Click for next page ( 34

The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement

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 33
33 2,400ft 1,200ft 1,200ft Figure 3.4. UK ATM gantry and detector spacing schematic. Lessons Learned The ATM solution was unprecedented in many ways. The Department for Transport is the first agency to use digital Even with the success of the pilot program, there are still some cameras for speed enforcement along a corridor with variable elements that will be modified or improved during the expan- speeds. The cameras are connected with the variable speed sion of ATM. Some of these modifications will affect the limit data and have assisted in maintaining a compliance rate approach for detection, cameras, ERA, and new technology. along the corridor that remains in the 90th percentile for In hindsight, the camera density could be reduced. The speeds above 50 mph. The digitized images from the enforce- possibility of supplementing cameras with more advanced ment cameras are transmitted directly to the police for review detection or other technologies should be considered. Cur- and enforcement. rently, the detection equipment is spaced every 300 ft, which Information on VMS is informative and accurate, which is excessive for monitoring traffic flow. The proposed spac- also helps with user compliance. The detection subsystem on ing, shown in Figure 3.4, would locate the detector stations the corridor is motorist incident detection automation signal 600 ft before the gantries and 600 ft after the gantries. Gantry (MIDAS) sensor loops. The system uses algorithms to moni- spacing is at 2,400-ft intervals, which means the detector sta- tor traffic flow and automatically adjusts VSL signs when flow tions would be located every 1,200 ft. decreases. These algorithms have been used for years on other Second, HA has an interest in more advanced technologies, roadway sections and are well trusted by HA personnel. The such as artificial intelligence or millimetric radar detection. automation between the detection and VSL signs allows the Millimetric detection provides a more refined monitoring of operators to focus on the issue that is causing slower speeds the roadway and could recognize debris or stalled vehicles. while also monitoring the back of the queue and approach- This advanced detection would help the control center deter- ing traffic. mine when it is safe to reopen the roadway after an incident. ATM is successful in the UK because of user compliance, Finally, it may be possible to reduce the overall size of an whether they are local, long distance, or freight. The stake- ERA. Decreasing the size of the ERAs could provide the same holder outreach performed during the early development of services and safety factors as the larger space at a lower cost. ATM has increased the buy-in and support for the solution. The corridor is clearly focused on the efficient and safe move- Analysis and Research Observations ment of goods and people. The UK implementation of ATM was initiated differently from those of other countries within Europe. They began by com- References pleting an in-depth safety analysis of the corridor. HA focused 1. Office of Operations, Federal Highway Administration. Traffic Inci- on determining the problem areas, the influences, and the dent Management. impacts that these areas make on an average daily trip along tim.htm. Accessed July 19, 2011. one of the UK's busiest corridors. Once those hazards were 2. JOPS: A Joint Operations Policy Statement. Washington State identified, a risk assessment was completed. ATM was identi- Patrol and the Washington State Department of Transportation, July 2008. Accessed July fied through a compilation of solutions focused on mitigating 19, 2011. the safety issues that had been identified. The solution was 3. Washington State Department of Transportation. Incident Res- decided to be the best choice for the cost, safety, and mobil- ponse: Initiatives. ity of the motorists along M42. initiatives.htm. Accessed July 19, 2011.

OCR for page 33
34 4. The Gray Notebook. Washington State Department of Transporta- tion. rdranger.shtm. Accessed July 19, 2011. 5. State of Washington. Government Management Accountability and 9. Hagen, L., H. Zhou, and H. Singh. Road Ranger Benefit-Cost Analysis. Performance. Accessed July 19, 2011. Center for Urban Transportation Research, University of South 6. Hallenbeck, M., and J. Nee. Evaluation of the Instant Tow Dispatch Florida, 2005. Pilot Program in the Tacoma Area. Washington State Transportation 10. Department of Transport. Accessed July 19, 2011. Center, Seattle, 2003. 11. MacDonald, M. M42 Active Traffic Management Monitoring Project, 7. Washington State Department of Transportation. Incident Response Road Safety "Before" Report. United Kingdom Highways Agency, Strategic Initiatives, November 19, 2007. London, 2005. sites/ntimc/docs/WSDOT-IR%20Initiatives%20as%20of%2011-19- 12. MacDonald, M. ATM Monitoring and Evaluation: 4-Lane Variable 07.doc. Accessed July 19, 2011. Mandatory Speed Limits--12-Month Report (Primary and Secondary 8. State Traffic Engineering and Operations Office. Road Rangers: A Indicators), Version D, Final Version. United Kingdom Highways Free Service Provided by the Florida Department of Transportation. Agency, London, 2008.