• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
Enterprise

Enterprise

  • About Us
    • Overview
    • Members
    • Join
    • Contact Us
    • History
  • Research Projects
  • Enterprise Management
    • TPF-5(359) ENTERPRISE Phase II – Pooled Fund Final Report
    • Progress Reports
    • Annual Work Plans
    • Management Plan
  • Resources
    • Program Brochure
    • Marketing Materials
    • ENTERPRISE ITS Planning Guidance (Warrants)
    • Helpful Links
    • Members Only

Completed

Intersection Conflict Warning Systems (ICWS) Related Documents/Links

This page includes a listing of Intersection Conflict Warning Systems (ICWS) related documents as of September 2019. If you would like to contribute to this listing or have any questions, please contact Tina Roelofs at roelofs@acconsultants.org.

SourceTitle and Description
AASHTOConnected Vehicle Infrastructure Deployment Analysis (June 2011)
ENTERPRISE ICWS Informational Booklet (September 2015)System Requirements for Intersection Conflict Warning Systems (ICWS) Final Report Final Report (May 2013)Concept of Operations for Intersection Conflict Warning Systems (November 2012)Intersection Conflict Warning Systems-Characteristics Summary (December 2011)Design and Evaluation Guidance for Intersection Conflict Warning Systems (ICWS) (December 2011)
FHWA Intersection Conflict Warning System Human Factors: Final Report (November 2016)Safety Evaluation of Intersection Conflict Warning Systems Final Report (June 2016)Safety Evaluation of Intersection Conflict Warning Systems (ICWS) TechBrief (February 2016)Intersection Collision Warning System TechBrief (April 1999)
Florida DOTFlorida’s Intersection Safety Implementation Plan (ISIP) Presentation (March 2017)Innovative Operational Safety Improvements at Unsignalized Intersections – Post-Mounted Flashing Beacons and Vehicle Actuated Variable Message Signs Final Report (August 2008)
Georgia – Gwinnett CountyProposed Guidelines for Traffic Actuated Warning Signs at Intersections with Limited Sight Distance (November 1999)
Iowa DOT Traffic Approaching When Flashing Signs (November 2010)Plan Set for Anamosa Intersection (October 2010)Plan Set for Dyersville Intersection (October 2009)
Iowa State University Institute for TransportationIntersection Conflict Warning System Research Poster (July 2015)
ITS InternationalPutting a Stop to Intersection Indecision  (February 2015)
Maine DOTFinal Technical Report #01-2 Evaluation of the Norridgewock Intersection Collision Avoidance Warning System on Route 201A, Norridgewock, Maine (November 2006)
Michigan DOT Special Provision for Intersection Warning System (December 2009)Special Provision for Wireless Vehicle Detection (December 2009)Intersection Warning System Plans for US-31 and M-77 Sites (August 2009)
Minnesota DOT Evaluation of Intersection Conflict Warning Systems in Minnesota (October 2017)Construction Plan for Rural Intersection Conflict Warning System (RICWS) and Lighting (April 2017)Intersection Safety Technologies Guidebook: Intersection Conflict Warning Systems & LED STOP Signs (May 2016)Rural Intersection Conflict Warning Systems Project Description (2012-2015)MnDOT  IIRICWS Safety (June 2015)System Requirements for Rural Intersection Conflict Warning Systems II Deployment (February 2015)Safe Intersections Project Description (2010-2015)Rural Intersection Conflict Warning System (RICWS) Reliability Evaluation: Final Report (June 2014)Advanced LED Warning Signs for Rural Intersections Powered by Renewable Energy – Final Report (December 2010)Cooperative Intersection Collision Avoidance Systems-Stop Sign Assist (CICAS) Project (2008)Intersection Warning System Project and Evaluation (June 2009)A Study of the Rural Intersection Conflict Warning System (RICWS) (September 2019)
Minnesota – Wright CountyITS to Address Non-Signalized Rural Intersection Safety: A County’s Perspective Presentation (November 2010)
National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control DevicesSuggested ICWS Language for 2017 MUTCD (June 2014)
National Highway Traffic Safety AdministrationCrash Factors in Intersection-Related Crashes: An On-Scene Perspective (September 2010)
National Science FoundationIntersection Conflict Warning System (ICWS) Safety Evaluation (August 2016)
New Hampshire DOTIntersection Conflict Warning System Facebook Entry (February 2018)
North Carolina DOT Presentation of Vehicle Entering When Flashing Evaluation (January 2013)Evaluation of the Safety Effectiveness of “Vehicle Entering When Flashing” Signs and Actuated Flashers at 74 Stop-Controlled Intersections in North Carolina (November 2012)Collision Diagrams for Vehicles Entering When Flashing Evaluation (September 2012)Design Example (February 2008)Flasher Standard 
PennDOT Crash Avoidance Systems Benefit/Cost Analysis (July 2011)Crash Avoidance System Presentation with 2008 Crash Data (2009)Collision Avoidance System Evaluation (January 2007)Crash Avoidance System Report (November 2003)Crash Avoidance System Construction Drawings (April 2001)
ScienceDIrectStudy on the Framework of Hybrid Collision Warning System using Loop Detectors and Vehicle Information (December 2016)
The Urban Transportation MonitorCrash Avoidance System Article in Urban Transportation Monitor Nov. 2004 (November 2004)
Transportation Research RecordEvaluation of Intersection Conflict Warning System: A Critical Gap Analysis (June 2018)
University of Minnesota Center for Transportation StudiesRural Intersection Conflict Warning System Evaluation and Design Investigation: Final Report (May 2018)
Utah DOTRural Intersection Conflict Warning System Guidelines (February 2018)
Washington State DOTStandard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal ConstructionPlan Set US 97 and Cameron Lake Road (March 2013)Plan Set for US12 and Jackson Hwy (January 2007)Prepare to Stop When Flashing System (PTSWF) Pilot Project Interim Guidelines (August 2006)Plan Set for US395 (May 2006)Existing and Planned PTSWF Locations
Wisconsin DOT Wisconsin Intersection Safety Presentation (June 2015)Rural Intersection Collision Avoidance System Outreach Presentation (March 2010)Rural Intersection Collision Avoidance System Brochure (February 2010)Rural Intersection Collision Avoidance System Project Overview Presentation (February 2009)Rural Intersection Collision Avoidance System Fact Sheet (January 2009)

Developing Consistency in ITS Safety Solutions – Intersection Conflict Warning Systems (ICWS) Phase 1

Intersection crashes continue to represent a significant share of transportation fatalities and serious injuries throughout the country. In addition to intersection lighting, signing and geometric improvements, organizations have turned to ITS as another tool for improving safety. Over the past several years, a variety of mainline and cross street oriented intersection conflict warning systems have been developed and tested in many states across the country. Some systems have been developed using local expertise, while others have been supported by the USDOT Cooperative Intersection Collision Avoidance Systems program. No specific guidance has been available for these systems in regard to placement, size, messaging, failsafe, etc. This has resulted in a fairly broad range of approaches and with the states’ growing experience there is now an opportunity to work together in moving toward standardization.

Bringing together organizations that have developed and deployed intersection conflict warning systems, the purpose of this project was to develop a consistent approach for accelerated, uniform deployment and further evaluation of intersection conflict warning systems (ICWS), and to recommend preliminary standards for MUTCD consideration. This work was initiated through a webinar and two in-person workshops. Participants included ENTERPRISE pooled fund states, other states that have deployed systems, FHWA, NCUTCD, AASHTO and NACE.

Results

  • Increased awareness of systems deployed
  • Preliminary standards to support accelerated and more consistent deployment for experimentation
  • Evaluation framework for further experimentation
  • Roadmap to reach complete standards in the MUTCD

Awards

This ENTERPRISE project received an award for Best New Innovative Practice during the 2012 National Rural ITS Conference for its success in bringing together organizations that have deployed intersection conflict warning systems (ICWS) to capture current practice and develop preliminary design guidance for further standards consideration.

Webinars/Workshops

For additional information and presentations from the project webinars and workshops click here.

Related Documents/Links

For a listing of related documents and links to this intersection warning conflict systems (ICWS) ENTERPRISE project click here. For more information about the other phases of ENTERPRISE work with intersection conflict warning systems go to:

  • Phase 2 – ICWS Coordination and Systems Engineering: This project furthered supported the standardization of ICWS by coordinating among the various national standards and association groups, and by developing a concept of operations and system requirements for the four types of ICWS identified in the Design and Evaluation Guidance for Intersection Conflict Warning Systems developed in Phase 1. 
  • Phase 3 – ICWS Support and Outreach: This phase will continue coordination with national standards groups, industry associations and other pooled fund programs that have been engaged through the ENTERPRISE ICWS work. Phase 3 will also continue to provide ICWS deployment support to ENTERPRISE members.
  • Phase 4 – Roadmap for Next Generation Intersection Conflict Warning Systems (ICWS): This project identified and documented issues related to the development and deployment of next-generation approaches to ICWS. This information was utilized to develop a roadmap of prioritized next steps to help guide future ICWS deployment efforts.

Impacts of Traveler Information on the Overall Network

ENTERPRISE member agencies use a variety of tools and approaches to inform travelers about conditions on the roadways, including Dynamic Message Signs (DMS) and traffic flow maps on internet dissemination websites.  The impacts of these tools are not clearly understood.  While the public response to these dissemination tools has been very positive, there remains minimal solid evidence about the travel pattern changes caused by these messages or the impacts on other routes. Based upon the ENTERPRISE Travel Time Best Practices project, in nearly every state deployed, the travel time reports have received very positive feedback, and perhaps the value lies in informing travelers of conditions ahead, regardless of whether they divert.

ENTERPRISE recognized the need for additional research on the impacts of traveler information and approved the “Impacts of Traveler Information on the Overall Network Project” to focus on understanding the impacts that travel time message displays (web and roadside) have on the network.

To determine the impacts of travel times, on-line surveys were created and linked to the traveler information portion of the Minnesota and Washington State Department of Transportation (DOT) websites to gather feedback from travelers regarding their use of travel time information displayed on the web and on roadside DMS.

In addition to surveying travelers’ opinions, historical travel time displays on DMS together with related traffic volume data (from locations downstream of the DMS) from the Minnesota and Washington State networks were analyzed.

This ENTERPRISE Project was highlighted in the July/August 2013 ITS International publication.

Understanding Utilization of Third Party Travel Data and Information

There are a number of private vendors today who sell and provide third party data for a variety of transportation purposes. Data may be oriented to commercial freight companies, personal navigation systems, transportation agencies and many more. Speed, travel time, volume and occupancy data is important in maintaining the safety and mobility of the transportation network. Some transportation agencies use this type of data from third party providers to deliver traveler information, manage traffic, and conduct studies.

ENTERPRISE initiated this project – Understanding Utilization of Third Party Travel Data and Information – to better understand what providers are offering, how states are using the data and what their options might be for future use of such data. The approach for this project involved an initial survey of ENTERPRISE member needs and uses for third party data.

The final report summarizes the information gathered during this project and is written in a format to accommodate easy future reference by the ENTERPRISE members. The information summarized in this report includes:

  1. ENTERPRISE member survey of third party data needs and uses
  2. Third party data provider information
  3. Public agency experiences with using third party data

Related Documents/Links

Following is a listing of related documents and links to the Understanding Utilization of Third Party Travel Data and Information ENTERPRISE project.

SourceRelated Document/Link
ENTERPRISEUnderstanding Utilization of Third Party Data and Information – Final Report
Washington State DOTRequest for Proposals: Traffic Data, May 2011
Washington State DOTRequest for Proposals-Amendment 1: Traffic Data
Washington State DOTThird Party Data Use Assessment
Virginia DOTRequest for Proposals: Statewide Evacuation, Special Event and Work Zone Real Time Video and Data Collection Services, October 2010
Ministry of Transportation OntarioAlternative Methodologies for Travel Time Studies Final Report, July 2012

ITS Warrants − Phase 1 and Phase 2

The ENTERPRISE Pooled Fund Study in 2009 developed initial warrants for the following Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) devices to assist agencies in the decision process of deploying technology devices as well as to validate the location of deployed devices. 

  • Closed Circuit Television (CCTV);
  • Dynamic Message Signs (DMS);
  • Highway Advisory Radio (HAR); and
  • Road Weather Information Systems (RWIS).

The second phase of the project was completed in 2010 and focused on developing warrants for the following technology devices:

  • Variable Speed Limit (VSL) Signs;
  • Dynamic Speed Display Signs (DSDS);
  • Curve Warning Systems;
  • Ramp Meters; and
  • Intelligent Work Zones.

Transportation professionals at the state/province, county, and city levels face challenges on how to handle increasing requests for the deployment of technology devices.  The overall approach to the ITS warrants is modeled after the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) warrants for traffic signal installations.  Based on this model, the ITS warrants identify guidelines to assist deployment decisions of technology devices.    

During the initial warrants effort more than 20 transportation professionals participated in testing the warrants and some of these agencies are continuing to actively using the warrants as part of the decision making process for selecting device locations.  The next warrant efforts continued to support the success of the initial phase by providing additional device warrants for transportation professionals to use.

  • Phase 3: This phase documented the activities ENTERPRISE conducted as owner and maintainer of the ITS planning guidance to assist in identifying potential organizations for transitioning the guidance. After the ENTERPRISE Board reviewed the different options for one organization to maintain the warrants, it was agreed that ENTERPRISE should continue to own and maintain the warrants and partner with organizations to review the warrants. The AASHTO Subcommittee on Traffic Engineering (SCOTE) agreed to review and provide comments on the planning guidance in 2013. In Phase 3, ITS Planning Guidance was also developed for Intersection Conflict Warning Systems.
  • Phase 4: The purpose of Phase 4 was to continue to partner with the SCOTE task force to update the ITS planning guidance documentation and website based on recommendations and enhance the planning guidelines developed to date.

Website

The ITS Warrants developed by ENTERPRISE are available at: http://enterprise.prog.org/itswarrants/. The warrants website includes background information of the development of the warrants, instructions on how to use the warrants, and the warrants for the devices developed to date.

Supporting the Transition of ITS Warrants to a Permanent Home − Phase 3

This project builds off a series of projects (ITS Warrants – Phase 1 and Phase 2) that have been conducted by the ENTERPRISE Pooled Fund Study to develop preliminary warrants for ITS devices. The warrants were designed to assist agencies with deployment decisions and site selection. ENTERPRISE continues to test and refine the warrants while exploring industry acceptance for the concept. The overall approach to developing the ITS warrants was modeled after the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) warrants for traffic signal installations.   

Ideally, the ENTERPRISE Program envisioned that a National or International agency would embrace the concept of technology device warrants and carry the concept forward in order to support traffic engineers for years to come. In order to move towards this vision, ENTERPRISE approved this project “Supporting the Transition of ENTERPRISE ITS Warrants to a Permanent Home”. The objective of this project was to document activities ENTERPRISE had conducted as owner and maintainer of the warrants to assist in identifying potential organizations for transitioning the warrants to a new owner.

As ENTERPRISE documented the details of each task that was involved with owning the warrants, a number of options were suggested as potential organizations to transition the ownership and maintenance of the warrants. However after the ENTERPRISE Board reviewed the different options for one organization to maintain the warrants, it was agreed that ENTERPRISE should continue to own and maintain the warrants and partner with organizations to review the warrants. This approach was based on the understanding that it would be easier to find agencies willing to review and comment on one or more warrants periodically than it would be to find an organization willing to accept the entire workload of all the warrants. Given this, ENTERPRISE as part of this project developed a warrants review process to assist with review and modifications of the warrants.

The Phase 3 effort, also included developing ITS warrants for Intersection Conflict Warning Systems.

At the completion of this project, ENTERPRISE moved forward with Phase 4 to work with a task force from the AASHTO Subcommittee on Traffic Engineering to review and provide input to the ITS Warrants.

Website

The ITS Warrants developed by ENTERPRISE are available at: http://enterprise.prog.org/itswarrants/

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 9
  • Page 10
  • Page 11
  • Page 12
  • Page 13
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 19
  • Go to Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

Copyright © 2026 by the ENTERPRISE Program. All Rights Reserved. · Log in