boston began taking e-mail subscribers in March 1993. This medium has a smaller potential customer base than facsimile machines. While 15% of U.S. households have a personal computer, only 3.2"/o have the computer-plus-modem configuration. It has been the experience of SmartRoute Systems that the primary users of traffic informat ion through electronic mail messages are fleet operators. The Unix operating system's electronic mail program can easily send messages to computers of different platforms (e.g. IBM, Macintosh, DEC, etc.). The Unix system can also interface with popular informat ion services packages such as Prodigy and CompuServe. Because Unix is based on multi-tasking (performing many functions at 33


once), it has historically been the operating system of choice for mini-computers and work stations. However, newer versions of Unix can now run on high-end personal computers, such as the IB M 386 machines ($800 for the Unix operating system). Reai-Tjme Access by Modem Systems In which multiple users access a large database by computer, modem and phone llnes are called bulletin board systems (BBS). Dissemination of traffic information using a BBS requires a computer on which to store and process the traffic reports a modem with extensive auto-answer capabilities (average price $300), and software to manage the bulletin board system. Eithe r the software must be written especially for the project, or the Center must make arrangements with an existing bulletin board system. Bulletin board systems are a well-established medium, so communications among different types of computers is not a problem. Inexpensive communications software packages enable different types of computers access to bulletin board systems Metro Traffic Control currently has a real-time computer link between its traffic report database, stored on an Apple llgs computer, and three Tampa Bay area radio stations. It Is also Important to remember that the system can only answer as many simultaneous modem links as there are dedicated phone lines (See Section on "Te l ephone Information Service" for cost estimates.) Just as traffic congestion is caused by too many people wanting to use the roads at the same time, there could be a similar rush hour demand for access to a traffic information database by modem. Therefore, it is important to develop ways to keep users' access time to a minimum and consider lim iting the total number of subscribers. This medium may be more appropriate for customers in need of detailed, area-wide, real-time traffic information, such as fleet operato rs 34


Table 4 lists the basic characteristics for each .information dissemination technique noted above. Table 4. Traffic Information Dissemination Techniques TECHNIQUE GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS Broadcast Media 21 of 25 major radio stations and 3 of 4 television stations contract Metro Traffic Control Infrastructure needed to support this media is already In place Highway adVIsory radio (HAR) is designated at 520 kHz and 1610 kHz. Tampa airport uses 1610 kHz A dedicated radio station could be expensiVe ($250,000/year for operating expenses) Visual Information for dedicated cable TV broadcast must require no pre-processing Inquiry-Based Media To uch-tone telephone can provide recorded (updated) messages for route specifiC Information "900" numbers (pay per minute) is time-consuming and expensiVe, whereas "800" number are comparable i n cost to a normal business line Metro Traffic Contr ol feeds their traffic announcements to a voice mailbox, which GTE MobUnet cellular phone users can access at discounted rates Highway-Based HAR and variable message sign s (VMS) require roadside Installation Media HAR requires drivers to tune to a specffi c frequency to receive messages. but no speci a l In-vehicle equipment is required VMS based on fiber-optic technology would cost about $118.000 per sign and $20,000/yr to operate and maintain Ught emitting diode (LED) VMS would cost 10%% more than fiberoptic VMS, unllkely to produce self-sustaining revenue, are best suited for publlc ownership Subscription-Based Requires customer to have speciallzed equi pment and to sign-up before Media receiving service Metro Traffic Control sends traffic reports via facsimile to a local Spanish radio station once per rush hour Fax machines cost about S1,200, and have "broadcast" mode About 90% businesses have fax machines, but only about 1% of homes Electronic mail programs can give co!}lmuters access to traffic Information via modem (15% U.S. homes have computers, but only 3% have modems) for about $800 Bulletin board systems (about $300) require extensiVe auto-answer capabilities Metro Traffic Control has a real-time computer link with three area radio stations Most appropriate for customers i n need of detai led information such as fleet operators 35


c. Traffic Control and Information Cen t ers 1. T ampa Bay Area City and County Owned Centers The section describes the operating characteristics of five city and county owned traffic control centers: Tampa, Hillsborough County, Clearwater, St. Petersburg and Pinellas County. A map of these centers is shown in Figure 8. These centers control the timing of actuated traffic signals using information collected through i nductance loop detectors. The Hillsborough County cente r has different methods of collecting Information and different uses for that information and thus has very d i fferent operational characteristics from the other four centers. The five centers share many of the same operating characterist i cs and with the exception of the Hillsborough County center the Tampa Bay area city and county owned traffic . control centers share the common features pointed out in Table 5. Table 5. Common Features of Tampa Bay Area Traffic Control Centers FEATURES OR OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS Utaization of an OS /32 operating system Utmzatlori of software compatible With Urban Traffic Control System (UTCS) Operation Monday thr o ugh Friday from the beginning of the morning rush hour to the end of the evening rush hour UtUizaJion of twis tedpair copper wire telephone l ines as a communications medium UtUJzatlon of Conc u rrent Model processors of the 3200 famuy Require an average annual operating cost of $650 per Inte r section, $2300 per intersection including maintenance Require average staffing levels of 2 peop l e per 1 oo intersections 36


I I I I I I I I I I I I I N r I I SC,t,Lf! I N M IIJ!S I -{ I , r Jlr rr' / ,--! '1 ) . . ; ' ; ; ; / / I I I I 7 '/ Y '"' l __) L egend 1. City of Tampa T raffic Control Center 2 Pinellas County T raffle Control Cente 3 City of Clearwater Traffic Control Center 4 City of Sl Petersburg T raffic Control Center 5. Hillsboroug h County Traffic Control Center 6. Howard Frs. nk land B rid ge (curr e ntly n in operation) 7. Sunshine Skyway Bridge 8 Metro Trstnc Control 9 Bay area Commuter SOMces F i g u r e 8 Tampa Bay Area Traffic C ontrol Centers


The St. Petersburg, Clearwater and Pinellas County centers all were financed through the same initiative and consequently share many similarities in systems architect ure. The centers were financed through a local gas tax which provided $15 million In total revenue for the establishment of the three municipal traffic control centers. Of this, a total of $11.2 million has been spent in bringing the centers on line. No state or federal funding was involved. All three centers use an upscaled version of the UTCS software that has been extended and enhanced. This updated version is known as MTCS Metropolitan Traffic Control System. An Important feature of the system is the on-line database which allows timing and phasing patterns to be generated by the computer, unlike the City of Tampa system. The system also uses a time-based coordinator syste m back-up in the controller, through which the computer Is constantly downloading the date and time to the traffic signal. The benefit is that in the event of a breakdown, the signal can change from on-line to stand-by mode almost inst antly, without the need to spend time synchronizing with the rest of the system, as i s necessary with older versions of the software. This translates to minimal inconvenience and delay to the motorist during maintenance or communications breakdown. City of Tampa Traffic Control Center The center is housed on the ground floor of the old City Hall Building in downtown Tampa. The center operates from 7:00a.m. to 6:00p.m., Monday through Friday and as may be required for special events. The annual budget is approximately $350,000 which includes salaries, and replacement and maintenance of the computer equipment. The center operates as an arm of the Design Department of the City's Transportation Division. Maintenance of field equipment is the responsibility of the Operations Department, which has an annual budget of approximately $1.2 million. The center maintains a close working relationship with FOOT and Hillsborough County, as exemplified by the fact that the existing Hillsborough County system is housed at the same l ocation Maintenance and other responsibilities are shared. 38


Except where necessary, as in the case of an emergency or disaster, there is no day-today cooperation or communication between the City's Traffic Control Center and other regional centers. At the heart of the system are three Concurrent Model 3210 processors. Each has the capability of handling approximately 256 intersections and the processing workload of the existing network is divided equally between the three. The existing network comprises a total of 710 intersections, of which 550 are under the control of the City and 160 are under the control of Hillsborough County. The system covers the entire City of Tampa lim its Data is transm i tted to the center via a copper-wire system that operates with two main trunks. One trunk serves northern Tampa, running along Nebraska Avenue; the other runs west along Kennedy Boulevard. Of the total number of in tersections in the system, 20% are fixed-time, 60% are semi actuated, and 20o/o are fully-actuated signals. All in tersections in the system Can be remotely monitored, if not controlled, via loop detectors. No freeway lane-mileage is covered by the system. The center uses an older version of the UTCS package developed by the Federal Highway Administration. The software is Fortran-based and is not user-friendly. Operating staff consider the existing system to be quite reliab le. However, the lack of an on-line database requires that the system be shut-down several times each day while Information is downloaded to the database. The problem can be solved by updating the UTCS software version presently in use, but this would require major changes in the hardware configuration and retraining of the staff. Pinellas County Traffic Control Center The Pinellas County Center, show!"' in Figure 9, is located on the grounds of the Pinellas County Division of Public Works. The center began operation just over a year ago. It is 39


located on the second floor as a measure against flooding The processing units are also stored above the level of the main floor of the center as an additional safety measure The center operates from 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p m., Monday through Friday, although staff are always on call. In addition, the system can be accessed via modem from any l ocation by certain key staff. The total annual budget is approximately $180,000, of which about $10,000 is spent on the physical upkeep of the center. There is an annual expense of $450 000 incurred from the use of GTE'S telephone line which is paid directly by the county. Maintenance of field hardware and the manpower involved I s covered by the budget for this department Figure 9. Pinellas County Traffic Control Center 40


The cities of Largo Pinellas Park and Dunedin each have traffic control networks that number between 30 50 intersections These sub-systems are tied into the Pinellas County traffic control system and operate as satellites of t he main network. All timing plans are developed by the county, a l though the state and cities may submit timing plans if they wish. The tim i ng plans are input into the database by the personnel at the center. The software used also provides for the uploading of traffic data to the FOOT mainframe computer, although this capability is not presently in use. The existing network comprises 295 intersections : 235 intersections are semi-actuated and the other sixty are fully-actuated Transmission takes place via dedicated GTE telephone lines. No freeway mileage is covered by the center. City of Clearwater Traffic Control Center This center Is located on the ground f l oor of the C l earwater City Hall Annex. The computers and related peripherals ere housed in an enc l osed area of approximately 1600 square feet. The center has been in operation since 1980, but was remodeled as part of a larger project that included the Pinellas County and St. Petersburg centers. The new center began operations just over a year ago. T he center I s run by a system eng i neer and a signa l engineer They are supervised by a Transportation Engineer. The entire staff, i ncluding maintenance and other field staff, fail under the administration of the City's Department of Public Works. The center operates from 8:00a. m. to 5:00p.m., Monday through Friday, although staff are constantly on call. In addition, the sys t em can be accessed via modem from any location by certa i n key staff such as t h e engineers i n charge. Because the center is located in the City of Clearwater Traffic Eng i neering office, they are able to share staffing and facilities with other related agencies The location was also chosen for its accessib ili ty to GTE's duct network which are used for runn i ng the transmission cables owned by the City. 4 1


Total annual operating budget is approx i mately $120,000, including the maintenance and replacement of field equipment and communications hardware. Of this amount, about $15,000 is spent on the physical upkeep of the center, i ncluding hardware and software. Three-fourths of the cable, transmission network is owned by the City; the other one fourth Is GTE telephone lines. The City Is also taking steps to replace the remaining portion of the network presently served by GTE telephone lines with its own transmission cable. The software used also provides for the uploading of traffic data to the FOOT mainframe computer, although this capability is not presently utilized. FOOT has statutory control over state-owned roadways, but i n practice the C i ty prov i des timing plans for these signals Occasionally the center may provide data to other public and private interests, upon request Traffic count data are provided to the county on an annual basis to be complied Into a county-wide report. The existing network comprises 143 Intersections About 100 intersections are fully actuated. The rema i ning 43 are semi-actuated, although the City is in the process of installing loops on the main streets of all semi actuated intersections. Unlike the County's network where loop detectors are installed only i n one lane the City of Clearwater has installed l oop detectors in all approach lanes at most of their intersect i ons. Data is transmitted via a twisted pair cable network. The City of Clearwater will soon install graphic-display monitors that will use menu driven software called MAPS to generate on line, on-screen displays of intersections In operation. City of St. Petersburg Traff i c Control Center This center is located on the grounds of the St. Petersburg Traffic Engineering Department. It shares facilities with a number of other related agencies including Parking Enforcement, Signs & Markings and Parking & Building Maintenance The computers and related peripherals are housed in an enc l osed area of a building that is ra i sed approximately three feet above ground level. The center began operations just over a year ago as part of a larger project that inc l uded the Pinellas County and City of Clearwater centers. 42


Unlike the case with Pinellas County and the City of Clearwater, the entire maintenance crew falls d i rect l y unde r the administrat i on of the traffic control center and their sal aries and related expenses are included in the center's budget. The center operates from 7:30am. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, although staff are constantly on call. In addition, the system can be accessed via modem from any location by certain key staff. The city uses telephone lines owned by GTE for transmitting data and information. GTE holds an escrow account of $3 mill io n from which the accrued annual interest goes towards the paymer:1t of the City's monthly usage charges Total annual operating budget Is approximately $700,000 incl uding the maintenance of field equipment and communications hardware. Of this amount, about $30,000 is requi r ed for the physical upkeep of the center, including hardware and software. A telephone line and modem provides dir ect link to FOOT for the uploading of traff i c data to the FOOT mainframe computer . FOOT has statutory control over state-owned roadways, although in p r actice the City provides timing plans for these s i gna ls. In a few Instances, St. Petersburg has found it more practical to swap maintenance and signal-timing responsibilities with the Pinellas County center Occasional ly, the center may provide hard copies of data to other pub lic and private interests, upon request. This Includes real estate agencies, newspapers and other private business organizations. Traffic count data i s provided to the county on an annual basis to be compiled into a county-wide report. The existing network comprises 288 intersections. One third are pret i med; the remaining two-thirds are semi-actuated. Data is transmitted via a twisted-pair cab l e network owned by GTE. No freeway mileage is covered by the center, although some metered ramps are Inc l uded 43


Hillsborough County Traffic Control Center A portion of the Hillsborough County traffic control system is presently housed at the City of Tampa Traffic Control Center. Aiioliier porti6n comprised of 57 intersect ions in Brandon is housed in the Hillsborough County office building In downtown Tampa However the county is presently installing Its own traffic control center which will begin operations In November 1993 Control of the 160 Hillsborough County intersections currently controlled by the City of Tampa Center will be transferred to the Hillsborough County Center at that time. The center will be located on the 23rd floor of the newly acquired Hillsborough County Building, a 28-floor structure on Kennedy Boulevard in downtown Tampa. The Hillsborough Center's network is not expected to include any city-owned signals. The center Is ex pected to be linked to the following agencies via a Wide Area Network (WAN): FOOT District Seven Office; T hirteenth Judicial Court District; Florida Highway Patrol; Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office; and City of Tampa Police A miniature redundant system is expected to be insta lled at the FOOT District Seven Office. FOOT will be allowed read-only communication access to the county's center. At present the county monitors 20 pe rmane n t count stations tied into a Concurrent Model 3210 processor at the existing City of Tampa center. However, the planned center will operate on the personal computer-based system called Management Information System for Traffic (MIST) developed by Farradyne Systems, Inc. The system will utilize three closed-circuit cameras, with an additional four planned for installation in the near future. Each camera will allow observation of 10 intersections, when operating under normal conditions. The cameras will be Interfaced with standard television monitors. Ultimately, the county plans to install video surveillance cameras on the following major routes: 44


State Highway 60 Dale Mabry Highway Hillsborough Avenue Fletcher Avenue 1 -275 Waters Avenue In addition to the existing 20 count stations, loops are being installed at 65 permanent count locations throughout the county. Transm iss ion will take place via conventional telephone lines, although the county has recently received federal funding for the design and installation of a fiber-optic system over the next two years. . The new MIST system will run on an OS/2 operating system In a Windows environment with pull-down menus. The system Is compatible with a wide variety of field equ ipmen t used by the traffic control centers of the Tampa Bay area and provides a compatible front-end interface for the UTCS system. It is also ab le to control and monitor variable message signs, HAR stations, ramp metering equipment, closed-circuit television cameras and incident management algorithms, according to Farradyne Systems, Inc. The expansion of the Hillsborough County Traffic Control Center is being financed through $950,000 of capital funds, as part of the State's Five Year Capital Program. The county is seeking an additional $3.1 million in federal fund ing for the installation of a fiber optic network over the next two years. 2. Other Tampa Bay Area Centers In addition to city and county owned centers which control traffic signal timings, Tampa Bay has several other installations and organizations which monitor traffic conditions and disperse transportation information. Four projects descr ibed here are two control system on Bay area bridges and two traffic control centers which are privately and quasi-privately owned. 45


Howard Erankland Bddge In 1982, an integrated traffic incident management system was put in place to divert traffic from the Howard Frankland Bridge to alternative bridges spanning Tampa Bay. The system included the components liste d below in Table 6 The purpose of the system was to divert traffic from the Howard Frankland Bridge to one or more alternative routes in the event of any incident or emergency. The computerized surveillance system, Surveillance and Control System (SCS), could automatically sense a disruption of traffic flow and exercise control over the system elements for traffic control. An operator also monitored incidents using mast-mounted cameras. Table 6. Components of the 1982 Howard Frankland Bridge Incident Detection and Management System . MAJOR SYSTEM COMPONENTS 113 total inductive loops for the purpose of monitoring traffic flow 8 mast-mounted cameras on the bridge 15 mechanical drum-type signs positioned before each bridge at diversion points 48 Flap-type lane control signs (red X's and green arrows) 4 matrix signs for driver Informationalong the bridge A computer system located In the Florida Highway Patrol office to integrate all the components and to inform FHP of the status of known i ncidents along the bridge The system was dismantled in 1992 ju st before construction of an additional parallel bridge. Increased capacity of the new bridge included the addition of emergency lanes, 46


and the radio frequency used for communication was reallocated by the Federal Communications Commission. FOOT is currently investigating two alternatives for reactivating a reduced version of the old system. One alternative recommends us ing a cellular telephone-based system, primar ily for com municatin g with the variable message signs. The second possibility is to use the telephone lines for motorlsi call boxes currently in use on the In terstate System. What may eventually resu lt is a system of video cameras and message signs, since no loops have been installed in the upgraded bridges. Some of the video equipment components have been transferred to the monitoring system on the Sunshine Skyway Bridge. Sunshine Skyway Bridge The Sunshine Skyway Bridge has a video camera-based, monitoring system for incident detection and management. The system components for the existing bridge are lis ted in Table 7. The bridge surveillance and control system console is shown in Figure 10. Table 7. Components of the Exist ing Sunshine Skyway Bridge Incident Detection and Management System MAJOR SYSTEM COMPONENTS 13 video cameras 6 variable m essage signs, flip-disc type 2 stop lights just before the main span on each end of the bridge 18 call boxes each hard-wired to a monitoring station 47


. I' + i I < i ; . ... ;: ,,., '.il f '.Y I , . . ' ' i ;. : : . .: ; Figure 10. Sunshine Skyway Bridge Surveillance and Control System An FOOT employee monitors the bridge 24-hours a day from a station on the northern end. Information on the physical condition of the intricate system of cables is also constantly monitored by data-logging equipment. Metro Traffic Control The Metro Traffic Control (MTC) center is located in the Marr iott Hotel of the Tampa International Airport. MTC produces spot traffic announcements for 22 of the 25 major radio stations and 3 of the 4 major television stations in the Tampa Bay area. MTC gets its information from aerial surveillance and from listening to police radio scanners. However it has no means of verifying the accuracy of its traffic reports. MTC's revenue 48


comes from sponsors whose advertisements accompany each traffic announcement. The frequency of traffic report updates varies from station to station, from once per rush hour to every 15 minutes. MTC has a direct computer link with three local radio stations and sends a report Via fax to a local Spanish-language station. MTC announcers also produce traffic reports for a voice mailbox which GTE Mobllenet cellular phone customers can access at a discount rate. MTC has two Apple llgs computers. one to store a database of traffic conditions and the other to produce a visual map of incidents. This map is fed directly to a local TV station during the evening broadcast. The computer stores ten maps of the Tampa Bay region showing major roads. The location of traffic incidents are indicated by flashing arrows. Metro Traffic Control in Tampa is a branch of a nationwide network of traffic Information services, headquartered in Houston MTC currently operates in 40 of the lar gest metropolitan areas in the United States. In 1990 MTC expanded to television with "Roadwatch America," reporting traffic conditions on a national basis. The primary audience of Roadwatch America is heavy vehicle operators . Bay Area Commuter Services In September 1988, Hernando, Hillsborough, Pasco and Pinellas counties were selected by FDOT as the site for a regi onal commuter service p ro gram that would integrate existing transportation demand management (TDM) services in the Tampa Bay area as well as promote other feasible alternatives to the single-occupant vehicle. From its central office in the Kennedy /Westshore area, Bay Area Commuter Services (BACS) serves an area containing more than 15% of the total population of Florida. The center operates a toll-free telephone customer service that provides prompt computerized information on ride-sharing and public transportation. BACS also operates a computerized ride matching program. The center has the benefit of a functioning marketing framework for the dissemination of traffic and transportation information. 49


3. Tampa Bay Interstate Study Master Plan In 1988, Greiner Engineering completed an Interstate Study Master Plan for the Tampa Bay area. The project grew out of an identified need to update the existing, and In some cases, substandard Interstate System built in the 1960's. The study was also a recognition that the Interstate System (1-4, 1-75 and 1-275) should continue to serve as the backbone of the Tampa Bay area surface transportation system. The Interstate Master Plan recommended that the following equipment listed in Tab l e 8, be Installed at locations throughout the Interstate network Table 8. Recommendations for the Tampa Bay Area Interstate Master P lan MAJOR SYSTEM COMPONENTS A traffic management ce n ter (2,000 sq. ft. minimum), operating 24 hours/day seven days per week 43 dosed clrcult television cameras, spaced at one-mile inteNals t 9 variable message signs 7 Highway Advisory Radio (HAR) transmitters 213 lane s ignal controllers 35 7 m i les of communication cable Over 2,600 inductance loop detectors, spaced 2000 feet apart 131 call boxes for an emergency roadside te lephone system 23 accident investigation s ites 23 heliports for Flight 50


4. Existing North American Traffic Operations Centers As guidance in determining the most appropriate characteristics for a future Tampa Bay Integrated Traffic Information System, basic characteristics of a selection of systems are summarized below. Detailed information on the four sites visited by CUTR staff is provided, along with a brief description of a sampling of other traffic centers and similar projects from around the u.s. Westchester Commuter Central Westchester County, immediately north of New York City, and Metro Traffic Control signed a fiVe-year contract in September 1992 to establish a center for gathering and relaying immediate traffic information about the roads and mass transit in the County. Westchester Commuter Central 0/'JCC) represents one of the first cooperative efforts in the U.S. to merge the resources of the public and private sectors into a single-source traffic information system. The 1 ,500 square-foot center, which was pre-approved by the County, is centrally located in the City of White Plains, and serves 42 separate municipalities with a combined population of approximately 850,000. Metro Traffic Control paid all start-up costs (which have not been identified), and operates and maintains WCC, approximately $6,300 per month, at no cost to Westchester County. The center provides real-time traffic information at no charge to public entities within Westchester County, but wee is concurrently marketing customized traffic information for a minimal cost to the private sector which includes corporations, radio and television stations, commercial real estate developers delivery services, and individuals in Westchester County. For example, NYNEX is currently paying $50 per month for five different informat ion services from wee. Metro Traffic Control's helicopters, planes, and land mobile units already in the New York City area, and the county's police patrol cars, buses, and motorists with cellular phones In their cars gather and send traffic informat ion to the center. This information is verified, analyzed, processed and inco rpo rated manually into concise, user-friendly reports. All the data collected at the center is disseminated to the public through radio, TV or cable 51


broadcasts, information kiosks, a "900" teleph one number and variable message signs along the roads WCC also has a working relationsh ip with Samaritania, a Boston-based company that provides roadside assistance to motorists. Through this service, the wee obtains traffic Information on the Tappan Zee Bridge and the New York State Thruway. The center has four employees. Three can handle normal rush-hour operations according to wee. Hours of operation are 5:30 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. No expansion of the current center Is expected. Up to this point, Westchester County has been quite I mpressed by the service provided by Metro Traffic Control and has even suggested private clients for the WCC Metro Traffic Control has brought its expertise in gathering and disseminating real -time traffic information, enabling wee to achieve its primary operational goals: to benefit citizens and businesses in Westchester County by reducing overall traffic congestion and commuter travel times, and improve air quality and motorist safety SmartBoute Systems. Inc. The SmartRoute Systems Inc. traffic center l ocated in Cambridge and serving the metropolitan Boston area (about 122 separate municipa liti es), is currently the only privately owned and operated traffic center in the United States. The company was formed about five years ago p rimar ily because Boston had no single comprehensive metropolitan traffic control center. This center represents a $2 million investment by SmartRoute Systems, Inc., and other private investors. The center is just under 3,000 square feet in area and has a tota l staff of 12 people. Four can operate the information center during normal rush hours. Hours of operation are 5:30a.m. to 7:00p.m., Monday through Thursday, 5:30am. to 9 :00p.m. on Fridays and noon to 9:00 p .m. on Sundays Operations and maintenance costs are approximately $1 million per year. lithe center did not also house Its corporate staff, "typical space requirement s would be about 2,000 square feet and operational costs would be substantially less, according to SmartRoute Systems. SmartRoute staff estimate that a "typical" center would require $750 ,000 to $1.0 million I n capital setup costs The center is strategically located adjacent to the regional telephone switching station. {AudioteX! is one technique SmartRoute Systems uses extensively for information dissemination.) Smart Route Systems has m inimized the 52


number of separate surveillance cameras needed by mounting them on city buildings with strategic lines of sight to major congestion areas Figure 11. SmartRoute Systems Traffic Operations Center The center, shown in Figure 1 1, receives it s info rmation from 47 slow-scan, black-and white cameras via microwave transmission and approximately 400 mobile probe vehicles via two-way radios. Pre-arranged van pool drivers and public agency express bus drivers operate the probe vehicles. Additionally, the SmartRoute Systems center monitors 350 publicly available radio frequencies for pollee, fire and ambulance. They have direct "ring-down lines to the state police communications center, two Amtrak dispatchers, the Massachusetts Highway Department radio room, and the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) operations center. Approximately 700 square miles of the metropolitan Boston area are cove red, including all major arterials, circumferentials, 53


and adjacent major feeder roads. Real-time traffic informa tion is provided over 1V (yi/CVB Channel 5 the local ABC affiliate), WOOS radio, and SmarTraveler telephone (617-3741234). Information is updated every 10 minutes. On January 13, 1993, the SmarTraveler program was initiated by SmartRoute Systems, Inc. Partners In this project include the Massachusetts Department of Transportation, Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, Massachusetts Port Authority, Massachusetts Turnpike Authority, the State Police, the Federal Highway Administration, WCVB Channel 5, WOOS Radio, the American Trucking Association Foundation, and CellularOne. Using a proprietary synchronous audiotext system the service provides real-time traffic and transit information free of charge to the public over the telephone throughout eastern Massachusetts. During the f irst 10 weeks of the service, SmarTraveler received an average of 2,000 calls pe r day. (During the blizzard weekend of March 13 and 14, SmarTraveler received 11,000 calls.) As of mid-June the average daily call count on the system had risen to about 5,000, with the current system capable of handling up to 40,000 calls per day in a market area of about 400,000 commuters. A recent survey was conducted among users of the system which indicated 82"A. found the service "very useful", and 96% of the users changed the time, route, or mode of their travel due to the information they received. The federal government is providing $1.5 million for the year long operational test, which has a total price tag of about $3.5 million. An independen t evaluation of the operational test will also be conducted . SmartRoute Systems, Inc., attributes the early success of their system to: accomplishing their goal of relieving public agencies of traff ic information gathering and dissemination duties which they wished to relinquish; inst an t credibility gained from sponsorship by the major public transportation agencies, including the Governor's office; and a sustained marketing and education effort in order to build consumer awareness and acceptance as well as modify travel behavior in a positive fashion. Minnesota GuideStar Minnesota GuldeStar's mission and strategic themes provide a framework for developing a statewide intelligent transportation system. The Guide Star program was conceived from 54


discussions that began in 19891nvolving the Minnesota Department of Transportation, the Center for Transportation Studies at the University of Minnesota, and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Program initiatives have been built around multi-modal solutions, customer involvement, and public-private partnerships. The Minnesota DOT traffic management center is the communications center for managing traffic in the Minneapolis/Sl Paul area of about 2.5 million residents and over 100 separate municipalities. As the center Is integrated with the GuideStar program, the foundation to create an advanced traffic management and information system for the state will be established. This system is envisioned to expand and subdivide, eventually linking the entire state. The 10,000 square foot center currently has 37 employees involved in design, operations and maintenance. The center has outgrown this original building constructed in. 1972, and a new facility is planned to be added in about five years. The dozen Guidestar personnel are currently not fully integrated with the center, nor are they housed In the same facility. Operations and maintenance costs for the center are high, about $7 million per year. The center utilizes 108 video surveillance cameras, 400 ramp meters, 3,000 loop detectors, and aerial surveillance from two rad io station aircraft. About 40% of the metropolitan freeway system is covered by the fixed in f ormation gathering Infrastructure. Information is disseminated over the radio stations, two cable TV stations that include video feeds from the surveillance cameras and 30 variable message signs. One radio station, KVEB 88.5 FM, is shared with the Minneapolis public school system. The 2-3 minute public radio station b roadcasts occur every 10 minutes during the weekday peak traffic periods. The original center was established from a federal grant and continues to receive a substantial federal subsidy. Since the GuldeStar program began in 1989, three major advanced technology projects have been initiated: Genesis, Travlink, and Autoscope. Genesis is a joint venture project between Motorola and Minnesota DOT which began in September 1992 under a $390,000 federal grant. Personal Communication Devices (PCDs), hand-held units being developed by Motorola, are to provide real-time highway and transit information. Costs for these prototype units are estimated at $2,000 to $6,000 each depending on the level of sophistication, and major employers will be approached 55


to encourage and perhaps subsidize purchase by their employees. The program recently received a $3 million grant from the FHWA IVHS Operational Test prog ram. The operational test for Travlink is scheduled to begin in Spring 1994. This project will be a joint effort among Westinghouse, US West, 3M, and the Minneapolis-St. Paul Reg i ona l Transit Board. This project will in vo lve transit vehicles that only travel the 1 authorized vehicle lane. About 800 homes will be equipped with a videotext communication system and about 20 information kiosks will be instal led at major public facilities in the corridor. The purpose of this effort will be to increase transit ridership by providing real-time ride-sharing information and highway travel times. Autoscope cameras use machine vision techniques to process a digitized image and emulate the output of inductance loop detectors. Autoscope cameras are capable of counting traffic and measuring vehicle speeds by lane Invented at the University of Minnesota, they cost $20,000 to $30,000 per unit and have been installe d along 1-394 to conduct continuous travel time studies. The cost-effectiveness of th is techno logy will be evaluated. The effectiveness of the traffic management center and GuideStar programs are constantly being monitored and evaluated. Recent in-house reports have shown that traffic accidents have been reduced by 25%, and travel speeds have increased by 33%, as a direct resu lt of the program Los Angeles ATSAC Operations Center The Automated Traffic Surveillance and Control (ATSAC) center is loca ted four stories below street level in the new City Hall building in downtown Los Angeles. The city embarked on its ambitious traffic control system to handle traffic conditions during the 1984 Olympics, and has expanded it considerably since then. A total of $47 million in federal funding has been spent on the system over the last three years, more than any other traffic management project in the United States. According to industry sources, this operations center may also be the most technologically advanced traffic management system currently operating in the U.S. An expert system" to handle inciden t detection 56


and management is now being installed and tested and Is expected to be fully operational by the end of 1993. The ATSAC center has a staff of n ine, housed in 2,200 square feet, but will soon be taking over adjacent office space and expanding to about 5,000 square feet. ATSAC currently controls 915 (23%) of the city's 4,000 traffic signals. A total of 1,650 (40%) signals will ultimately be integrated into the ATSAC operations center. The ATSAC operations center automatically adjusts the s i gnal timing in response to both the conditions at the intersection and according to system-wide conditions. A few dozen "intelligent" traffic signals that communicate with each other are also located around the L.A. Coliseum. These signals perform regional pattern matching to detect specia l traffic situations. All maintenance of the high-tech equipment i s performed by city employees. The nearby cities of Pasadena and Anaheim have traffic control centers, however ATSAC has no direct data link with them The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) operates a traffic control center across the street f rom the building in which ATSAC Is housed. This control center monitors the freeways, whereas ATSAC is responsible for the surface streets. The Caltrans center controls ramp metering, highway advisory radio, variable message signs and produces the map for the "Freeway Vision cable TV service. There is a direct modem link between the Caltrans and ATSAC centers. A variety of transmission media is utilized for communication betWeen the traffic controllers and ATSAC such as fiber-opt i c cable, RF microwave, copper cable and leased phone lines, depending on the dis tance required for tr ansmission. City engineers are currently working on compressed video technology to transmit video images over coaxial cable where fiber-optic trun ks are unavailable. Within the operations center, video information displays are updated every 60 seconds. Vehicle speeds, volumes, queue lengths and travel time delay can also be color coded on the roadway network image. The traffic contro l software is based on the UTCS software, developed by FHWA, which utilizes a centralized cont rol algorithm. 57


Public traffic info rmation is available to commuters via three different radio frequencies. "Airport Radio" plays on 530 AM, Caltrans iuns a HAR frequency at 1610 AM, and the city operates another HAR service at 1520 AM. Eventually, the "expert system" will automatically generate messages and voice for the HAR. The LA. Smart Corridor project centers around the Santa Monica Freeway (Interstate 10), from Los Angeles International Airport to downtown Los Angeles. The freeway carries about 340,000 vehicles per day; five arte rial streets parallel the freeway. The objective of the smart Corridor" project is to divert motorists off the congested Santa Monica Freeway on to the parallel arterials using r adio broadcasts and variable message signs. City eng i neers believe that because of the phenomenally high volume to capacity ratio, operating conditions can be improved significantly by diverting 10% of the traffic onto local arterials. Caltrans assists in this effort by conducting coordination workshops for the local media to Induce them to provide alternative routes in their traffic broadcasts. Intersections which lead to the freeway ramps have low-range HAR transmitters, variable message signs and t raffic signals tied int o the ATSAC operations center. A comprehensive evaluation of the Smart Corridor project will be conducted in late 1993. This evaluation will be performed from both the operator and user perspective. The goal Is to divert 10% of the drivers off I n te rstate 10. Atlanta, GA In preparation for the 1996 Olympics, the first-fully integrated computerized traffic and transportation management system is being installed in Atlanta. This system will enable traffic managers from local governments to send and receive information through a networked communications system Georgia DOT has secured $70 million In funding ($12 million in state and local funds, $58 million from federal sources) for this project. The system will cover f ive counties and six cities and will include 600 "intelligent'' traffic signals, video surveillance cameras, variable message signs and numerous loop detectors. A $13.2 million system design contract was recently awarded to TRW, Inc. from Cleveland. 58


Columbus. OH Developed in 1990, the "Paving the Way" traffic management program was used on the 7.5-mile, Inters tate 71 reconstruction north of downtown Columbus, Ohio, to provide traveler information to drivers navigating through construction zones. The three-year $4 6 million program received 90% of its funding from FHWA and 10% from the Ohio DOT. This public Information network issued press releases every day to 70 agencies. Three park-n-ride lots and 46 peak direction bus trips were added, along with an "800" number providing car and van pool information. Complaints to the city and Ohio DOT were considerably reduced as a result of the project. Sao Jose. CA Beginning in 1988, a six-year implementation schedule for the Traffic Signal Management Program costing $12 million was undertaken by the city. A t otal of 526 in tersections were combined into 54 control groups. The communications network was comprised of a mixture of city-owned and leased telephone lines. The program is being enhanced to inc lude closed-circuit television to p rov i de real-time display of c ritical in tersections. Baltjmore/washjogton, D.C. The Chesapeake Highway Advisories Routing Traffic (CHART) is Maryland's entry into advanced traffic management systems. The perennial, seasonal traffic jam between the Baltimore-Washington metropolitan area and the ocean resorts of Maryland's Eastern Shore was the catalyst for this program. "Reach the Beach" provides real-time motorist information through variable message signs, HAR, an "800" telephone number and a roving sound truck patrolling the corridor. CHART is also spearheading one of the first network approaches to linking multiple traffic operation centers along a long (125-mile) travel corridor. When fully operational In 1994, the statewide operations center will function 24 hours a day, seven days a week, requiring 12 operators in the control room. 59


Orange County. CA In late 1991, Orange County approved a plan to build and operate a state-of-the art traffic operations center using closed-circuit televisions, ramp meters, freeway detectors, variable message signs and freeway serv ice patrols. The system i s planned to be fully operational by the mid-1990's. The center will act as a single, county-wide freeway operations center staffed by Caltrans and the California Highway Patrol. The center will manage and control all existing freeways In the county, new publlc freeways, and proposed public and p rivate toll roads. Capital costs for the system are estimated at $25 to $30 million, and annual maintenance and operations costs are expected to be about $12.4 million. Oakland County. Ml The first phase of an Integrated traffic operations center in Troy, Michigan, was completed in October 1992 for the Oakland County Road Commission This traffic operations center forms the first part of a five-year, $70 million IVHS program called FAST-TRAC. The traffic operations center was designe d by Rockwell International Corporation's Autonetics Strategic Systems Divislqn Real-time traffic ro uting is provided through a system comprised of a network of roads ide infrared beacons, specially equipped vehicles with on-board computer systems and a centralized computer system link ing the two. Nort hern virginia The Virginia Department of Transportation's traffic management system is a computerized highway surveillance and control system that monitors 30 interstate miles on 1-395, 1-495 and 1-66. The system consists of 550 l oop detectors, 48 closed-circuit cameras and 100 variable message signs. The center, located in Arlington, Virginia, operates seven days a week from 5:00 a.m. to midnight. Its staff includes five operators, two superviso rs, and seven field technicians. Virginia DOT plans to extend the system another 36 miles, and incorporate the Autoscope monitoring component. 60


New York City A system of traffic sensors and smart t r affic s i gnals costing $100 million is bei ng p l anned for the New York City area. This summer the first phase of the system Is being Installed In Manhattan: It involves the installation of 1 100 elect r omagnetic sensors linked to 3,000 traffic signals to better control the 880 000 vehicles that enter the borough on an average day. This system will be one of the most elaborate and expensive systems In the world. After spending $45 million in Manhattan, the city plans to spend $50-$60 million to expand the network to the Bronx, Brooklyn and Queens by 1996. City officials are hoping that by the end of the decade, motorists may be using computers in their vehic l es, homes, and offices to plan the fastest and most convenient routes around and through the c ity. San Antonio. TX The Bendix Field Engineering Corporation un d er contract with Texas Department of H i ghways and Public Transportation ( D istrict 15, San Antonio) has r ecently begun developing a Freeway Traffic Management System fo r the c ity of San Antonio. This $32 m illi on, effort will cover 191 freeway miles, and inc l udes a 30,000 square-foot control center. The hardware for the c o ntrol ce n ter will include 72 video mon i tors and 18 operator workstations The system will consist of a 50-mile fiber-optic commun i cat i ons network, 85 miles of commun ic at i ons cab l e link ing system components, 52 video surveillance cameras, 51 variable message s i gns 73 l ane contro l signals and 536 loop detectors. D. Funding Option s Typical so u rces for financ i ng traveler i nfo r mat ion and traffic management projects include federal state and l oca l highway and transportat i on improvement funds In f ormation obtained through site visits by CUTR staff i ndicate that traff i c control centers receive funding from a variety of differen t sources, i nclud i ng regiona l ent i ties and the private sector. 6 1


1. Federal Funding Part B of Title VI, "Research," of the lntermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) Is titled the "Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems Act of 1991." This portion of the ISTEA define s ways of using federal funds for development of traveler information and traffic management systems. Section 6055 "Technical, Pla n ning and Operat i onal Testing Project Assistance states "the Secretary shall assist state and local officials In developing plans for area wide traffic management control centers among other projects This section enables the Secretary to make grants to state and local governments for feasibility and planning studies tor development and implementation of NHS." Any inter agency traffic and i ncident management entity, including independent authorities contracted by a state for imp l ementat i on of a traffic management system, are elig i ble to receive fede r a l ass i stance for deve l opment of an IVHS program. Section 6058 "Funding authorizes $71 mill i on for FY92 and $86 million for FY93 through FY97 for the IVHS Corridors program; and $23 million for FY92 and $27 m i llion for FY93 through FY97 for other IVHS act i vit i es. The federal share cannot exceed 80% on any IVHS projects except those that are determined to be innovative, high-risk operat i onal or ana l ytical tests that do n o t att r act non-Federal commitments but are dete r mined by the Secretary as having significant potentia l to help accomplish l ong-term goa l s ." I n addition to Pa rt B of T i t l e VI, the I STEA ident i fies three other sources of funding for projects and activities that fall with i n commonty accep ted definitions of traveler information and traffic management systems. They are the Nat i onal Highway Systems (NHS), the Surface Transportation Program (STP), and the Congest i on Mitigat io n and A i r Quality I mprovement (CMAQ) program. I STEA Section 1006(d) cites operat i ona l imp r ovements as eligible for funding with NHS funds. Section 1005, paragraph (f) of ISTEA defines operationa l improvement as 62


"a capital Improvement for Installation of traffic surveillance and control equipment, computerized signal systems, incident management programs, and transportation demand management facilities, strategies and programs." In addition, NHS funds can be used for "startup costs for traffic management and controls such that costs are limited to the time period necessary to achieve operable status but not to exceed two years following the date of the project approval, If such funds are not used to replace existing funds. Startup costs for tra ffic management and control are defined in Section 1005 as "Initial costs (including labor costs, administration costs, cost of ut/f/tfes, and rent) for Integrated traffic control systems, Incident management programs, and traffic control centers." Section 1007 of ISTEA describes the STP. Paragraph (1) under "E lig ib le Projects" notes that operational improvements are eligible for STP fund ing. Paragraph (6) lists "capital and operating costs for traffic monitoring, management, and control facilities and programs" as eligible. There are no time limitat ions for STP funds. Section 1008 of ISTEA describes the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program. Types of projects eligible for use of these f und s are cited in Section 108(1)(1)(A) of the Clean Air Act which lists transportation control measures that include "traffic flow improvement projects that achieve emission reductions ." 2. State and Local Funding State and local funding sources will certainly be required at least for continuing operations and maintenance activ iti es. The prioritization of federal dollars within states and metropolitan regions has caused state and local agencies to assume much of the burden 63


for initial construction and implementation. The money can be raise d from traditional revenue sources, such as general taxes, special bonding initiatives or local gasoline taxes. 3. Private Funding Private companies may work jointly with public agencies or provide substantial funding through user fees. Quasi-public transportation authorities, such as ports or toll roads, that can benefit from a regional traffic information center could contribute to startup and operational costs. Tampa Bay area commuters who participated in the focus group Interview sessions indicated, however, that they are not willing to pay for real-time traffic information through direct user fees. In cases where public agencies contribute no funding whatsoever, it Is recommended that the public agency still must have an ancho r relationship" with the project. One such . relationship could be permission to use the agency's name in marketing. T raveler information and traffic management systems will always be of interest to public transportation agencies because these systems have a wide public benefit. Informed travelers who avoid congested routes (possibly by us ing transit) provide a system-wide benefit because overall congestion is reduced. In ad dition, an early findings rep ort conducted by SmartRoute Systems indicates that the public has more confidence in traffic informa tion from an identifie d public agency 4. Case Studies An on-going debate exists among the proponents of traveler in formation technologies on the merits of public versus private ownership of various ATIS services. The only consensus reached so far Is that there is no one configuration which works best in every context. The following case studies present different models of ownership of ATIS functions. The Westchester Commuter Central project is unique in that the traffic control center Is paid for almost entirely by private funds. Metro Traffic Control paid for the construction and operation of the center. Operational costs run about $75,000 annually. Westchester 64


County's only financial contribution is one county employee on staff at the center as a liaison to public agencies. Westchester County received a grant from the New York State Department of Transportation to pay for this employee's salary. Metro Traffic Control hopes to recoup their Investment outlay by selling the traffic information to local media outlets, large employers and other customers. The Boston SmarTraveler project Is funded by almost equal port ions of public and private monies. Like Metro Traffic Control i n Westchester County, SmartRoute Systems plans to recoup their investment by selling their traffic info rm ation database to a variety of customers. The company will be flexible in its response to varying degrees of public and private financial support. Eventually, the company hopes that projects such as "SmarTraveler Systems will be supported entirely by the private sector. However, SmartRoute .Systems is willing to accept public funding while the commercial market develops. The Minnesota Traffic Management Center was bui lt in 1973 mostly with federal funds as part of FHWA's Urban Corridor Management program. Eventually, the annual operation and maintenance costs were transferred to the Minnesota DOT. These costs run approximately $7 million per year. GuideStar grew out of the research division of the Traffic Management Center and is now a separate entity. GuideStar is an amalgam of IVHS.related projects and will use a 3.5-mile section of 1-394 as a lab oratory for testing new IVHS technologies. GuideStar receives substantial federal funding approximately $9 million per year from the FHWA's IVHS Operational Test program. The $47.2-million L.A. Smart Corridor project was financed through a mix of Federal, State and loca l funds. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) contributed $13 million. The MTA is the resu lt of a merger between the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission and the Southern California Rapid Transit District. Smart Corridor is but one of the many projects funded by the MTA s pecia l assessment half-cent sales tax. Caltrans contributed $12.4 million as part of its Tran sportation Systems Management program. Seven million dollars came from the Petroleum Violation Escrow Account (PVEA), a fund administered jo intly by the state of California and the U.S. Department of Energy into which companies pay compensation for environmental 65


pollution. The Smart Corridor project also received around $1. 0 million from developers to assist in mitigation of the traffic impact of their projects, as required by city statute. The City of Los did not contribute directly to this $47.2 million total. I nstead, Los Angeles DOT bears the full cost of operation and maintenance of the Smart Corridor project and ATSAC control center. This money comes out of the city general fund and could not be quantified at this time One reason why the Westchester County project and Boston SmarTraveler can rely so heavily on private, instead of public funds, is that their traffic information collection techniques rely almost exclusively on information collection techniques traditionally used by private agencies, such as aerial surveillance, monitoring of po lice radios and fleets of private "probe vehicles. In contrast, a significant portion of data collection for both the Minnesota Traffic Management Center and the Los Angeles ATSAC Control Center are in-pavement detectors. Both projects are supported almost entirely through federal funds 66


IV. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT In addition to studying available evaluatlon results of A TIS projects around the country, this project used several techniques to gauge public perception concerning a real-time traffic information center for the Tampa Bay area. Consensus-building techniques included assembling an advisory committee composed of intended users of the system and conducting focus group interview sessions with both "commercial" and commuter" users of real-time traffic information. By listening to advisory committee and focus group members, the particular characteristics of the Tampa Bay metropolitan area were brought into each stage of the conceptual design process. A. Advisory Committee Input To solicit public participation and enhance public awareness of a regional traffic information center, CUTR formed an advisory committee consisting of inten ded users of a Tampa Bay real-time traffic information system: local radio and television stations, transit agencies, transportation management associations, taxi companies, delivery companies and the police, traffic engineering and road maintenance divisions of the local govern men ts in the region. Advisory committee members are listed in Appendix A. CUTR conducted four advisory committee meetings throughout the year-long contract period. At each meeting, CUTR staff presented their most recent findings and received comments from advisory committee members. The follow ing points have emerged as items of consensus: Information Collection: Use resources currently available in order to save money. Traffic Management Center: I nformation processing functions (the "brain") and dissemination functions (the mouth") should be performed by the same organization. 67


A central informat ion collection point is needed that is "politically neutral," such as a private or quasi-private organization. There have historically been problems with the kind of interagency cooperation that is necessary for a regional system. The center should be operated by a private vendor. Concerns about accountability and accuracy could be addressed In the contractual agreement between the public agency and the private vendor. Informat ion Dissemination: Public perception of the accuracy of traffic reports is essential for widespread support for the system. The center should improve the level of detail and accuracy of reported information by cross-checking information from various sources. B. Focus Group Interview Sessions The focus group inteNiew sessions provided an opportunity to obtain qualitative feedback on the relevance, basic features and performance characteristics of the proposed Integ rated Transportation Information C enter Table 9 lists the primary questions posed during the focus group inteNiew sessions. To select the focus group participants, CUTR staff Initially identified over 100 potential focus group member organizations, then divided the list into two groups according to the organizations' need for traffic inf ormation, i.e. "comme rcial" and "commuter" users. Some organization fell into both categories. An example is GTE, which needs t raffic information for both its employees and its fleet of vehicles.) CUTR staff then i dentified indivi duals from those organizations who were willing to participating in the sessions. The focus group interviews sessions were conducted on July 30, 1993, at the Center for Urban Transportation Research on the University of South Florida main campus. Ten people participated in the Commuter Group session; 11 people partic ipated in the 68


Commercial Group session. Participants are listed in Appendix B. Both sessions were videotaped in their entirety. In addition, CUTR research staff were assigned to take detailed written notes. The participants of each group were given a brief questionnaire in order to get them thinking about their need for real-time traffic informat ion. A copy of the questionnaires are contained in Appendix C. Table 9. Primary Questions for Focus Group Interviews PRIMARY QUESTIONS What is the perception of traffic conditions in the Tampa Bay area. overall and during rush hours? What are the most appropriate media for disseminating Information? What portion of the cost could be expected to be bome directly by the public? How does the public rate existing means of receiving traffic information? What are essential features of real-time traffic information broadcasts? What are major congestion areas In the Tampa Bay area? 1. Commuter Group The Commuter Group session was conducted f rom 9:00 a.m. to 12 noon on July 30 1993. Ten people participated in the session; they are listed in Appendix B. Perception of Traffic Conditions Rush hour traffic conditions were rated poor to fair, even when compared to other larger cities. They think that there is no l onge r any s ig nificant degree of seasonality to the 69


problem and that traffic conditions are poor even in the summer. During rush hours the traffic seems to progress in waves, separated by lull periods. Timing can therefore make a significant difference in the degree of delay experienced. A five minute delay in leaving home in the morning can result in an additional 15-to-20 minute delay. Because of the high volumes, the traffic situation is extreme l y volatile, with any minor I ncident resulting in a major back-up. In addition to the morning and evening rush hours there is also a distinct midday rush hour period, lasting from about midday to 2:00 p.m. Participants rated overall traffic conditions as poor and traffic congestion as continuous. Several participants noted that they would prefer to dr i ve during rush-hour, since the rush hour drivers are normally more experienced Participants noted that most serious accidents take place during the off-peak period. Existing Traffic Reports The car radio is the most popu l ar me d ium used for accessing information on traffic conditions. A few participants also tune in to te l evision broadcasts before leaving home in the mornings. Partic i pants found b r oadcasts to be generally useful, notwithstanding the perceptions indicated in Table 10. Table 10. Focus Group Perceptions of Existing Traffic Reports PERCEPTIONS OF FOCUS G ROUPS Traffic reports are not frequent and timely e n o ugh, and participants are unable to get "What they need, when they n eed it Commuters sometimes hear news of a congestio n area or incident after they are already &luck In traffic Traffic reports are often lacking in geographic detail since they must cover such a large area Traffic reports are often limited to the interstates, excluding major arterials Participants expressed some skepticism conceming accuracy of traffic reports over the radio 70


Traffic reports are viewed as much more valuab le in the morning before leaving for work. Only three of the ten participants ind i cated that they sometimes tune In to evening traffic report broadcasts before leaving their place of work. Participants revealed that traffic reports are a lso useful during the weekend, though not with the same degree of urgency. Most of the more popul ar rad i o stations would notify their liste ning audiences of special events or unusual traffic incidents. Informatio n on Alternative Routes Most participants responded that they apprec ia ted being advised to take alternative routes, however, they would prefer to find their own route rather than follow the advice given in the broadcast. One reason given was that it was likely that everyone else tuned In to the broadcast would try to use the alternat iv e route, thus simply transferring the congestion problem elsewhere. Some participants felt that they would be more r esponsive to the broadcast if they were in a familiar a r ea and had some know l edge of the alternat ive ro ute. They would also be willing to respond to such advice at any time, regardless of the purpose of their trip. However, advice on alternative routes should include detailed, descriptive information on the routes recommended. . Desjred Features of a Traffic Report The following features were seen by participants as the most im portant features of a good traffic report. They are li sted in the order of i mportance as perce ived by the group: 1. Broad, but Specific Coverage: The group felt that a traffic report should be regional in its coverage but sho ul d contain detailed geographical information. The main broadcast should be broken into segments each specific to a well-defined, geographical area that wou l d be i dentified before each segment of the report begins 71


2. In-depth Description of Incident: The report should be specific enough to describe the nature of the Incident causing the delay. This will allow the traveller to make his/her own judgement as to the extent of the resulting delay. 3. Indications or Operating Speeds: Some indicat ion of average operating speed should be included in the report. The group suggested that a speed Index would provide an indication of the degree of congestion. 4. Projected Delay: The group expressed a desire for the broadcast to give some indicat ion of the expected delay that would result from an incident. 5. Suggested Alternative Routes: Some information on alternative routes should be included in the report . . 6. Length of Traffic Backup: The extent of the existing traffic back-up resulting from the incident would be useful in deciding on alternative routes. The group felt that the personality behind the report was not important, although It was agreed that some reports are more professionally done than others. They cited clarity, depth and accuracy as important considerations. Timjng and Frequency of Regorts The group felt that there was a need for a radio station solely dedicated to disseminating traffic information. Ideally, it would operate around-the-clock, seven days per week. A bare minimum service would be one that offers traffic reports every ten minutes during the three daily rush-hour periods, Monday through Friday. It would also include notices concerning special events. At the middle of the spectrum would be a system that provides a continuous update on traffic conditions only during rush hours, Monday through Friday. 72


Communication Media Despite the importance attached to the car radio as a means of disseminating traffic information, the group felt that other media were necessary to ensure that traffic information reaches as wide an audience as possible. They suggested the following media as alternatives to the car radio that they might also find useful: variable message signs; newspaper articles for Information on special events and road construction; and an "BOO" telephone number with a menu driven system that would allow access to information on specific routes. Willingness to Pay The group was hard-pressed to identify conditions under which they would be willing to pay directly for traffic information. However, participants recognized that a portion of the cost of a traffic information system must be borne by the public, either directly through user fees or indirectly through taxes. One suggestion was that major employers underwrite the cost, since they would benefrt from increased punctuality and productivity of their employees. Mgjor Congestion Areas The following were cited as some of the most serious congestion points in the Tampa Bay area: the Ulmerton merge; the 1-4/1-275 interchange; the Fowler Ave./1-275 Interchange; Dale Mabry Highway.; and the intersection of Florida Ave. and Bearss Ave. 73


Additional Comments The group appeared to share the opinion that although the proposed Integrated Transportation Information System would provide a useful service for the travelling public, it was at best a piecemeal solution to the problem of congestion on the road network. In particular, they expressed a desire to see an expansion in transit service: increased operating hours, increased number of routes and linkage between Pinellas and Hillsborough counties. 2. Commercial Group The Commercial Group session was conducted from 2:00 p.m to 5:00 p.m on July 30, 1993. Eleven people participated in the session; they are li sted in Appendix B. Participants were asked to present their opinions and perspectives not from their personal point of view, but from the standpoint of their affiliated business organization or agency. The group felt that reliable traffic information was impo rtan t and, in some cases, critical to the productivity of their organization. Perceptions of Traffic Conditions The group's assessment of traffic conditions during rush hours varied from poor to fair, with one participant expressing the opin ion that it was very poor. Participants said that the main cause of traffic congestion was the archaic conditions of the highway system. One participant noted that congestion was worse on Tuesdays than any other day of the week. Participants also cited buses stopping at pick-up points as a major cause of traffic back-up and delay along certain routes. Participants also noted that problems are compounded by the absence of alternative routes. Traffic conditions overall were generally rated fair to good, although two participants rated them very poor. Participants also noted that most serious acc idents took place during the off-peak period of the day. 74


Existing Traffic Reports Similar to the commuter group, the most popular medium for traffic reports among this group Is radio, although some of the participants did convey that they would use the televis ion report if i t was available. Accuracy was seen as an important requirement, but the perception was that traffic reports were usually late or after the fact. Desired features of a Traffic Report The following features were viewed as essential features of a traffic report and are listed in order of importance as seen by the group: 1/2. Location of Incident/Cause of Delay : The group felt that specific details on the location of the incident and cause of the delay are the most essential feature of a traffic report. 3/4. Degree of B lockage/Time of Incident: There was some disagreement as to which of these two features is next in importance Some felt that they would be able to de duce the amount of delay involved if they were notified as to how many lanes were b locked Others felt that it would be sufficient to be given the time of the incident and be left to make an estimation of the time required for the situation to return to normal. 5. Nature of Incident: In order for the traveller to estimate the degree of resulting delay, the group fe lt that it was necessary to receive some Informat ion on the nature of the incide n t or cause of delay. 6. Other Features: Projected clearance time, the length of the resulting backup and instructi ons on alternative routes were felt to be important. The opinion was expressed, for example, that there are so few alternative routes available as to render this in f o rmat ion virtually useless in many cases. 75


Timing and Frequency of Reports The group felt that a dedicated radio station would be an ideal and justifiable option, broadcasting traffic information 24-hours a day, seven days a week. As a minimum, participants felt that accurate, information on major inci dents as they occur would be sufficient to make traffic reports useful to their organization. At the middle of the spectrum would be updates every 10 to 15 minutes, from 6:00a.m. to 6:00p.m., Monday through Friday. In addition, updates on special events or Incidents should be broadcast on weekends as the need arises. Communication Media The medium of choice is the radio. Participants felt that by f ar it is the most convenient and affordable alternative. Variable message signs were also cited by representatives of . the taxi and limous ine services as useful and helpful to their drivers. Willingness to Pay In general, the group was not very enthusiastic in their r esponse to the notion of having to pay directly for traffic information. To some, though the idea of paying for commercial slots In a radio broadcast was more acceptable. Major Congestion Areas The general perception of the group was that traffic congest i on was widespread; but they listed the following locations as being most severe: Dale Mabry Highway; Fowler Ave, from 1 to the USF campus; 1-4/1 interchange; Courtney Campbell Causeway on the Hillsborough County side; Access routes to the beaches in Pinellas County. 76


A map of major congestion areas, as indicated by the Commercial and Commuter groups, is shown in Figure 12. Additional Comments Although radio was by far the most popular medium the group suggested that a conglomeration of diffe r ent means may be necessary in order to fully realize the true worth of the proposed Integrated Transportat i on Information System Some suggested a lV monitor with a col or-coded map showing the location and severity of inciden t s. Variable message signs we r e a l so mentioned as a useful communicat ion medium, particularly to cab drivers and delivery trucks. It was suggested that large private co r porations be solicited to assist in meeting the costs of operations, since they would benefit f rom increased punctuality and productivity of their emp l oyees. 77


N r tCAI.I I N .1.\ILE$ -:;rI& -r --: ---n-< -rr\ -I ., ..... I i / Q I ; I I ,! 0'/\.U _I c c:urn I Legend 1. Ulm e rton Merge 2 1-411-275 Interchange "mallunction junction" 3 Fowler Avenue 11-275 Interchang e 4 Dal e Mabry Highway 5 lnlerseo ll o n of F l orida Avenue end Bearass A venue 6. Courtney Campbell Cause way on t h e Hillsborough sid e. 7 Acoeaa routes t o th e beaches in Pinellas County Figur e 12 Major Cong e st i on Are a s as Indi ca t e d by Focu s Gro up P a rticipan ts


V. RECOMMENDED SYSTEM Consistent with the consensus reached by the project advisory committee, this section contains the recommendation for a regional real-time traffic information center for ttie Tampa Bay Area The proposed name of the center i s the 'Traffic V i sion Center or "TVC thus emphas i zing a real time reg i onal congestion map as one of the center s primary outputs The name is open to revision, as p art of a metropolitan area-wide market i ng prog ram. The recommended traffic information system contained in this report and illustrated in Figure 13, conceptually the same as the Surveillance, Commun i cations and Control (SC&C) system included in the Tampa Interstate Mas t er Plan freeway traffic management and incident detection/response system A. System Description 1. Data Collection Every existing source of traffic informat ion in the Tampa Bay area i s included in the schematic design (Figure 13) in order to m a intain the autonomy and i nfrastructure already established for each source. There is a wide range of detail in the data collected by various sources, ranging from real-time traffic coun t s collected by the city and county owned traffic control centers to the anecdotal reports on areas of traffic congestion provided by Metro Traffic Control. Some pre-processing at the source points i s requi r ed. It is recommended that a computer t erminal be installed at the locations noted below, linked by a narrow-band transm i ssion med i um suc h as coax i al cab l e allowing two-way communicatio n with the proposed center. Entry of observed congested areas and incidents should be performed manually unless otherwise noted 79


COLLECTION & PROCESSING DISSEMI NAT ION FOOT ' TraveiUng ' City ofT-a Pinellas County ' ' I SACS ' ' I ' --------., 1.4nd Mobile Probes / St. I'-..; :---, ----I I VMS TampaPotce I I I I Traffic ' ' Vision c-' I HAR .... L .......... ----I Center I (lVC) I I v -ough HARTline AVL C8i!On caiJ.tn ____ j__ -... CO.n!y I Television ' --------' I ' 1' HIOsborough County SUnahlna Skyway Bridge I Bridgo W#l --....... ........... Radio I ......... r.- -------------------- ConltOI I ' L ...... .! .. -----I GTEMobilnel ._ _ __________ _ Figure 13. Schematic Diagram of the Recommend System 80


City and County Owned Traffic Control Centers It is recommended that the city and county owned traffic control centers be linked to the regiona l center via coaxial cable. Software must be Installed at all five city and county owned centers to convert the data obtained from loop detectors to reports of traffic congestion. The Management Informatio n System for Traffic (MIST) available from Traffic Control Technologies, a subsidiary of Farradyne Systems, Inc., can perform this function The Hillsborough County Traffic Control Center will use a personal computer-based version of MIST when the newly-constructed center begins operations In November of 1993. The existing city and county owned traffic control centers in the Tampa Bay area are as follows: City of Tampa Pinellas County City of Clearwater City of St. Petersburg Hillsborough County Hillsborough County The planned Hillsborough County Traffic Control Center will operate up to seven closed circuit television cameras. Ultimately, the county plans to install video surveillance cameras on State Road 60, Dale Mabry Highway, Hillsborough Avenue, Fletcher Avenue, 1-275 and Waters Avenue The TVC will be linked to the Hillsborough County's fiber-optic cable wide area network, so that it will have direct video access to these cameras. Flodda Department of Transportation FOOT maintains a number of pe rmanent count stations at various locations around the Tampa Bay area. Information from these stations can also be integrated into the proposed surveillance system. A redundant center with a read-on ly data link to Hillsborough County will also be housed at FOOT. 81


Sunshine Skyway and Howard Frank land Bridges FOOT operates the Sunshine Skyway Bridge surveillance and control system. FOOT will operate the surveillance and control functions on the Howard Frankland Bridge If plans for reviving such a .system are impleme nted Florida Highway Patrol The Florida Highway Patrol obtains its information by monitoring the emergency channel of CB radios and by call-ins from their patrol cars and motorists. FHP will also be opening a new command center imm ediately adjacent to the Florida DOT District Seven Offices in Tampa. HARlline Automatic Vehicle Loca tion System HARlline has recently installed an Automatic Vehicle location system that will allow real time monitoring of the operations of its fleet of 172 buses. The trans it agency conducted a performance test of the system on its entire route n etwork on August 9, 1993 The system should be operational by October 1993. Th i s system can provide a useful source of traffic information if integrated into the p ro posed system. Metro Traffic Control Metro Traffic Control operates a surveillance center located at the Marriott Hotel of the Tampa International Airport. Its information is ob tained f rom aerial observation and monitoring police radio frequencies Metro Traffic Control already maintains a database of congested areas and traffic incidents This database should be linked directly with the lVC. Land Mobile Probes Five business in the Tampa Bay area, previously listed in Table 1, have vehicles which traverse the road network, assist stranded motorists and serve as a source of Information 82


on traffic congestion. The TVC will establish a dedicated phone line to receive traffic reports via cellular phone from these probe vehicles. TVC staff will record these reports Into the TVC's database. Citizen Call-In The TVC will institute two telephone numbers (one 800" number and the other with toll free access by cellular phones) for motorists to call in and report traffic incidents. TVC staff will record these reports into the TVC's database. Additional Sources One of results of the focus group sessions was a list ing of locations perceived as the most congested areas in the Tampa Bay metropolitan area, listed in Table 11 and previously illustrated in Figure 12. It is recommended that each municipal center fully evaluate those locations which it deems most critical and ensure that surveillance and data collection is sufficient at these particula r locations. Table 11, Major Congestion Areas as Indicated by Focus Group Participants PERCEIVED CONGESTED AREAS (in no order of severity) Utmenon merge 1-4/l-275 interchange ("malfunction junction') Fowler Avenue, from 1 to the USF campus Dale Mabry Highway Florida Avenue and Bearss Avenue intersection Courtney Campbell Causeway,on the Hillsborough County side Access routes to the beaches in Pinellas County While the Sunshine Skyway and Howard Frankland bridges have ehher planned or operating surveillance and control systems, no infrastructure is currently in place or planned for Incident detection on either the Courtney Campbell Causeway or the Gandy 83


Bridge. It is also recommended that a suitable system be installed on these bridges, allowing interface between the City of Tampa and Pinellas County centers. It is recommended that the TVC have access to information collected by newly installed traffic surveillance equipment. For example, the Tampa Interstate Master Plan recommends that Florida DOT install closed television cameras and In ductance loop detectors throughout the Tampa Interstate System. The TVC will have access to the data collected by this equipment by its coaxial cable link to Florida DOT. 2. Center Input. Processing and Output The TVC will receive traffic info rmat ion in text form via coaxial cable from several sources. The Information received will be In a standardized form, with each report containing a time stamp, location and nature of incident or congestion. The TVC will process all reports rece i ved, adhering to the following principles, as indicated by advisory committee meetings and f ocus group interview sessions. Whenever possible, the TVC's reports will provide expected time of delay and specific alternative routes t o avoid inci den ts and non-recurring congestion. However, the TVC must coordinate with loca l ju risdictional staff when recommending local arterial streets as alternate routes. The TVC's reports will contain detailed information about the location of congestion and incidents, includ ing direction (e.g. northbound" vs. "southbound".) The reports will also use a standard procedure for naming of roads and avoiding colloquialisms (e.g. malfunction junction ) so that the reports are understandable to newcomers and tourists. Each reported traffic inci dent in the TVC's database will be accompanied by both a time stamp and "sunset estimate", i.e. an estimate of how long it will 84


take for traffic conditions to return to normal. After the "sunset estimate" has elapsed, the TVC will stop report ing that incident, unless another source reports that the inc ident is still causing traffic congestion and delay. Traffic reports from the citizen call-in telephone number must be verified by at least one other source before being reported. The TVC will compile information from these various sources. The TVC will disseminate traffic reports in the following two forms: Color video map of Hillsborough and Pinellas Counties showing Interstates and major arterials. Sections of road will be color coded by degree of congestion (i.e. existing operating speeds) and major incidents will be highlighted. Database of all current locations of congest i ons and Incidents for the TVC's coverage area. As a future enhancement, the center shall develo p software to detect incidents within three to four minutes, to operate communications and control devices automatically and verify all operations. Ownership and Operation It was the consensus of the advisory committee that the TVC be operated by a private contractor, with a public agency, such as Florida DOT, administer ing the contract with this contractor: Specifically, the following points emerged during the four advisory committee meetings held during the year-long contract period: Information processing funct ions and dissemination functions should be performed by the same organization. This structure lends itself more easily to private operation. 85


. A central information collection point is needed that is politically neutral." There have historically been p ro b lems with the kind of interagency oooperated that In necessary for a regional system Public agencies lack the flexibility in employee work hours and hiring/firing policies needed to operate the center effectively. Concerns about acoountability and accuracy should be addressed In a oontractual agreement between a public agency and the private vendor. Several companies should bid competitively for thi s contract. The contract will address issues of public accountability and accuracy of the traffic information disseminated. A detailed protoool for operations and reporting will be established. It is reoommended that the contract be funded by a m ix of federal, state and other funds for an initial period of two years It is anticipated that the oontractor would be able to generate revenue from this service by making real-t i me traffic information available to other groups. The vendor will not be able to charge any fee to public agencies, nor will the vendor be able to charge a fee to any agency which i s itself a source for traffic information for the TVC. However, the vendor will be able to charge user fees to other organizations, such as large employers and major activity centers (e. g. Convention Center, Bush Gardens, Tampa Stadium, Aorida ThunderDome, Tampa International Airport, the Pier area in downtown St. Petersburg and beach resort hotels .) It is unlikely that radio and television stations would be willing to pay for the service, considering that they have free access to traffic reports from Metro Traffic Control. MTC's revenue comes from advertisements which accompany each report. Coverage Based on the information available from the sources listed above, the TVC will receive traffic reports on the entire Interstate System and most major arterials. It is recommended 86


that the boundaries of the TVC's designated area of coverage be Hillsborough and Pinellas counties. However, some interfaCing on the I nterstates will be requ i red from Pasco and Manatee counties Hours of Operation It is recommended that the TVC be fully operational weekdays dur i ng peak periods: 6:00 a.m. 9:00 am. and 4:00 p.m. 7:00 p.m., and on weekends as necess i tated by major special events. It Is also recommended that the TVC receive traffic information 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Because data i ntake of the center would not be fully automated at first, continuous operation would require three e i ght-hour shifts, as discussed in the staffing section below. As the data collection and dissemination functions become more fully automated, the staff would be reass i gned and the staffing level for the TVC reduced. Staffing The required staff for each of three eight-hour shifts will be comprised of: two traffic technicians, responsible for the overall operations of the TVC, (one technician for the midnight to 8:00 a.m. shift) and one computer operator, responsible for ensuring that the syS1em remains up-and-running. The entire staff would report to a genera l manage r and an assistant, who would be present at the TVC during regular wor k -hours (7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.), but will have access to the TVC at all times A l ong w ith the superv i sion of the staff, they would be responsible for the strategic p l anning and ma rk eting of the TVC and its services, as would be the case with any private, profit oriented o r ganization. An administrative assistant, responsible for l ooking after the general administrative needs of the TVC would also be ava i lable during regular working ho urs. It is further r ecommended that at least one member of the staff be a certified traffic enginee r The TVC would be directly accountable 87


to the FOOT District Seven Office which will coordinate operations between the regional TVC and the various municipalities and set operational guidelines and protocol. Space Requirements Based on the recommended staff, the TVC will require 1,600 to 2,000 square feet, preferably 2,000 square feet to allow for archival storage of traffic data. Physical Location Four possible sites for the physical location o f the TVC are recommended for consideration, as illustrated in Figure 14. A single location should be selected after further review and analysis. Downtown Tampa Because the City of Tampa comprises one of the largest single traffic generators on a regional scale, its seems appropriate that the TVC be located In downtown Tampa within centralized access to many of its contributing agencies and clients. Fowler/USF Area Location in the East Fowler /USF area would enable the TVC to take advantage of the close proximity to Rorida DOT District Seven Offices and the future Rorida Highway Patrol Command Center. T his location will also facilitate CUTR to use the TVC for experimental research and data analysis. St. Petersburg/Clearwater Airport This location is central to the Tampa Bay metropolitan area and is in close proximity to the west entry point onto the Howa rd Frankland Bridge, as well as a close vantage point to several reoccurring congestion areas in Pinellas county. 88


I I I I I I I I I I I I I N I f I 0 1 u w.t I I $C,t,L IN MI!.:S I ""';I'T"'" _ ,__,_,_. ,<---+---, 1. I -1 If" -(J I / I ; ; ; ; / / i1 I '1 ... 1 I I I I _;c Legend Sources ol Traffic lnfonnalion 1. City ol Tampa 2 PineRas County 3 City of Cle arwater 4 City of Sl P et ersb urg 5 H i ll s b o rough County 6. F l orida DOT 7 F l orida Highway Patr o l 8 HARTline AVl Con trol Center 9 M etro Traffic Control Recommended location: A. Downtown T ampa B Fowler/ USF Area C. Sl Petersb urg/ C le arwater Airport D W es t s hore F i g u re 1 4 Sour ces o f Traffic In formation and R ecomme n de d L ocations for the TVC


Westshore Area This location Is centrally located and in close proximity to the existing bay crossings, and also is located in the first priority reconstruction segment for the Tampa Interstate Master Plan. This location would enable the lVC to take advantage of the close proximity to Bay Area Commuter Services and Metro Traffic Control. Harc!ware The main criteria for determining hardware needs would be the amount of storage needed for the data generated by the system. Since the Information being processed at the lVC would be summary information received from the local traffic control centers, required storage would not be of the magnitude of that of the local centers. It would appear that a system based on personal computers (PC) may be feasible. The lVC would be comprised of a series of work stations, one workstation per staff member on duty. The stations would be served through a local area network (LAN) system that transmits this information from the work stations to a common central processing unit (CPU) In addition, the lVC will have the software and hardware capability to store and retrieve video surveillance data from the cameras operated by Hillsborough County and any newly installed cameras. This video data will be merged with other sources to simulate response to incidents to assist the Tampa Bay incident management team. Software An appropriate LAN operating system would be necessary. In addition the system would require software that provide the capabilities of generating summary maps of varying levels of geographic detail from the common, regional database of the minicomputer. MIST is one example of an appropriate software that may fit these requirements, although its summary reports are not the primary output of the system. In addition, MIST runs on a PC platform and may not be compatible with UTCS. Detailed research and analysis of the available options would be necessary. 90


Transmission Media In an effort to keep project costs down, a narrow-band medium such as coaxial cable will be used as the transmission medium from traffic information sources to the TVC. The transmission medium from the TVC to points of dissemination will depend on the form that information takes Transmission of the color-coded video map will require a wide band medium such as fiber-optic cable. Transmission of the regional database will require a narrow-band medium such as coaxial cable. 3. Information Dissemination Cable TV Stations The primary area cable television operators in the areaJones, Paragon and Vision Cable -will have d irect access to the TVC's color video map, pending negotiation with their corresponding municipal cable television offices: The video map can be broadcast on publlc access channels, so that it is offered at no additional cost to cable subscribers. Another option is to offer the service as part of a non-standard cable package, requiring additional subscr iption fees. If the service is offered on the public access channel, the TVC should pay for the installation of high-bandwidth transmission medium. If the service is a revenue generator, the cable companies shou l d pay the cost of transmission. Metro Traffic Control Metro Traffic Control will continue to provide th eir "value added", professionally produced audio traffic reports to local radio and televisio n stations fo r free, generating revenue through advertisements which accompany each traffic rep ort. Radio and television stations will have Indirect access to the TVC's traffic reports through Metro Traffic Control. Local radio and television stations will have the option of direct access to either the TVC's traffic report database or video map, however the stations must install a transmission medium to the TVC at their own expense. (This scenario assumes that MTC is not selected to operate the TVC, although it is possible that they could be selected.) 91


Metro Traffic Control will have access to the TVC's traffic report database via coaxial cable. MTC may have access to the video map, but must install a wide bandwidth transmission medium at their own expense. Bay Area Commuter Servjces Bay Area Commuter Services will have access to the TVC's traffic report database via coaxial cable. Commuters can use BAGS' toll free telephone number to access the traffic informa tion by phone. BAGS has offered to play a major role in the information dissemination component of this system. In addition, BAGS would be able to offer commute alternatives to the single occupant vehicle. Therefore, BAGS has been selected as the primary source of traffic information via telephone. GTE MobileNet GTE MobileNet users have direct access to the TVC's traffic report database through the voice mailbox currently updated by Metro Traffic Control. This voice mailbox could be directly linked to the TVC's traffic report database, however, conversion of the TVC's database into a 60 -sec ond audio report would be at GTE Mobiienet's expense. variable Message Signs and Highway Advisory Radio Aorida DOT currently operates a highway advisory radio channel near the Tampa Internationa l Airport and variable message signs on the Sunshine Skyway Bridge. Renewed operation of FOOT's variable message signs on the Howard Frankland Bridge has also been proposed. Since Florida DOT is one of the TVC's sources of traffic information, it will have access to the TVG's database. Future variable message signs and HAR broadcasters should be controlled by FOOT, with input from the TVG. 92

PAGE 100

Qtber Dissemination Methods The TVC will offer access to its traffic info r mation database to any public agency which installs new dissemination media so that these dissemination media would be broadcasting more comprehensive and accurate traff i c information. However, it is likely that the public agencies will already have a data link to the TVC For example, the T ampa Bay Interstate Master Plan recommended that Florida DOT install 19 variable message signs and seven HAR broadcasters throughout the Tampa Interstate network. 93

PAGE 101

B I mpl e mentation Staging The recommendations f o r imp lementation staging are intended t o segregate the total TVC (Surveillance and Control System) i nto manageable, stand a lone projects. In the worst case scena rio that funding was no l onger available to Implement the ultimate system, any phase that had been previous l y constructed cou l d operate and serve a functional purpose Ther efore, the i mplementation stages outlined In Table 12is comparable to the staged implementation recommended in the Tampa Interstate Mas t e r P lan for its SC&C system. Table 12 i ndicates the recommended general stages for TVC implementation and the approxima t e t imeframe for completion. Tab le 12. Pr oposed I mplementat i o n Stages for T ampa Bay TVC PHASE IMPLEMENTATION STAGES' Phase I Stage 1 ( u p to 2 yrs) Sel ect sit e design and construct new buil d ing OR lease exi sting build ing for the TVC /SC&C Stage 2 A (2-4 years) Oesi gn and linkage" of all existing city and co u nty owned traffic con t rol cent e rs, and other exi st ing traffic data collection sources, with the TVC/SC&C (Including operational performance test and eval uat ion fo r entire In-p lace system) Stage 28 (1 3 years') Desi gn and "linkage' of the TVC/SC&C with public dissemination sources (Including operati ona l p erformance test and evaluation f or enti r e in-place system) Phase 11 Stage 3 (1 years') Design and "li nkage' of v ideo-surveillance stations at most congested areas with TVCfSC&C (Includin g operational p erformance test a nd evaluation for e n tire Inp l ace system) Phase 111 Stage 4 (un known) Design and detailed comp reh_ensive 'linkage with ordered priority segments of Tampa Interstate Master Plan (as defined by Technical report F6f Freeway Traffic Management P lan), and compa r able P inellas county roadway neiYiork Improvements ( I ncludi n g operational performance t est and evaluation for e ntir e Inp lace system) Phase IV Sta ge 5 (1-2 years') Development ol software for incident detectionjresponsejmanagemenl (including operational performance test a n d evaluation f or entire in-place system) Duration time frame. not year of Implementation. Stage s can, and are intended to overlap. 94

PAGE 102

c. Cost Estimate At this point in the conceptual design of the TVC/SC&C system only order-of-magnitude cost estimates can be made. Based on cost estimates contained in the Tampa Interstate Master Plan and other cost estimates contained in this report for component features, this cost estimate is intended to provide an average generic" capital and operating cost estimate. A more detailed estimate can be determined only after future deteil design is completed. Table 13 indicates these average costs by implementation stage (defined previously in Table 12). In order to develop this order-of-magnitude estimate, direct comparison has been made to the cost estimates in the Tampa Interstate Master Plan (for general costs by extent of coverage area andjor components) and extrapolated, as necessary. Table 13. Order-of-Magnitude cost Estimate CONSTRUCTION IMPLEMENTATION CAPITAL ANNUAL OPERATING & PHASE STAGE COST MAINTENANCE COSTS Phase I 1 $0' $400.000 2A $5,000 000 $1,000,000 28 $1, 000,000 $200,000 Phase 11 3 $350,000 $70,000 Phase Ill 4 $12,000,000' $2,400,000' Phase IV 5 $500,000 $100,000 If new building is constructed, then capital costs would be approximately $850,000. Included In cost estimates of proposed Tampa Interstate Improvemen ts. 95

PAGE 103

VI. CONC!-USION The objective of this report was to develop an early deployment plan (i.e. conceptual design) for an integrated transportation information system for the Tampa Bay area. This system was broken down and analyzed according to three basic system components: (1) information collection, (2) information dissemination, and (3} control centers. Through a consensus-building process of soliciting public involvement from focus groups and a technical project advisory committee, the consolidation of the most feasible system component features was obtained and a recommended system identified. Further, this recommended system has had the benefit of consideration of lessons learned from other similar transportation information centers, and assured compatibility with existing and planned traffic surveillance activities in the Tampa Bay area. Given the recommended system defin ition, imp lementatio n staging and order-of magnitude cost, the "next steps" to undertake have been outlined. In order to provide the highest probability of successful and timely dep l oyment, a ll of the following thirteen tasks should be accomplished. In order of i mportance these deployment tasks are as follows: 1. Obtain formal commitment from core group t o move forward with the project. 2. Identify a "champion" for the "cause." This could be a public agency, private company, or Individual. 3. Identify and formalize cost-sharing partnership(s}, inc luding clear and mutually agreed upon roles and res ponsibilities of the partnership(s). 4. Create market incentives for p rivate sector involvement. 5. Conduct detailed market area analysis regarding ultimate system features. 96

PAGE 104

6. Refine protocol and operational features/components of the recommended system In preparation of ah RFP pl:lckage for bidders, and seek qualified bidders list from IVHS America and other sources. 7. Develop system architecture and performance specification suitable for solicitation of Request for Proposals (RFP). 8. Establish a detailed schedule commitment for staged system procurement and Installation. 9. Refine first phase i mplementation staging that is both self-contained and suitable for stand-alone operational test and includes comprehensive evaluation. 10. Seek opportunities for vendors performing product demonstrations, at no cost to locals that are compatible with recommended system component features. 11. Advertise for qualified bidders for first phase staging of overall system. 12. Develop specific measurable short-term and long-range performance objectives for the system. 13. Provide a continuing means of education and informat i on sharing regarding project (i.e., marketing campaign) t o both potential system providers and users. 97

PAGE 105

BIBLIOGRAPHY "Advanced Driver Informat i on System Now Operational in Boston", The Urban Transportation Monitor, July 19, 1991. Advanced Public Transportat ion Systems: The State of the Art Update Federal Transit Adm inistration Report No. OOT-VNTSC-FTA-92-3, April 1992. Allied Signal brochure on San Antonio traffic management system. 'Atlanta to Install First Smart Highway System", ENR, April 26, 1993, p 13. Automatic Audio Signing: Literature Survey Analysis, Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA/RD-81/097, February 1981. AWA Traffic Systems America brochure. Bellevue Smart Traveler Phase 1: An Operational Test of Innovative Ridersharing Technology, University of Washington, September 11, 1992. Blumentritt, Charles, A Compressed Video System for Traffic Surveillance, Texas Transportation Institute Dallas, TX February, 1 990. Gallfornla Smart Traveler SYstem, Federal Trans it Administration, Report No DOT-T-9216, February 1992. "Columbus Discovers T ra ffic Management", Civil Engineering, April 1992, p. 22. Computer Recognition Systems brochure Guidelines for A. T M S ., I VHS America Wash i ngton D.C ., 1992. GuideStar brochure. Hedtke, John, Using Computer Bulletin Boards, MIS Press, New York, 1992. Intelligent Vehicle-Highway SYstems Projects in the United States, Federal Highway Administration, May 1992. Kassoff, Hal, "Mary land's CHART P ro gram: A New Model for Advanced Traffic Manageme nt" ITE Journal, Vol. 62, No. 3, March 1992, pp. 33-36. 98

PAGE 106

Levy, Clifford J "New $100 Million Sensor System to Monitor New York Traffic Congestion", New York Times, August 29, 1992, p. 16. MediaMark Research Report, 1989 Microwave Sensors brochure. Morris, Joan and Stacy Marber, "Virginia's Traffic Management System", ITE Journal, July 1992, pp. 13. "New Traffic Operations Center for Orange County Expected to Show Significant Benefits", The Urban Transportation Monitor, October 11, 1991, p. 4. Public and Private Sector Roles in Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems (NHS) Development, Federal Highway Administration Report No. FHWA-PL-92,024, April 1992. Rowe, Edwin, Los Angeles Smart Corridor Project". Northern Virginia Conference on IVHS, December 8, 1992 Saralee brochure "The Selection and Implementation of an Advanced Traff i c Management System", pc trans, Fall 1992, pp. 21-24. Sherman, Barry, Telecommunications Management: The Broadcast and Cable Industries McGraw-Hill, New York, 1987 Small, Eric, Broadcast Subcaffiers for NHS: An Introduction, Modulation Sciences Technical Papers, 1992. SmartRoute Systems brochure. Study of Media and Markets, Simon Market Resea rch Bureau, 1990. Tampa Interstate Study: Task F6f Freeway Traffic Management Plan Technical Report, Greiner, Inc., March 1989 Traffic Control Technologies brochure. Traffic Detector Handbook: Second Edition Institute for Transportation Engineers, Washington, D.C., 1990 99

PAGE 107

''Traffic Operations Center Completed for Unique IVHS Project in Detroit Area", The Urban Transportation Monitor, October 30, 1992, p. 3. . "TV Shows Freeway Speeds In L.A. Continuously During Peak Per i ods The Urban Transportation Monitor, October 16, 1992. Upchurch, Jonathan, et. al. Evaluation of Variable Message Signs, Center for Advanced Research in Transportation, Arizona State Univers i ty, July 1991. 100

PAGE 108

Appendix A Advisory Committee Members Dan Bradley Assistant News Directo r WFLA/ Channel 8 905 E. Jackson St. Tampa, FL 33602 Phone: (813) 228-8888 Fax: (813) 225-2770 Corporal K Buddy Brogdon City of Tampa Police Department 1710 N. Tampa St. Tampa, FL 33602 Phone: (813) 225-5789 Fax: (813) 273..()770 Jack Brown State Traffic Operations Engineer Florida Department of Transportation 605 E. Suwannee St., Mailstop 36 Tallahassee, FL 32399 Phone: (904) 488-4281 David Buser District Traffic Operations Eng in eer Aorida Department of Transportation District 7 11201 N. McKinley Dr., Suite C300 Tampa, FL 33612 Phone : (813) 975 Fax: (813) 975-6477 Bob DeCarlo Traffic Anchor W101 WUSA/WDAE 504 Reo St. Tampa, FL 33609 Phone: (813) 289..()455 101 < David DeFreitas Executive Directo r Bay Area Commuter Services 5100 W. Kennedy Blvd., Suite 265 Tampa, FL 33609 Phone: (813) 282 Fax: (813) 282-2472 Sharon Dent Executive Director Hillsborough Area Regional Transit 201 E. Kennedy Blvd., 16th Floor Tampa, FL 33602 Phone : (813) 623-5835 Sergeant T. Dioquino Pinellas County Sheriff's Office P 0. Drawer 2500 Largo, FL 34649-2500 Phone: (8 13) 587-6107 Virginia Fouts City of St. Petersburg Police Department P.O. Box 2842 St. Petersburg, FL 33705 Phone: (813) 893-7 157 Robert Grimsley Maintenance Engineer Florida Department of Transportation 2820 Lesl i e Rd. Tampa, FL 33619 Phone: (813) 744 -6038 Fax: (813) 744-605

PAGE 109

Michael Halladay Operation Test Team Leader Federal Highway Administration Office of Traffic Management & IVHS HTV-20 400 Seventh St., S. W. Washington, D.C. 20590 Phone: (202} 366-6503 Lt. David Hardman Lt. Special Operations & Traffic Clearwater Police Department 644 P ierce St. Clearwater, FL 34616 Phone: (813) 462 -6027 Fax: (813} 462-6044 Patricia Harrison Congestion Management/IVHS Engineer Federal Highway Administration Region IV 1720 Peachtree, N.W., Suite 200 Atlanta, GA 30367 Phone: (404} 347-4075 Fax: (404} 347-2125 Debbie Herrington City of Tampa Traffic Engineering City Hall Plaza Tampa, FL 33602 Phone: (813) 223-8330 Fax: (813} 223-8448 Jeff Kolb Congestion Management/IVHS Eng i neer Federal Highway Administration 227 N. Bronaugh St., Room 2015 Tallahassee, FL 32301 Phone: (904} 681-7712 Fax: (904} 681-7613 102 Louis Minardi General Manager Yellow Cab P.O Box 1748 Tampa, FL 33606 Phone: (813} 253-8871, ext. 308 Fax: (813) 251-6876 Douglas Mullis Division Engineer Pinellas County Traffic Engineering Division 315 Court St. Clearwater, FL 34616 Phone: (813} 464-3198 Fax: (8 13) 464-4530 Jacqueline Nipper Pinellas County Emergency Communications 400 S. Ft. Harrison Ave. Clearwater, FL 34616 Phone: (8 13} 462-6324 Bob Oliver Dispatch Manager Federa l Express Company 6302 Benjamin Rd., Suite 402 Tampa, FL 33634 Phone: (813) 886-1445 Captain Denny Pedrick Florida H i ghway Patrol P.O Box 11158 Tampa, FL 33680 Phone: (813) 272-2211 Fax: (8 13 ) 2 72-2721

PAGE 110

Tom Renshaw Director City of St. Petersburg Traffic Engineering Department 1744 N. 9th Avenue St Petersburg, FL 33713 Phone: (813) 893 Fax: (813) 893 7212 Deputy Brett Saunders Traffic Homicide Inves tigator Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office P.O. Box 3371 Tampa, FL 33601 Phone: (813) 247-8602 Bill Steele Transit Planner Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority 14840 N. 49th Street Clearwater, FL 34622 Phone : (813) 884-0821 Fax: (813) 535 Darryl Tharin Studio Coordinator Metro Traffic Control Tampa Airport Marriott Hotel, Suite A3 Tampa, FL 33607 Phone : (813) 875-8500 Fax: (813) 876-5125 A. L. Tidwell District Maintenance Engineer Aorida Department of Transportation District 7 Maintenance Mailstop 7-1200 11201 N. Malcom McKinley Dr. Tampa, FL 33612 Phone: (813) 975-6055 Fax: (813} 975-6278 103 John Vanacore Traffic Enginee r Hillsborough County Engineering Services Department 1000 N. Ashley St., Suite 901 Tam pa, FL 33602 Phone: (813) 272-5912, ext. 3410 Fax: (813) 272-6458 Peter Yauch Traffic Engineer Assistant Director of Public Works City of Clearwater P.O. Box 4748 Clearwater, FL 34618-4768 Phone: (8 13) 462-6572 Fax: (813) 462-6641

PAGE 111

Commuter Group Donna Clark 3974 w. 75 Street Apt #901 Bradenton, FL 34290 634-4063 Joe Gross Code Enforcement Officer City of Temple Terrace 11250 N 5th Street Temple Terrace, FL 33617 989-7040 Henry Holli s 7701 Leon Ave. Templ e Terrace, FL 33637 985-9519 Julis James 15810 Spring Crest Cir. Tampa, FL 33624 962..()6()4 Chris Jennings 15484 Bedford Circle West Clearwater, FL 34624 582 3137 Mary Lou Miller 18720 Gulf Blvd. Unit 7A Indian Shores, FL 34635 593-0490 Shawnee Pace 2510 S 62nd Avenue St. Petersburg, FL 33712 974 5472 Appendix B Focus Group Participants 104 Cathy Tack City Manager's Assistant City of Temple Terrace P.O. Box 16930 Temple Terrace, FL 33687 989 7 1 09 Tyrone Thompson 635 S. 51st Avenue St. Petersburg, FL 33705 867 5478 Tama Tillman 3214 Fox Lake Dr. Tampa, FL 33618 963.01 1 5 Commer cia l Groyp Patr i c k Geo rge Promot ion D i rector 0105 5510 Gray St. Tampa, FL 33609 2871 047 Chief Robert Hancock Ass i s t ance Ch i ef Hillsborough County Fire Department 3210 S 78th Street Tampa, FL 336 1 9 744-5638 Pat Mart i n Un i g lobe Travel 4141 Bayshore Blvd., Suite 1105 Tampa, FL 33611 2821 566

PAGE 112

Jim Marzano Public Affairs Manager GTE P.O. Box 110 MC10 Tampa, FL 33601 224-6614 Barry Reese U.S. Courier 2790 Jewel Rd., Bell Air Bluffs Tampa, FL 34640 584-2508 David Scott Assistant Manager 1701 W. Cass St. Tampa, FL 33603 251-3107 Duke Simpson Regional Manager Jim Palmer Trucking 6710 E. Hillsborough Ave. Tampa, FL 33610 664-1700 Bill Steele Transit Planner Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority 14840 N. 49th Street Clearwater FL 34622 884-0821 Stephen Wade Sales Manager H&W Trucking 5144 W. ldlewind Tampa, FL 33634 623-!i835 105 Les Weakland Supervisor of Maintenance Hillsborough Area Regional Transit 4305 E. 21st Ave. Tampa, FL 33605 623 5835 Patricia Powers City of Temple Terrace Police Department 11250 N. 56th Street Temple Terrace, FL 33617

PAGE 113

Appendix C Focus Group Questionnaires Commuter Focus Group Session Introductory Quest i onnaire Name: Address: H ome: Office: (Where should check be mailed? Home Office.) SS#: I I 1. Briefly outline the route you most often use to get to and from your place of work? 2. How often on average do you use this route? _ times per week 3. At what time do you normally leave home for work? __ a.m./p.m 4 At what time do you normally leave your p lace of work to return home? __ a.m./p.m. 5. As a regular commuter how would y ou rate t rave l conditions in the Tampa Bay du r ing rush hours, i.e., 7:00 9:00a.m. and 4:006:00p.m.? poor fair good excellent 106

PAGE 114

6. How would you rate overall travel condition, in the Tampa Bay area? poor fair good excellent 7. Are there any alternative routes available to you in getting to and from work? yes no 8. How willing would you be to switch to an alternative route if you were advised to do so by traffic authorities? not willing somewhat willing very willing Why?: ----------------------------------107

PAGE 115

Business Organizations Focus Group Session Introductory Questionnaire Name: Company Address: Ph. No.: ( ) __ Fax. No.:( ) _ Home Address: Ph. No.:( >--:-:-(Where should check be mailed? Home Work.) SS#: _(_(_ -1. How important are traffic conditions in the Tampa Bay area to the performance of your organization or business? 2 How would you rate t raffic conditions in the Tampa Bay area during rush hours, i.e 7:00 9:00a.m. and 4:00-6:00p.m.? poor fair good exceUent 3. How would you rate traffic conditions overall, in the Tampa Bay area? poor fair good excellent 4. How important is reliable traffic information in you r line of business? not important slightly important som e what important very important 108

PAGE 116

5. In your opinion, would your organization be willing to pay for, or subsidize the cost of obtaining reliable traffic information? _yes no __________________________________________ 109

PAGE 117

Appendix D Local Contacts Bay Area Commuter Services 5100 W. Kennedy Blvd., Suite 265 Tampa FL 33609 Phone: 282-2467 Fax: 282-2472 Contact lan Kasper Bill Currie Ford I nc. 5815 N. Dale Mabry Highway Tampa, FL 33614 Phone: 872-0186 Contact: Den Lewis, Public Rel at ions Glen Gonzales, Driver C ity of Clearwater Cabl e 1V Liaison Office City Hall 112 S. Osceola Ave. Clearwater, FL 34616 Phone: 462 City of C l earwater Traffic Control Cente r Department of Public Works and Tra ff ic Engineering P O. Box 4748 Clearwater, FL 34618 Phone: 462-6572 Fax : 462-6641 Contact: Peter Yauch, Assistan t D i recto r of Public Works and Traffic Engineering and John Amiro, Signa l Systems Engineer City of St. Petersburg Cable Representative 600 1st Avenue N, Suite 102 St. Petersburg FL 33701 Phone: 893-7050 Contact: Gene Webb 110 City of St. Pe t ersburg Traffic Contro l Center Traffic Engi neer ing Department 1744 9th Avenue N St Petersburg, FL 33713 Phone : 893-7421 Fax: 893 Contact: Tom Renshaw, Director and Jon Stevenson, Traffic Signal Coordinator City of Tampa Cabl e Communications Office City Hall Plaza Tampa FL 33602 Phone: 223-8217 Contact: John McGrap h City of T ampa Traffic Control Center Traffic Eng i neering Divis ion City Hall P laza Tampa, FL 33602 Phone: 223 Contact: Mike Scan lon C l earwater Nissan 16117 U.S. 1 9 N Clearwater, FL 34624 Phone: 536 Cont act: Craig Smith President Coca-Cola 10017 Princess Pal m Or., Suite 101 Tampa FL 33610 Phone: 623 Contact : Dan Silverman, Media Manager Ern i e Haire Ford Jeep & Eagle, I nc. 9545 N Florida Ave T ampa, FL 33612 Phone: 933-657 1 Contact: Gene Sw iger, General Director

PAGE 118

Hillsborough County Cable lV Administration 623 E. Twiggs Tampa, FL 33602 Phone: 272-5217 Hillsborough County Traffic Control Center Engineer ing Services Department 1000 N. Ashley St ., Suite 901 Tampa, FL 33602 Phone: 272-5912, ext. 3410 Fax: 272-6458 Contact : John Vanaco re, Traffic Engineer Metro Traffic Control Tampa Airport Marriott Hotel, Suite A3 Tampa, FL 33607 Phone: 875-8500 Fax : 876-5125 Contact : Darryl Tharin, Studio Coordinator Pinellas County Traffic Contro l Center Traffic Eng i neering Division 315 Court St. Clearwater FL 34616 Phone: 464 3198 Fax: 464-4530 Contact: Ken Jacobs Divis ion Eng i neer Jones l ntercable, I nc. 4400 W. Dr. Martin Luther K i ng Blvd. Tampa, FL 33614 Phone: 877-6805 Paragon Cable 5908 Breckenridge Pkwy. Tampa, FL 33610 Phone: 621-4691 111 Paragon Cable 11500 9th Stree t N St. Petersburg FL 33716 Phone: 579-8400 Tyrone lsuzu 3433 Tyrone Blvd. N St. Petersburg, FL 33710 Phone : 345-9999 Vision Cable of Pinellas, Inc. 2551 Drew St. C l earwater FL 34625 Phone: 797-1818 WFLZ Power 93 FM 4002 Gandy Blvd. Tampa, FL 33611 Phone: 839-9393 Contact: Jason Dixon, Driver WMTX (Mix 96) 1 8167 U.S. 19 N Clearwater, FL 34624 Phone: 961 9600 Contact: Don Driver WRBQ (0105) FM Stereo 1380 AM 55 1 0 Gray St., Su i te 130 Tampa FL 33609 Phone: 287-1047 Contact: Pat George WQYK 99 FM & AM 9450 Koger B l vd. St. Petersburg FL 33702 Phone: 224-0183 Contact: Lori Moon Public Relations WUSA/WDAE (W 1 01) 504 Reo St. Tampa, FL 33609 Phone: 289 Contact: Regina Carr Traffic Anchor

PAGE 119

Appendix E Externa l Contacts AWA Traffic Systems America, Inc 2127 University Park Drive, Suite 300 Okemos, M l 48864-3975 Phone: (517) 349-6300 Fax: (517) 349-6066 Contact : Karen Ajluni Sales Eng i nee r Bendix Field Engineering Corp. (Allied-Signal Aerospace Company ) One Bendix Road Columb i a, MD 210451 897 Phone: (410) 964 7875 Fax: (410) 730-6775 Contact : Vincent Pierce Senior Man ager Computer Recog n ition Systems, Inc. 11 Orion Park Dr. Ayer, MA 01432 Phone : (508) 772-3991 Fax: (508) 772-57 48 Contact: Sal D Agostino, General Manager IVHS America A TIS Committee Chair: James R il lings Principal Research Eng i neer General Motors Corporation P.O Box 9055 Warren, Ml 48090-9 0 55 Phone: (313) 986-2990 Fax: (313) 986-3003 IVHS America A TIS Commi tt ee Secretary: John MacGowan Reg i onal Adm i nist r ator Federal Highway Administration T urner Fairbanks Research Center 6300 Georgetown P ike, HSR-10 Mclean, VA 22101-2296 Phone: (703) 285-2405 Fax: (703) 285 2264 112 IVHS America A T MS Committee Chair: Eugene Ofstead Assistant Commissioner Minnesota DOT 395 John Ireland Blvd., Room 417 St Paul, MN 55 1 55 Phone : (612) 296-1344 Fax: (6 1 2) 296 6135 IVHS America ATMS Committee Secretary : Sheldon Strickland Chief of Traff i c Management Divis ion Federal Highway Admin istration HTV-30 Room 3419 400 Seventh St., S.W. Phone: (202) 366-1993 Fax: (202) 366-2249 I VHS America Committee Staffer Gordon F i nk D i rector of Research and Technology IVHS America 1 775 Massachusetts Ave., N.W. Su i te 510 Washington, D.C. 20036 Phone: (202) 857-1243 Fax: (202) 296-5408 Lo s An g e l es S m art Corridor Room 950 Cit y Ha ll 200 N. Spring St. Los Ange l es CA 9001 2 Pho n e : (213) 237 1983 Contact: Vere j Janoyan, Transportation Engineer

PAGE 120

Metro Traffic Control 45 E. 45th Street New York, NY 10017 Phone: (212) 370-Q001 Fax: (212) 370-1667 Contact: Shane Capella, Director of Corporate Development Microwave Sensors, Inc. 7885 Jackson Rd. Ann Arbor, Ml 48103 Phone: (313) 426-5950 Fax: (313) 426-0140 Minnesota GuideStar 117 University Ave., Room 248 St. Paul, MN 55155 Phone : (612) 296-8567 Fax: (612) 296-6599 Contact: James Wright, Director Modulation Sciences, Inc. 12A World's Fair Dri ve Somerset, NJ 08873 Phone: (908) 302-3090 Fax: (908) 302-0206 Saratec Traffic Inc. {Peek Traffi c) 1500 N. Washington B lvd. Sarasota, FL 34236 Phone: (813) 366-6770 Fax: (813) 365-0837 Contact: William Buck Vice President of Operations Smart Route Systems, I nc. 141 Portland St., Suite 8100 Cambridge, MA 02139 Phone: (617) 494-8100 Fax: (617) 494-5271 Contact: Stephen Crosby, Chairman 1 1 3 Transportation Control Systems {Farradyne Systems) 1201 W. North B Street Tampa, FL 33606 Phone: {813) 253-2734 Contact : John Gills, President Westchester Commuter Central 400 Executive Blvd. Elmsfo rd NY 10523 Phone : (914) 345-8800 Contact: Cliff Cole, Operations Manager

PAGE 121

ANTIS A TIS ATMS ATSAC AVI AVL BAGS BBS CB CHART Appendix F Glossary of Abbreviations Automated Network Travel Time System A Automatic Vehicle Location system manufactured by AWA Traffic Systems America. Advanced Traveler Information Systems The application of advanced technologies to improve information available to travelers. A subset of Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems. Advanced Transportation Management Systems The application of advanced techno logies to i mprove the management of urban traffic systems. A subset of Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems. Automated Traffic Surveillance and Control A traffic management center operated by the City of Los Angeles DOT in Los Angeles, California. Automatic Vehicle Identific a t ion Wireless communications between a transponder mounted on a vehicle and a sensor located at the roadside. Uses Include toll collection, traffic management and fleet management. Automatic Vehicle Location The installation of devices on a fleet of vehicles (e.g. buses, trucks or taxis) to enable the fleet manager to determine the l eve l of congestion in the road network. AVL is also used to enable the fleet function more efficiently by knowing the location of vehicles in real-time Bay Area Commuter Services Coordinates Transportation Demand Management activities for Hillsborough, Pinellas, Pasco and Hernando counties. Bulletin Board System A database accessib l e to mult i ple users v i a computer, modem and phone lines. Citizen's Band Radio A band of radio frequency designated by the FCC for civilian use. Chesapeake Highway Advisories R outing Traffic Provides traffic information to motorists travelling between the Ba l timo re Washington metropolitan area and Maryland's Eastern Shore. t 14

PAGE 122

CMAQ Congestion Management and Air Quality A federal program which funds air quality improvement projects. CPU Central Processing Unit The part of the computer or computer system which performs core processing functions. CUTR Center for Urban Transportation Research A transportation research center based at the University of South F lori da; conducted this conceptual design study for Florida DOT. DOT Department of Transportation Either local or state transportation agency, e.g. Rorida DOT, Los Angeles DOT. FAST-TRAC Faster and Safer Tr avel Through Traffic and Advanced Controls A traveler information an d t raffic management p roje ct in Oakland County, Michigan. FCC Federal Communicat i ons Commission The federal agency which regu l ates te l ecommunications in the United States. FOOT Florida Department of Transportation Funded 20% and served as project manager for this study. FHP Rorida Highway Patrol FHWA Federal Highway Administration Funded 80% of this study; authorized by the ISTEA legislation to spend $660 million on IVHS projects from FY92 throug h FY97. HAR Highway Advisory Radio The transmission of localized traffic adv i sory messages using 520 AM and 1610 AM frequencies. HARTline Hillsborough Area Regional Transit The public transit provide r for Hillsborough County. HOV High Occupancy Vehicle Any vehicle containing more than one person suc h as buses, carpools, vanpools. 115

PAGE 123

GPS IS TEA IVHS LAN LPRS MBTA MIST MTA MTC MTCS Global Positioning Sys t em A method of determining the posit ion of vehicles using communication with a satellite. lntermodal Surface Transportation Effic i ency Act Passed in 1991, this leg i slation authorized nationa l surface transportation funding for the next six years. The I STEA legislation was unusual i n the fact that it allowed transportation funds to be spent on uses not traditionally classified as transportation-related (such as Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems.) Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems The application of advanced technologies to improve the efficiency and safety of transportation systems Local Area Network A method of connecting seve r a l computers toge ther using either high or low bandwidth communication med i a License P l ate Readin g System A product manufactured b y Compute r Recogn ition Systems Inc. which automatically reads the license p l a t es of moving veh i cles Massachusetts Bay Transit Authority The public transit authority of the Boston m et r opoli t an a r ea. Management Informat ion System for T ra ffic A software package used from converting lowl eve l traffic count data to high-level congestion r eports; w r itten by Farrady n e Systems, Inc. and distributed by T r affic Control Technologies. Metropolitan Transportation Au t h o ri t y The pu blic trans it authority of the Los A n geles metro p olitan area. Metro Traffic Cont rol A private company wh i ch collects and disseminates traffic information through radio and telev i s ion spot announcements Metropolitan Traffic Con t rol System A software package used fo r contro lli ng the tim ing of traffic signals in an urban road network; written and dist ri bu t ed by Computran Corporation; compatib l e with UTCS; extends the capa b ilities of UTCS. 116

PAGE 124

NHS PC PCD PVEA RFP SC&C scs STP TOM TVC UTCS VMS National Highway Systems A federal prog ram which funds transportation projects Personal Computer Personal Communication Device A small, portable device used for commun i cations, such as pagers and cellular phones Petroleum Violation Escrow Account A fund administered jointly by the state of California and the U.S. Department of Energy into which companies pay compensation for environmental pollution. Request for Proposals Surve i llance and Control System A traffic management system proposed in the T ampa Interstate Master Plan Surveillance and Contro l System A software package which collects t r affic in f orma t ion and manages traffic flow on the Howard Frank l and Brid ge. Surface Transportation Program A federal program wh ich funds transportat ion project s. Transporta t ion Demand Managemen t An attempt to reduce demand for transportation through various means, such as encouraging t he use of high occupancy vehicles alternative work hours, telecommuting, improvement of jobs/housing balance Traff i c V i sion Center The integrated traffic management and traveller information system for the Tampa Bay met r opolitan area proposed in this r eport. Urban Traffic Con t rol System A software package used for controlling the tim i ng of traffic signals in an urban road network; deve l oped by the Federal Highway Administration and used by most loca l t r affic eng i nee r ing departmen t s in t he United States. Variable Message S i gns Highway s i gns wh i c h can change t he message they d i sp l ay. 117

PAGE 125

WAN Wide Area Network A method of connecting several compute rs together using fiber optic cable. WCC Westchester Commuter Central A traffic management center operated by Metro Tr affic Control in Westchester County, New York. 118

PAGE 126

Appendix G Infrastructure I nventory Survey 119

PAGE 127

Appendix G Infrastructure Inventory Survey


Download Options

Choose Size
Choose file type
Cite this item close


Cras ut cursus ante, a fringilla nunc. Mauris lorem nunc, cursus sit amet enim ac, vehicula vestibulum mi. Mauris viverra nisl vel enim faucibus porta. Praesent sit amet ornare diam, non finibus nulla.


Cras efficitur magna et sapien varius, luctus ullamcorper dolor convallis. Orci varius natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus. Fusce sit amet justo ut erat laoreet congue sed a ante.


Phasellus ornare in augue eu imperdiet. Donec malesuada sapien ante, at vehicula orci tempor molestie. Proin vitae urna elit. Pellentesque vitae nisi et diam euismod malesuada aliquet non erat.


Nunc fringilla dolor ut dictum placerat. Proin ac neque rutrum, consectetur ligula id, laoreet ligula. Nulla lorem massa, consectetur vitae consequat in, lobortis at dolor. Nunc sed leo odio.