1. Scope and Summary

Overview - The Scope and Summary Chapter has the dual role of introducing the reader to both the document and to the ICM system. In essence, it serves as an executive summary for the Concept of Operations document. Many readers may not get any further than the initial chapter. Accordingly, a reader should be able to walk away from reading the scope with a high-level understanding of the ICM system and its mission as well as knowing what to expect in the remainder of the document should they decide to continue on.

1.1 Introduction and Document Contents

This is the "Concept of Operations" for an Integrated Corridor Management System (ICMS) to be deployed along the Generic Corridor located within the Cities of Neptune and Atlantis, and serving the Metropolis Central Business District as well as the suburban and commercial areas beyond the aforementioned cities. This document provides a user-oriented view of the system concept. It does not delve into technology or technical details. Rather, it focuses on the corridor's needs and problems, goals and objectives, the proposed operational approaches and strategies for attaining these goals, the institutional framework in which the ICMS will operate, and the associated operational, technical, and institutional issues that must be addressed. It has been developed to help communicate this view to the corridor stakeholders (i.e., any person or group with a direct interest in the integrated operation of the Generic Corridor and the associated networks² and cross-network linkages) and to solicit their feedback. In essence, the Concept of Operations lays out the ICMS concept, explains how things are expected to work once it's in operation, and identifies the responsibilities of the various stakeholders for making this happen.

The Concept of Operations consists of several chapters and sections as summarized in Table 1-1.

Table 1-1. Layout - ICMS Concept of Operations

1. Scope and Summary Introduction and Document Comments ICM Corridor Boundaries and Travel Characteristics Corridor Stakeholders and Users Need for Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) ICM Vision, Goals and Objectives 2. References 3. System Overview and Operational Description Corridor Boundaries and Networks Corridor Stakeholders Operational Conditions of the Generic Corridor and Included Networks Existing Network-based Transportation Management/ ITS Assets Proposed Near-Term Network Improvements Current Network - Based Institutional Characteristics Regional ITS Architecture Review Individual Network and Corridor Problems, Issues, and Needs Potential for ICM in the Generic Corridor Generic Corridor Vision 4. ICM System Operational Concept Corridor Goals and Objectives Application of ICM Approaches and Strategies ICM Concept Asset Requirements and Needs Comparison of ICM Asset Requirements with Current / Proposed Assets Generic Corridor Concept Operational Description Alignment with Regional ITS Architecture Implementation Issues Generic Corridor ICM Concept Institutional Framework Performance Measures and Targets 5. ICM Operational Scenarios Daily Operational Scenario Scheduled Event Scenario Incident Scenarios Minor Traffic Incident Major Traffic Incident Minor Transit Incident Major Transit Incident Major Planned Special Event Scenario Evacuation Scenario

1.2 ICM Corridor Boundaries, Networks and Stakeholders

The Generic Corridor is a largely linear band, approximately 15 miles in length, consisting of a freeway, adjacent arterials, and a parallel rail system as shown in Figure 1-1. The generic corridor is primarily a commuter corridor utilized for travel between the central business district of employment (in Metropolis) and commercial areas and suburban residential areas. At one end of the corridor is the Black Water River, which is the jurisdictional boundary for Metropolis. On the other side of the river, the Generic Corridor is divided between two cities: the City of Neptune is to the north of the rail line, and the City of Atlantis is to the south of the rail line. The Black Water River is crossed by four bridges: one for the freeway, one each for the freeway spur and the Broadway arterial (both of which empty into the central business district), and a railway bridge for the regional rail service.

Figure 1-1. Map of the Generic Corridor

The corridor is part of the Black Water River Metropolitan Planning Organization (BWRMPO) region and also part of an inter-regional multi-state corridor that is designated as an evacuation route. The networks comprising the generic corridor and their respective characteristics are summarized below:

• Freeway Network (including a spur into the CBD), operated by the State DOT - three travel lanes in each direction, with one of the lanes designated as HOV-3 during the peak hours (and open to all traffic during non-peak hours). The HOV lanes operate on the freeway spur; but not on the segment of the freeway that by passes the CBD.
• Arterial Network - Two arterial networks on opposite sides of freeway, with Main Street located in Neptune, and Broadway located in Atlantis, with each operated by their respective City Departments of Public Works / Transportation. Each arterial has two travel lanes in each direction, with no parking. Signalized intersections are spaced nominally at one-half mile intervals. Broadway links directly to a bridge crossing the Black Water River, entering the Metropolis CBD.
• Regional Rail Network, operated by the Regional Rail Agency - Two tracks (one in each direction), and 5 stations located within the corridor, with bus stops at each terminal and Park & Ride facilities at the three outer stations.
• Bus Transit Network, operated by the Generic Bus Authority - Local bus service operating on Main Street and Broadway, with bus stops every one-half mile (approximately), including the rail stations (except the Metropolis CBD Station) for the Main Street service. There is also an express bus service (originating outside the corridor) operating in the freeway HOV lanes, leaving the freeway and servicing the Beech Street and Cherry Street rail terminals within the Generic Corridor.

Those with operational and management responsibilities for the individual networks are shown graphically in Figure 1-2. The Generic Bus Authority operates on all of the roadway networks. Enforcement, security, and accident investigation on these networks is the responsibility of the state police (freeway), the Neptune Police, the Atlantis Police, and the Rail Agency Police. Ambulance services and HAZMAT clean-up is the responsibility of the local fire departments.

Figure 1-2. Operational Responsibility for Corridor Networks

The ICM stakeholders for the generic corridor are listed in Table 1-2, all of which were involved to some extent in the development of this Concept of Operations.

Table 1-2. Generic Corridor Stakeholders

State department of transportation (DOT) Neptune Department of Transportation Atlantis Department of Public Works Metropolis Department of Transportation Regional Rail Agency Generic Bus Authority Black Water River MPO State Police Neptune Police Atlantis Police Rail Agency Police Fire Departments (include ambulance service and HAZMAT) AAA (representing users of the roadway) Visitors Bureau (representing tourists that use the corridor) Strap Hangers Association (representing transit riders) FHWA FTA DHS / FEMA Courier fleets (e.g. US Postal Service, Federal Express, UPS) Information Service Providers

1.3 Corridor Operating and Institutional Conditions

The Generic Corridor provides transportation for the movement of commuters, freight, recreational, and other traffic, with commuter traffic comprising 70 percent of the travel market during peak periods. Traffic congestion along the roadway-based networks is a growing problem in the Generic Corridor, particularly during the peak periods. For example:

• The regular freeway lanes operate with an average peak period speed of approximately 35 mph; although the freeway HOV lanes operate at an average peak period speed of 55 mph.
• The two arterial facilities, Main Street and Broadway, both operate at an average peak period speed of 25 mph.
• With respect to transit operations within the corridor, the roadway congestion problems have also degraded the operation of the buses - particularly on the arterials and surface streets - making it increasingly more difficult for buses to maintain their published schedule. Specifically, 30 percent of the buses operating along the two arterials run behind schedule during the peak period.
• The express buses, which operate primarily within the HOV lanes of the freeway, also experience delays when moving out of the HOV lanes to exit the freeway and traveling along the arterials to service the rail stations. The peak period express bus service runs behind schedule 15 percent of the time.
• The regional rail service has an excellent on-time performance record (better than 95 percent). The increasing roadway congestion has increased rail ridership to some extent; but it is still under-utilized in terms of its available passenger-carrying capacity, even during the peak travel periods. This is due, in part, to a relatively limited number of parking spaces at some of the rail stations.

The congestion problems have resulted in a number of serious mobility related issues, such as loss of personal and professional time, increased fuel consumption, environmental degradation, and traveler frustration. As congestion and delays have increased, actual throughput corridor-wide has actually declined.

Due to the high percentage of freeway incidents, including weather-related problems - which combined account for more than half of the freeway congestion - travel reliability along the freeway is very low. The average freeway travel time can fluctuate by as much as 100 percent on a day-to-day basis depending on the location and severity of the incident. Moreover, freeway incidents often result in a shift of trips from the freeway to the arterials, resulting in a 50 percent increase in arterial travel time, with a concomitant impact on the reliability of bus operations along the arterials.

The various transportation agencies and public safety agencies within the Generic Corridor have implemented a variety of policies, strategies, and Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) technologies to improve performance of their respective networks. For example:

• State DOT uses a freeway management system incorporating roadway surveillance (detectors and CCTV); incident management procedures for detection and response, including freeway service patrols; Dynamic Message Signs (DMS) at selected locations along the freeway; and ramp metering. The State DOT also operates a website that provides real - time information on freeway operations.
• Neptune and Atlantis use traffic signal control systems along the length of Main Street and Broadway, providing coordinated signal operation on a time-of-day / day-of-week basis. No surveillance is provided along the arterials except for local actuation detectors on the approaches to the signalized intersections. There is also CCTV at the major intersections.
• The Regional Rail Agency and the Generic Bus Authority have each implemented transit management systems to improve service to their customers, including automated vehicle location (AVL) systems with schedule adherence capabilities. Both agencies also operate websites that provide real - time information on the operations of their respective transit networks.
• The police and fire departments utilize a computer-aided dispatch (CAD) system.

The current Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) includes an array of improvements and enhancements to these ITS-based transportation management systems, such as a new road - weather information system and additional DMS and CCTV along the freeway, HOV by-pass capability at the metered freeway on-ramps, enhanced communications subsystem for the Atlantis and Neptune signal systems, and In-terminal / wayside DMS (e.g. next train / bus arrival) at all stations and bus stops. Additionally, the Generic Bus Authority and the Regional Rail Agency have entered into an inter-agency agreement for the development of a combined smart card payment system for both bus and train fares - an improvement that will eventually cover the region.

These agency-specific systems, strategies and technologies have provided benefits in the context of their individual networks. However, the institutional fabric within the Generic Corridor is multi-agency, multi-functional, and multi-modal; and the authority for transportation-related decision-making is dispersed among the different agencies. As such, the management and operations of the various networks in the Generic Corridor (and the supporting ITS-based systems) have tended to be "stovepiped," with minimal communications between the transportation networks and their operators except for major events and incidents. On a day-to-day operating basis, the corridor consists of independent networks and systems. For example:

• Traveler information is available, but it is relatively sparse and incomplete from a corridor perspective. Moreover, travelers must go to separate web sites to obtain pre-trip information.
• Another important source of corridor information is the Police and Fire Departments' Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) System that supports emergency call taking and dispatch; although it is currently only accessible by the police and fire units.
• There are limited means by which route and modal shifts between networks can be readily accommodated, due to a lack of real-time information on the status / spare capacity of some of the networks and junctions (e.g., the arterial streets and the rail station park and ride lots), the inability to readily change the operating parameters of these networks (e.g., arterial signal timing, ramp metering rates), or some combination.
• There is no coordination between the arterial signal timing and bus operations, such as providing signal priority to those buses that are running behind schedule.
• This lack of coordination also exists between rail and bus schedules and their respective operations (e.g., "just-missed" bus-rail connections that increase a rider's wait time and level of frustration).

That said, the current institutional environment does offer more opportunities than constraints in support of Integrated Corridor Management. For example, task forces have been established for the many special events held in Metropolis. These special event task forces address the impact of these events, looking at all aspects of venue management including transportation. Through the task force, a central command for transportation is established in advance that coordinates the planning, preparations, and event-day operations command. However, after each event, the task force, including the central command, is disbanded and all central command protocols are relinquished.

The generic corridor is also part of a broader Regional ITS Architecture, in which all the Generic Corridor Stakeholders participated. The BWRMPO took the lead in developing the Regional ITS Architecture, including the establishment of a "Regional ITS Architecture Committee." This Committee maintains the architecture, and has the authority to establish sub-committees and coordinate the procurement of ITS projects. The Regional ITS Architecture promotes system integration (refer to Table 1-3), but given that none of the attributes have been deployed, it has had limited effect on coordinating regional transportation management and operational activities.

The coordination facilitated by the Regional ITS Architecture Committee and the special event centralized command model indicates that an institutional structure to support ICM could be established.

Table 1-3. Attributes of Regional ITS Architecture

Real-time information sharing (data, video) between all agencies. Clearinghouse of real-time information covering all critical routes and modes. This ATIS database integrates available information from agency-specific systems to provide a composite picture of the real-time status of the surface transportation network. Regional coordination support between transportation agencies and public safety agencies during "major" incidents, construction activities and special events (i.e., those for which the impacts cross most of the agency boundaries). A regional payment/financial clearinghouse, by which the same ETC tag / smart card can be used to pay transit fares, tolls and parking in the region. It does not include inter-agency operations or control of system components.

1.4 Need and Potential for Integrated Corridor Management

The basic premise behind the proposed Integrated Corridor Management System (ICMS) is that the various networks that comprise the generic corridor, and their associated systems, can be operated in a more "integrated" manner though the use of currently available technologies. It is anticipated that by "linking" the adjacent networks into an ICMS — in essence, creating a "system of systems" — the benefits currently provided by the individual network-specific transportation management systems will be further enhanced.

By definition, "Integrated Corridor Management" focuses on the operational, institutional, and technical coordination of multiple transportation networks and cross-network connections comprising a corridor. ICM can encompass several activities which address the operational problems and needs previously identified. Moreover, the ICMS concept will address several of the corridor issues and needs identified by the stakeholders during interviews and a workshop, as summarized in Table 1-4.

Table 1-4. Major Corridor Issues and Needs (as Identified by Stakeholders)

More of a "corridor-wide" and multi-modal view of ITS and operations Improved coordination, communication (i.e., information sharing) and integration between all transportation stakeholders. This is done to some extent for special events; but needs to be expanded to cover day-to-day operations and minor incidents. Information clearinghouse available to all transportation stakeholders (including emergency services, commercial vehicles, tourism, travelers etc.) with a single graphical representation and common geo-referencing. More standardization and system interoperability within and between all stakeholders. Focus of standards should be on interoperability / integration. Improved operational coordination of networks in the corridor, particularly at junctions, such as freeway ramps and connecting arterial signals, signalized intersections and bus operations, transfers between rail and bus) Accurate models to simulate corridor operation under various scenarios Joint use of resources and infrastructure (e.g., service patrols, DMS) leveraging equipment use between agencies. Increased public outreach; educate about the benefits of ITS and operations. Travel information presented consistently throughout the region (seamless to the traveler), such as travel times. Increased transit usage within the corridor; this should also help alleviate roadway congestion Coordinated and efficient responses to incidents involving all agencies (transportation, police and fire), including integration of incident command structure and emergency procedures. Methods (performance measures) for screening, monitoring and evaluating corridor-based strategies and operations to determine whether deployments are successful, meet agency goals and are cost-effective.

1.5 ICM Vision, Goals and Objectives

The Generic Corridor stakeholders have established the following vision:

In the future, the Generic Corridor will be a seamless transportation system in which travelers can conveniently shift between modes and routes in order to complete trips. All users will be able to readily access traveler information that is comprehensive, timely, accurate and useful. This information will let them travel more safely, and reach their destinations in a reasonable and predictable period of time. The Generic Corridor will work collectively: Each part of the transportation system will address performance in order to improve the movement of people and goods in the entire corridor. The operations, technology, and institutions of all system parts will be aligned to address problems and improve corridor performance.

Using the vision statement as a starting point, and with due consideration of the Generic Corridor conditions, deficiencies and needs, the corridor stakeholders developed ICMS goals and objectives as summarized in Table 1-5.

Table 1-5. ICMS Goals & Objectives

Corridor Perspective - A corridor perspective must be established among all the entities in the corridor. A single network's goals and objectives cannot take precedence over the other combined networks' goals and objectives. A corridor perspective will be established through institutional integration and the development of common performance measures. All entities will take on appropriate responsibilities and share levels of control. Associated objectives include an ICMS funding structure, ITS standards, and corridor-based performance monitoring. Corridor Mobility and Reliability - The transportation agencies within the corridor have done much to increase the mobility and reliability of their individual networks, and will continue to do so. The integrated corridor perspective builds on these network initiatives, managing delays on a corridor basis, utilizing any spare capacity within the corridor, and coordinating the junctions and interfaces between networks, thereby providing a multi-modal transportation system that adequately meets customer expectations for travel time predictability. Associated objectives include reducing overall trip and person travel time through the corridor, improving travel predictability, increasing transit ridership, and improving commercial vehicle operations through and around the corridor. Corridor Traveler Information - Travelers must be provided with a holistic view of the corridor and its operation through the delivery of timely, accurate and reliable multimodal information, which then allows travelers to make informed choices regarding departure time, mode and route of travel. Associated objectives include expanding the network coverage and types of information gathered on corridor conditions (e.g., arterials, weather, air quality), providing a complete ATIS database with traveler information presented in a consistent matter (including a single graphical display of the corridor and all networks), and expanding the coverage and availability of ATIS devices. Corridor Event and Incident Management - Provide a corridor-wide and integrated approach to the management of incidents, events, and emergencies that occur within the corridor or that otherwise impact the operation of the corridor, including planning, detection and verification, response and information sharing, such that the corridor returns back to "normal conditions" as quickly as possible. Associated objectives include improve pre-planning and provide a coordinated response for incidents, events, and emergencies that have corridor and regional implications (e.g., common command structure), and develop a comprehensive training program involving all corridor networks and public safety entities.

These corridor-wide goals and objectives are interrelated such that activities and strategies oriented towards attaining one of the goals will likely impact (usually in a complementary fashion, but not always) the attainment of other goals and objectives. They also recognize that the traveler's (i.e., the customer's) perspective is that there is only one surface transportation system; and that the public generally does not care which jurisdiction or agency is responsible for the road or transit network on which they are currently traveling. As taxpayers and fare / toll payers, they want and deserve a safe and reliable trip - one that provides a consistent level-of-service with minimal congestion, and is predictable in terms of travel time. They also deserve accurate and timely information so that they can make informed decisions before and during trips.

1.6 ICM Operational Approaches and Strategies

Several ICM strategies were identified by the corridor stakeholders based on their contribution to achieving the Generic Corridor goals and objectives. These strategies can be categorized by the following ICM approaches:

• Information Sharing / Distribution: Real-time information (data and video) will be shared all stakeholders and their respective systems, and combined into an information clearinghouse that can be viewed by all the stakeholders and form the basis for a corridor-based advanced traveler information system (ATIS) database that provides information to travelers pre-trip (e.g., via websites and 511). Information Service Providers (ISPs) and other value-added entities will also have access the corridor ATIS database. En-route traveler information devices (DMS, transit public announcement systems) will be used to describe current operational conditions on another network(s) within the corridor. These and other strategies within the "Information Sharing/Distribution" Approach will provide the informational foundation for ICM operations. This is the first step to the integration of the individual network systems. The focus on travelers is supported by the trip information services that will be implemented.
• Improve the Operational Efficiency of Network Junctions and Interfaces: Representative strategies include signal priority for the Generic Bus Authority vehicles (e.g. extending green times to buses that are operating behind schedule) along Main Street and Broadway; transit hub connection protection (e.g., holding buses at rail stations while waiting for a regional rail service to arrive); multi-agency/multi-network incident response teams and service patrols; and coordinated operation between ramp meters and arterial traffic signals in close proximity. These "Improve Operational Efficiency" strategies address many of the corridor deficiencies that affect the efficiency of transit operations, and their implementation will reduce travel times and increase the reliability of the Generic Bus Authority operations, as well as enhancing the convenience of rail travel. The strategies use cross-network operations to improve each individual network's performance by taking advantage of another network's functions. This, in turn, builds a foundation for a corridor perspective as well as changing the focus to the traveler's trip performance.
• Accommodate / Promote Cross-Network Route and Modal Shifts: In general, the ICMS will merely provide information ("inform") to users via the information sharing strategies and accommodate any user-determined network shifts (e.g., modify arterial signal timing to accommodate traffic shifting from freeway, modify ramp metering rates and HOV by-pass policies to accommodate traffic and buses shifting from arterials to the freeway, modify transit priority parameters to accommodate more timely bus service on Main Street and Broadway). During major incidents and events, and if agreed to by all affected stakeholders, network shifts will be promoted ("instruct") using the various ATIS devices. "Accommodating/promoting shifts" among networks makes efficient use of any spare capacity within the corridor to better manage congestion and facilitate reliability. Shifting trips among corridor networks, whether via "inform" of "instruct," is the essence of a corridor perspective and supports a traveler focus by informing corridor users of all their transportation alternatives and the conditions on each.
• Manage Capacity-Demand Relationship Within Corridor — "Real-Time" / Short Term: The implementation of cross-network shifts assumes that spare capacity exists on the adjacent networks and the cross-network linkages and junctions (e.g. park and ride facilities). If not, it may be necessary either to temporally increase the capacity of these alternate networks and / or reduce the corridor demand. For example, coordinate scheduled maintenance and construction activities among the corridor networks such that the total corridor capacity (i.e., the sum of the individual network capacities) is not reduced below some minimum acceptable level as determined by the stakeholders; add transit capacity by adjusting headways and number of vehicles on the Regional Rail network and the Generic Bus Authority service; increase roadway capacity by opening the freeway HOV lanes / shoulders; modify HOV restrictions (increase minimum number, make bus only); modify transit fares to encourage ridership; modify parking fees; restrict / reroute commercial traffic; etc. The "Manage Capacity-Demand Relationship (short-term)" approach provides operational strategies that further enhance corridor mobility and reliability. As a general rule, these strategies will be deployed only during major incidents, events, and / or emergencies.
• Manage Capacity-Demand Relationship Within Corridor — Long Term: These strategies - such as low-cost infrastructure improvements to cross-network linkages and junctions, guidelines for work hours during emergencies / special events, and other TDM activities - are considered "long term" in terms of the amount of time required for developing and deploying the strategies, and / or the time required for the desired results to accrue. This approach addresses the lack of adequate parking for the Regional Rail service and any other physical constraints that may limit integrated operations. There is great potential to enhance current and near-term operations within the Generic Corridor by implementing the ICMS and the cross-network operational strategies summarized above. All of these enhancements would not be possible from an independent network operational perspective.

1.7 ICM Concept Operational Description

In the future, the Generic Corridor ICMS will provide, to the greatest extent possible, efficient and reliable travel throughout the Generic Corridor and the constituent networks, resulting in improved and consistent trip travel times. Using cross-network strategies, the Generic Corridor will capitalize on integrated network operations to manage the total capacity and demand of the system in relation to the changing corridor conditions.

The daily operation of the corridor will be similar to the transportation command center model that has been used for major special events; but will now be applied on a permanent basis for day-to-day operations. This will be accomplished via a virtual Corridor Command Center (CCC) operating among the corridor agencies. This virtual corridor command center will operate the ICMS as a "sub-regional" system managing the various networks and influencing trips that use the corridor. The virtual command center will consist of agency, network, and public safety Agency/Service Operations Officers (ASOs). The ASOs will be designated by their respective organizations and approved by a centralized decision-making body established for the Generic Corridor. Each agency/service officer will be in charge of a specific corridor network or service with respect to ICM operations and coordination. The ASOs, with approval of the central body, will also designate a Chief Corridor Operations Officer (CCOO) every three years. The chief operations officer responsibilities will consist of coordinating corridor operation on a daily basis and managing the response to any fluctuations in capacity and or demand.

All operations among corridor networks and agencies (e.g., activation of specific ICM strategies) will be coordinated by the corridor command center. The CCC will investigate and prepare corridor response plans for various scenarios that can be expected to occur within the Generic Corridor. The chief corridor operations officer will be responsible, with the other agency / service operations officers, for configuring the CCC with respect to its functions and staffing for all hours of operations. Staff will be assigned by the corridor stakeholders to support daily operations, develop response plans, analyze system deficiencies and needs, and general administration. Performance measurement and monitoring will also be the responsibility of the corridor command center. The agency / service operations officers, led by the chief corridor operations officer, will be accountable to a centralized decision-making body and make reports as the decision-making body designates.

Communications, systems, and system networks will be integrated to support the virtual corridor command center. Voice, data, video, information, and control will be provided to all agencies based on the adopted protocols and standards for the sharing of information and the distribution of responsibilities. The ICMS will support the virtual nature of the corridor command center by connecting the chief, agency / service operations officers, and other critical staff on a real-time basis via communications and other ITS technologies. The chief corridor operating officer, ASOs, and other CCC staff will monitor corridor travel conditions 24/7, and use the response plans, real-time information, and the implemented corridor strategies to address any conditions that present themselves. While all the ICMS operational strategies will be available for use, it is envisioned that only a subset of these strategies will be activated at any one time, depending on the operational conditions and events within the corridor.

The corridor command center will conduct desktop scenario sessions to prepare, train and refine response plans for incidents, special events, weather, and evacuations. All the agency / service operations officers and staff will know their respective roles and responsibilities and will be aided, when available, by response plans and ICMS decision support software. Moreover, agency operations officers will be able and authorized to improvise as situations may dictate.

Traveler information (on 511, websites, DMS, and through the media and ISPs) will be corridor-based, providing information on corridor trip alternatives complete with current and predicted conditions. Travelers will access or be given real-time corridor information so they can plan or alter their trips in response to current or predicted corridor conditions.

Each traveler will be able to make route and modal shifts between networks easily due to integrated corridor information, integrated fare/parking payment system, and coordinated operations between networks. Using one network or another will be dependent on the preferences of the traveler, and not the nuances of each network. Travelers will be able to educate themselves about the corridor so they can identify their optimal travel alternatives and obtain the necessary assets (e.g., smart card, available parking) to facilitate their use of corridor alternatives when conditions warrant.

1.8 Required Assets and ICMS Implementation Issues

As previously noted, the various transportation and public safety agencies within the Generic Corridor have implemented a variety of policies, strategies, and ITS technologies (i.e., "assets") to improve performance of their respective networks. Nevertheless, additional corridor assets are required to implement and support the operational strategies and for the ICMS to meet the corridor goals and objectives. The most significant of these proposed changes (from a field infrastructure and technical integration perspective) are summarized in Table 1-6. These and the other "missing" assets will be prioritized and accounted for when the high-level and detailed level component designs are developed as part of the systems engineering process.

Table 1-6. Summary of Significant Changes and Additions to the Generic Corridor

Organizational Entity	Change Description
Atlantis	Surveillance along the entire length of Broadway and cross-network connectors, providing volumes and average speeds / travel times. Additional CCTV along Broadway, including coverage of bus stops Inbound and outbound DMS on Broadway at critical locations Transit priority and emergency preemption devices and enhanced controller firmware at signalized intersections along Broadway Enhanced controller software and communications with adjacent freeway ramp meters
Neptune	Surveillance along the entire length of Main Street and cross-network connectors, providing volumes and average speeds / travel times. Additional CCTV along Main Street, including coverage of bus stops Inbound and outbound DMS on Main Street at critical locations Transit priority and emergency preemption devices and enhanced controller firmware at signalized intersections along Main Street
Regional Rail Agency	Additional spaces at park and ride lots (Beech St. & Pine St. stations) Surveillance of park and ride lots at the three stations for real-time monitoring of parking availability Software to calculate parking availability (number of vacant spaces) Automated passenger counting technology (i.e., determine availability seating on each train)
Generic Bus Authority	On-board devices for signal transit priority, including connection to schedule adherence subsystem
Public Safety Agencies	Enhancements to CAD software to identify “best” routes Interface to CAD, including protection / security of sensitive information
Corridor-wide	Corridor simulation model Communications linkages between transportation management and emergency service centers (connect to existing subsystems) ITS standards for center – to – center communications Interfaces to existing systems, including “translators” as required Servers for information processing and aggregation, video sharing and control Decision support software for evaluating current / projected corridor conditions and selecting the most appropriate response plans

The ICM concept represents a significant paradigm shift for management and operations within the Generic Corridor - from the current lack of any coordinated operations between corridor networks and agencies, to a fully integrated and pro-active operational approach that focuses on a corridor perspective rather than a collection of individual (and relatively independent) networks. To make this happen, several implementation and integration issues must be resolved. Several of these implementation issues will involve choices that cannot be fully addressed and subsequently resolved until later stages of the systems engineering process (e.g., design, procurement, and implementation). Some of the key issues are summarized below:

• Several of the technology issues were identified previously in Table 1-6 (e.g., the need for additional surveillance capabilities, additional DMS). The technical details - such as the distribution and actual location of the devices, and their respective capabilities, will be addressed during the Requirements and Design stages of the ICMS project. Another major technology issue involves the adoption and implementation of ITS standards for the center - to - center (C2C) connections, and how these standards are integrated into the legacy systems within the corridor (e.g., potential use of "translators"). Video sharing represents another issue. The ICM concept for the Generic Corridor includes significant sharing of video between the corridor stakeholders and with the media / ISP's. The desire is to have "full-motion" video in this regard; although this will significantly increase the bandwidth requirements for the C2C communications subsystem.
• Several operational issues must be resolved prior to system implementation if the various ICMS strategies are going to be applied consistently and in a manner that improves overall corridor performance. A preliminary Operations Plan and Manual will be developed during system design. This plan will address several issues such as the procedures and protocols for identifying route / modal shifts when spare capacity exists on multiple networks, and also when sufficient spare capacity is not available within the corridor; policies for implementing demand / capacity management strategies; procedures and protocols for the shared use of resources and / or shared control of ITS devices (including resolution of multiple and conflicting) requests for the same device; potential safety concerns with the ICMS operational strategies; and disseminating traveler information in a consistent manner across networks. With respect to the latter issue, the common convention for operations-based measures and AITS displays will likely be comparable link travel times.
• Resolving the institutional issues is an on-going process of coordination and collaboration between corridor stakeholders. As previously discussed, the current institutional framework within the Generic Corridor is multi-agency, multi-functional, and multi-modal, with the authority for transportation-related decision-making is dispersed among several different agencies. A more formal institutional structure, with defined processes and documented policies as well as dedicated staff with the appropriate responsibility and authority to operate the Generic Corridor as an integrated system, will be necessary for the ICMS to be a success. A proposed institutional structure to support the implementation and on-going operation of the ICM concept is described next.

1.9 Generic Corridor ICM Concept Institutional Framework

The management and operations of the corridor and the ICMS will be a joint effort involving all the stakeholders. To effectively manage and operate the ICMS concept as described in this Concept of Operations document, the creation of a central corridor decision-making body is recommended. This body, designated as the Generic Corridor Operations Panel (GCOP), will consist of leadership level representatives from each of the stakeholders in the Generic Corridor. The GCOP will be the central decision-making body for the corridor, managing the distribution of responsibilities, the sharing of control, and related functions among the corridor agencies. The GCOP will be responsible for establishing the necessary inter-agency and service agreements, budget development, project initiation and selection, corridor operations policies and procedures, and overall administration.

To support the GCOP and other future corridor operations panels, it is recommended that the Regional ITS Architecture Committee be restructured, re-chartered, and renamed to reflect an expanded scope that includes the promotion and stewardship of corridor-based coordinated operations throughout the metropolitan region. The new committee will continue its duties in relation to the Regional ITS Architecture, but the duties will be expanded to promote coordinated operations within the various corridors that make up the region, as well as addressing any "inter-corridor" operational issues (i.e., be the coordinator of multiple corridor operation panels and ICM systems).

The BWR Transportation Operations Council will be the regional body to identify and investigate future coordinated operations opportunities, such as deploying Integrated Corridor Management systems in other corridors within the region. The BWRTOC will coordinate all operations request for funding (from the GCOP) and present requests to the main MPO committees for approvals. The BWRTOC will review corridor operating procedures, policies, and technical standards in order to ensure consistency, compatibility, and compliance with the Regional ITS Architecture.

The proposed institutional framework for the Generic Corridor ICMS as described above is shown in Figure 1-3.

Figure 1-3. Institutional Framework of Generic Corridor ICMS

ICMS procurement / implementation approaches and funding, and the individual agency responsibilities in this regard, are still being discussed by the stakeholders. Each network and agency has existing procurement policies and practices. Each procurement policy and practice has to be identified and understood in order to establish a system procurement policy for the ICMS. The procurement policy may be a combination of policies or a policy that directs the use of the most appropriate agency practice for the item being procured. As the ICMS project moves from concept to the design stage, formal inter-agency agreements will be developed and executed describing this institutional framework and structure in detail, including each agency's responsibilities.

It is emphasized that this ICMS concept is consistent with the Regional ITS Architecture. There are no conflicts, per se; but the ICMS concept does include significantly more information sharing (including command and control functions) and integrated operational capabilities than provided by the Regional ITS Architecture. Moreover, the ICMS concept includes a virtual CCC, which is not addressed in the regional architecture.

Summarizing, as a result of the ICMS concept, the Generic Corridor will be an integrated transportation system, managed collectively and operated centrally (when circumstances dictate), to maximize its utility to corridor travelers. All corridor assets will be attuned to obtain the goals and objectives of the corridor, as well as the goals of each individual traveler as there preferences prescribe. The corridor users will recognize the Generic Corridor as a seamless transportation system that provides them with multiple viable alternatives that they can select based on their specific travel circumstances and needs.

---

² The term "network" is used to denote a specific combination of transportation facility and mode.

 

Previous | Next

ITS Home | US DOT Home | Privacy | Feedback

United States Department of Transportation - ITS