Broadening Integrated Corridor Management Stakeholders (2020)

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.

B-1 A P P E N D I X B Overview of Integrated Corridor Management Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) involves the coordination of transportation management techniques among networks in a corridor that can collectively address congestion and improve overall corridor performance. The United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) ICM program demonstrates how Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) technologies can efficiently and proactively manage the movement of people and goods in major transportation corridors. Overview of Integrated Corridor Management One area of transportation operations that has the potential for increased efficiency lies in how transportation agencies coordinate day-to-day operations along heavily traveled corridors. Along most urban transportation corridors, each transportation agency within the corridor (e.g., local departments of transportation, bus operators, light rail operators, etc.) handles operations independently, with the exception of incidents or planned events. As road users experience increased levels of congestion, delay, and incidents, this operational model has become less effective in meeting the transportation needs of the people that rely on the corridor.5 ICM is an approach to improving transportation that takes into account all elements in a corridor, such as highways, arterial roads, and transit systems. By optimizing the use of existing infrastructure assets through coordinated transportation management techniques, transportation investments can go farther. There are many corridors in the country with underutilized capacity (in the form of arterials, freeway travel lanes and parallel transit capacity (e.g., bus, rail, bus rapid transit, etc.)) that could benefit from ICM. The maturation of ITS technologies, availability of supporting data, and emerging multiagency institutional frameworks make ICM practical and feasible. There is a large number of freeway, arterial, and transit optimization strategies available today that are already in widespread use across the United States. Most of these strategies are managed locally by individual agencies on an uncoordinated basis. Even those managed regionally are often managed in isolation (asset-by-asset) rather than in an integrated fashion across a transportation corridor. Dynamically applying these strategies in combination across a corridor in response to varying conditions is expected to reduce congestion “hot spots” in the system and to improve the overall productivity of the system. Furthermore, providing travelers with actionable information on alternatives (such as multimodal comparative travel times) is expected to mitigate bottlenecks, reduce congestion, improve the resilience of the system during major incidents, and empower travelers to make more informed travel choices. Typically, the key champions of ICM are State DOTs and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs). These multijurisdictional agencies have the authority and resources to manage ICM corridors as 5 Federal Highway Administration, Integrated Corridor Management and Transit and Mobility on Demand, FHWA- HOP-16-036. Available at: https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop16036/fhwahop16036.pdf.

B-2 Broadening Integrated Corridor Management Stakeholders systems and regional event management systems. These systems provide the necessary intelligent transportation system foundation for integrated corridor management. Metropolitan areas that are considering ICM will likely have formal or informal operations planning groups from which to build an ICM team. The question of who should be involved should be left to the participants themselves. It is important to keep all stakeholders informed throughout the process, even when they are not directly involved. Continued involvement of all stakeholder groups will add significant value to the project—from adding precision to the design and informing traveler demand modelers, to proactively addressing agency regulations. Interagency agreements between stakeholders are typically required in situations where infrastructure assets and information exchange is shared between agencies. Institutional, organizational, and technical arrangements will be further explored in Appendix H. FIGURE B.1 depicts the expected functionality of an ICM system, which typically involves three distinct yet interrelated types of integration: Institutional integration relates to coordination and collaboration between various agencies and jurisdictions that transcends institutional boundaries. Operational integration refers to multiagency and cross-network operational strategies to manage the total capacity and demand of the corridor. Technical integration refers to sharing and distribution of information, and system operations and control functions to support the immediate analysis and response to congestion. In 2007, the U.S. DOT partnered with eight “Pioneer Sites,” selected to explore the institutional guidance, operational capabilities, ITS technology, and technical 6 U.S. DOT Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, Integrated Corridor Management Analysis, Modeling, and Simulation for the U.S.-75 Corridor in Dallas, Texas Post-Deployment Assessment Report, FHWA-JPO-16-396. Available at: https://ntl.bts.gov/lib/60000/60400/60490/FHWA-JPO-16-396.pdf; U.S. DOT Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, Integrated Corridor Management Analysis, FIGURE B.1. Functionality of an Integrated Corridor Management system (FHWA). collaborative, multimodal systems. Assets owned and operated by these agencies include, but are not limited to, advanced traffic management systems, ramp meter information systems, managed lane/HOV control systems, 511 traveler information systems, changeable message sign systems, camera surveillance methods needed for effective ICM. In 2008, three of the Pioneer Sites (Dallas, TX; Minneapolis, MN; and San Diego, CA) were selected to conduct AMS of their ICM concepts. Two sites (Dallas, TX and San Diego, CA) were selected to demonstrate their ICM systems by the end of 2015. The Dallas site ICM program centered on the transit offerings of the Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) system. The San Diego site includes a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system as a critical part of their ICM deployment. Post-deployment assessment of the two Pioneer Demonstration sites showed a 0.1 percent and 3.3 percent reduction of delay along the study corridor in Dallas and San Diego, respectively. Both study corridors showed benefits in travel time reliability during peak periods as well.6

Overview of Integrated Corridor Management B-3 Recently, over 40 new sites applied for ICM grants, signifying a great demand for ICM. In February of 2015, 13 sites were selected by the U.S. DOT to receive grants to expand the ICM program focusing on developing Concepts of Operations, Requirements, and Analysis Modeling and Simulation Plans for their sites. Five of these sites specifically called out freight or transit in their corridor descriptions. The map in FIGURE B.2 highlights the expansion of ICM activities nationwide. FIGURE B.2. Nationwide Integrated Corridor Management activity as of August 2017 (https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/pressroom/fhwa1504.cfm). Integrated Corridor Management Strategies ICM combines two fundamental concepts: active management and integration. Active management involves monitoring and assessing the performance of the system and dynamically implementing actions in response to fluctuations in demand. In an ICM corridor, all individual facilities must be actively managed so that operational approaches can be altered in real-time in response to an event anywhere on the system.7 The broadness, versatility, and complexity of ICM is apparent when trying to compile a comprehensive list of potential ICM strategies. At a basic level, the goals of ICM projects involve: • Improving travel time. • Increasing corridor throughput. Modeling, and Simulation for the I-15 Corridor in San Diego, California Post-Deployment Assessment Report, FHWA-JPO-16-403. Available at: https://ntl.bts.gov/lib/61000/61100/61131/FHWA-JPO-16-403.pdf. 7 Federal Highway Administration, Integrated Corridor Management and Traffic Incident Management: A Primer, FHWA-HOP-16-035. Available at: https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop16035/fhwahop16035.pdf.

B-4 Broadening Integrated Corridor Management Stakeholders Improving travel time reliability. Improving incident management. Enabling intermodal travel decisions. Safety for all travelers. mitigate an array of corridor deficiencies. Potential mitigation strategies are not limited to a single observed deficiency—they can be designed to address multiple issues. Recurring congestion refers to congestion caused by routine traffic volumes in a typical environment—no unusual circumstances have occurred. Non-recurring congestion describes unexpected or unusual congestion caused by an event that was unexpected and transient relative to other similar days. For example, non-recurring congestion can be caused by lane blocking events (accidents, disabled vehicles, debris in the roadway, construction, etc.), inclement weather, or significant increase in traffic volumes in comparison to typical traffic volumes for that particular location.8 Integrated Corridor Management System Components The role of the Integrated Corridor Management System (ICMS) is to ingest, integrate and analyze data from a comprehensive set of sources, including freeway, arterial, transit, traveler information, commercial vehicle operation, traffic surveillance and monitoring, and incident management systems. FIGURE B.3 lists potential systems that can be connected to the ICMS, depending on the availability and need of the ICM strategies selected for implementation. ICMSs are generally connected to existing, upgraded, and new systems. Communication to the ICMS can be one-way (data feeds into the ICMS) or two-way (the ICMS also sends data to the system). Value of Integrated Corridor Management Key lessons learned from agencies that have implemented ICM are presented in this section. While quantitative assessments of proposed ICM solutions show annual travel time savings, improvement in travel time reliability, annual fuel savings, annual emissions reductions, and 10-year net benefit estimates, ICM projects are not without their challenges and limitations. Agencies looking to pursue ICM projects should be fully informed of what it will involve. Pros Transportation researchers have used Analysis, Modeling and Simulation (AMS) methodologies to estimate the impacts of proposed ICM solutions (see TABLE B.3). Projected benefit-cost ratios range from 10:1 to 22:1 over a 10-year period. 8 U.S. DOT ITS Joint Program Office, Integrated Corridor Management Concept Development and Foundational Research Phase 1 – Concept Development and Foundational Research, FHWA-JPO-06-034. Available at: https://ntl.bts.gov/lib/jpodocs/repts_te/14273_files/14273.pdf. There is no standardized set of ICM strategies to include in an ICM project. Ultimately, the ICM strategies chosen for a specific corridor will depend on a range of factors such as traffic patterns, available assets, and agency collaboration. TABLE B.1 and TABLE B.2 present samples of ICM strategies that can be used to

TABLE B.1. Potential Integrated Corridor Management strategies for freeways. Observed Deficiency Potential Mitigation Strategies Description Potential Benefits Safety/Crashes Improved Dynamic Corridor Ramp Metering Algorithms Dynamic adjustment (up or down) of metering rates based on current conditions on the facility and remaining available capacity of the facility/system. Increase throughput Decrease vehicle hours traveled Decrease primary incidents Increase speeds Decrease travel times Decrease delay Queue Warning Inform travelers of the presence of downstream stop-and- go traffic based on real-time traffic detection using warning signs and flashing lights. Decrease primary and secondary incidents Decrease speed variability Improved Decision Support Systems (DSS)/Incident Response Plans DSSs use real-time data and knowledge of the current state/conditions of the network to provide appropriate alternate routes to TMC operators as they respond to incidents (e.g., traffic collisions, severe weather, evacuations). Reduce response time Reduce negative impacts on network performance Media and Social Media Alerts Mobile alerts for real-time traveler information such as congestion hot spots and locations of incidents, lane closures, and construction events can provide roadway users with actionable information. Decrease primary and secondary incidents Decrease delay Non-Recurring Congestion Dynamic HOV Conversion When congestion is light, the HOV lane can be operated as a general-purpose lane, and when congestion is severe, access can be limited to transit vehicles only. For facilities that lack dedicated HOV lanes, hard shoulder running can be used to add a general-purpose lane to the freeway, while the median lane is simultaneously converted into an HOV lane. Increase transit ridership Increase transit on-time performance Speed Harmonization/Variable Speed Limits (VSL) VSL is used to slow traffic down gradually ahead of a congested area to reduce the occurrence of traffic collisions, and attempts to set speed limits appropriately in the congested regions so that traffic continues to flow smoothly rather than deteriorating to less efficient stop- and-go conditions. Increase capacity Decrease primary and secondary incidents Increase average speed Decrease peak-period duration

Observed Deficiency Potential Mitigation Strategies Description Potential Benefits Decrease emissions Decrease fuel consumption Dynamic Rerouting Alternate route guidance is provided to drivers heading for designated destinations when conditions on the primary route have deteriorated below a prescribed threshold due to congestion, weather conditions, or other situations. This strategy is closely supported by effective DSSs. Decrease travel time Increase average speed Decrease speed variability Media and Social Media Alerts Mobile alerts for real-time traveler information such as congestion hot spots and locations of incidents, lane closures, and construction events can provide roadway users with actionable information. Decrease primary and secondary incidents Decrease delay Recurring Congestion Lane Use Signals/Dynamic Lane Management Opening and closing of lanes on a facility in response to real-time conditions. Congested conditions may result in the opening of additional lanes (such as reversible or shoulder lanes) to traffic. When closures occur, lane use signals provide drivers warning ahead of the closure so that they may anticipate the merge ahead. Increase throughput Increase capacity Decrease primary and secondary incidents Decrease emissions Dynamic Pricing Uses tolls to manage supply during periods of high demand. Prices are set to maintain a prescribed level of performance on the facility, such as a minimum acceptable speed. Provisions are sometimes enacted that allow HOVs and transit vehicles to receive discounted toll rates. Increase transit ridership Increase transit on-time performance Dynamic Junction Control Lane configurations at a ramp merge or diverge are updated throughout the day to best accommodate the current traffic demands (high entrance volumes and/or high exit volumes). Decrease ramp and mainline delays Decrease mainline and ramp travel times Decrease primary accidents Media and Social Media Alerts Mobile alerts for real-time traveler information such as congestion hot spots and locations of incidents, lane closures, and construction events can provide roadway users with actionable information. Decrease primary and secondary incidents Decrease delay Source: Active Traffic Management Congestion Relief Analysis Study and http://www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov.

TABLE B.2. Potential Integrated Corridor Management strategies for arterials. Observed Deficiency Potential Mitigation Strategies Description Potential Benefits Safety/ Crashes Emergency Vehicle Signal Preemption System Emergency services vehicles (ambulances, fire trucks, police cars) equipped with sensors can trigger signalized intersections to synchronize traffic and crosswalk signals in the forward path, allowing them to pass through a corridor to reach the incident. Decrease travel time for emergency service vehicles Reduce response time Decrease secondary incidents Automated Work Zone Information System (AWIS) The AWIS system uses a Central System Controller, highway advisory radios (HAR), traffic sensors, CMSs, and speed stations to calculate and report delay times to travelers via CMSs. The public is provided with general work zone and delay information via various traveler information sources (e.g., 511, HAR system). Decrease fatal crash rate Decrease rear-end crash rate Improved Decision Support Systems (DSS)/Incident Response Plans A DSS evaluates a set of business rules based on current traffic conditions (time of day, day of week, incident severity, location of the incident, possible issues with alternate routes) and determines the best predefined response plan which involves potential alternate routes, signal and metering light timing changes, equipment and personnel requests, and communication plans. Decrease response time Decrease incident clearance time Decrease delays Decrease secondary incidents Media and Social Media Alerts Mobile alerts for real-time traveler information such as congestion hot spots and locations of incidents, lane closures, and construction events can provide roadway users with actionable information. Decrease primary and secondary incidents Decrease delay Non- Recurring Congestion Predictive Traveler Information Travel time estimates are generated based on predicted (as opposed to recently observed) performance of the system, using models, expected incident clearance times, schedules of regional special events, etc. and are expected to be more reliable and accurate than those based on past data. Increase on-time performance Increased transit and parking capacity New parking spots planned within the corridor can be used to attract single occupancy vehicle (SOV) trips to transit. Additional buses or light rail vehicles can be added as necessary to accommodate increases in demand. Financial incentives such Increase transit ridership Decrease freeway and arterial travel time Increase capacity

Observed Deficiency Potential Mitigation Strategies Description Potential Benefits as reduction in fees for transit and parking may be incorporated into this strategy. Dynamic Lane Reversal A specialized and common form of dynamic lane management, this strategy involves the designation of a specialized lane (or lanes) on a facility to the direction of travel that would most benefit from its capacity according to current conditions. Some reversible lane facilities follow preset time-of-day schedules. Decrease travel time Increase capacity Decrease delay Media and Social Media Alerts Mobile alerts for real-time traveler information such as congestion hot spots and locations of incidents, lane closures, and construction events can provide roadway users with actionable information. Decrease primary and secondary incidents Decrease delay Recurring Congestion Coordination of Freeway Ramp Metering and Arterial Signal Control Ramp metering and arterial signal control systems that are operated in isolation can lead to excess congestion. In a coordinated system, ramp-metering rates are generally used to inform signal operations on nearby arterials, so that their operations complement—rather than conflict with—each other. Decrease delays Decrease travel time Reduced emissions Increase throughput Adaptive Traffic Signal Control Operating a signalized intersection, corridor, or network of arterials such that the timing parameters are set based on current traffic conditions. These systems can respond reactively to atypical traffic conditions (e.g., high demands caused by special events), or proactively to anticipated recurrent congestion based on historical data. Decrease travel time Decrease delay Decrease number of stops Transit Signal Priority (TSP) When a transit vehicle approaches a signalized intersection, TSP systems will attempt to give priority to the vehicle by extending the green phase until the vehicle passes through the intersection, or by reducing the duration of the red phase if it is already active. Decrease person-hours of delay Increase transit ridership Increase transit on-time performance Decrease travel time Decrease fuel consumption Media and Social Media Alerts Mobile alerts for real-time traveler information such as congestion hot spots and locations of incidents, lane closures, and construction events can provide roadway users with actionable information. Decrease primary and secondary incidents Decrease delay Source: Active Traffic Management Congestion Relief Analysis Study and http://www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov.

FIGURE B.3. Potential Integrated Corridor Management system components (San Diego Association of Governments and http://www.topslab.wisc.edu/workgroups/icm/ICM%20Best%20Practices.pdf). Integrated Corridor Management System Freeway Management System Advanced Traffic Management System Ramp Meter Information System Lane Closure System Congestion Pricing System Managed Lanes/HOV Control System Arterial Management System Regional Arterial Management System Transit Management System Regional Transit Management System Transit Signal Priority System Smart Parking System Traveler Information System Arterial Travel Time System Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) System 511 National Weather Service Changeable Message Sign System Media Alerts Social Media Alerts Commercial Vehicle Operation Freight Advanced Traveler Information System Traffic Surveillance and Monitoring System Arterial Street Monitoring System Park & Ride Lot Monitoring System CCTV Camera System RFID Speed Detection System Bluetooth Travel Time Detection System Incident Management System Regional Event Management System

B-10 Broadening Integrated Corridor Management Stakeholders TABLE B.3. Estimated pre-deployment benefits of Integrated Corridor Management. Evaluation Measures San Diego Dallas Minneapolis Annual Travel Time Savings (Person-Hours) 246,000 740,000 132,000 Improvement in Travel Time Reliability 10.6% 3% 4.4% Gallons of Fuel Saved Annually 323,000 981,000 17,600 Tons of Mobile Emissions Saved Annually 3,100 9,400 175 10-Year Net Benefit1 $104 million $264 million $82 million 10-Year Cost $12 million $14 million $4 million Benefit-Cost Ratio 10:1 20:1 22:1 1 The values of safety benefits were not included in San Diego, Dallas, and Minneapolis estimates. Source: U.S. DOT, Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) ITS Benefits, Costs, and Lessons Learned: 2017 Update Report, FHWA-JPO-17-500. Available at: http://www.itsknowledgeresources.its.dot.gov/its/bcllupdate/pdf/BCLL_Freeway_ICM_2017_FINAL.pdf. Additional benefits cited by agencies involved in implementing complex multiyear and multi-agency ICM projects include: ICM provides the opportunity to proactively improve and maximize the performance of the transportation system by serving as an alternate to traditional major infrastructure investments that may be more expensive or constrained by environmental issues.9 Proactive management of incidents and congestion helps to minimize negative impacts to network performance when faced with unexpected or unusual events. ICM solutions provide corridor users with real-time situational awareness (travel times, incident information, and expected delays) via traveler information sources, enabling travelers to make smarter travel decisions. ICM produces benefits across different operational conditions (recurrent and non-recurrent congestion). Developing relationships with other agencies that operate in the same corridor opens up opportunities for tackling overlapping transportation issues using coordinated efforts, shared resources, and different perspectives. Cons On a qualitative level, the following were cited as the top reasons that agencies were not pursuing ICM and operational strategies: A need to dedicate available funds to maintenance of existing infrastructure and initiatives. A prevailing sentiment that such strategies will not address the agency’s or the region’s transportation problems. A lack of any focused or concerted effort at the agency to motivate a shift from capital to operational strategies. 9 Feedback from Alex Estrella (San Diego Association of Governments), ICM Manager of the I-15 Demonstration Site.

Overview of Integrated Corridor Management B-11 Incident response plans, as well as predictive models need to be updated and tested on a regular basis to ensure that they accurately reflect the ICM corridor demands, asset availability, and data feeds from various transportation management systems. Elements of Integrated Corridor Management within Agency Operations Many agencies are already performing some forms of ICM without explicitly labeling it as such. TABLE B.4 lists elements of ICM that may be recognized by other forms or terminology that agencies may be more closely familiar with, such as traffic incident management (TIM), transportation system management & operation (TSM&O), active transportation and demand management (ATDM), Smart Cities, and the general scope of transportation management centers (TMCs) and transportation operations centers (TOCs). ICM solutions are complementary to, and are further enhanced by related multidisciplinary, multijurisdictional, performance-driven initiatives such as these, as well as objectives-driven, performance- based planning for operations efforts. TABLE B.4. Programs, strategies, and terms that involve elements of Integrated Corridor Management. Programs Elements Supporting ICM Traffic Incident Management (TIM) Mobility, travel time reliability, and traveler safety are negatively impacted when traffic incidents occur. TIM programs have made an effort to shift away from traditional ad-hoc incident response towards coordinated incident response while exploring new tools and technologies that can improve incident detection, response and clearance. The overall objectives of TIM programs: 1) responder safety; 2) safe, quick clearance; and 3) prompt, reliable, interoperable communications share common goals with ICM. Transportation Management Centers (TMCs) and Transportation Operations Centers (TOCs) TMCs and TOCs are the technical and institutional hub of most freeway and arterial management systems. It is where transportation system data is collected, processed, and synthesized to produce information to be used in decision-making. TMC staff use this information to monitor the operation of the freeway and to initiate control strategies in response to traffic situations and incidents. The various jurisdictions that play a role in TMCs/TOCs share a common goal of optimizing the performance of the entire surface transportation system. Improving decision-support systems in an ICM system often involves the infrastructure and processes that exist at TMCs/TOCs. Transportation System Management & Operation (TSM&O) TSM&O strategies optimize the transportation system with management and operation strategies, instead of building high-cost infrastructure projects. With fewer funds available to build our way out of congestion, TSM&O strategies focus on ITS applications. One way to improve ICM is by integrating existing ITS and management efforts into multi-modal, multi-jurisdictional, corridor-wide transportation management systems. Active Transportation and Demand Management (ATDM) ATDM is identified in MAP-21 as one of the components of TSM&O. Using available tools and assets, traffic flow is managed and traveler behavior is influenced in real-time to achieve operational objectives. ATDM strategies fall into the overall ICM approach of managing capacity during crashes, non-recurring congestion, or recurring congestion. Smart Cities Smart Cities are defined by the FHWA Joint Program Office (JPO) as a “system of interconnected systems, including employment, health care, retail/entertainment, public services, residences, energy distribution, and not least, transportation. This ‘system of systems’ is tied together by information and communication technologies that transmit and process data about all sorts of activities within the city.”1 ICM is

B-12 Broadening Integrated Corridor Management Stakeholders Programs Elements Supporting ICM seen as a practical application of a smart cities objective, confined to a corridor instead of citywide. 1 U.S. DOT ITS JPO, The Smart/Connected City and Its Implications for Connected Transportation, FHWA-JPO- 14-148. Available at: https://www.its.dot.gov/itspac/Dec2014/Smart_Connected_City_FINAL_111314.pdf. Strategies for Building Trust and Consensus Successfully facilitating coordination and collaboration among diverse stakeholder groups that may have competing priorities may come in many shapes and forms. There is no exact formula to determine what strategies are needed for building trust and consensus among ICM stakeholders. However, the following best practices were identified for planning and designing smart corridors.10 Clear Institutional Framework A strong project requires a defined institutional framework. Once a project manager or champion is defined, a stakeholder’s map needs to be designed to determine a clear workflow diagram and communication protocols. Once the main actors are on board and know their role and responsibilities, a multi-jurisdictional project is able to start the planning process. Common Vision The project needs to have a common vision across all the stakeholders. An agreement needs to be set on what problems the project will address and which future scenario is expected once the project is up and running. This involves having a stated and written agreement on the project’s mission, goals and objectives. It is important to consider possible funds to establish objectives in line with targeted funding programs. For example, if the project is looking to obtain funding from Advanced Transportation and Congestion Management Technologies Deployment (ATCMTD) grants, the objective should consider improving safety, efficiency, system performance, and infrastructure return on investment. Secure Funding One of the most important factors in a successful traffic management project is to have a realistic funding plan. This plan needs to consider important costs throughout the project’s life cycle, including operation costs, maintenance, and training, among others. It is important to determine the funds available for this project and understand the phases that they could be used for. In general, implementation costs require a significant amount of resources. If one of the ICM strategies requires adaptive signal control along alternative arterial routes, all jurisdictions within the ICM corridor need to secure funding for any necessary traffic signal upgrades within the same period in order for the strategy to be feasible. For implementation costs, similar projects have looked at Federal funds like STP, ATCMTD, CMAQ, and ITS funds, which could contribute with a significant share of the necessary funds. 10 Smart Corridor projects are intended to improve travel for all modes (passenger traffic, freight, and transit) through low-cost solutions and Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) along a specified roadway facility. Best practices have been adapted from: Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Cook DuPage Smart Corridors Plan and Design Report: Technical Report. 2015.

Overview of Integrated Corridor Management B-13 Equally important is to determine how the day-to-day operation scheme would be funded. Several mechanisms can be considered. Alternatives, such as tax cuts, State and local resources, cooperative and cost-sharing agreements, have been proven successful. Projects of this type can be taken as an opportunity for local agencies—which currently fund their traffic signal operations—to upgrade and implement technology for their cause at a lesser cost than doing it individually. Once a project champion is defined, as well as responsibilities and jurisdictions, a stable financial plan can be thought through to ensure the success of the project. Arrangements and Agreements Having clear and precise documents stating roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders is key for success. It is critical that agreements and responsibilities are defined over Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs), cooperative agreements, and official reports, like the Concept of Operations in Kansas City or the Strategic Transportation Plan in Gateway Cities. Operational Expertise A successful transportation management system relies heavily on the operability of the project. For this reason, it is important to consider and include staff members or external consultants with a desired level of expertise in the field. This helps reduce the risk of inoperability at early deployment, which might have an important effect during the project lifespan. It is important to consider this not only during the implementation, but also during the day-to-day activities. For this, training should be considered at early phases of the project. Operational Collaboration Managing the complexity of an integrated corridor management system (ICMS) implementation will not be easy. In most cases, the project will involve bringing together multiple agencies that perform operations using diverse methods and include the integration of their heterogeneous systems. Increased communication, organization and documentation will be required to ensure that all project partners understand and agree upon project expectations and are kept informed of the status of the project. Systems engineering is the discipline developed to manage the complexity of large-scale systems. In particular, systems engineering is often used in the management of software-intensive projects. It is highly recommended that a systems engineering approach (see FIGURE B.4) be used to manage ICMS implementations. Having a defined process tailored to the ICMS project will be critical for successful implementation.11 As the ICMS is being designed, one example of collaboration that is required of the various operations- level decision makers is the mechanism by which response plans will be selected and implemented. Together, the ICM team develops the business rules for selecting specific response plans, which are coded into the decision support system (DSS). The Dallas U.S.-75 ICM team opted to designate a specific ICM Coordinator whose role would be to evaluate and approve the response plans generated by the DSS before they are sent to all operating agencies. Unlike the Dallas ICMS, the San Diego I-15 ICMS identifies congestion events automatically, using stakeholder-defined thresholds for operational conditions and running them against real-time data. When traffic conditions meet certain thresholds, the DSS takes a combination of appropriate subsystem action plans to form a response plan, which is triggered automatically. Although the San Diego DSS implements response plans without requiring human 11 Federal Highway Administration. Integrated Corridor Management: Implementation Guide and Lessons Learned. FHWA-JPO-12-075. February 2012. https://ntl.bts.gov/lib/47000/47600/47670/FHWA-JPO-12- 075_FinalPKG_508.pdf

B-14 Broadening Integrated Corridor Management Stakeholders intervention, it does have the ability for a transportation operator to object to the recommended response plan and prevent it from being implemented in their area. FIGURE B.4. Systems Engineering V-Diagram (U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Systems Engineering Guidebook for Intelligent Transportation Systems). Regular Feedback Regular feedback is necessary for continuous improvement, one of the critical pieces of FHWA’s ICM implementation process. Traffic conditions are in constant flux and the conditions that were assessed at the beginning of an ICM project may have changed before an ICM project has even been fully implemented. This may decrease the effectiveness of implemented response plans. The San Diego I-15 ICM team holds monthly post-incident debriefing meetings with operations-level stakeholders to collect feedback on aspects of the ICMS that work well, and elements that need to be improved.