Adaptive Traffic Control Systems: Domestic and Foreign State of Practice (2010)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2010 www.TRB.org NAT IONAL COOPERAT IVE H IGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM NCHRP SYNTHESIS 403 Research Sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials in Cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration SUBSCRIBER CATEGORIES Highways • Operations and Traffic Management Adaptive Traffic Control Systems: Domestic and Foreign State of Practice A Synthesis of Highway Practice CONSULTANT ALEKSANDAR STEVANOVIC Advanced Transportation Concepts, LLC Salt Lake City, Utah

NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Systematic, well-designed research provides the most effective approach to the solution of many problems facing highway administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local interest and can best be studied by highway departments individually or in cooperation with their state universities and others. However, the accelerating growth of highway transportation develops increasingly complex problems of wide interest to highway authorities. These problems are best studied through a coordinated program of cooperative research. In recognition of these needs, the highway administrators of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials initiated in 1962 an objective national highway research program employing modern scientific techniques. This program is supported on a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of the Association and it receives the full cooperation and support of the Federal Highway Administration, United States Department of Transportation. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies was requested by the Association to administer the research program because of the Board’s recognized objectivity and understanding of modern research practices. The Board is uniquely suited for this purpose as it maintains an extensive committee structure from which authorities on any highway transportation subject may be drawn; it possesses avenues of communications and cooperation with federal, state, and local governmental agencies, universities, and industry; its relationship to the National Research Council is an insurance of objectivity; it maintains a full-time research correlation staff of specialists in highway transportation matters to bring the findings of research directly to those who are in a position to use them. The program is developed on the basis of research needs identified by chief administrators of the highway and transportation departments and by committees of AASHTO. Each year, specific areas of research needs to be included in the program are proposed to the National Research Council and the Board by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Research projects to fulfill these needs are defined by the Board, and qualified research agencies are selected from those that have submitted proposals. Administration and surveillance of research contracts are the responsibilities of the National Research Council and the Transportation Research Board. The needs for highway research are many, and the National Cooperative Highway Research Program can make significant contributions to the solution of highway transportation problems of mutual concern to many responsible groups. The program, however, is intended to complement rather than to substitute for or duplicate other highway research programs. Published reports of the NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from: Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet at: http://www.national-academies.org/trb/bookstore Printed in the United States of America NCHRP SYNTHESIS 403 Project 20-5 (Topic 40-03) ISSN 0547-5570 ISBN 978-0-309-14304-2 Library of Congress Control No. 2009942376 © 2010 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FMCSA, FTA, or Transit Development Corporation endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. NOTICE The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of the Governing Board of the National Research Council. Such approval reflects the Governing Board’s judgment that the program concerned is of national importance and appropriate with respect to both the purposes and resources of the National Research Council. The members of the technical committee selected to monitor this project and to review this report were chosen for recognized scholarly competence and with due consideration for the balance of disciplines appropriate to the project. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied are those of the research agency that performed the research, and, while they have been accepted as appropriate by the technical committee, they are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, or the Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation. Each report is reviewed and accepted for publication by the technical committee according to procedures established and monitored by the Transportation Research Board Executive Committee and the Governing Board of the National Research Council. NOTE: The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research Council, the Federal Highway Administration, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, and the individual states participating in the National Cooperative Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of this report.

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished schol- ars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. On the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and techni- cal matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Acad- emy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achieve- ments of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, on its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academyís purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Acad- emy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scien- tific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both the Academies and the Insti- tute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board is one of six major divisions of the National Research Council. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisci- plinary, and multimodal. The Board’s varied activities annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation depart- ments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. www.TRB.org www.national-academies.org

NCHRP COMMITTEE FOR PROJECT 20-5 CHAIR CATHERINE NELSON, Oregon DOT MEMBERS KATHLEEN S. AMES, Springfield, Illinois STUART D. ANDERSON, Texas A&M University CYNTHIA J. BURBANK, PB Americas, Inc. LISA FREESE, Scott County (MN) Public Works Division MALCOLM T. KERLEY, Virginia DOT RICHARD D. LAND, California DOT JAMES W. MARCH, Federal Highway Administration JOHN M. MASON, JR., Auburn University ANANTH PRASAD, HNTB Corporation ROBERT L. SACK, New York State DOT FRANCINE SHAW-WHITSON, Federal Highway Administration LARRY VELASQUEZ, New Mexico DOT FHWA LIAISON JACK JERNIGAN WILLIAM ZACCAGNINO TRB LIAISON STEPHEN F. MAHER COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAMS STAFF CHRISTOPHER W. JENKS, Director, Cooperative Research Programs CRAWFORD F. JENCKS, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs NANDA SRINIVASAN, Senior Program Officer EILEEN DELANEY, Director of Publications NCHRP SYNTHESIS STAFF STEPHEN R. GODWIN, Director for Studies and Special Programs JON M. WILLIAMS, Program Director, IDEA and Synthesis Studies JO ALLEN GAUSE, Senior Program Officer GAIL R. STABA, Senior Program Officer DONNA L. VLASAK, Senior Program Officer DON TIPPMAN, Editor CHERYL KEITH, Senior Program Assistant DEBBIE IRVIN, Program Associate TOPIC PANEL KEVIN BALKE, Texas A&M University RICHARD A. CUNARD, Transportation Research Board KEVIN FEHON, DKS Associates, Oakland, CA EDWARD L. FISCHER, Oregon Department of Transportation ARIF KAZMI, Arizona Department of Transportation W. LESLIE KELMAN, Les Kelman & Associates, Toronto MARTIN D. PARKER, Open Roads Consulting, Arlington, VA GARY PIOTROWICZ, Oakland County (MI) Roads Commission BILL J. SHAO, City of Los Angeles Department of Transportation BOB SNYDER, Maryland State Highway Administration ROBERT WILLIAMS, Miami-Date County EDDIE CURTIS, Federal Highway Administration (Liaison) ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Special thanks go to Peter T. Martin (Professor of Civil Engineering at the University of Utah) who introduced the author to the realm of Adaptive Traffic Control Systems and assisted in this project with many invaluable advices. The author would also like to thank Larry Head (Head of Systems and Industrial Engineering, University of Arizona), Nathan Gartner (Professor, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Uni- versity of Massachusetts, Lowell), Bernard Friedrich, (Professor, Insti- tute of Transportation and Urban Engineering, Technical University of Braunshweig, Germany), Yasuhiko Kumagai (Professor, Kochi Univer- sity of Technology, Japan), Herman van der Vliet (Manager of Traffic Engineering, Peek Traffic B.V., Utrecht, Netherlands), Juergen Mueck (MOTION Project Manager, Siemens AG Industry Sector, Munich, Germany), and Frazer Johnson (Manager at Traffic Systems Branch, Road and Transit Authority, New South Wales, Australia) for their invaluable support in the initial stage of this study. Their initial com- ments regarding the scope and feasibility of this study helped to deter- mine the course of the study. Very valuable assistance in the prepara- tion of this synthesis was provided by the following group of ATCS vendors, developers, and users who helped to describe various ATCSs presented in this study: Bill Shao (Los Angeles Department of Trans- portation), Carlo Di Taranto (MIZAR Automazione, Italy), David Lucas (Arizona State University), Eddie Curtis (Federal Highway Administration), Farhad Pooran (Telvent), Filippo Logi (Siemens AG, Germany), Florian Weichenmeier (GEVAS Software, Munich, Ger- many), Frazer Johnson (Road and Transit Authority, New South Wales, Australia), Juergen Mueck (Siemens AG, Germany), Michael Sullivant (Rhythm Engineering), Pitu Mirchandani (Arizona State University), Robert Braun (Technical University of Munich, Germany), Steven Shaw (Road and Transit Authority, New South Wales, Australia), Steve Shelby (Siemens, USA), Tobias Pohlmann (Technical University of Braunshweig, Germany), Vito Mauro (MIZAR Automazione, Italy). The author is very grateful to the members of the study’s topic panel who provided excellent feedback during the entire course of this study, which significantly improved organization and content of the study. The author also appreciated the assistance of Jon Williams (Program Direc- tor of Synthesis Studies) and other NCHRP synthesis staff who handled administrative matters of this project. Most importantly, special thanks go to Gail Staba, Senior Program Officer, who managed this project on behalf of NAS and TRB.

Highway administrators, engineers, and researchers often face problems for which infor- mation already exists, either in documented form or as undocumented experience and practice. This information may be fragmented, scattered, and unevaluated. As a conse- quence, full knowledge of what has been learned about a problem may not be brought to bear on its solution. Costly research findings may go unused, valuable experience may be overlooked, and due consideration may not be given to recommended practices for solving or alleviating the problem. There is information on nearly every subject of concern to highway administrators and engineers. Much of it derives from research or from the work of practitioners faced with problems in their day-to-day work. To provide a systematic means for assembling and evaluating such useful information and to make it available to the entire highway com- munity, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials— through the mechanism of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program— authorized the Transportation Research Board to undertake a continuing study. This study, NCHRP Project 20-5, “Synthesis of Information Related to Highway Problems,” searches out and synthesizes useful knowledge from all available sources and prepares concise, documented reports on specific topics. Reports from this endeavor constitute an NCHRP report series, Synthesis of Highway Practice. This synthesis series reports on current knowledge and practice, in a compact format, without the detailed directions usually found in handbooks or design manuals. Each report in the series provides a compendium of the best knowledge available on those measures found to be the most successful in resolving specific problems. FOREWORD Adaptive Traffic Control Systems (ATCSs), also known as real-time traffic control sys- tems, adjust, in real time, signal timings based on the current traffic conditions, demand, and system capacity. Although there are at least 25 ATCS deployments in the United States, these systems may not be well understood by many traffic signal practitioners in the coun- try. Their operational benefits are demonstrated, but there are still some reservations among the people in the traffic signal community. These systems are considered expensive and complex and they require high maintenance of detectors and communications. The study methodology included three sequential efforts. The first focused on the selec- tion of ATCSs, which are typically deployed in the United States (and worldwide) and iden- tification of ATCS agencies. The next effort undertaken was a literature review that gath- ered and reported information about ATCS operations and deployments from previous studies. Finally, two electronic surveys were conducted: a shorter e-mail survey for ATCS vendors and a longer website-based survey for ATCS users. Responses were obtained from 34 of 42 agencies in North America, an 81% response rate. Also, 11 responses from agen- cies in other countries were obtained. Municipal and county traffic operations agencies were the major contributors among the 45 agencies that responded to the survey. Aleksandar Stevanovic, Advanced Transportation Concepts, LLC, Salt Lake City, Utah, collected and synthesized the information and wrote the report. The members of the topic panel are acknowledged on the preceding page. This synthesis is an immediately useful doc- ument that records the practices that were acceptable within the limitations of the knowl- edge available at the time of its preparation. As progress in research and practice continues, new knowledge will be added to that now at hand. PREFACE By Gail R. Staba Senior Program Officer Transportation Research Board

CONTENTS 1 SUMMARY 5 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Background, 5 Study Goals and Objectives, 6 Study Methodology, 7 Agency Participation, 7 Analysis Approach, 8 Report Organization, 9 10 CHAPTER TWO OVERVIEW OF DEPLOYMENTS Introduction, 10 Operational Environment, 10 Implementation of Adaptive Traffic Control Systems, 10 Summary, 16 17 CHAPTER THREE WORKING PRINCIPLES OF MAJOR ADAPTIVE TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEMS Introduction, 17 Summary of Adaptive Traffic Control Systems Characteristics, 17 Summary, 20 23 CHAPTER FOUR INSTITUTIONAL ASPECTS Introduction, 23 Training, 23 Operations, 24 Maintenance, 26 Summary, 27 28 CHAPTER FIVE SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS Introduction, 28 Detection, 28 Hardware, 30 Software, 30 Adaptive Traffic Control Systems and Microsimulation Tools, 32 Communications, 32 Summary, 35 36 CHAPTER SIX IMPLEMENTATION COSTS AND BENEFITS Introduction, 36 Costs of Deploying Adaptive Traffic Control Systems, 36 Evaluation Studies, 37 Benefits from Adaptive Traffic Control Systems Deployments, 38 Public Perception, 41 Summary, 42

43 CHAPTER SEVEN LESSONS LEARNED Introduction, 43 User Perspectives, 43 Summary, 45 47 CHAPTER EIGHT CONCLUSIONS 49 REFERENCES 50 ACRONYMS 51 APPENDIX A VENDORS’ DESCRIPTIONS OF MAJOR ADAPTIVE TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEMS 83 APPENDIX B SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE 96 APPENDIX C BIBLIOGRAPHY OF ADAPTIVE TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEMS