Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 9
9 Traffic Management Center (RTMC) in April 2003. There fic operations. CMT membership consists of representatives are workstations located in the RTMC control room for free- from the Metropolitan Transit Authority, the San Antonio way operations, police dispatch, maintenance operations, and Public Works Department, Alamo Dome, the San Antonio traffic news media. Police Department, the Bexar County Sheriff's Department, MnDOT and MSP share an 800-MHz radio communica- EMS providers, towing and recovery service providers, and tions system. Working with MnDOT, MSP is deploying nine county health agencies. transportation operations communications centers throughout TIM operations in the San Antonio metropolitan area have greater Minnesota (five operational with four coming on-line). further benefited from the TransGuide Operation Center, These centers serve as communication hubs for emergency which has been specifically designed to provide a central point response, maintenance operations, traffic management, and of coordination in responding to emergencies for TxDOT and traveler information. the San Antonio Police Department. This center has also provided a platform to share voice, data, and multimedia com- munications among multiple responders. Methods of infor- 3.1.5 Phoenix mation sharing include co-location in the operations center, a shared radio system, a trunked radio system, a CAD-traveler Through a variety of initiatives, Arizona DOT, Maricopa information system, and CCTV images. County DOT, and the Phoenix Fire Department have all tried to enhance TIM through information sharing. Methods of information sharing include shared radio systems, direct phone 3.1.8 San Diego lines, traveler information workstations, facsimile, alphanu- meric pagers, and CCTV images. Relative to the other loca- California DOT (Caltrans) and the California Highway tions surveyed, there is a limited amount of actual information Patrol (CHP) have demonstrated a commitment to manage sharing between public safety and transportation agencies. traffic incidents cooperatively. To support incident man- Institutional issues are the primary factors limiting information agement functions, the two agencies developed an interface sharing. between CHP and Caltrans through the San Diego Regional Computer Aided Dispatch Interconnect (InterCAD) project. Although development and implementation of InterCAD was 3.1.6 Salt Lake City not deemed a success, many technical and institutional lessons were learned from the project. These lessons learned will be Information sharing between Utah DOT (UDOT) and critical as both agencies remain committed to sharing infor- Utah Highway Patrol (UHP) in Salt Lake City is beneficial, mation and may embark on a similar project in the future. persistent, and effective. Relationships between the two com- Methods of information sharing include co-location in the munities are mutually reinforcing and are exemplified by the operations center and a "sanitized CAD system" that enables good fit between the two communities at all levels. UDOT Caltrans to enter details into a record external to the CHP CAD was able to take advantage of the Winter Olympics event system. being held in Salt Lake City to upgrade many of its systems and operations to a high degree of readiness. Also, much of the technical integration challenges were avoided by incor- 3.1.9 Seattle porating UDOT and UHP into the same radio communica- tions and CAD systems. Information sharing between UDOT The Washington State Legislature, the Washington State and UHP is primarily accomplished within the CAD system; Patrol (WSP), and the Washington State Department of however, highway CCTV imagery is used by both agencies Transportation (WSDOT) share a common focus to reduce at the traffic operations center. UDOT and public safety field congestion on roadways in Washington State through coor- personnel are tightly integrated and work exceptionally well dinated and cooperative incident management. As a result, together at the scene of highway incidents. both agencies are able to make decisions internal to their own agencies to provide the foundation that ultimately supports information sharing between the two agencies. Leadership 3.1.7 San Antonio and support of decision makers enables those responsible for TIM to focus their efforts on improving safety and mobility Much of the success of TIM functions in the San Antonio in the Seattle metropolitan area through the sharing of infor- metropolitan area can be attributed to (1) the strong institu- mation. As a result, WSP and WSDOT have demonstrated an tional structures that have underpinned development and ability to collectively develop and implement advanced tech- operation of data and communications systems and (2) joint nologies to support coordinated and cooperative interjuris- planning and training activities. Critical to the institutional dictional and interdisciplinary communications in the context framework is the corridor management team (CMT), which of TIM. Methods of information sharing include an intercom provides an unofficial and informal platform to discuss traf- system between the WSDOT center and the WSP call center,