A Framework for Improving Travel Time Reliability (2013)

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.

13 C h a p t e r 2 approach There is a large and still-growing set of reports, papers, presen- tations, and other documents available to anyone who begins to look into the specific area of travel time reliability within the larger umbrella term of Transportation Systems Management and Operations. This fact alone defines an important and intimidating barrier for newcomers to the field. There is so much information available from so many different sources and in so many different formats that it is difficult for newcomers to quickly and efficiently distill these resources into the relative few that collectively define the current state of the practice within this fast-evolving field. With this thought in mind, the project team began by recog- nizing that its experience in the field and its knowledge of which existing resources fall into the “Tier 1” category of being seminal works describing the state of the practice would be valuable contributions toward mainstreaming reliability and TSM&O into everyday practice. Therefore, the project team spent considerable effort in identifying and selecting a specific set of documents for review that, in its judgment, fall into the Tier 1 category defined previously. In addition to helping the target user community find easier access into this emerging field, this select set of documents also provides the project team with insight into both the knowledge gaps remaining to be filled and their relative importance to a useful and functional knowledge database. The document selection process involved several iterations among the team members in order to identify the most relevant existing documents. The document list was refined through a series of internal team meetings. Although the document list is not considered final at this point, the team believes that the selected documents capture the essence of the current state of the practice of Reliability and TSM&O. The process started with the team evaluating all the active and concluded SHRP 2 Program projects under the Reliability focus area. In addition, six projects under the Capacity focus area were identified as relevant to Reliability and TSM&O. Two projects under the Renewal focus area and one project under the Safety focus area were considered to have useful informa- tion to the existing knowledge base. As a result, 21 projects from the SHRP 2 Program (12 from Reliability, six from Capac- ity, two from Renewal, and one from Safety) were selected to be included in the synthesis summary task. In addition to the SHRP 2 projects, other significant reports and documents that collectively define the current state of the practice in the areas of Reliability and TSM&O were also reviewed and evaluated. These are referred to as Tier 1 documents because of their current importance and stat- ure in defining the Reliability/TSM&O state of the practice. The documents that were selected included publications from FHWA, state DOTs, selected websites, and other research doc- uments and papers. As a result, 34 additional documents were added to the final list for review. Thus, 55 documents were reviewed. The complete list of these documents is provided in Appendix A. The document review process involved assigning each of the 55 documents to team members based on their areas of expertise and involvement with the document production. As part of the document review, a high-level overview was pre- pared for each of the documents according to the following topical areas: • Summary of the work; • The project’s recommendations for future research; • Practical application procedures and opportunities; • Caveats or limitations associated with the key products and findings; and • Related work that may also be of interest. In order to concentrate the review process output in a single location, the team developed a synthesis web-based tool in which to enter the results of the document review pro- cess and easily access and summarize the information. Existing Reliability/TSM&O Content

14 Organizational taxonomy Before the document review began, an organizational taxon- omy was created to classify and categorize documents according to their focus within the Reliability and TSM&O areas. The pur- pose of this taxonomy structure was to organize documents into different categories that are familiar to practitioners so that they could easily find and browse the information in the KTS. The team developed an initial outline for the taxonomy structure using a top-down approach. Team members identi- fied (a) the range of audience types that can be expected and would be encouraged to use the KTS, (b) typical reasons that each audience type would be drawn to the KTS, and (c) the kinds of information each audience type would be seeking from the KTS. This led to an initial taxonomy for the database structure that would facilitate the KTS visit purposes being contemplated. This initial taxonomy was then refined based on subsequent reviews of key reliability-related websites to see how information was disseminated on them. The result was a taxonomy that facilitated the document review process. The final taxonomy table is structured in three levels, in which Levels 1 and 2 classify the document in terms of con- tent (business processes, strategies and treatments, data and analytic tools). Level 3 classifies the document in terms of infor- mation type (guidance, current research, case study). Table 2.1 shows the taxonomy table structure. The taxonomy categories are described in the next subsections. Business Processes This category relates to business processes that need to be undertaken by agencies in order to maximize the benefits of incorporating a formal Reliability and TSM&O program into their core structure. The subcategories consist of Planning, Programming/Budget, Performance Measurement, Procure- ment, and Project Development. Technical Processes The technical processes category mainly discusses the need for standards, verification, and validation, while dealing with the implementation of technical and technological aspects of a Reliability and TSM&O program. The subcategories consist of System Architecture/Engineering, Verification and Valida- tion (V&V), Vehicle Technologies/Connected Vehicles, and Standards. Institutional Issues The institutional issues category is focused on addressing institutional and human resources challenges in order to main- tain a successful Reliability and TSM&O program. The sub- categories consist of Leadership, Organization/Staffing, Recruitment/Retention, Funding, Collaboration, and Public– Private Partnership (PPP). Strategies and Treatments Several intelligent transportation system (ITS) and related strategies are available to effectively improve and track travel time reliability performance. The key is to identify the most suitable set of strategies and to be able to continuously evaluate how they are affecting travel time reliability. These strate- gies are divided into the following subcategories: Active Traffic Management/Travel Demand Management/Pricing, Work Zone Management, Integrated Corridor Manage- ment, Traffic Incident Management/Emergency Transpor- tation Operations, Road Weather Management, Arterial Traffic Control Device Operations, Freeway Operations, Freight Management Operations, Traveler Information, and Roadway Geometric Design. Data and Analytic Tools A fundamental way that travel time reliability can be improved is through the proper use and evaluation of existing data. Sev- eral innovative ways to handle and predict data, estimates of the economic benefit of travel time reliability, and methods for data collection and management can be found in this category. The subcategories are as follows: Reliability Predictive Methods, Evaluation of Operations Strategies, Data Collection and Man- agement, Performance Measurement, and Economic Analysis of Reliability/Costs and Benefits. Outreach and Marketing Marketing Reliability and TSM&O is an important compo- nent of making policy makers, decision makers, practitioners, and the traveling public aware of the benefits provided by implementing programs that address nonrecurring disrup- tions on traffic. This taxonomy category was further divided into the following subcategories: Business Cases, Branding, and Communicating Reliability Information. Education The educational component of Reliability and TSM&O is fundamental to train local agencies’ staff and to incorporate this concept in early stages of transportation engineering careers. The subcategories for this level are Course Curricula and Training Programs. Important remaining Gaps After the taxonomy structure was defined, each document was assigned to one or more cells in terms of content and information type. After all documents were reviewed, each cell of the taxonomy table was populated so that initial gaps in the literature could be identified. Figure 2.1 illustrates the number of documents available for each cell in the

15 Table 2.1. Taxonomy Structure Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 - Information Types Guidance/ Standard/ Policy State of Practice/ Current Research Case Studies Cost and Benefit Database Facts and Stats New Stuff Business Processes Planning Programming/Budget Performance Measurement Procurement Project Development Technical Processes System Architecture/Engineering Verification and Validation (V&V) Vehicle Technologies/Connected Vehicles Standards Institutional Issues Leadership Organization/Staffing Recruitment/Retention Funding Collaboration PPP Strategies and Treatments Active Traffic Management/Travel Demand Management/Pricing Work Zone Management Integrated Corridor Management Traffic Incident Management/Emergency Transportation Operations Road Weather Management Arterial Traffic Control Device Operations Freeway Operations Freight Management Operations Traveler Information Roadway Geometric Design Data and Analytic Tools Reliability Predictive Methods Evaluation of Operations Strategies Data Collection and Management Performance Measurement Economic Analysis of Reliability/Costs and Benefits Outreach/Marketing Business Cases Branding Communicating Reliability Information Education Course Curricula Training Programs

16 Figure 2.1. Taxonomy table summary. Black areas are not applicable (NA).

17 matrix. Using this matrix, the team was able to identify information gaps in specific categories as discussed in the next subsections. Business Processes For business processes there is a lack of benefit and cost infor- mation regarding the implementation and maintenance of a successful Reliability and TSM&O program. Technical Processes There is a lack of case studies related to technical processes. Institutional Issues Documentation addressing recruitment under institutional issues was not found during the synthesis. In addition, facts and statistics for one-half of the subcategories were not found for this level. Strategies and Treatments This category is probably the most well-covered topic, given the range of documents that discuss the application of ITS and related strategies to improve travel time reliability. Data and Analytic Tools Under data and analytic tools, more facts and statistics are needed. Outreach and Marketing Few business case documents were found. Education This is the category with the fewest number of documents. This is an important gap to be filled in order to spread the knowledge of Reliability and TSM&O and to make these programs successful. In general terms, sufficient qualitative information (Guid- ance and Standards, State of the Practice) has been found across most of the main categories. However, quantifying benefits on travel time reliability, especially when it comes to business and institutional (agency-related) matters is a major gap that has been identified. In addition to identifying the number of documents that apply to each subject area in the taxonomy table, the proj- ect team assessed the quality and depth of material in each document. To conduct this assessment, the team conducted a high-level review of the contents of each of the 55 docu- ments. Appendix A provides a list of the documents and a brief summary of many of them. Key Gap-Filling Options and recommendations This section describes the results of the team’s Phase 2 gap analysis effort. The goal of this activity was to establish a set of gap-filling projects to conduct in Phase 3 following approval from the TETG. The team prioritized the overall list of gap- filling projects, recognizing that not all gaps will be able to be filled as part of the SHRP 2 L17 project. This effort focused on gaps that needed to be addressed to effectively main- stream TSM&O practices. Gaps were identified by consider- ing the primary needs and barriers the target audiences face in terms of understanding the value of operational strategies to improve reliability and implementing these operational strategies. The products from the gap-filling activities complemented the framework of the KTS produced as part of this project. However, the gap-filling activities were not intended to address implementation of other SHRP 2 Reliability products. The SHRP 2 product implementation gaps were identified as part of a separate effort being led by SHRP 2 in connection with a Reliability Program Workshop held in Irvine, California, in March 2011. A multistep process was undertaken to develop the list of recommended gap-filling projects. First, a half-day brain- storming session was conducted as part of a working meet- ing to identify and discuss gaps in TSM&O. Following the meeting, a summary of gaps was circulated among team members and discussed and modified as part of weekly con- ference calls. From this effort, 12 gap-filling projects were identified. For each of these projects, a one-page research problem statement was prepared. Following completion of these problem statements, the gap-filling projects were pri- oritized and the set of recommended projects for Phase 3 was identified. Projects were prioritized both in terms of need and also of their feasibility within the schedule and budget constraints of the project. Table 2.2 summarizes the 12 gap-filling projects identified by the research team. The projects shaded in gray represent the high-priority projects that were carried out in Phase 3. As shown in Table 2.2, a total of six projects were carried out in Phase 3. These projects addressed communication needs (Projects 1 and 6), technical guidance (Projects 2, 4, and 5), and program and budgeting (Project 3). Two additional projects were identified as high priority (Projects 7 and 8). Project 7 has become SHRP 2 Project L31. Project 8 was funded through the Capacity area of the SHRP 2 program. The results of this proj- ect were included in the SHRP 2 Project L17 KTS. Projects 9,

18 Table 2.2. Gap-Filling Projects # Description Objective Product Schedule in Months Priority for L17 1 Persuasive TSM&O Case Study Briefing Book for Decision Makers To provide compelling examples from state and regional experience that support the benefits of TSM&O in terms that are directly relevant to decision makers. Mini briefing book for decision makers 9 High 2 Deployment Guidance for TSM&O Strategies To provide guidance for matching the deployment of TSM&O strategies to institutional, highway, and traffic conditions. Guidebook 9 High 3 TSM&O Program and Budget Development To develop guidelines for determining short-term programs and budgets as well as procedures for identifying long-term needs for TSM&O within an agency. Guidebook 9 High 4 Standard Evaluation and Reporting Procedures for TSM&O Strategies To provide guidance on how to conduct field eval- uations of operations strategies and to use the results both internally and externally. Guidebook 6 High 5 Synthesis on Valuing Travel Time Reliability To provide interim guidance on how to value travel time reliability until a full-scale research project is completed. Guidebook 6 Higha 6 Key Sub-Audience Business Case and Communication Strategies to Support Mainstreaming of TSM&O To develop business case and communication strategies for up to an additional six sub- audiences to supplement brand, communica- tion strategies, and sample materials being developed as part of the L17 scope. Business cases and report 6 High 7 Development and Delivery of CEO Workshops To conduct workshops for new CEOs and Chief Engineers to demonstrate TSM&O benefits and successful practices. Workshop materials and briefing report 9 Highb 8 Integration of Operations into Transportation Decision Making To provide technical staff and policy makers the decision-making structure and supporting infor- mation needed to integrate consideration of oper- ational improvements into overall transportation decision making during planning, programming, corridor planning, and NEPA/permitting. Separate applica- tion in TCAPP 12 Highc 9 TSM&O in the “new context of” constrained transportation improvements To provide resource material that focuses on identifying the set of recent changes in the con- text for transportation improvement—state and regional—that have constrained conventional (capacity) improvements and imply greater need for focus on efficient and effective opera- tions of the existing network. The material would be designed to be used by policy and planning staffs. “Responding to Constraints” handbook and related web material 9 Medium 10 Development of a TSM&O Course To develop course materials for one graduate-level course on TSM&O. Course material and “train-the-trainer” material 9 Medium 11 Guidance and Application Proce- dures for Predicting the Perfor- mance of TSM&O Strategies To develop guidance for applying analysis, model- ing, and simulation tools in the evaluation of emerging TSM&O strategies. Guidebook 12 Low 12 Facts and Stats for TSM&O To summarize readily available quantitative infor- mation regarding implementation statistics, benefits, and costs of TSM&O strategies to incorporate in the KTS. Database and report 6 High Note: Shaded rows represent recommended gap-filling projects for L17 Phase 3. NEPA = National Environmental Policy Act of 1969; TCAPP = Transportation for Communities—Advancing Projects through Partnerships. a A full-scale follow-on project is recommended for developing a recommended practice for valuing travel time reliability. b This project has been replaced by Project L31. c This project became part of Project C01.

19 10, and 11 were judged to be of low or medium priority and were not pursued at this time. The facts and statistics described in Project 12 were provided in the case study briefing book pages (Gap-Filling Project 1) and the business case primer (Gap-Filling Project 6). Following an initial review of the gap-filling projects by the TETG at the June 28–29, 2011, meeting in Washington, D.C., the TETG recommended further analysis to examine potential overlap and conflict with other SHRP 2 activities. Accordingly, the project team conducted a detailed assessment of all prod- ucts being produced from all projects in the SHRP 2 Reliability program (including Projects L1 through L17), the proposed gap-filling projects (GF Project 1 through GF Project 12), and the planned development projects approved by the SHRP 2 Oversight Committee. The project team identified “go-to” products for each of the taxonomy cells shown in Figure 2.1. A go-to product is one that practitioners would refer to as a pri- mary source of information to address a question on a particu- lar topic. The results of this mapping exercise confirmed that the proposed gap-filling projects do not overlap with other ongoing or planned SHRP 2 research activities, and that each of the gap-filling projects addresses an identified gap, as shown in Appendix B. Gap-Filling project Summaries The gap-filling projects were conducted during Phase 3 to supplement the information contained on the KTS so that it would provide a more comprehensive, useful, and usable source of information for TSM&O. The results of these efforts were a set of guidebooks and reports describing a synthesis of practice. These documents are posted on the SHRP 2 website at http://www.trb.org/main/blurbs/169243 .aspx. A broad overview of the contents of each document is provided next. GF PROJECT 1—Persuasive TSM&O Case Study Briefing Book for Decision Makers Many key decision makers in transportation—whether elected or appointed—have a modest background in transportation. (Among state DOT CEOs, 50% come from outside transpor- tation and serve for an average of 2.5 years.) It is important, therefore, to provide information that presents the payoffs from increased program attention and investments in TSM&O in terms that are related to both the external and internal policy environment for such decision makers. This project used some existing best-case examples that relate the advantages of TSM&O. The examples were organized to deal with the range of state and regional contexts (large versus small, urban ver- sus rural) and with policy, program, and resource issues that are typically facing decision makers. The material was tightly organized; heavy on examples, graphics, and illustrations; and designed for the nontechnical decision maker audi- ence. The product from this effort was a series of single- page summaries (referred to as briefing book pages) that provide compelling examples from state and regional expe- rience that support the benefits of TSM&O in terms directly relevant to decision makers. These pages are shown in Appendix C. GF PROJECT 2—Deployment Guidance for TSM&O Strategies A common question posed by operators who already have TSM&O activities under way is, where do we deploy next and what do we deploy? Guidance is needed to support agencies in deciding what, when, and where TSM&O strate- gies should be deployed, both in the short term and in the long term. To accomplish this objective, a synthesis of current practice was undertaken through a series of case studies with state operations personnel. Specifically, the following issues were addressed: • What would agency personnel like to know to further enhance the deployment strategies and the logistics of deployment? • What funding issues are faced in trying to expand deploy- ment and how have they been resolved? • What strategies are considered when funds become avail- able or authorized? What are the gaps in knowledge about how best to deploy them when ready? • For a recent deployment example, what were the conditions and context of the application? • To what degree have technical and analytic procedures been applied to deployment planning? • What deployment strategies are not producing the desired results? • What other agencies or entities would benefit from further cooperation in order to integrate dynamic strategies like incident management and work zones? • What other issues have occurred with current deployment strategies? • Have other agencies influenced current deployment procedures? • What lessons were learned from early experience and how did deployment processes change based on these? Based on the case studies, the project defined several general approaches or models that states have used in deployment planning, including both formal and informal approaches. In addition to the synthesis of the practice, this project also defined the structure for a more detailed guidebook on this subject.

20 GF PROJECT 3—TSM&O Program and Budget Development Other functional areas (e.g., pavements, safety, and bridges) have long-standing procedures for developing annual programs and budgets and for identifying their long-term needs in the periodic needs assessments conducted by state DOTs. No com- parable processes exist for TSM&O. Planning documents such as deployment plans and architectures exist but are usually dis- connected from annual program and budget development and are not well integrated into the same needs identification pro- cess as other functional areas. This project created guidance on how annual TSM&O programs should be developed, particu- larly in light of the trend toward performance-based manage- ment of the transportation system. Because TSM&O strategies address both congestion and safety concerns, it is imperative that a cross-cutting approach be developed so that a TSM&O program is integrated with those of planning, construction, and safety. In the long term, the analytic process that determines future transportation needs must also account for TSM&O. Budget development is critical to the long-term success of TSM&O programs. Gap-Filling Project 2 considered budgeting as part of the deployment planning process. However, securing funding is so vital that this project took a more in-depth look at the subject. GF PROJECT 4—Standard Evaluation and Reporting Procedures for TSM&O Strategies Operators are increasingly being asked, what benefits have we received from our TSM&O activities? Ongoing performance monitoring systems are just now being deployed to help answer that and other questions, but many issues remain. There is no standard way of developing performance measures or collect- ing and managing data from different sources. Past evaluations have used a variety of data and methods, making it difficult to identify exactly what the benefits of operations are and how the results can be applied in different situations. Without stan- dardized guidance, different agencies are likely to develop their own particular approaches, a situation which can pose prob- lems in uniformity, consistency, and data validity. It is highly important to ensure that evaluations are done with rigor and that they use consistent methods. This is to ensure that the results will be transferable to other areas. With the passage of the MAP-21 legislation (and its emphasis on performance management of the highway programs), guidance on conduct- ing evaluations will be valuable to practitioners. Project evalu- ations will be a key component of a performance management system and are a valuable adjunct to systemwide trend monitor- ing. Evaluations of deployed TSM&O strategies are being pro- moted as a major part of ongoing performance monitoring programs. The results of evaluations can be used as a way to promote TSM&O. Finally, a standard method for reporting the results would demonstrate how TSM&O improvements pro- vide cost-effective solutions to congestion and safety problems. This synthesis of current practice provided guidance on how to conduct field evaluations and how to use the results both inter- nally and externally. Gap-Filling Project 4 produced a guidebook that presents a step-by-step procedure for conducting before-and-after evaluations of operations strategies. It included defining a standard set of performance measures, data processing meth- ods, controlling for external factors, and comparative analysis techniques. GF PROJECT 5—Synthesis on Valuing Travel Time Reliability There have been various methods suggested for valuing travel time reliability. These methods include (1) quantifying the value of travel time based on stated preference surveys, (2) quantifying the value of travel time based on revealed pref- erence travel logs, and (3) applying the value of time to changes in measured travel time after the application of TSM&O treat- ments. The third method is referred to as the options theoretic approach. Associated with each of these methods are widely varying levels of real-world experience, case-study experience, or both. The extensive amount of international experience that has already been accumulated in this area is not yet well recognized in the United States. Comprehensive resolution of this issue would involve a separate SHRP 2 Reliability research project. In the interim, a methodology is needed that provides guidance to practitioners in their day-to-day practice. This project summarized domestic and international experiences into a set of best-practice recommendations on how to value travel time reliability until the full-scale research project is completed. GF PROJECT 6—Key Sub-Audience Business Case and Communication Strategies to Support Mainstreaming of TSM&O The purpose of the branding and communication track of the SHRP 2 L17 project was to develop business cases and sample communication materials that can support the mainstreaming of TSM&O at federal, state, and regional transportation agen- cies. The SHRP 2 Project L17 scope included the development of the business case and sample communication materials for three primary target audiences: 1. Investment Decision Makers: policy-level decision makers at any level (federal, state, and regional) and mid-managers who have primary responsibility for recommending investment priorities to policy decision makers. 2. Implementers: practitioners who work at all government levels (federal, state, and regional) from all disciplines,

21 including multiple types of engineering, planning, district, headquarters, and transportation management center managers and staff. 3. Travelers: passengers and freight. While the high-level business case for each of these indi- vidual target audiences is similar, these audiences are very broad. The goal of supporting mainstreaming TSM&O can be advanced by the development of more tailored busi- ness cases and sample materials for key sub-target audi- ences. The objective of this project was to supplement the current SHRP 2 Project L17 scope to identify up to six “sub- audiences” that are most essential to driving TSM&O inte- gration and developing business cases, communication strategies, and sample materials to address these audiences. Sub-audiences may include specific positions at a transporta- tion agency such as the district engineer, senior planner, or other positions identified as central to advancing the TSM&O brand. The materials that were developed for these sub- target audiences were integrated into the business case primer (discussed in Chapter 4). GF PROJECT 8—Integration of Operations into Transportation Decision Making The traditional state DOT decision-making processes for planning, selecting, and funding capacity and operational improvements have been disconnected. Capacity and opera- tional improvements frequently rely on separate funding sources, sometimes on different time cycles, and usually involve different technical staff and decision makers. In recent years, the transportation industry at the federal, state, and regional levels has focused on the impact that operational improve- ments can have on mobility, particularly in congested areas. The remaining challenge is to integrate operations across the industry by having each state DOT or metropolitan planning organization take this information and apply it to its specific technical and funding decision-making processes. The objec- tive of this project was to incorporate the operational improve- ment decision-making process into the Transportation for Communities—Advancing Projects through Partnerships (TCAPP) web tool so that practitioners understand how to sys- tematically identify and evaluate operational improvements as a part of the overall transportation decision-making process. The result of this effort was a systematic “how-to” guide that is flexible and adaptable enough for agencies to tailor to their individual needs. Documentation was assembled to quantify the effectiveness of TSM&O treatments. These treatments have a significantly high benefit-cost ratio as compared with traditional roadway expansion. They also lead to significant reductions in delay, incidents, and crashes. Figure 2.2 summarizes these results for 10 TSM&O strategies. The numerical values for each strategy represent benefit-cost ratios that have been calculated for each strategy. Of course, the benefits will vary based on local condi- tions, but these data clearly demonstrate the beneficial results that operational treatments bring to the roadway system. For more information on infrastructure productivity, see http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/mgi/research/ urbanization/infrastructure_productivity. Source: Intelligent transportation systems, Capitol Research, Council of State Governments, April 2010; Transport for London, 2007; Intelligent transportation systems benefits, costs, deployment, and lessons learned desk reference: 2011 update, U.S. Department of Transportation, September 2011; Urban mobility plan, Seattle Department of Transportation, January 2008; McKinsey Global Institute analysis. Figure 2.2. Strategies and payoffs of TSM&O.