Completed

The traveling public has many options for traveler information, including 511 phone systems, traveler information websites, and applications that can be downloaded for a variety of popular mobile devices (mobile apps).  In an effort to understand the role that mobile apps play in the industry, the ENTERPRISE Pooled Fund Study researched traffic safety and traveler information apps published by private and public sector agencies.

This ENTERPRISE project “Traffic Safety and Traveler Information Apps” focused on understanding two specific types of mobile device apps: traveler information apps that disseminate real-time information to help improve the mobility and safety of users; and safety apps that are intended to deter unsafe actions, such as inattentive driving. 

This final summary report for this project documents the features and functions of mobile device apps operated by many state and provincial Departments of Transportation (DOTs), as well as those operated by private companies.  It is important to note that the functions and features of mobile apps are constantly changing and even as the report was developed additional features may have been added to the apps. In addition interviews were conducted with personnel from DOTs to help understand the motivation behind the development and operation of the traveler information mobile apps, and to understand the unique role these apps play in each DOT’s traveler information system.

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 Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) as another tool for improving safety. Over the past several years, a variety of mainline and cross street oriented intersection conflict warning systems (ICWS) 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.

The purpose of the project was to continue coordination with national standards groups, industry associations and other pooled fund programs that have been engaged through the ENTERPRISE ICWS work. Phase 3 also continued to provide ICWS deployment support to ENTERPRISE members.

Webinar Series

A series of webinars were hosted by ENTERPRISE throughout 2015. They were designed to facilitate peer exchange on both introductory and advanced topics. For more information about the webinars contact Ginny Crowson at crowson@acconsultants.org.

Webinar 4 – ICWS Advice from the Experts
November 17, 2015 
This final webinar featured a panel of experts from Design Electric, WSB, Iowa Department of Transportation, North Carolina Department of Transportation and St. Louis County Minnesota. Panelists offered expert advice about ICWS regarding design, construction, operation and maintenance.
Webinar Presentation
Webinar Recording

Webinar 3 – Liability, Reliability and Credibility – Challenges for ICWS
June 25, 2015, 2:00 – 3:30 p.m. (Central) 
Jon Jackels from SRF Consulting discussed how reliability and credibility can be engineered into ICWS to responsibly address concerns over liability while reaping the benefits of safety.
Webinar Presentation
Webinar Recording

Webinar 2 –FHWA Development of Crash Modification Factors (DCMF) Safety Evaluation of ICWS
April 23, 2015, 2:00 – 3:30 p.m. (Central)Scott Himes from VHB presented the results of a national safety evaluation of ICWS sponsored by the Evaluation of Low Cost Safety Improvements Pooled Fund Study.
Webinar Presentation
Webinar Recording 

Webinar 1 – ICWS 101: An Overview of the System
February 26, 2015, 2:00 – 3:30 p.m. (Central) 
Ken Hansen from the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) introduced the concept of ICWS as an ITS safety solution and describe the current state of ICWS resources and use. Ken is a senior engineer with MnDOT and is the project manager for the department’s Rural ICWS deployment project.
Webinar Presentation
Webinar Recording

Related Documents/Links

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

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

The ENTERPRISE Pooled Fund completed a project in 2012 called the Assessing the Impacts of Travel Times on the Overall Network to understand the impacts that travel time message displays (web and roadside) have on the network.  The outcome of the project concluded that travel time displays have an impact on traffic diversions as travelers react to the increased information presented to them.  However the project did not go into a next phase to understand what locations are conducive to travel time displays being the most effective at diverting traffic.

This Phase 1 ENTERPRISE Portable Travel Time Display (PTTD) and ICM with Parallel Routes project was initiated in 2016 with the intent of exploring the feasibility of a system that would enable Departments of Transportation to temporarily locate and test travel time displays at additional locations in order to assess the anticipated impacts on the network without a permanent deployment. Phase 1 completed the initial systems engineering analysis that is included in the Project Summary Report and created a plan for identifying Phase 2 locations that is included in the Corridor Selection Worksheet.  

The next phase of this project would include finalizing locations for deploying PTTD for limited periods of time (1-3 months) matching the requirement identified in Phase 1 to assess the impact on the network to decide if a permanent deployment of a travel time display system is warranted, before moving the portable system to new sites for further assessment.   Additionally, if enough PTTD deployments occur in multiple states, the ENTERPRISE members could begin to understand contributing factors that can help predict the impacts of travel time displays. 

Transportation agencies that utilize fiber optic infrastructure for telecommunications, intelligent transportation systems (ITS), and other applications may be in a position to leverage existing in-place infrastructure owned by other entities and/or share new agency-deployed infrastructure with other entities. In these cases, it is important for agencies to understand laws that govern the use and sharing of fiber-optics infrastructure or exchanging resources to gain access to fiber owned by other entities, and to develop internal policies that provide procedural guidance. Agencies may not have the staff, experience, processes, and/or agreements they need to enable sharing fiber infrastructure with another entity.

Some state and provincial transportation agencies have established policies that govern the use of fiber and that guide sharing arrangements. Resource availability and practices would be useful for ENTERPRISE agencies to learn from and model. 

The objective of this ENTERPRISE project “Policies, Laws, and Agreements for the Use of Fiber Communications” was to prepare a summary of resources (policies, laws, agreements) on the use of fiber communications of transportation agencies and to highlight practices for sharing fiber infrastructure.

To accomplish the project objective, policies on fiber communications, state and federal laws and/or FHWA rules that govern the use of fiber, and any agreements or partnership strategies used for sharing fiber optic infrastructure were collected and summarized. In addition, the project summarized practices for the use of these policies, laws, and agreements, especially for facilitating resource sharing. A survey was also distributed to transportation agencies to enhance the online search by collecting additional information on current sharing practices including existing policies and agreements.  The online research and survey were then used to select four agencies to contact to provide additional details on fiber sharing practices to document in the final report.

Sample fiber sharing agreements made available to the project are included in the table below.

Agreement Entities	Agreement	Description
Iowa DOT and City	Cooperative Agreement	Iowa DOT granted city access to the DOT ITS network in exchange for  electrical service to cameras, sensors, and ITS equipment and the ability for the city to install cameras and ITS devices on the DOT ITS network.
Iowa DOT and Iowa Communications Network (ICN)	ICN DOT Master Agreement for ITS Amendment 4 Amendment 8	Agreement relating to the installation, use, and maintenance of fiber optic cable and communications services. Amendment 4 provided the ICN with installation design and project oversight for ITS project along interstate corridor and established maintenance responsibilities. Amendment 8 enabled the DOT to utilize ICN’s Fiber Management Software System to design, plan, and manage fiber optic network and related infrastructure.
Iowa DOT and FiberComm	Agreement	Allowed Iowa DOT to install a fiber optic cable network for an ITS project while FiberComm maintains existing fiber optic network and provides technical support and public internet bandwidth to the Iowa DOT.
Virginia DOT and Telecom Provider or City	Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Template	MOU template to govern the terms and conditions of sharing arrangements. Each agreement is negotiated for specific requirements, terms, and conditions.
Wisconsin DOT and Other Wisconsin State Department	MOU Amendment Permit	In-state fiber resource sharing between WisDOT and the Wisconsin Department of Administration.
Wisconsin DOT and University	Lease Agreement Amendment	The University of Wisconsin – Madison leased WisDOT fiber that WisDOT obtained from a Telecom Provider.
Wisconsin DOT and Local Police Department	Permit and MOU	Local police department installed a CCTV camera and shared the video feed with the WisDOT State Traffic Operation Center.
Wisconsin DOT and Illinois Tollway	MOU	The Illinois tollway used existing private fiber for a camera and dynamic message board in Wisconsin and granted video feed access from the camera to the WisDOT State Traffic Operation Center.
Wisconsin DOT and Telecom Provider	MOU	Allowed WisDOT to swap fibers between a telecom provider facility and state-owned facility.
Wisconsin DOT and Telecom Provider	Controlled Access Highway Right-of-Way Occupancy: Template	Telecom provider agreement template.
Wisconsin DOT and Telecom Provider	Right-of-Way Occupancy Agreement	Enabled carrier to construct, operate, and maintain fiber optic communication facilities longitudinally within interstate right-of-way in exchange for dark fibers, conduit, handholes, and cash.
Wisconsin DOT and University and Telecom Provider	Controlled Access Highway ROW Occupancy Agreement	ROW agreement covering 15 counties that provided WisDOT with access to 12-strands of dark fiber on approximately 300 miles of the state highways.

Transportation agencies at the state, provincial, and local levels receive many requests to display non-urgent messages on Dynamic Message Signs (DMS) regarding advertising, safety messages, and special events, for example. Agencies must decide how to respond to these requests. In addition to state, provincial, and local level policies and preferences about the use of DMS, federal design standards such as the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) must also be considered when deciding which requests to approve.

This project conducted an online search to gather state, provincial, local, and federal policies and guidelines for DMS messaging. The search also included documenting related DMS studies or efforts. Transportation agencies were also contacted to provide additional details on information gathered through the online search. In addition, ENTERPRISE members provided input throughout the duration of the project to enhance the search for DMS messaging related documents and guidelines. A survey was distributed to state, local, and provincial transportation agencies to gather additional details on the DMS message requests received by transportation agencies as well as the policy or process for handling DMS message requests. The project also researched the potential for public-private partnerships for DMS deployment and operations and documented a few potential future scenarios for connected and automated vehicle implications on DMS.

Several ENTERPRISE member agencies have transportation networks within their jurisdictions that intersect with international borders: Michigan DOT, Minnesota DOT, Texas DOT, and Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO).

Management and coordination of traffic operations at borders often requires agency resources. In addition, it is important to provide accurate and timely traveler information, such as border wait times, alerts, and construction notices, to the traveling public.

ITS technologies and systems used at borders often serve a critical purpose in assisting agencies with traffic management and traveler information. Enhanced knowledge of available technologies, uses, and benefits will equip ENTERPRISE members with potential solutions to improve agency coordination and management.

The project documented issues, challenges, practices, coordination approaches, and technologies for managing traffic at highway border crossings.

Project Webinars

As one component of this project, two project webinars were held to share information on a variety of topics.

• Webinar 1 – Data Collection and Uses at International Border Crossings
  July 26, 2016 
  This webinar featured a panel of experts that shared information about data collection and uses at international border crossings.
  • Webinar Recording
  • Webinar Presentations
    • Welcome and Project Overview – Bill Legg, Washington State DOT
    • Traffic Data Collection Technologies to Estimate Wait Times
      • Technology Options – Juan Villa, Texas A&M Transportation Institute
      • Arizona DOT Bluetooth vs. Wi-Fi Penetration Rate Study – Yung Koprowski, Lee Engineering
    • Data Uses, Tools and Trends
      • Niagara International Transportation Technology Coalition (NITTEC) – Athena Hutchins, NITTEC
      • Texas DOT – Juan Villa, Texas A&M Transportation Institute
• Webinar 2 – Agency Coordination Practices at International Borders
  September 26, 2016 
  This webinar featured a panel of experts on agency coordination at international border crossings.
  • Webinar Recording
  • Webinar Presentations
    • Welcome and Project Overview – Bill Legg, Washington State DOT
    • Whatcom Council of Governments Border Coordination – Hugh Conroy, Whatcom Council of Governments
    • Niagara International Transportation Technology Coalition (NITTEC) – Athena Hutchins, NITTEC
    • Buffalo-Niagara Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) Project – Keir Opie, Cambridge Systematics, Inc.