1. executive summary/introduction

1 12/98

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY/INTRODUCTION

The Advanced Traveler Information Systems (ATIS) Policy Committee and the ATISTechnical Committee were established by the Minnesota Department of Transportation’s(Mn/DOT) Deputy Commissioners’ staff in late 1997.

The ATIS Technical Committee, with oversight from the Policy Committee, was chargedwith the responsibility for developing a statewide ATIS plan. The plan was to identifyshort- and long-term goals and include all ATIS activities in which Mn/DOT is either aleader or a participant. The plan was also to address three major issues:

• Identify the highest priority issues facing ATIS initiatives, particularly clarifying therole of the private sector.

• Identify the highest priority ATIS standards issues and coordination and establishmentof standards.

• Recommend mechanisms to ensure that the appropriate level of communicationstakes place among and between ATIS-related initiatives as well as with ITS and othertransportation initiatives.

This Executive Summary is intended to highlight key elements of the plan. TheStatewide ATIS Plan was presented to Mn/DOT’s Deputy Commissioners forconsideration, and the Plan was approved in November 1998. It is expected that the planwill continue to be reviewed and refined.

In this report, the term “travelers” is used sometimes as a substitute term for “customers”or “users.” Also used interchangeably in this report are the terms “data” and“information.” Generally speaking, data refers to the raw material collected. This datacan be given to travelers/customers either as unprocessed data or as processed, value-added information. In both cases the customer receives information. If the data is passedon to other information service providers for them to add value to it, the passed-on data isconsidered data, not information.

ATIS VISION AND GOALS

VISION STATEMENT

TRAVELERS IN MINNESOTA WILL HAVE THE INFORMATION THEY NEED TO HAVE A SAFE,EFFICIENT AND SATISFYING TRIP.

Minnesota’s long-term vision for ATIS is that a mix of public- and private-sector entitieswill deliver accurate, consistent and reliable information to make travel safer and moreefficient, and to increase user satisfaction. Timely and accessible information will be

2 12/98

provided to as many users as possible, using the most appropriate technology. ATIS willaddress customer needs statewide, in coordination with adjacent states. To the extentpracticable, ATIS will be self-sustaining. In the short term, ATIS will provide timelycore information to core users at selected geographic locations, using available devicesand technology.

Goals

The vision developed for ATIS identifies three priority goals: (1) to make travel safer;(2) to make travel more efficient; and (3) to increase customer satisfaction.

Expected Outcomes

Ultimately, the effectiveness of ATIS initiatives or applications will be measured by theirability to achieve certain desired outcomes. These outcomes are an outgrowth of theATIS goals defined above and are listed in the table below.

EXPECTED OUTCOMES FROM TRAVELER/CUSTOMER INFORMATION

Information Item DecreasedAccidents

ImprovedEmergency

Services

DecreasedCongestion

DecreasedDelay

DecreasedInfrastructure

Wear

IncreasedTax

Revenue

IncreasedTraveler

Satisfaction

Route specific road condition– weather related

ü ü ü ü ü

Road construction/ops ü ü ü ü ü Weight restrictions (weatherrelated)

ü ü

Trip travel times/operating oractual speeds

ü ü ü ü

Congestion levels ü ü ü ü ü Incidents ü ü ü ü ü Weather conditions (visibility,etc.)

ü ü ü ü

Posted detours ü ü ü ü Closures/alternate routes ü ü ü ü Tourist information: lodgingand activities, gas stations,truck stops

ü ü

Medical emergency facilitieslocations

ü ü

Transit scheduling ü ü ü Park-and-ride locations ü ü ü Airport and parkinginformation

ü

In-vehicle road guidance ü ü ü “Mayday” ü ü Parking available (metro area) ü ü Event parking and information ü ü

3 12/98

ATIS PUBLIC/PRIVATE SECTOR POLICY

The Technical and Policy Committees have formulated the following policy regardingpublic/private sector roles. Further work on this policy needs to be conducted before it ispresented to Mn/DOT’s Deputy Commissioners for discussion and adoption.

PROPOSED ATIS POLICY REGARDING PUBLIC/PRIVATE SECTOR ROLES The state retains responsibility and accountability for ensuring thattravelers have access to basic information needed to use the transportationsystem safely and efficiently. The state will encourage the development ofpublic/private sector partnerships and continued operation of competitiveprivate markets to provide travel information to the public. In cases whereprivate markets cannot deliver that information, the state will funddevelopment and operations. State-funded development and operationswill be outsourced when that is the most effective and efficient way todeliver access to travel information.

The public sector’s core responsibility for providing travel information should reflect thegoals defined in the ATIS vision by focusing on the top two priority goals:

• Provide information that will assist in preventing, avoiding or minimizing travel-

related crashes and incidents.

• Provide additional information that is required to ensure that the transportation systemoperates efficiently, especially in terms of reducing congestion and delay.

ATIS BUSINESS MODELS

For purposes of the plan, the information related to business models and contractingoptions are taken from the recently completed “ATIS Business Model Framework,”prepared by the Washington State Transportation Center (TRAC), under sponsorshipfrom ITS America and USDOT (1998).

Four business models or approaches are identified for operating an advanced travelerinformation system:

1. Public-Centered Operations

2. Contracted Operations

4 12/98

3. Franchise Operations

4. Private, Competitive Model (National Weather Service Model)

The following graphic illustrates the concept of shared responsibility for informationdelivery by the public and private sectors.

The public sector has the primary responsibility for providing safety-related informationto the public. Its second priority is to provide information that is needed to improvetravel efficiency; however, this responsibility can largely be shared with the privatesector. In addition, the private sector has the primary responsibility for providinginformation aimed at increasing user satisfaction.

5 12/98

One of the primary conclusions is that, at this time, no single business plan will worksuccessfully to attain every desired travelers information outcome.

The implication of the public/private sector policy is that Mn/DOT will actively promotemaximum private sector involvement and competition (private, competitive model) in allelements of traveler information, from data collection to delivery. Mn/DOT will retainresponsibility to traveler information when this private-sector model does not produce theexpected outcomes.

ATIS GUIDING PRINCIPLES

A preliminary set of guiding principles was defined to assist in future ATIS systemdevelopment. These principles should be validated through ongoing market research andoperational tests. These principles are:

• Define Mn/DOT’s role and responsibilities• Ensure quality and availability of information defined by its accuracy, timeliness,

consistency and personalization• Make public-sector data readily available to others• Allocate resources for system operation and maintenance at time of deployment• Minimize redundancies in data collection, processing and delivery• Select appropriate delivery mechanisms• Ensure ATIS system integration with other information and its systems• Establish a cooperation and coordination process• Include special events in ATIS planning• Ensure that the appropriate information reaches specific customer groups• Identify non-traditional stakeholders and ensure their accessibility to traveler

information• Conduct additional market research/business planning for ATIS deployment

ATIS PROJECT DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES

Every ATIS project should have a clear statement of what outcomes it is intended toachieve or support. Each project should be consistent with the priorities and otherinitiatives of its public and private partners. It should conform to appropriate federal,state, and industry laws and standards. If it creates responsibilities for on-goingmaintenance and operations, the size of those “tails” should be estimated andresponsibility for them accepted by the appropriate institutions. Every ATIS projectshould have a well-documented project plan that includes tasks and deliverables, a time-line, resource estimates and sources, a management structure, and risk management,coordination, and evaluation plans.

6 12/98

Adherence to a project development process will help each ATIS project:

• Clarify its goal, objectives and scope• Clarify the roles of public and private partners• Ensure fit with Mn/DOT and state priorities• Ensure fit with other initiatives• Secure review by appropriate oversight groups• Ensure conformance with laws, rules, policies, principles and standards• Account for “tails”• Develop a thorough project plan• Gain necessary approvals

ATIS PLAN ACTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The following actions and recommendations are intended to better plan, coordinate anddeploy the ATIS elements of project initiatives and operations in Minnesota:

Actions

1. Implement oversight of ITS projects (see attached figure)2. Identify staff accountable for ATIS/ITS coordination3. Create an ongoing ATIS technical group4. Conform to the project development process5. Establish stewardship for traveler information6. Define accessibility of public sector data by the private sector7. Coordinate metro and statewide ATIS services8. Keep up with ongoing work on standards9. Use market research to validate ATIS plan elements

Recommendations

1. Consider establishing “traveler information” as a core business of Mn/DOT2. Conduct further work on the ATIS policy regarding public/private sector roles,

and present to Commissioners for approval

7 12/98

Figure – Oversight Structure

8 12/98

2. DEFINITION OF ATIS ELEMENTS

The objective of providing advanced traveler information is to enable users to makeinformed decisions about their travel so as to achieve certain desirable outcomes (e.g.,more relaxed, faster, safer travel). To understand the elements of the ATIS process andhow to achieve its objectives requires an analysis of the who, what, when, where, howand why:

• Who are the markets and customers for information services?

• What are the actual travel-related information that should be delivered?

• When (at what point before or during the trip) should information be delivered?

• Where (in what geographic area) should the information be delivered?

• How (by what method) will the information be delivered to the user?

• Why is the information being provided? What is the desired outcome?

Each of these elements must be defined to provide a complete description of a specificATIS initiative. Working through the descriptions of each element helps to provide apicture of how a project will integrate into the elements of other projects, either plannedor in place.

Information (What), Customers (Who), and Outcomes (Why)

In defining Advanced Traveler Information Systems (ATIS) in Minnesota, it is necessaryto first identify what types of information will be delivered, to whom it will be providedand what the expected outcome of delivering this information will be. This basicdescription of ATIS elements provides the foundation for exploring specificimplementation opportunities.

Table 1 identifies 36 current and potential customers of ATIS in Minnesota. The list ofpotential customers has been grouped into categories that reflect their likely use of similarATIS information. Additionally, specific information items and their relationship wereidentified and are summarized in Table 2.

An analysis of Table 2 indicates that there is a great deal of overlap of expected outcomesfrom the information provided. Table 3 has been prepared to show how each informationitem can serve a variety of outcomes.

9 12/98

TABLE 1ATIS CUSTOMERS

1. TravelersBy Mode By Travel Purpose1.1 Auto drivers 1.9 Commuters (work trips)1.2 Auto passengers 1.10 Non-work (non-peak periods)1.3 Transit riders 1.11 Recreation1.4 Paratransit riders 1.12 Seasonal/2nd residence commuters1.5 Telecommuters 1.13 Tourism1.6 Pedestrians 1.14 Pass through traffic (trucks/automobiles)1.7 Bicycle Riders1.8 Freight carriers

2. Transit & Paratransit Providers2.1 Vehicle drivers2.2 Reservations/scheduling2.3 Dispatching2.4 Trip planning2.5 School administration/school bus driver

3. Emergency Service Dispatchers (air and land)3.1 Ambulance3.2 Police3.3 Fire3.4 State Patrol3.5 Highway Helpers3.6 Tow Truck Operators

4. Fleet Managers/Dispatchers4.1 Shippers4.2 Transit dispatchers4.3 Delivery fleets4.4 Freight carriers

5. Agencies / Jurisdictions5.1 State/county/city/transit, etc.5.2 Maintenance/operations5.3 Traffic Management Centers5.4 Transit Operations

6. Other Users/Disseminators6.1 News/TV and radio reporters6.2 Employers6.3 MPOs, TMOs and ATPs

10 12/98

TABLE 2INFORMATION ITEMS, CUSTOMERS AND OUTCOMESInformation Item Customers(1) OutcomesRoute specific roadsurface condition –weather related

All customers Improved safety, diverted traffic, less trip delay, fewer trips, lesscongestion, improved operations; improved customer service andsatisfaction, time savings

Road surfaceconstruction/ops

All customers Improved safety, diverted traffic, less trip delay, fewer trips, lesscongestion, improved operations; improved customer service andsatisfaction, time savings, plus greater user satisfaction,convenience

Weight restrictions(weather related, butdifferent)

1.9, 2, 4, 5.1 Less damage to infrastructure, long-range financial savings,decreased trip delay and cost

Trip traveltimes/operating or actualspeeds

1, 2, 3 (except 3,4), 4, 6

Diversion to transit, on-time delivery, trip avoided or time of trip ischanged, fewer accidents

Congestion levels 1, 2, 3 (except 3,4), 4, 5, 6

Diversion to transit, on-time delivery, trip avoided or time of trip ischanged, fewer accidents plus and more uniform speeds-safety,efficiency, driver satisfaction.

Incidents 1-7 Diversion to transit, on-time delivery, trip avoided or time of trip ischanged, fewer accidents plus and more uniform speeds-safety,efficiency, driver satisfaction.

Weather conditions(visibility, etc.)

All customers Improved safety, diverted traffic, less trip delay, fewer trips, lesscongestion, improved operations; improved customer service andsatisfaction, time savings

Posted detours 1-6 • Improved safety, diverted traffic, less trip delay, fewer trips,less congestion, improved operations; improved customerservice and satisfaction, time savings, plus greater usersatisfaction, convenience

• Diversion to transit, on-time delivery, trip avoided or time oftrip is changed, fewer accidents

Closures/alternate routes 1-6 • Improved safety, diverted traffic, less trip delay, fewer trips,less congestion, improved operations; improved customerservice and satisfaction, time savings, plus greater usersatisfaction, convenience


Tourist information:lodging and activities, gasstations, truck stops

1-6 Increased sales tax revenue, benefits local economy, increased usersatisfaction, and safety, similar for truck stops.

Medical emergencyfacilities locations

All customers • Improved safety, diverted traffic, less trip delay, fewer trips,less congestion, improved operations; improved customerservice and satisfaction, time savings, plus greater usersatisfaction, convenience


Transit scheduling 1.2-1.5, 1.10-1.11,6

System coordination, decreased congestion, improved ridership,less transit subsidy, fuel conservation.

Park-and-ride locations 1.2-1.5, 1.10-1.11,6

System coordination, decreased congestion, improved ridership,less transit subsidy, fuel conservation.

Airport and parkinginformation

1, 6 Increased user satisfaction

In-vehicle road guidance All Customers Increased user satisfaction, Improved operations efficiency “Mayday” 5, 6 Increased safety, Improved emergency response Parking available (metroarea)

1 (except non-motorized)

Increased user satisfaction, Improved operations efficiency

Event parking andinformation

1-4 Increased user satisfaction, Improved operations efficiency

(1) References are to numbers shown in the list of ATIS customers in Table 1.

11 12/98

TABLE 3 EXPECTED OUTCOMES FROM TRAVELER/CUSTOMER INFORMATION

Information Item DecreasedAccidents

ImprovedEmergency

Services

DecreasedCongestion

DecreasedDelay

DecreasedInfrastructure

Wear

IncreasedTax

Revenue

IncreasedTraveler

Satisfaction

Route specific road condition– weather related

ü ü ü ü ü

Road construction/ops ü ü ü ü ü Weight restrictions (weatherrelated)

ü ü

Trip travel times/operating oractual speeds

ü ü ü ü

Congestion levels ü ü ü ü ü Incidents ü ü ü ü ü Weather conditions (visibility,etc.)

ü ü ü ü

Posted detours ü ü ü ü Closures/alternate routes ü ü ü ü Tourist information: lodgingand activities, gas stations,truck stops

ü ü

Medical emergency facilitieslocations

ü ü

Transit scheduling ü ü ü Park-and-ride locations ü ü ü Airport and parkinginformation

ü

In-vehicle road guidance ü ü ü “Mayday” ü ü Parking available (metro area) ü ü Event parking and information ü ü

12 12/98

The data-to-outcome process is graphically illustrated in Figure 1. It depicts, withexamples, the steps needed to take the raw data and convert it into useful information,then selecting methods to deliver the information to specific users at specific times so asto effect a traveler response and achieve desired outcomes. INFORMATION TIMING (WHEN), GEOGRAPHIC AREA (WHERE) AND DISSEMINATIONMETHODS (HOW) To complete the description of ATIS services it is critical to understand not only howfrequently the information needs to be provided, but also how current it should be, atwhat point in the trip it should be available, and where and how the customer is going toreceive the information. A description of these elements is provided next. Information Timing (When?)

1. Data Timing/Accuracy• Current

− Real-time− Delayed

• Periodic• Forecasted

2. Trip-Related Timing

• Before the trip• During the trip• On-site/at-site• At all times

Geographic Area (Where?)

• Metro area− Spot− Small area− Corridor− Metrowide

• Other cities• Sub-regions• Rural areas• Statewide• Out of state

ATIS Dissemination Methods (How?)

• Phones• Cellular phones• Pagers• Kiosks• View only monitors• Fax• Internet/websites/e-mail• INTRANET

• Local commercial radio• Highway Advisory Radio

(HAR)• TV/cable TV• VMS/CMS• Mobile data terminals• In-vehicle devices

13 12/98

FIGURE 1

14 12/98

ATIS SYSTEM ARCHITECTURE The ATIS architecture provides a common structure for the design, implementation andoperation of ATIS systems. It is a flexible framework around which multiple designapproaches can be developed. In developing the Minnesota ATIS architecture, theNational ITS Architecture and the research done under the POLARIS project inMinnesota were followed to ensure consistency. The ATIS physical components have been grouped into categories based on their functionand location once deployed. This provides a method of examining ATIS systems basedon the relative location of the individual subsystems (see Figure 2). Center Subsystems deal with functions normally assigned to public/privateadministrative, management or planning agencies. They constitute the “nerve centers” ofthe ATIS architecture; they are points where information about transportation systemconditions is synthesized for distribution. Roadside Subsystems include data capture and display devices placed at or near theroadway infrastructure. For example, a variable message sign (VMS) or surveillancecamera would be included in roadside subsystems. In general, any device, which eitherhas a fixed outdoor position or is used in relation to a fixed roadside element isconsidered a roadside subsystem. Vehicle Subsystems include any device that is installed in a vehicle. Devices can beeither for data gathering such as Global Positioning System (GPS) receivers, or forreceiving and disseminating data and information such as mobile data terminals (MDT).In many cases, a device can have several functions, but its classification as a vehiclesubsystem is maintained because of its physical location. Traveler Subsystems represent functions that are of interest to travelers or carriers.They include a variety of dissemination mechanisms including site-specific (kiosks), in-vehicle (radios, computers), or in the travelers’ home or workplace (telephones,computers). The common characteristic of the Traveler Subsystems is that their primaryfunction is to deliver information to users of the transportation system. These subsystemsmay be passive, as in the case of a traffic radio broadcast, or highly interactive, as in a tripor itinerary planning applications. Providing the transport between the data gathering Center Subsystems and TravelerSubsystems are intermediate elements including ATIS data servers, which then feed thedata distribution mechanisms. The architecture identifies four communication media types to support thecommunications requirements between subsystems. They are wireline (fixed-to-fixed),wide area wireless (fixed-to-mobile), dedicated short-range wireless (fixed-to-mobile),and vehicle-to-vehicle wireless communications (mobile-to-mobile).

15 12/98

FIGURE 2 MINNESOTA ATIS FRAMEWORK

16 12/98

3. CUSTOMERS WANTS AND NEEDS Since 1994, the following five studies are key among studies that have been conducted inMinnesota to gauge the expectations, desires, and satisfaction of travelers and, in the caseof Polaris, all end users of ATIS-related products and services: • Rural ITS Deployment Study April 1994• Motorists Information Study September 1995• POLARIS April 1996• Public Attitudes … in Minnesota 1996-1997• User Acceptance of ATIS January 1997 These studies have shown a great deal of consistency in their findings. This summaryhighlights some of their most important conclusions. A full review of the marketresearch studies can be found in the appendix to this plan. Concerns of Travelers • Increased safety and security and a decreased level of stress are the primary outcomes

hoped for by travelers/customers. Information Content • Travelers are primarily concerned about obtaining information related to safety and

transportation conditions.• Travelers wish to receive information about incidents, weather and road conditions,

congestion, and route planning.• The quality of information is important to travelers. Factors such as timelines and

accuracy play a key role in determining the value of the information to the traveler.• Urban commuters need travel time information more for the morning commute than

for the afternoon. Information Delivery • Radio traffic reports are the preferred mode of information delivery by travelers (76%

of respondents ranked as useful), electronic message signs are next in preference(61% of respondents ranked as useful).

• TV broadcasts and telephone services were ranked as useful less often (20%).• Travelers show a preference for passive delivery mechanisms (i.e., active

participation by the traveler is not required).• Mn/DOT’s traffic web site had only a nine percent awareness rating in 1997.

17 12/98

System Funding • 76% of travelers believe there should be some type of user fee for ATIS services.• 39% of travelers believe that the user should bear the cost of the system; 59%

believed that costs should be shared between travelers and other transportationentities.

18 12/98

4. ATIS VISION AND GOALS

VISION STATEMENT

TRAVELERS IN MINNESOTA WILL HAVE THE INFORMATION THEY NEED TO HAVE A SAFE,EFFICIENT AND SATISFYING TRIP.

Minnesota’s long-term vision for ATIS is that a mix of public- and private-sector entitieswill deliver accurate, consistent and reliable information to make travel safer and moreefficient, and to increase user satisfaction. Timely and accessible information will beprovided to as many users as possible, using the most appropriate technology. ATIS willaddress customer needs statewide, in coordination with adjacent states. To the extentpracticable, ATIS will be self-sustaining. In the short term, ATIS will provide timelycore information to core users at selected geographic locations, using available devicesand technology.

Goals

The vision developed for ATIS identifies three priority goals: (1) to make travel safer;(2) to make travel more efficient; and (3) to increase customer satisfaction.

How can the ATIS goals of making travel safer and more efficient and increasingcustomer satisfaction be achieved within the context of the existing and planned roadwayinfrastructure?

1. Customer Safety

What information should be given to customers to improve their safety? Safety iscompromised when unexpected conditions create impediments to travel:

• Road/bridge restrictions • Incidents• Road/bridge closures • Hidden accesses• Road/bridge work • Unexpected or substandard• Hazardous weather conditions roadway geometrics• Hazardous road surface conditions • Slow or too-fast moving vehicles• Accidents/crashes

Lack of timely information about impediments to travel and unexpected conditionscreate situations or responses that lead to accidents and crashes:

• Sudden stops/hard braking (“sea of red lights”)• Inability to deal with the condition (loss of control)

19 12/98

• Confusion about what to do• Unsafe maneuvers (use of shoulders, U-turns, lane changing, passing in

no-passing zones)

2. Transportation System Efficiency

What information should be given to customers to improve transportation systemefficiency? System efficiency is affected by most of the factors that affect safety(listed above) as well as by other factors such as:

• Recurring congestion/delays • High-volume, heavy commercial• Accident or incident location Vehicles• Eliminating heavy peaking • Trains at at-grade railroad crossings• Unbalanced directional travel • Out-of-date, inaccurate or• Insufficient information Insufficient information

about roadside amenities/facilities • Transit/high-occupancy vehicles

Lack of timely information leads to system inefficiency (secondary crashes, delays,increased travel costs, increased vehicle-miles of travel, inefficient use of off-peaksystem capacity, over-reliance and overuse of the roadway system, underutilization ofalternate modes of transportation, and increased costs to businesses, consumers and,ultimately, to the economy).

3. Customer Satisfaction

What information should be given to customers to increase their satisfaction with thetransportation system? Customer satisfaction is maximized when travel impedimentsand risks (in the form of improved safety and system efficiency) are minimized oreliminated. Customer satisfaction also increases when uncertainty about travel isreduced by providing timely information such as:

• Estimated travel time• Trip travel time reliability• Park-and-ride locations• Availability of parking• Availability of spaces at rest stops• Direction information

• Location of alternate routes• Transit availability• Estimated transit arrival time• Availability of tourist information

(attractions/hotels/eats)• Assistance with trip planning

Lack of timely information leads customers to make unsafe and inefficient decisionsabout mode, time of travel, route choice, and frequency of travel that can result indissatisfaction and frustration. Timely information allows users to adjust their travelto best suit known conditions.

20 12/98

5. ATIS PUBLIC/PRIVATE SECTOR POLICY


PROPOSED ATIS POLICY REGARDING PUBLIC/PRIVATE SECTOR ROLES The state retains responsibility and accountability for ensuring thattravelers have access to basic information needed to use the transportationsystem safely and efficiently. The state will encourage the development ofpublic/private sector partnerships and continued operation of competitiveprivate markets to provide travel information to the public. In cases whereprivate markets cannot deliver that information, the state will funddevelopment and operations. State-funded development and operationswill be outsourced when that is the most effective and efficient way todeliver access to travel information.

The public sector’s core responsibility for providing travel information should reflect thegoals defined in the ATIS vision by focusing on the top two priority goals:


related crashes and incidents.

• Provide additional information that is required to ensure that the transportation systemoperates efficiently, especially in terms of reducing congestion and delay.

It is expected that, ultimately, the marketplace will significantly influence what specificsets of travel information and delivery mechanisms will be employed by the public andprivate sectors. Initially, the public sector will lead the data collection, processing anddissemination of traveler information through free and widely available media such astelephony, Internet, variable message signs, and FAX services to other media. The MetroDivision is also funding both radio and television broadcasts of traveler information tosupplement the existing private sector traffic information broadcasts widely available onboth radio and television. Staff dealing with the effects of recent, serious safety-relatedtraffic incidents in Districts 1 and 4 could have benefited from the ability to have timelytraffic messages broadcast on local radio and television (even if payment were necessary).

The private sector has a need to generate a profit on its investments in travelerinformation systems. In the interest of public safety, the public sector will continuallylook for opportunities to support private initiatives that can make traveler informationdelivery self-sustaining and profitable to the private sector. The public sector, in an effortto conduct operational tests of traveler information delivery systems in the Metro Areaand in Greater Minnesota, will partner with the private sector and/or provide funding toconduct these tests. Several rural initiatives are proposed in the next two years that areinitially public-private partnerships to test the rural marketplace for traveler information.

21 12/98

A major urban project will determine if the private sector can both collect data andprovide traveler information. As part of that initiative, Smart Route will be addingCCTV and other traffic detection to the freeways in the Metro Area not currently wellcovered by the TMC. It will use this information plus information provided by the TMCto provide both free and for-fee traveler information services. Rural initiatives include acable television traffic and road condition report in District 4 and a cell phone system inDistrict 1. Other rural initiatives and tests include kiosks, FAX, telephony, pager andInternet systems in Districts 1 and 3.

The private sector’s initial efforts into traveler information in the Twin Cities hasprimarily been seen as providing information to increase traveler satisfaction. The privatesector role is not seen as having a major benefit on safety or system efficiency. The initialefforts of the private sector in the rural market will probably also start with travelersatisfaction as the primary objective. For example, AAA has, for some time, providedmap-based route guidance to its customers. However, with the advent of in-vehiclenavigation systems and low-cost GPS, already almost ½ percent of vehicles are equippedwith MayDay or other private route guidance systems. MayDay systems could have asignificant safety benefit, especially in rural areas, inasmuch as its deployment isexpected to increase exponentially over the next few years.

The ultimate balance of private sector and public sector funding of traveler informationsystems depends upon the ability of each sector to provide critical information in a timelymanner. Figure 3 illustrates the concept of shared responsibility for information deliveryby both sectors. A look at how weather information is provided to the public would helpto further visualize this model. General weather information is provided daily and hourlyby the media, free of charge, to customers, and Mn/DOT has provided signing on thehighways to assist travelers to locate these stations on their radios. However, when thereis a weather emergency, the National Weather Service (NWS) interrupts all radio andtelevision broadcast to provide weather warnings. The private sector has now taken theNWS information, added value to it to provide better information (more detailed, morelocation-specific, etc.) on weather emergency than the NWS. Stations that provide thevalue-added information are able to broadcast their own rather that the NWS information,but the background NWS system remains in place as a public safety resource. This sametype of scenario could be applicable to traveler information. Mn/DOT would maintain ahighly-accessible traveler information system, but detailed information would eventuallybe made available by the private sector.

Table 4 presents an assessment of the relative ability of the public and private sectors toprovide traveler information. Initial capitalization of data collection and informationdelivery systems is a concern for both sectors. This Policy supports use of public-privatepartnerships as way to add momentum to these early efforts.

22 12/98

FIGURE 3 ROLE OF THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTORS IN ATIS DELIVERY

The public sector has the primary responsibility for providing safety-related informationto the public. Its second priority is to provide information that is needed to improvetravel efficiency; however, this responsibility can largely be shared with the privatesector. In addition, the private sector has the primary responsibility for providinginformation aimed at increasing user satisfaction.

23 12/98

TABLE 4 COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT OF INFORMATION DELIVERY BY THE PUBLIC AND PRIVATESECTORS

Criteria Public Sector Private Sector 1. Speed of Implementation

• Ability to fast-track + +++• Accelerate data delivery process + ++• Timely expansion of service + ++• Introduce technological innovations + +++

2. Flexibility

• Ability to offer multiple services (bundling) + +++• Address consumer-based market needs + +++• Address needs of non-traditional markets +++ +• Provide baseline information ++ +• Disseminate information statewide ++ ++• Disseminate information to all modes ++ +

3. Data quality

• Accuracy + +• Reduce variability (“granularity”) ++ ++• Provision of real-time information ++ ++• Reduce conflicting reports to users ++ +

4. Taxpayer Cost

• Reduce public sector cost + +++• Generate self-sustaining revenue streams (e.g.,

for system operation and maintenance) + ++

• Information free of charge to users ++ + 5. System Compatibility

• Promote standardization ++ +• Promote system integration +++ +• Promote statewide coordination +++ +• Coordination/integration among services ++ +

6. Jurisdictional Issues

• Ability to link enforcement and emergencyresponse

++ +

• Responsive to public sector needs (e.g., trafficmanagement)

++ +

• Minimize interjurisdictional conflicts + ++• Ability to overcome in-place processes + ++• Promote free-market competition + +++• Elimination of data exclusivity issue + +

24 12/98

Relative Ability: (+) Low; (++) Moderate; (+++) High.

25 12/98

ATIS BUSINESS MODELS (1)

Four models are discussed (Figures 4.1 – 4.4). Their main attributes and characteristicsare presented below. Any of these models could be used depending on the data/information to be disseminated and the delivery mechanism used. Model I – Public-Centered Operations • Majority of ATIS process is in the public sector’s control.• Assumes public sector has sufficient resources to control significant portion of ATIS

operation, including data fusion.• Generates least revenues.• Greatest level of public control.• Greatest public expenditure.• Requires high level of technical expertise within public agency.• Allows business relationship with private sector to be very simple.• Data given freely to the public which reduces revenue potential and discourages the

private sector from using its funds to expand the market.• Data given freely to the private sector who also collects additional data.

Model II – Contracted Operations • Data fusion contracted to private sector— public sector maintains some control.• Public sector gives data freely to private sector companies and to the general public.• Generates moderate revenues (from data fusion contract).• Public sector can access technical skills of private sector while maintaining control

over data fusion process.• Primary drawbacks are that, like the Public-centered approach, it is costly to the

public and the opportunity for private sector revenue generation is limited.

Model III – Franchise Operations • This approach leans more heavily on the private sector for the resources to build and

operate ATIS.• The public sector does not do any data fusion. (1) The information contained in this section is taken from the draft of the “ATIS Business Model

Framework,” prepared by the Washington State Transportation Center (TRAC), under sponsorshipfrom ITS America and USDOT (1998).

26 12/98

• A single contracted private sector firm takes over the data fusion and also collectsmuch of its own data.

• The private sector data fusion provider agrees to give the fused data to the publicsector free of charge, but can sell the fused data to other private sector providers aswell as to customers.

• The public sector cuts back on the availability of free data.• The cost to the public sector is reduced considerably.• Provides opportunity for revenue sharing between the public and private sectors.• The public may have to pay for much of the information it was getting free

previously.• The private sector has to rely on the private sector for fused data it needs to enhance

transportation system management.• Risks creating a monopoly if successful; risk to public sector if private sector goes out

of business and needed fused data ceases to flow. Model IV – Private, Competitive Model (National Weather Service Model) • The public sector makes data available to more than one company to provide data

fusion service.• Data could be provided free of charge initially and for a fee later, as the market grows.• Companies add value and resell data to the public and to other information service

providers.• Public-sector agencies purchase data from competing private-sector companies.• Fosters competition among private-sector companies that could result in lower-cost

services, high level of consumer satisfaction, greater information dissemination andgreater public access to information.

• The market may not be large enough to sustain multiple companies and the revenuestream may be too small to achieve market growth and support new deployment.

• Loss of competition could occur if one or more companies leave the market.

One of the primary conclusions drawn from examining the above business models is that,at this time, no single business plan will work successfully to attain every single outcomedesired.

The implication of the public/private sector policy is that Mn/DOT will actively promotemaximum private-sector involvement and competition (Private, Competitive Model) inall elements of traveler information, from data collection to delivery of information.However, Mn/DOT will retain responsibility for traveler information should this private-sector model not produce the desired outcomes.

27 12/98

Figure 4-1 & 4-2

28 12/98

Figure 4-3 & 4-4

29 12/98

Business Plan Selection One of the primary conclusions drawn by the ATIS Committee that helped develop the[Business Model Framework] document is that, at this time, no one business plan willwork successfully for every region of the country. Each region has unique features thathave to be considered. These include the obvious, such as • How much infrastructure is in place• What funding is available• How many public jurisdictions and agencies are participating• The size (population and geographic) of the area to be covered• The demographics of the region.

It also includes elements less obvious but equally important, such as the following:

• What is the attitude of the pubic and the affected political leaders toward privatizationof public services?

• How important to the citizenry and the local political structure is emphasizing publicsector goals such as social equity and equal access to public information?

• What is the level of public sector technical expertise in crucial ATIS functional areas?• What is the level of available staffing for those areas of expertise?• How important is mitigation of risk to the public sector? Answering these last five questions (and others like them) is as important asunderstanding the infrastructure and funding availability with which the ATIS businessplan must operate. These last questions are important because they yield insight that will help in selectingamong possible alternatives. The physical situation (availability of infrastructure andrevenue) indicates the possibility. However, the choice among “realistic” alternatives isoften based on the political weight of the benefits and costs associated with thosealternatives.

A variety of contracting options is available. Depending on the needs of the participants,different contracting options can give different levels of control and incentives to both thepublic and private sectors. With careful selection of a contracting mechanism, the ATISbusiness plan will ensure that the relationships between the public and private sectors areappropriate and are supported.

To provide detailed information on the contracting options that support theserelationships, this report has summarized a large number of contracting options. Much ofthis discussion is taken from the report Overcoming Barriers to ITS – Lessons Learned

30 12/98

from other Technologies by the Urban Institute, Cambridge Systematics, CanfieldPaddock and Stone PLC, and MTA-EMCI, for the Federal Highway Administration(1995). A variety of other resources on public/private relationships are also useful forinvestigating this subject.

A tabular summary of contracting options is shown in [Appendix C]. The table lists avariety of contract methodologies and describes the nature of the business relationshipsthat each supports. The table can be used either to identify the contracting mechanismsthat will work with a given set of desired relationships, or to identify the characteristics ofthe business relationships that are determined by a specific contracting mechanism.

In general, the contracting mechanisms at the beginning of this multi-page table providethe most public control over the good or service to be produced. The contractingmechanisms toward the bottom of the table provide the private sector with the greatestflexibility to service the market.

31 12/98

6. ATIS GUIDING PRINCIPLES In order to implement the ATIS plan, Mn/DOT and the public sector as a whole need todevelop guiding principles for system development. A preliminary set of guidingprinciples is presented next. The validity of the policies and the following guidingprinciples will be subjected to validation through on-going market research andoperational test evaluations. Attention to national trends should also assist withvalidation or rejection of these principles. The Rural Deployment Initiative –Transportation Operations/Communication Centers Executive Committee should providestewardship for the on-going validation of these policies and principles for GreaterMinnesota. ITS Minnesota and the Minnesota Guidestar Board of Directors should alsoplay an important role in validation of ATIS Policies and Principles.

The following guiding principles have been written from Mn/DOT’s perspective.However, they could well apply to the public sector as a whole. Mn/DOT’s Role – Mn/DOT has a responsibility to ensure the provision of travelerinformation to the public, especially information that improves safety and reducescongestion. Data/Information Quality and Availability – As with any product or service, thequality of the data/information as perceived by the customer plays a large role indetermining success or failure. Since, in general, ATIS initiatives provide information asopposed to a physical product, it is the quality of the information itself that must beensured. Five factors have been identified as determining information quality: accuracy,timeliness, consistency, level of detail and personalization. • Accuracy – Is defined as how reliably the information provides a complete picture of

the conditions of interest to the user. Accuracy can be spatial, temporal, ordescriptive. Suggested targets for data accuracy:

- Spatial - When location is reported, accuracy of location or termini of theproblem should be within 1/8 mile and on the correct route.

- Temporal - When event duration is reported, accuracy should be within10 minutes.

- Descriptive information – When event descriptions are provided, they shouldaccurately describe the condition, e.g., road closed, lane blocked, wet snow,packed snow, etc.

• Timeliness – Is determined by the lag between detection of reportable conditions andthe delivery of the information to users. Suggested targets for timeliness data:

- Incidents should be reported within 5 minutes of the detection of the incident.

32 12/98

- Incident clearance should also be reported within 5 minutes.- Road openings and closures should be reported within 10 minutes of their

occurrence. • Consistency of information – Is needed to create user confidence in the system.

Terminology should be standardized within systems and between systems. The timethat information is made available to users should also be consistent; for example,construction/road closure or crash reports should be made available within a certainnumber of minutes of their occurrence or detection. Suggested targets for dataconsistency:

- No contradictory or ambiguous information should be delivered.- National information message standards should be used. ITE and SAE are

developing message standards. • Personalization – Can be key to fulfilling user expectation. The measure of

personalization is in how well the information presented to a user provides a pictureof conditions complete enough for the user’s needs without delivering anoverwhelming amount of data, either in volume or scope. Suggested target:

- The public sector should not provide personalized traveler information to thegeneral public. This is a private sector responsibility.

Access to Public-Sector Data -- In recognition of the principle that data collected by thepublic sector is available to the anyone who requests it and that the data is being collectedto the serve the public good, the public sector will make road condition, traffic and otherroadway data readily available to private sector information service providers. It is thePolicy of this Plan that any charges for data collected, processed or disseminated byMn/DOT shall be in accordance with the Minnesota Data Practices Act. This statuteallows for recovery of documented development costs and for documented costs ofcopying or dissemination. Operation and Maintenance of Traveler Information Systems – As ATIS systems aredeveloped, steps must be taken to ensure that the systems will be operated and maintainedproperly in order to ensure data/information quality, timeliness and accuracy. It isimperative that the resources required to operate and maintain ATIS systems be clearlyidentified and allocated prior to ATIS system deployment. Mn/DOT should determinethe resource impacts of operation and maintenance of ATIS in Minnesota. TheDepartments is seeking operation and maintenance funding support for ITS during the2000-2001 biennium. Federal funds may also be available for some aspects of operationsand maintenance of these systems.

33 12/98

Minimizing Redundancies – Mn/DOT should develop and/or support the developmentof ATIS systems that minimize redundancy in the collection of traveler information data.Other systems with data valuable to travelers should be integrated or linked to Mn/DOT’sATIS systems. Delivery Mechanisms – No data, regardless of its quality, can be effective in achievingdesired outcomes if it is not presented in a manner that is accessible. Research conductedby Mn/DOT has clearly shown that passive delivery mechanisms are strongly preferred.Methods such as radio broadcasts and roadside variable message signs were rated highlyin traveler surveys, both in terms of preference and effectiveness. Methods whichrequire users to be highly proactive in obtaining data have a much lower level ofpreference. In recent studies by the UND, Center for Aeronautics, Regional WeatherInformation Center, cell phones have been shown to be a potentially importantinformation delivery mechanism. Initially, travelers could call the ATIS for roadcondition information. Ultimately, travelers could subscribe to a private ISP to havepersonalized traffic or road condition alerts automatically delivered to their cell phones.

Initial indications are that private sector deployments of kiosks to provide travelerinformation may be profitable. Traveler information is provided on the kiosks as a freeservice. Revenue streams are generated from advertising and from other for-a-feeservices through the kiosk such as on-line banking, e-mail access, etc.

The delivery medium is an important determinant of the effectiveness of ATIS. Thefollowing factors should be considered: • Location – Unless the information delivered is specific to one site, the delivery

medium should either be portable or a fixed roadside sign. • Interaction – Most users prefer information to be delivered in a passive manner

requiring as little user intervention as possible. • Technology – Using systems already in place (radio, pager, cell phone) is preferable

to introducing new devices to the user. This is both because of the ‘comfort level’ ofthe user with technology and because of the scarcity of space within vehicles and theinconvenience of carrying additional personal devices.

System Integration – Mn/DOT ATIS systems should be integrated and linked tovaluable traveler data systems maintained by others (e.g., Weather Service, MN Office ofTourism). ATIS systems should also be integrated with other ITS systems such asMayday, AVL and CAD. On a regional level, ATIS systems should be integrated into theTransportation Operation Centers and Communications Centers (TOC/CC). Mn/DOT

34 12/98

will also pursue linking Minnesota ATIS systems with adjacent states and CanadianProvinces, as well as with the automotive industry on national and internationalinitiatives. In all cases, compliance with the National ITS Architecture will be pursued tothe fullest extent possible.

Cooperation and Coordination – The Districts and Metro Division should cooperateand support each other’s ATIS activities. This support will consist of, as a minimum,using a common ATIS architecture, common communication and message standards andcommon center to center data standards. The TOC/CC Executive Committee will besteward over assuring ongoing cooperation and coordination are implemented on everynew initiative and expansion of existing initiatives. The TOC/CC will also providestewardship of assuring interagency cooperation and coordination with such agencies asDPS, Office of Tourism, DNR, etc.

Special Events – Mn/DOT should actively plan and assure effective operation of ATISsystems related to major planned special events that potentially have an adverse impacton traffic.

Customer Segmentation – Mn/DOT should ensure that appropriate ATIS data isavailable to specific customer groups that directly impact Mn/DOT’s mission to improvesafety and reduce congestion. For example, information about specific accident locationwould be very important to emergency services for route selection and improved responsetime. Mn/DOT may use operations resources to purchase dissemination of emergencytraveler information through the media when necessary to assure the safety of travelingpublic or specific travelers which can not be reached any other way.

Non-Traditional Stakeholders – The public sector needs to clearly identify potentialusers who, because they represent a small market segment, are difficult to reach bytraditional means. If these groups are not adequately served by the private sector, thepublic sector may have to take on the responsibility for serving them.

Market Research/Business Planning – Mn/DOT should use market research in its ATISplanning to determine priorities for ATIS development, deployment and continuingoperation. This research should address both human factors and outcomes related toproposed and existing ATIS initiatives. Research into ways to improve data quality,information usefulness and benefits should be initiated. When research indicates aninitiative is not cost-effectively providing the outcomes desired, Mn/DOT will terminatethe initiative as long as other more cost-effective initiatives exist and are in place.

35 12/98

7. CURRENT AND PLANNED ATIS PROJECT INITIATIVES

To determine the state of ATIS deployment in Minnesota, an inventory was completed ofmajor state and national projects that exist, are currently underway, or are planned.

At the state level, Minnesota has a wide variety of ATIS efforts in place, coveringdiffering modes and customer groups. The Traffic Management Center (TMC) currentlyhas the most comprehensive traveler information delivery system for the Twin CitiesMetro Area. Radio, TV, computer, and stationary signs are all used to deliver traffic andincident data. Other, transit-oriented initiatives are underway in southwestern andnortheastern Minnesota aimed at improving service and decreasing costs. Weatherinformation and road conditions are provided through telephone and Internet service inthe Districts 2 and 4 Road / Weather project. The Minnesota projects are listed in Table 5along with their broad descriptions.

OVERLAP ANALYSIS

Tables 6, 7 and 8 organizes the ATIS-related projects by the organization responsible forthem. To assess the service provided by these projects Minnesota, an analysis wasundertaken in which the customers served, data provided, and delivery mechanisms usedby each initiative was determined. In assessing the customers served, an aggregation ofmetro, regional, and statewide was used to provide geographic context to the users ofeach project. Travelers are most commonly the primary consumers of data provided.This is true of travelers within the metro area, as well as on a regional and statewide level.Transit and emergency response providers are also common users of data, particularly at aregional level, where the large distances involved and rural addressing schemes can havea significant impact on the ability of a vehicle to find a specific location. In these cases,safety is directly effected by the availability of navigational and road condition data.

Significant overlap can be found in several of the data items provided by ATIS projects.Most notable are the road condition and congestion level/incident data provided by theTraffic Management Center (TMC) and ORION projects in the metro area. This is duelargely to the wide variety of dissemination mechanisms employed by the TMC. Travelerinformation such as parking information and transit scheduling has the most sparsecoverage by current ATIS projects.

The most common method of information delivery has become the Internet, using http(web) or e-mail technology, with 12 of the current projects using this method. Radio andtelevision broadcasts or message signs are the next most common, with nine projectsusing each of these respectively. Some projects, most notably the TransportationOperations Centers and ORION Traveler Information use as many as five distinctdelivery mechanisms.

36 12/98

Minnesota InventoryPage 1 11 x 17

37 12/98

Minnesota InventoryPage 2

38 12/98

TABLE 6OVERLAPPING CUSTOMERS

Metro Regional

Initiative ProjectTravelers Transit /

paratransitproviders

EmergencyService

Dispatchers

FleetManagers /Dispatchers

Agencies /Jurisdictions

Other Travelers Transit /paratransitproviders

EmergencyService

Dispatchers

FleetManagers /Dispatchers

Agencies /Jurisdictions

Other Travelers Transit /paratransitproviders

Office of Transp. Op CentersAdvanced In-Vehicle SigningTrans. Mayday +Systems, SW Transit Coord.Districts & D2&D4 ATISPartners Moorhead

Traffic/RRXSt. Paul Parking

ARTIC

Coord Rural Address

Divert

CVISN

Mn/ DOTAeronautics

Weather

Mn/DOT Existing SitesMaintenance Albert Lea Project

RWIS

Mn/DOT Scenic BywaysInformation Weather/Road Info.System Pavement Condition.

Tourism Info

State Park Info

Metro ORION FreewayDivision ORION Arterial

ORION Traveler Info.

Log 20/20 (Metro Freight)

Changeable Signs

Radio KBEMMn/DOT TV ParagonTraffic TV KVBMManagement TC SidewalkCenter Commercial Traffic

Trilogy

ICTM

Legend

Primary Customer Overlapping Customer

39 12/98

TABLE 7OVERLAPPING DATA

Initiative ProjectRoad

Surface(weather)

Road Surface(construction)

WeightRestrictions

Travel Times/ Speeds

CongestionLevels

Incidents WeatherConditions

PostedDetours

Closures /AlternateRoutes

Tourist Info.(lodging,

activities, etc.)

MedicalFacility

Locations

TransitScheduling

Park andRide

Locations

Airport andParking

Info.Office of Transp. Op Centers

Advanced In-Vehicle Signing

Trans. Mayday +

Systems, SW Transit Coord.

Districts & D2&D4 ATIS

Partners MoorheadTraffic/RRXSt. Paul Parking

ARTIC

Coord Rural Address

Divert

CVISN

Aeronautics Weather

Mn/DOT Existing Sites

Maintenance Albert Lea Project

RWIS

Mn/DOT Scenic Byways

Information Weather/Road Info.

System Pavement Condition.

Tourism Info

State Park Info

Metro ORION Freeway

Division ORION Arterial


Log 20/20 (MetroFreight)Changeable Signs

Radio KBEM

Mn/DOT TV Paragon

Traffic TV KVBM

Management TC Sidewalk

Center Commercial Traffic

Trilogy

ICTM

40 12/98

TABLE 8OVERLAPPING DELIVERY MECHANISMS

Initiative ProjectComputer on

DOTNetwork

Dial-in toDOT

Network

Kiosk orRemote

Computer

Internet Pager/Mobile

Computer

In-VehicleDevice

Phone Fax CMS/VMS Radio or TV

Office of Transp. Op Centers

Advanced In-Vehicle Signing

Trans. Mayday +

Systems, SW Transit Coord.

Districts & D2&D4 ATIS

Partners MoorheadTraffic/RRXSt. Paul Parking

ARTIC

Coord Rural Address

Divert

CVISN

Mn/ DOTAeronautics

Weather

Mn/DOT Existing Sites

Maintenance Albert Lea Project

RWIS

Mn/DOT Scenic Byways

Information Weather/Road Info.

System Pavement Condition.

Tourism Info

State Park Info

Metro ORION Freeway

Division ORION Arterial


Log 20/20 (MetroFreight)Changeable Signs

Radio KBEM

Mn/DOT TV Paragon

Traffic TV KVBM

Management TC Sidewalk

Center Commercial Traffic

Trilogy

ICTM

40 12/98

NATIONAL ATIS EFFORTS

Nationally, 12 projects were identified, ranging from large “umbrella” initiatives, such asthe GCM and Southern California Priority Corridors to specific, private ventures such asthe SmartTraveler traveler information services (see Table 9). Many of the projects werea comprehensive solution, which included a traffic operations center, and variousmanagement devices, in addition to traveler information.

An example of a well-developed system is the Seattle, WA, SmartTrek system, whichincludes multi-modal traveler information and multiple dissemination methods.SmartTrek offers both traffic and trip planning functions through telephone, computer,radio, television, and sign channels. Several similar projects are being implemented inother cities.

41

TABLE 9SIGNIFICANT NATIONAL ATIS EFFORTS

Project name Location Function TechnologiesSouthern California ITSPriority Corridor

Orange County andAdjacent Areas

Identify and implement a variety oftraveler information andtransportation managementtechnologies throughout the corridor

Central TIC(s), call center, vehicle detection,VMS, CAD, web, CCTV, radio advisory,ramp meters, signal control, pagers, AVL,broadcast TV, information kiosks

TravInfo San Francisco, CA Provide traffic, transit, and ride shareinformation

Central TIC, call center, various web andpager interfaces through 3rd party vendors

GCM Priority Corridor Gary/ Chicago, IL toMilwaukee, WI

Centralize transportation information,improve dissemination

Central TIC, vehicle detection, VMS, CAD,Web, CCTV

TranStar Houston, TX Manage freeways and arterials,coordinate emergency services,provide traffic information

Central TIC, vehicle detection, VMS, CAD,Web, CCTV

TransGuide San Antonio, TX Manage freeways and arterials,provide traffic information

Central TIC, vehicle detection, VMS, CAD,CCTV, lane signals

ARTIMIS Cincinnati, OH Manage freeways and arterials,provide traffic information

Central TIC, call center, vehicle detection,VMS, CCTV, AM radio advisory

TRANSCOM NY, NJ, CT Standardize and centralizetransportation information fordistribution

NAVIGATOR Atlanta, GA andsurrounding counties

Coordinate system management,provide traffic/transit information

Central TIC, vehicle detection, VMS, CAD,CCTV, information kiosks

AzTech Phoenix, AZ Manage freeways and arterials,provide traffic information

Central TIC, call center, vehicle detection,VMS, CCTV, AM radio advisory, rampmeters, signal control

SmartTrek Seattle, WA Integrate traffic management, providetraveler information

Central TIC, call center, vehicle detection,VMS, CAD, web, CCTV, AM radioadvisory, ramp meters, signal control, pagers,Hand-held PC, AVL, MayDay

SmartTraveler Boston, MA;Philadelphia, PA;Cincinnati, OH;Washington, D.C.

Provide traveler information Call Center, Web

RWIC Grand Forks, ND Provide weather informationMOTORCITI Detroit, MI Provide a testbed for multiple ITS

productsVarious

42 12/98

8. STANDARDS

Standards of interest to advanced traveler information systems involve standardpresentation of information, standard data definitions and storage formats, and electroniccommunications protocols.

Presentation Format – The use of standard presentation of information helps improvethe travelers' comprehension of the information. For example, a radio announcer maydescribe traffic as being "slow". Mn/DOT may describe traffic at a different location as"heavy". Which traffic condition is worse? A traffic map on Microsoft Sidewalk mayshow the color white as "wide open", while another map may use green to mean there isno congestion. Consistent terminology, consistent icons, consistent use of colors, and aconsistent means of identifying a geographical area or roadway will help the travelerbetter understand the information.

Standard Data Definition – Utilizing standard data definitions and data storage formatsallows data to be collected once and used by many traveler information systems withoutrequiring translation or interpretation between systems, and without duplicating datacollection. For example, precipitation or temperature may be stored as metric or Englishunits. One database may have accident locations coded as free-form text descriptions,while another may have specific fields for jurisdiction, route number, mile point, etc. Avehicle detector on the freeway may describe its "occupancy" as a number from 0 to 200in 0.5 percent increments, while a traffic signal system may store the same information asa number from 0 to 100 in percent. One system may say an accident happened on TH 120at a certain mile point, while another may say the accident happened on Century Avenueat 10th Street. Utilizing consistent data standards will allow easier sharing of the data.

Standard Communications Protocols – The use of standard implementationarchitectures and protocols for transmitting information to travelers allows the installedequipment to serve multiple purposes and to be expandable, resulting in an integratedmeans of access for the traveler. For example, using Internet standards such as http andhtml allow traveler information to be provided using the same web browsers that travelersuse for other information. A traffic signal control system installed with consideration forthe entire ITS architecture will provide a means for the traffic flow data to be used fortraveler information purposes, in addition to the traffic control purposes for which it ismainly intended. On the other hand, a special, non-standardized weather reportingterminal can only be used to report weather.

The most stable and arguably the most useful of these levels of standards are the datastandards. Presentation of information to the traveler as well as the choice ofcommunication channels will evolve with technology. Consistent data standards canhave a useful lifetime that is much longer than the technology standards.

43 12/98

Standards Mn/DOT Currently Employs

1. Information Presentation Standards

• Standard Signs Manual – Establishes, determines and communicates standardsand specifications concerning standard dimensions, colors and otherrequirements for highway signs and signals. For information on maps andmanuals contact Map and Manual Sales at Room G-19, Mail Stop 260,Transportation Building, St. Paul, Minnesota 55155, (612) 296-2216.

• Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MMUTCD) – Setsforth the basic principles that govern the design and usage of traffic controldevices, including all traffic signs, highway traffic signals, traffic markingsand other devices erected or placed or adjacent to a highway or street byauthority of the public body or having jurisdiction, for the purpose ofregulating, warning, or guiding traffic.

• Traffic Engineering Manual – Establishes uniform guidelines and proceduresprimarily for use by appropriate personnel in Mn/DOT. It complements, butdoes not duplicate the MMUTCD.

• Office of Communications Web Page Graphics and Navigation – Provides tipson characteristics of a good Web site that will have a consistent Mn/DOT lookand feel.

2. Data Standards

• ITIS (International Traveler Information Interchange Standard) – Identifiesmessages and method for specifying location for traveler informationmessages. (Note: The ITIS location reference approach is currently not beingconsidered for a location-referencing standard in the national standard–settingeffort. Also the ITIS data dictionary is not the same as the ATIS datadictionary effort in the national standard-setting effort.)

• Statewide IRM Policies, Guidelines, and Standards – Provide policies,guidelines, and standards applicable to state agencies, particularly related tothe Government Data Practices Act, and also relating to processes for agenciesto follow to ensure that government data is managed as an informationresource.

http://www.state.mn.us/ebranch/admin/ipo/hb/document/irm15pol.htmlhttp://www.state.mn.us/ebranch/admin/ipo/hb/document/standard.htmlhttp://www.state.mn.us/ebranch/admin/ipo/guideline.html

44 12/98

• Mn/DOT IRM Policies, Standards and Guidelines – Identifies policies,standards, and guidelines for data, applications, and technology withinMn/DOT.

3. Implementation Architectures and Protocols

• Internet Standards – Specify the data and communications formats andprotocols for information sent across the Internet, such as e-mail, World WideWeb, and File Transfer Protocol.

• Internet Naming Standards – Internet Assigned Numbers Authority.http://www.iana.org/

• Telco Touchtone

• Radio Broadcast Data System – Specifies the means for sending low data-ratedata on a sideband of an FM radio station.

• STIC – Specifies the means for sending high data-rate data on a sideband ofan FM radio station.

• Office of Communications Web Page Size Limits – Specifies a 50 kbyte limitfor Web pages on Mn/DOT Web servers to provide good performance forusers.

• National Architecture for ITS – Provides a common structure for the design ofintelligent transportation systems. The architecture defines the functions thatmust be performed to implement a given ITS user service, the physical entitiesor subsystems where these functions reside, the interfaces/information flowsbetween the physical subsystems, and the communication requirements for theinformation flows.

• Polaris ITS Architecture – Brings the National Architecture for ITS one stepfurther to identify the specific types of operation centers, roadside elements,vehicles, and personal information access equipment involved in ITS inMinnesota. It identifies which functions are performed by which componentsand what the interfaces are between components.

• National Electrical Code – Specifies practices for the installation of electricalequipment and wiring to protect against fire and shock hazard.

45 12/98

Existing Standards Not Employed by Mn/DOT


• None identified.

2. Data Standards



• NTCIP (National Transportation Communications ITS Protocol) for ATC(Advanced Traffic Signal Controllers) – Provides a standardized protocol fortraffic signal controllers of different manufacturers to interoperate in acoordinated traffic signal system.

Standards Under Development



2. Data Standards

• LRMS - Location Reference Message Specification, SAE J2374 – Definesseveral methods of specifying location for traveler information and trafficmanagement systems.

• TCIP - Transit Communications ITS Protocol – Includes a transit datadictionary plus various message sets.

• ATMS (Advanced Traffic Management Systems) data dictionary, ITE –Defines data elements to be used in traffic management systems.

• ATIS (Advanced Traveler Information Systems), SAE – Defines dataelements to be used in traveler information systems.


• National Transportation Communications for ITS Protocol, Device Profile –Center to Center – Specifies communication protocols for exchanginginformation between traffic management centers.

46 12/98

• National Transportation Communications for ITS Protocol, Object Definitionsfor Dynamic Message Signs – Specifies the communications protocol forcontrolling dynamic message signs.

• National Transportation Communications for ITS Protocol, Object Definitionsfor Environmental Sensor Stations for Environmental Sensors – Specifies astandard protocol to receive data from road weather sensor stations.

• ATIS message list, SAE – Specifies standard data messages for use in ATISimplementations.

• ATIS message structure for high speed FM subcarrier – Specifies standardmessage structures for sending transportation data cross a high-speedsubcarrier of an FM radio station.

• Message set for External TMC Communications – Specifies standard datamessages for transferring data from a traffic management center to a privatetraveler information service provider.

Actions/Recommendations

• Implementation of Existing Standards

Mn/DOT has already implemented most of the existing standards that are finalizedand directly applicable to ATIS. There are, however, a number of directly applicablestandards that are in some level of draft form that could serve as a beginning point inany new ATIS development. Most of these are listed above "Standards UnderDevelopment". These include data dictionaries and message sets whose developmentthe USDOT has supported with funding. Most of these standards are being developedusing a top-down approach. The National ITS Architecture identified the areas ofneed for standards, and administrative and technical staff from the areas of interest aredeveloping standards based upon anticipated usefulness in as-yet-future interoperablesystems. Because of the limited, installed base of interoperable ATIS systems,because of insufficient market experience for determining user information andformat needs, and because these standards are not merely a formalization ofwidespread standards, these emerging standards will almost certainly requiresignificant revision to be made useful.

47 12/98

The following recommendations apply for existing, emerging, and draft standardswhich are stable enough to be useful:

Recommendation #1 - Utilize existing, emerging, and draft ITS ATIS-relatedstandards when developing new ATIS implementations, where feasible.

When developing new ATIS implementations, avoid using proprietary,vendor-specific data formats, messages, and protocols which cannot be upgraded tostandard data formats, messages, and protocols as they emerge. Basing newdevelopments on the approach contained in drafts of the standards will provide thebest assurance of an ability to upgrade to a final standard once it is published.

Recommendation #2 - Make modifications to the draft standards as required toimplement ATIS.

Because the standards are in draft form and have followed a top-down approach, theymay contain errors, omissions, or lack of precision that will only appear as duringimplementation. These shortcomings have to be addressed in order to develop aworking system.

Recommendation #3 - Document deviations from the draft standards that made inorder to implement ATIS, and share those documents with the correspondingstandards development organizations (SDOs).

By providing feedback to the standards-setting bodies, other organizations can besaved from developing their own differing solutions to the standards shortcomings.SDOs are usually very eager to receive and incorporate this type of real-lifeexperience into the standards.

• External Standards or Interim Standards

The external standards-setting process for developing actual, approved, and publishedstandards is very time consuming. It is usually accomplished by volunteers fromvarious industries who participate to ensure that products they manufacture are notsuddenly "non-compliant", and that the final adopted standards fit with theircompany's planned approach for their products. There can sometimes be politicalmaneuvering between private or government participants that can drag out thetimeline even more. The USDOT has provided funding for certain standards-development efforts to ensure that high priority ITS standards, including ATISstandards, emerge in a more timely manner. Nonetheless, waiting for externalstandards involves an unpredictable delay that cannot be tolerated in an ATIS projectworthy of implementation.

48 12/98

Recommendation #1 - Do not delay projects in order to wait for an external standardto be developed.

Recommendation #2 - Where an ATIS implementation should be interoperable orshare a common look and feel with other ATIS or non-ATIS systems, involveparticipants from all the affected systems to develop a common interface design to usewhere standards are not existing.

Not every part of an ATIS has to be standardized. There is room for many technicalsolutions to meet the same need. When a system has an interface to other systems, orto humans, standardization is often valuable. It is important to identify which parts ofthe system need to be standard and which do not. Related projects should thendevelop a common approach for those parts of the respective systems which wouldbenefit from it, where no external standards exist.

• Participation in External Standards Setting

On some of the standards committees there are no, or very few, public-sectorparticipants. The public sector brings experience in the operation of ATIS that isoften lacking among the private sector participants.

Recommendation #1 - Mn/DOT should support participation of its experienced staffin external standards-setting activities related to functions Mn/DOT performs byallowing time to work on these efforts and providing funding for travel.

Mn/DOT has a very high level of experience in ATIS implementation as compared tomany other public sector entities. This experience would contribute greatly to thequality of ATIS standards.

• Develop Mn/DOT Standards

The Office of Information Resource Management (OIRM) develops and implementsthe policies, standards, plans and strategies required for Mn/DOT to build shareable,reusable information, to improve the quality and reduce the costs of information. Thestandards promoted by this office have been based upon the needs of Mn/DOT and itscustomers, and have not been related to the external national or internationalstandards-setting efforts in the ITS area, including ATIS. There is the potential for agreat deal of overlap and incompatibility between these two standards efforts.

Recommendation #1 - Mn/DOT's Office of Information Resource Managementshould participate in external ITS data standards efforts.

49 12/98

Recommendation #2 - Mn/DOT's Office of Information Resource Managementshould attempt to reconcile the data standards developing externally for ITS with thedata standards it promotes within Mn/DOT.

Much of the real time data that ATIS systems rely upon was originally collected tomeet an operational or control need, such as collecting weather data to aid in winterroad maintenance, collecting traffic flow data to operate traffic signals, and collectingcurrent accident information in order to manage traffic on the freeway. Thoseinvolved with the operational and control systems, whether public agency operators orprivate manufacturers, have set the standards used to collect and distribute thisreal-time data, or else the data is in proprietary format. At the same time, others haveneeded historical documentation of related data for planning purposes such as usingaccident logs and traffic counts for planning and safety studies. Many of the OIRMstandards address mostly the planning needs. There have been increasing efforts atutilizing data collected by the operational and control systems to supply the needs ofthe planning efforts and to supply ATIS implementations with real-time data. To thisend, national and international standardization efforts have progressed, and these needto be reconciled with Mn/DOT's OIRM standards.

One national effort the USDOT is undertaking is defining the requirements for an ITSservice for data archiving. Input by OIRM into this effort would help both thenational effort and Mn/DOT's data sharing efforts.

• Maintenance of Standards Information

Recommendation #1 - Mn/DOT should appoint a steward of the "Standards" sectionof this plan to keep it updated with the current status of individual ATIS standards.

50 12/98

9. ATIS PROJECT DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES

This section of the Minnesota Advanced Traveler Information System Plan is intendedfor use by the sponsors and project managers of ATIS initiatives in Mn/DOT and otheragencies to help them ensure the success of their projects. It will help each project:

• Clarify its goal, objectives and scope• Clarify the roles of public and private partners• Ensure fit with Mn/DOT and state priorities• Ensure fit with other initiatives• Secure review by appropriate oversight groups• Ensure conformance with laws, rules, policies, principles and standards• Account for “tails”• Develop a thorough project plan• Gain necessary approvals

These guidelines explain in detail each of the elements listed above and identifies sometools and resources necessary for achieving them. Appendix B contains a list of commonissues encountered by ATIS projects, offers some solutions to them or identifies personsor organizations that can help address them.

PROJECT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

Every ATIS project should have a clear statement of what it is intended to accomplish.Each project should be consistent with the priorities and other initiatives of its public andprivate partners. It should conform to appropriate federal, state, and industry laws andstandards. If it creates responsibilities for on-going maintenance and operations, the sizeof those “tails” should be estimated and responsibility for them accepted by theappropriate institutions. Every ATIS project should have a well-documented project planthat includes tasks and deliverables, a time-line, resource estimates and sources, amanagement structure, and risk management, coordination, and evaluation plans.

The sections that follow lay out a series of tasks that should be undertaken in thedevelopment of each ATIS project. These tasks should not be viewed as a linear, step-by-step process; many will be undertaken in a parallel or in an iterative fashion.

1. Clarify Goal, Objectives and Scope

Each project should develop a clear statement of what it will do and how it willaccomplish the outcomes it sets out to achieve or support. This should take the form of awritten description of the project that identifies:

• Whether the nature of the project is research, operational test, or deployment

51 12/98

• The customers it will service• The customer outcomes it will support• The data it will capture or use and the information it will deliver to customers• The quality and geographic extent of data it will capture and/or deliver• The information delivery mechanism(s) it will develop or use

Chapter 2 of this Minnesota Statewide Plan for ATIS includes a scheme for categorizingATIS customers, data/information, and delivery mechanisms. Chapter 7 contains aninventory of ATIS initiatives and how they relate to those categories. Use of the samecategorization scheme by new projects will make it easier to identify opportunities tocoordinate with other initiatives.

The decision about classifying the project as either research, operational test, ordeployment is crucial. Research efforts and operational tests generally do not account for“tails” and are less constrained by policy and standards. However, it is important to askthe question, what if it works? Research and operational tests should not be allowed totransition into deployments without taking the new deployment project through thisdevelopment process.

2. Clarify the Roles of Public and Private Partners

Each project should develop a clear statement that identifies which of its components willbe developed by public agencies, which by private partners, and which agencies or privateorganizations will be responsible for the operation and maintenance of each component.The statement must be consistent with the policy set forth in Chapter 5 (once it isadopted).

3. Ensure Fit with Mn/DOT and State Priorities

Each project should ensure that it is consistent with Mn/DOT’s priorities and with thepriorities of its partners. This task is designed to ensure that the managers who areultimately responsible for their organizations have an opportunity to review projects forfit with their priorities before each project makes too much progress or too manycommitments on the agency’s behalf. Agency managers will examine the project’s goal,objectives, and scope, and compare them against their agencies’ strategic and tacticalplans.

In Mn /DOT, this means that participation in each ATIS initiative should receive earlyapproval at the division director level. For projects that will deploy databases,applications, or communications technology that will be Mn/DOT’s responsibility, thedepartment has a process for gaining that approval and for ensuring fit with its otherinitiatives. This process, known as the Business Area Initiatives (BAI) process, is used

52 12/98

for all information resource development efforts, not just ATIS projects. Responsibilityfor coordinating its use is assigned to the IRM consultant position in each Mn/DOTdivision.1

4. Ensure Fit with Other Initiatives

Each project should investigate related initiatives and document how it relates to thoseinitiatives in order to avoid duplication of effort and to ensure that resources are sharedappropriately among projects.

Chapter 6 includes an inventory and status of initiatives as of mid-1998. Mn/DOT’sOffice of Advanced Transportation Systems will maintain that inventory up to date. Newprojects should compare their scopes (in terms of customers, outcomes, data/information,geographic extent, etc. – see (1.) and lists of partners (2.) – with those of other projectsplanned or underway. That comparison will identify overlaps among projects, overlapsthat are opportunities to avoid redundant work or to share or use resources moreeffectively.

Some examples of resources developed in other projects that might be reused include:

• Market research findings for the same customer group• Contractual or other arrangements with potential partners• Data such as weather conditions, road closures, or traffic characteristics• Map coverages and street name and address data• Automated algorithms for navigation• Communications infrastructure components

5. Secure Review by Appropriate Oversight Groups

A process needs to be clearly defined to ensure that all ITS projects, and specificallyATIS initiatives, are properly reviewed and coordinated. To this end, fouroversight/coordination structures have been identified:

a. Statewide ITS Leadership Team

This committee provides direction and sets priorities for ITS efforts in the statebased on availability of resources, achievement of desired outcomes and costeffectiveness. Major ITS deployment decisions are made by this body.

1 Kearney; TRIM – Rosario Adiarte; State Aid for Location Transportation – Mjyke Nelson; EngineeringServices – Tim Quinn; Operations – Bill Roen; and Metro – Joe Delmore.

53 12/98

b. System Architecture Oversight

The ITS system architecture is structured around various subsystems that areconnected by a communications system:

• Center Subsystem• Traffic Subsystem• Vehicle Subsystem• CVO Subsystem• Traveler Subsystem• Communications

These subsystems are multimodal. The Traveler Subsystem can be divided intousers and operators; users can be assigned to the Center Subsystem and operatorsto the Vehicle Subsystem. Once responsibility is assigned to the remaining foursubsystems, ITS projects can then be reviewed from the perspective of each of theapplicable subsystems.

In summary, if the objectives of coordination, minimizing duplication, integrationand successful deployment and operation are to be achieved, major ITS projectsmust secure the review and guidance of each of the above oversight groups.

To illustrate, suppose an ATIS project (e.g., Cell Phone Operational Test) is beingconsidered. The above process would require that the following steps be taken:

• It is assigned to the appropriate Mn/DOT office (i.e., OATS).• OATS talks to OM. Even though it is an Operational Test, the implications

regarding “trails” need to be discussed in the event that the test is successful.• Because of the ATIS components, the ATIS Technical Group reviews the

proposal for consistency with state-of-the-art and with desired outcomes.• Because users need to relate to Roadside and Center Subsystems, the project

needs to be reviewed by these two groups.• Once this first set of reviews (at the concept level) is completed, the OATS

can present the proposal to the Statewide Policy Committee who may or maynot approve the project.

• If approved, the project will go through the previous steps for a more detailedevaluation.

• Once completed the project moves to the project development and projectimplementation process.

• Once the Operational Test is completed and evaluated, it is presented to thePolicy Committee who determines whether or not the concept should bedeployed statewide.

54 12/98

c. Program Delivery Oversight

ITS projects fall into four program delivery areas:

• Research and Development/Operational Tests• Project Development Process/Design• Project Deployment/Implementation• Operations and Maintenance

Depending on the project or its status, the relevant Mn/DOT personnel need to beinvolved in reviewing the project in question.

d. ITS User Service Groups Oversight

User service groups represent bundles of services that fall into one of thefollowing groups:

• Advanced Traveler Information Systems (ATIS)• Advanced Traffic Management Systems (ATMS)• Commercial Vehicle Operations (CVO)• Advanced Public Transit Systems (APTS)• Emergency/Incident Management (E/IM)

Projects that fall into any of these groups should be reviewed and receive inputfrom the respective user service committee or working group.

6. Ensure Conformance to Policy and Standards

Each project must be aware of the laws, rules, policies and standards that constrain it. Allprojects are subject to applicable laws, rules and policy. Research projects andoperational tests are less constrained by standards than are deployment projects. Eachproject should identify places where it deviates from policy and standards and documentjustifications for deviations.

Important state laws and rules that will affect ATIS projects include those governing datapractices and contractual relationships between public and private entities. The state andMn/DOT have policies governing ethics, contracting, and information management thatwill affect ATIS projects. Chapter 5 and 6 sets forth ATIS-related policies and guidingprinciples. Chapter 8 identifies current and proposed standards that will constraindeployment projects.

55 12/98

7. Account for Tails

Each project should, before it is approved, estimate the annual costs of ongoingmaintenance and operations of the system(s) developed by the project and it shouldidentify the organization(s) that will be accountable for maintenance and operations. Nodeployments should be authorized until such costs are estimated and the responsibleorganizations have been identified and have acknowledged their new responsibilities.

Deployment project managers should consult with those responsible for maintenance andoperations to select system components that are proven and so as to minimize impacts onmaintenance budgets and personnel. If a project adopts a component that is already partof another system, those responsible for maintenance will require less training and fewerspare parts.

Project plans should include tasks covering the completion of as-built plans (to supportprotection of buried utilities), development of maintenance manuals and schematicdiagrams, and the provision of training to operations and maintenance personnel.

8. Develop Project Plan

Each project should create a formal project plan. The project plan document shouldsummarize the products of each of the tasks above, and it should identify:

• The project’s management structure• Assumptions and constraints affecting the project• Stakeholders, and a process for communicating with them• Estimates of the project’s costs and benefits• Risks to project success and a risk mitigation plan• A plan for coordinating with other initiatives• A plan for evaluating project success• A work breakdown structure showing tasks to be undertaken, task deliverables, inter-

task dependencies, and a schedule• The people and funds required for each task and who will provide them

Both OATS and OIRM have examples of project plans that might prove helpful and canoffer advice on tools for creating and managing a work breakdown structure.

9. Gain Approvals

Each project should seek and receive a formal approval from:

• Each participating organization that is providing funding or other resources to theproject

• Each organization that will bear some responsibility for post project tails

56 12/98

• Each organization that is responsible for ensuring compliance with applicable rules orstandards

• The ITS Statewide Policy Committee

In Mn/DOT, approvals from resource providers should come from the division directorlevel. (If the project involves the creation of databases, applications, or networks, theapproval will come through the Business Area Initiative process. See (4.) above.)

57 12/98

10. ACTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter contains actions and recommendations to better coordinate the ATISelements of project initiatives and operations in Minnesota. They cover the definition ofATIS projects, short-term steps to coordinate current initiatives, organizational structurechanges, and policy and standards work that remains to be done. For most of therecommendations the organization(s) accountable for acting on them are identified andrough cost estimates are offered.

Actions

1. Implement Oversight of ITS Projects

Successful achievement of the ATIS vision requires a body with authority and capacity toapprove ATIS initiatives and require their coordination. We do not recommend thecreation of a new, separate ATIS Oversight Committee. Instead, ATIS oversight shouldbe integrated with oversight of the entire ITS program through Mn/DOT’s Statewide ITSLeadership Team. By “entire ITS program” we mean all ITS user services (ATIS, CVO,ATMS, etc.) and all Mn/DOT organizations sponsoring ITS projects (OATS, Metro,Maintenance, the Districts, etc.). The proposed ITS oversight structure is shown inFigure 5.

The ITS Leadership Team is accountable to the Deputies’ staff. The estimated cost is$40,000 per year.

2. Identify Staff Accountable for ATIS and ITS Coordination

Improving coordination among ATIS and ITS initiatives is required and will not comewithout cost. The ITS oversight structure will require staff support, as will its technicalworking group(s). In addition to providing that support, this function would serve as asingle point of contact for managers and sponsors of ATIS and ITS projects foridentifying coordination opportunities and requirements. These responsibilities willreside with OATS.

3. Create an Ongoing ATIS Technical Group

An ongoing ATIS Technical Group should be formed for two purposes. The first is toprovide technical advice to the ITS Leadership Team for all projects involving ATISelements, and provide a forum for face-to-face communications and coordination amongthe technical leaders of ATIS projects. The second is to develop standards for travelerinformation. (Refer to Section 9 – ATIS Project Development Guidelines, item 5:Secure Review by Appropriate Oversight Groups.) The ATIS technical group is shown inFigure 5 as the Traveler Subsystem.

58 12/98

Figure 5

59 12/98

Accountable to the Statewide ITS Leadership Team. The estimated cost is approximately$20,000 per year.

4. Conform to the Project Development Process

Chapter 9 sets forth project development process guidelines that should be followed byATIS initiatives. The guidelines will help each project:

• Clarify its goal, objectives, and scope• Clarify the roles of public and private partners• Ensure fit with Mn/DOT and state priorities• Ensure fit with other initiatives• Secure review by appropriate oversight groups• Ensure conformance with laws, rules, policies, principles and standards• Account for “tails”• Develop a thorough project plan• Gain necessary approvals

Initiative sponsors and project managers are held accountable by the ITS oversightstructure (see Recommendation 2). The cost will be approximately $10,000 per project

5. Establish Stewardship for Traveler Information

Table 7 in Chapter 7 shows that there is substantial overlap in the data created and usedby ATIS initiatives, but it does not indicate the degree to which traveler information datais created and used in other transportation process. (For example, it does not indicate thattraffic volume information detected in the freeway management function can be used bythose who create traffic flow maps or that the Pavement Condition Reporting System usesmap data created in the cartographic process.)

Mn/DOT, as part of its information resource management initiative, is in the early stagesof developing an information resource stewardship program. The aim of the program isto identify a manager who will be the single point of accountability for ensuring that eachinformation resource is fit for use by every process that needs it, regardless of where inthe agency the process is performed. The stewardship program is immature. Stewardshave not been identified for most information resources and there is not yet consensus onall the responsibilities and authorities of stewards. Even when those objectives areachieved, it will be some time before stewards (and other stakeholders) fully accept theirroles and carry them out successfully.

60 12/98

In the meantime, the ITS or ATIS governance structure should ensure that discussionsabout stewardship of the most widely shared data begin and that these discussionsconnect with the overall stewardship program. The following offices are candidatestewards for some of the information categories in Table 7:

• Road Surface (Weather) : Maintenance• Road Surface (Construction) : Construction, Maintenance• Weight Restrictions : Maintenance• Travel Times / Speeds : Metro Freeway Operations• Congestion Levels : Metro Freeway Operations• Incidents : Metro Freeway Operations• Weather Conditions : Maintenance, Aeronautics• Posted Detours : Construction• Closures / Alternate Routes : Maintenance• Tourist Information : TBD• Medical Facility Locations : TBD• Transit Scheduling : Metro Transit• Park and Ride Locations : Metro Transit• Airport and Parking Information : Metro Division

The ITS governance organization must hold stewardship discussions. The InformationLeadership Council should approve stewardship designations. The cost is estimated atapproximately $10,000.

6. Define Accessibility to Public Sector Data by the Private Sector

A policy needs to be developed to define whether or not Mn/DOT should charge privateservice providers for information Mn/DOT collects and provides them.

Mn/DOT collects vast amounts of traffic and road-related data. This data has been madeavailable at no cost to private-sector providers such as Metro Traffic Networks,Microsoft, and all Metro area television channels. A statewide policy needs to bedeveloped to address whether or not Mn/DOT should charge these service providers fordata or develop quid pro quo arrangements. This policy would ensure that all privateservice providers are treated equally. However, any charges for data collected, processedand disseminated by Mn/DOT must be in accordance with the Minnesota Data PracticesAct.

61 12/98

7. Promote Coordination between Statewide/District/Metro Division/Private Information Systems

Mn/DOT operates and maintains an 800 number and local Twin Cities dial-in access toroad condition information. Most Districts have a similar 800 number or other numberfor access to road condition information. Metro Division - TMC also a dial-in system.These systems are operated and maintained by Mn/DOT. Two private sector initiatives(Smart Route - Metro region, and Castle Rock Services - Statewide) are developing orproposing to develop telephony systems as well. Mn/DOT will be paying some initialcosts for these systems but eventually the hope is that they will be self-sustaining.District 2 will be testing cell phone access to road condition information. This system isbeing operated by the UND-Regional Weather Information Center (RWIC). Mn/DOTwill provide funding to initiate the system, but eventually it is hoped this system will alsobe self-sustaining.

Coordination could be accomplished by creating an ATIS Technical Committee thatreports to the Statewide ITS Policy Committee. (See Recommendation 3) ThisCommittee would be charged with adopting standards, reducing unnecessary redundancy,and promoting initiatives which prove both to be able meet the dual objectives of makingsure travelers have the information they need to make safe and comfortable trips and ofcreating traveler information systems which are self-sustaining. This coordination willbecome more crucial given the national effort to create a 211 line for traveler information.

The cost for this coordination is estimated at $50,000 per year or one-half full-timeequivalent. The benefits could be better cost effectiveness of systems being deployed.The coordination could also be a role of the ATIS stewardship addressed inrecommendation number 5.

The decision on size of the staff and its place in the organization would be made byDeputies’ Staff; implementation accountability attaches to the selected division director.The estimated cost is between $100,000 and $200,000 per year (2 to 3 positions).

8. Support Ongoing Work on Standards

See Chapter 8 for recommendations regarding standards.

62 12/98

9. Conduct Market Research

Market research is needed to validate three important elements of the ATIS plan:

• Validate the Vision• Evaluate the projects to assess quality improvement• Validate the strategic initiatives

The market research effort should be done in the metro area as well as statewide.

Recommendations

1. Consider Establishing “Traveler Information” as a Core Business ofMn/DOT

In executive-level discussions that led to the initial identification of Mn/DOT’s corebusinesses, a much discussed topic was whether to include “traveler information” as acore business. This decision is to be made by Mn/DOT’s Deputy Commissioners. Webelieve that traveler information should be identified as a core business or a product line.Once this is done, Mn/DOT should build the management structures necessary to lead,direct, and integrate what is now a broadly-dispersed and un-integrated collection oftraveler information, and to ensure that Mn/DOT’s ATIS vision and policies are carriedout.

2. Continue Work on ATIS Policy Regarding Public/Private Sector Roles


The state should encourage the development of public/private sector partnerships andcontinued operation of competitive private markets to provide traveler information to thepublic. In cases where private markets cannot deliver that information, the state shouldfund development and operations. State-funded development and operations should beoutsourced when that is the most effective and efficient way to deliver access to travelerinformation. The specific public/private business model should be defined in the contextof the specific need or application and the desired outcomes. No single business modelfits all needs. (Appendix C can be referenced for potential contracting business options.)

63 12/98

The public sector’s core responsibility for providing traveler information should reflectthe goals defined in the ATIS vision by focusing on the top two priority goals:


related crashes and incidents.• Provide additional information that is required to ensure that the transportation

system, and thus travel, operates efficiently, especially in terms of reducingcongestion and delay.

64 12/98

1. Executive Summary/Introduction

65 12/98

2. Definition of ATIS Elements

66 12/98

3. Customers Wants and Needs

67 12/98

4. ATIS Vision and Goals

68 12/98

5. ATIS Public/Private Sector Policy

69 12/98

6. ATIS Guiding Principles

70 12/98

7. Current and Planned ATIS ProjectInitiatives

71 12/98

8. Standards

72 12/98

9. ATIS Project Development Guidelines

73 12/98

10. Actions and Recommendations

74 12/98

11. Appendices

A. Market Research SummaryB. Project Development: Common IssuesC. Potential Contracting Options

For copies of Appendices Contact State Bahler at (651) 296-0152

75 12/98

(1)

76 12/98

Minnesota Statewide Plan For

Advanced Traveler Information

Systems (ATIS)

December, 1998

i 12/98

Table of Contents

Page

Glossary of Acronyms and Abbreviations ................................ ... iii

1. Introduction/Executive Summary ................................ ................ 1

2. Definition of ATIS Elements................................ ........................ 8• ATIS Elements ................................ ................................ ...... 8• ATIS System Architecture ................................ ..................... 14

3. Customer Wants and Needs ................................ ...................... 16

4. ATIS Vision and Goals ................................ ............................... 18

5. ATIS Public/Private Sector Policy ................................ ............... 20• Policy................................ ................................ ..................... 20• Business Models ................................ ................................ ... 24

6. ATIS Principles ................................ ................................ ........... 30

7. Current and Planned ATIS Initiatives ................................ .......... 34• Overlap Analysis ................................ ................................ ... 34• National ATIS Efforts................................ ............................. 40

8. Standards ................................ ................................ ................... 42• Recommendations ................................ ................................ 46

9. ATIS Project Development Guidelines ................................ ....... 50

10. Recommendations................................ ................................ ...... 57

11. Appendices................................ ................................ ................. 64• Appendix A – Market Research Summary• Appendix B – Project Development: Common Issues• Appendix C – Potential Contracting Options

For copies of Appendices contactSteve Bahler at (651) 296-0152

ii 12/98

Table of Contents

List of Figures

Figure 1 ATIS Process – From Data to Outcome ........................ 13

Figure 2 Minnesota ATIS Architecture ................................ ......... 15

Figure 3 Role of the Public and Private Sectors in ATIS Delivery 22

Figure 4-1 Public Centered Operations................................ ........... 26Figure 4-2 Contracted Operations................................ ................... 26Figure 4-3 Franchise Operations ................................ .................... 27Figure 4-4 Private, Competitive Operations ................................ .... 27

Figure 5 ITS/ATIS Oversight Structure ................................ ........ 58

List of Tables

Table 1 ATIS Customers ................................ ............................ 9

Table 2 Information Items, Customers and Outcomes ............... 10

Table 3 Expected Outcomes from Traveler Information ............. 11

Table 4 Comparative Assessment of Information Deliveryby the Public and Private Sectors ................................ .. 23

Table 5 Inventory of Minnesota Projects with anATIS Component ................................ ........................... 35

Table 6 Overlapping Customers ................................ ................. 37

Table 7 Overlapping Data ................................ ........................... 38

Table 8 Overlapping Delivery Mechanisms ................................ 39

Table 9 Significant National ATIS Efforts................................ .... 41

iii 12/98

STATEWIDE PLAN FOR ADVANCED TRAVELER INFORMATION SYSTEMS

ATIS Policy Committee Members

Marthand Nookala, Chair Adeel Lari Tom SatreMn/DOT OATS Office of ATF State of MN, Office of Tech.

Gene Ofstead Karl Rasmussen Lucy KenderAssistant CommissionerMn/DOT TRIM

Mn/DOT Operations Mn/DOT Communications

Dennis Lazenberry Andrew Terry Dennis FoderbergDPS, MN State Patrol Mn/DOT Operations Mn/DOT OATS

Cecil Selness Mark Wikelius Gary WorkmanMn/DOT Access Management Mn/DOT Operations Mn/DOT Metro

Mary Welfling Mike RobinsonMn/DOT Finance & Admin. Mn/DOT District 1

ATIS Technical Committee Members

Steve Bahler, Co-Chair John Griffith Roger KochevarMn/DOT OATS Mn/DOT Land Management Mn/DOT Operations

Karl Olmstead, Co-Chair Kay Korsgaard Dennis LazenberryMn/DOT Info Resource Mgmt Mn/DOT Communications DPS MN State Patrol

Tom Glancy Sue Groth Judy RockvamMn/DOT Finance & Admin. Mn/DOT Metro Division Mn/DOT Operations

Tom Grimes Nancy Melvin Ray StarrMn/DOT Operations Mn/DOT Div. Freight Plan. Mn/DOT Metro Division

Roberta Dwyer Jason Archbold Sue SheehanMn/DOT District 1 Formerly Mn/DOT District 4 Mn/DOT OATS

Committee Technical Support

Ferrol O. Robinson, PrincipalSRF Consulting Group, Inc.

iv 12/98

GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AAA Automobile Association of AmericaARTIC Advanced Rural Transportation Information and CoordinationATC Advanced Traffic Signal ControllersATIS Advanced Traveler Information SystemsATMS Advanced Traffic Management SystemsATP Area Transportation PartnersAVL Automatic Vehicle LocationBAI Business Area InitiativesCAD Computer-Aided DispatchCATV Cable Access TelevisionCC Communication CenterCCTV Closed-Circuit TelevisionCMS Changeable Message SignCOG Council of GovernmentCVISN Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and NetworksCVO Commercial Vehicle OperationsD2/D4 Mn/DOT Districts 2 and 4DIVERT During Incidents Vehicles Exit to Reduce Travel TimeDMS Dynamic Message SignsDNR Department of Natural ResourcesDPS Department of Public SafetyESS Environmental Sensor StationsGCM Gary/Chicago/Milwaukee CorridorGPS Global Positioning SystemHAR Highway Advisory Radiohttp Hypertext Transfer ProtocolICTM Integrated Corridor Traffic ManagementIRM Mn/DOT Information Resource ManagementITE Institute of Transportation EngineersITIS International Traveler Information Interchange StandardsITS Intelligent Transportation SystemsITSA Intelligent Transportation Society of AmericaLRMS Location Referencing Messaging SpecificationMDC Mobile Data ComputerMDT Mobile Data TerminalMMUTCD Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control DevicesMn/DOT Minnesota Department of TransportationMPO Metropolitan Planning OrganizationNTCIP National Transportation Communications ITS ProtocolNWS National Weather ServiceOATS Mn/DOT Office of Advanced Transportation SystemsOEC Mn/DOT Office of Electronic CommunicationsOIRM Mn/DOT Office of Information Resource ManagementOM Mn/DOT Office of Maintenance

v 12/98

OTE Mn/DOT Office of Traffic EngineeringPC Personal ComputerPCRS Pavement Condition Reporting SystemRFPP Request for Partner ProposalsRWIC UND Regional Weather Information CenterR/WIS Road/Weather Information SystemSAE Society of Automotive EngineersSDO Standards Development OrganizationsTC Twin CitiesTCIP Transit Communications ITS ProtocolTIC Travel Information CenterTMC Traffic Management Center (Twin Cities)TMO Transportation Management OrganizationTOC/CC Transportation Operation Centers/Communication CenterTRIM Mn/DOT Transportation Research & Investment ManagementU of M University of MinnesotaUND University of North DakotaUSDOT United States Department of TransportationVMS Variable Message Sign

A-1 12/98

APPENDIX AMARKET RESEARCH SUMMARY

The following is a summary report of various market research reports relating to ITSconcepts, traveler wants and needs, and public attitudes toward advanced travelerinformation systems. The following is the listing of reports reviewed:

• User Acceptance of ATIS Products and Services: A Report of Qualitative Research;Interim Report, January 1997

• Minnesota’s Rural ITS Deployment – Building Upon the Minnesota Guidestar RuralScoping Study, April 1994

• Rural IVHS Scoping Study – An Assessment of Rural Minnesota Traveler’s Needs• Polaris – Minnesota Traveler Wants and Needs, April 1996• Public Attitudes and Opinions about Transportation in Minnesota – Report of the

1996-1997 Statewide Omnibus Survey• Motorists Information Study for Minnesota Department of Transportation,

August-September 1995• Second Annual Perception Tracking Study Regarding Metro Area Traffic

Management, May 1997

The following summaries are taken from each of the reports. Although many of thereports covered a variety of topics, this summary will focus on the information pertainingto traveler information systems. Each summary will follow the following format:

Title1. Methodology2. Survey respondents (audience)3. Goals or focus of the study (if stated)4. Findings5. Conclusions

The reports, Minnesota’s Rural ITS Deployment – Building Upon the MinnesotaGuidestar Rural Scoping Study and Rural IVHS Scoping Study – An Assessment ofRural Minnesota Traveler’s Needs, were combined into one summary as they stemmedfrom the same project.

By using the summaries of these research projects, this report will consolidate the overallfindings into categories or attributes as identified by travelers. In the report UserAcceptance of ATIS Products and Services: A Report of Qualitative Research; InterimReport, January 1997, seven attributes pertaining to ATIS product or service offerings areidentified by users. Along with these categories, other categories were created accordingto the information presented in the reports. This has been done in an attempt to describecategories of information as they apply to ATIS projects. The summary information areused to expand upon the thirteen attributes identified:

A-2 12/98

1. Accuracy of information2. Timeliness of information3. Reliability of information4. Cost (people will pay for level of use)5. The level of personalization of the decision guidance6. The ease of access of the specific information needed7. The perceived safety implications8. Method of information delivery9. Geographic considerations10. Multimodal and commercial transportation11. Information application and uses12. Wants and needs13. Miscellaneous

The following 13 categories and the summary information as it applies to each topic ispresented next.

1. Accuracy of Information

• Many respondents do pay attention to traffic/transportation reports on thebroadcast media, before starting a trip or while en route. The information isjudged to be worthwhile, but also often incorrect, outdated, insufficientlyspecific, or limited in geographic coverage.

• People like passive sources such as radio or television. People will not seekadditional information unless they perceive the value of it to be high enough

• Respondents who were “not very” or “not at all” satisfied with roadinformation based their reasons on perceptions of delay and inaccuracy of theinformation.

• Seventy-eight percent of drivers viewed KBEM as being more accurate andtimely than other stations. Two percent said KBEM was less accurate.

2. Timeliness of Information


• Seventy-three percent stated that they felt that radio reports were accurate andtimely enough to be useful.

A-3 12/98

3. Reliability of Information


• Seventy-five percent of respondents are either “somewhat” or “very satisfied”with the traveler information available before and after they have beguntraveling by car on major highways.

• Information regarding winter travel received satisfaction ratings in the92-94% range.

• Road construction and maintenance delay information received the lowestsatisfactory ratings with a 76-80% satisfaction rating.

• Respondents who were “not very” or “not at all” satisfied with roadinformation stated as reasons perceptions of delay and inaccuracy ofinformation.

4. Costs (people will pay for level of use)

In response to who should pay for the technologies, the responses were as follows:

• 39% indicated that the user should pay for the technology• 54% believed that the cost should be shared among users, government and private

business

In response to how user fees should be collected, the responses were:

• 76% indicated that users should be assessed a fee for usage• 14% believed that fees should be collected through taxes• 8% stated that a combination of the two is preferred

5. Level of Personalization of the Decision Guidance

6. Ease of Access of the Specific Information Needed

• New technologies that have the highest value require the least amount ofeffort on the part of the traveler.

• Three technologies ranked high as likely to be used: special radio channel,changeable message signs, and an information telephone line.

• Technologies less favorably ranked as likely to be used include cellulartelephones, computerized information centers, and in-vehicle TV monitors.

• In response to how people would like to obtain pre-trip and en-routeinformation, 70% stated rest areas as the preferred center. Other locationsinclude truck stops, gas stations, and cafes.

• Ninety-eight percent of drivers know about traffic reports and 86% of drivershave their radio on in the car.

A-4 12/98

• Forty-four percent of drivers listen to traffic reports on the radio before theyleave their home in the morning.

• Fifty-five percent said that electronic signs on freeways were very useful, and69% said that they have taken an alternate route because of what an electronicsign said.

• Fifty-four percent said that a full time traffic radio station would be useful.Seventy-four percent of KBEM listeners said this would be a good idea.

• Other ideas considered to be less useful (20% range) were cable TV, trafficchannels and phone number to call for traffic reports.

7. Perceived Safety Implications

• High leverage opportunity areas are those that reduce, stress and provide asense of driving security.

• Incremental opportunity areas are those that address more intrinsic needs suchas safety, value, availability, and comfort.

8. Method of Information Delivery

New technologies that have the highest value are those that require the least amount ofeffort on the part of the traveler.

In viewing new visually-based technologies, focus groups conveyed the followingconcerns:

• They thought that pre-trip traffic information would be stale by the time theirtrip was being made.

• The proactive efforts necessary to access the information (navigatingtelephone, cable TV, computer menus, etc.) were seen as significantly moreonerous than turning on the radio or television.

• In-vehicle systems had (as of 1997) software and hardware limitations: toolarge for portability, yet too small and indistinct to be used regularly in avehicle.

• To be useful, pre-trip information must offer a significant improvement – inscope, detail, and or quality – over that available over the broadcast media.There was some skepticism over the feasibility of such improvement.

• In response to how people would like to obtain pre-trip and en-routeinformation, 70% stated rest areas as the preferred center with other locationsbeing truck stops, gas stations, and cafes.

• Three technologies ranked high as likely to be used: special radio channel,changeable message signs, and an information telephone line.

• Technologies less favorably ranked as likely to be used included cellulartelephones, computerized information centers, and in vehicle TV monitors.

A-5 12/98

9. Geographic Considerations

Minnesota’s rural traveler defines the rural as that area outside of the seven-county areaof Minneapolis/St. Paul.

• 48% of Minnesota’s population is rural• 89% of Minnesota’s road miles are found in rural areas.• 53% of vehicle-miles traveled in the state occur on rural roadways.• 73% of all fatal crashes occurred on rural roadways.

10. Multi-modal and Commercial Transportation

11. Information Application and Uses

• Saving personal travel time by avoiding delays was the primary focus.• Unanticipated delays are more troublesome than the recurrent (expected)

delays experienced every day.• High-leverage opportunity areas are those that reduce, stress and provide a

sense of driving security.• Moderate opportunity areas are those that address the need for, travel

information such as congestion delays, route plans, and “yellow pages”information.

• 88% claim that they would use an alternate route if they knew about a trafficproblem on their existing route before they left their home.

• 63% would use an alternate route if they heard about a traffic problem whilethey were en-route while 27% said they would keep going and hope the trafficproblem would be gone by the time they arrived at their destination.

• 73% stated that they felt that radio reports were accurate and timely enough tobe useful.

12. Wants and needs

Minnesota traveler wants and needs:• Choice of travel modes• Best route plan based on specific criteria• Travel mode is available whenever needed• Travel mode is available wherever needed• Timely and accurate accident, traffic and congestion information• Timely and accurate weather and road condition information• Clear and timely directions to follow desired route• Get to destination directly without unnecessary stops and delays• Safe from accident, injury, theft or violence• Timely information on alternatives to avoid delays• Easy access to comprehensive travel services and information• Timely and accurate road construction and maintenance information

A-6 12/98

• Free of stressful experiences• Able to make good use of travel time• Good value for cost• Get help quickly in event of accident, emergency or breakdown• Comfortable and easy to use• Fair and aggressive law enforcement• Easy access for everyone• Not disruptive to environment or communities

The following list is a rank order of traveler wants and needs based on telephoneinterviews:

• Safe• Available when needed• Get help quickly in emergency• Comfortable and easy to use• Fair and aggressive law enforcement• Get to destination directly without delays• Good value for cost• Free of stressful experiences• Timely road/weather information• Clear, timely directions• Timely information on construction/maintenance• Timely traffic/incident information• Timely alternatives information• Access to travel service information• Best route plan• Good use of travel time• Choice of travel modes

Types of information wanted:

• Morning traffic conditions ranked highest• Blocked lanes, closed lanes, slippery/icy road conditions ranked next• Not blocked but slowed lanes, congestion in normally high traffic areas,

current speeds, and waiting time at ramp meters.• Of less importance were parking availability at park and ride lots.

13. Miscellaneous

The attributes of ATIS products that appear to be of most value to people include:

• Accuracy• Timeliness

A-7 12/98

• Reliability• Cost• The level of personalization of the decision guidance• The ease of access of the specific information needed• The perceived safety implications• Unanticipated delays are more troublesome than the chronic (expected) delays

experienced every day• Good deal of fatalism when it comes to attitudes toward traffic. As stated in

one Los Angeles group, “There’s death, taxes, and traffic”

People like passive sources such as radio or television – People will not seek additionalinformation unless they perceive the value of it to be high enough

Three key issues to applicable technologies to be used.

• Communications requirements: the type of communications equipment mostapplicable in a rural setting includes fiber optics, telephone lines, satellite, andradio subcarriers. The specific applications range across three categories:

- For communications between a central control area and permanentstations, technologies would include kiosks, changeable message signs,variable speed limit signs, in-field weather stations, and roadside callboxes.

- For communication using personal mobile devices, technologies wouldinclude telephone systems, commercial radio systems, personal computersand on-board route guidance devices, mayday beacons, and automaticvehicle locators.

- For communication between permanent stations and in-field equipment,technologies would include weather sensors, loop detectors, videocameras, ramp metering, and traffic signal timing control.

• The staffing and operations requirements involved in maintaining ITSapplications were determined to be significant, frequently demanding anumber of full-time, specially trained employees.

• Concern for compatibility between rural and urban applications so technologycan be shared.

Metro traffic characteristics

• 70% of drivers commute to work or school• 90% drive alone• 8% carpool• 2% take the bus

A-8 12/98

• 90% of commuters drive during at least one of the rush hours with two out ofthree using the freeway

• 80% feel that metro traffic congestion has increased over the past five years.

Tolerance for traffic congestion is unchanged from the last survey

The following chart gives a description of Mn/DOT’s traffic management tools, percentawareness, and a ranking of importance from 1 to 10:

Activity % Aware Rating, 1 to 10

Highway helpers 74% 8.6Park and ride lots 94% 8.2Overhead electronic signs 96% 8.0KBEM 56% 7.5By-pass ramps 72% 7.3Express lanes 93% 7.0Paragon TV 25% 6.9Mn/DOT web page 6% 6.3Ramp metering 99% 6.1

81 % of drivers commute on average 5 days of week.65% of commuters use the freeway

Of those who commute, they estimate (average) that they spend 46% of their time on thefreeway.

Downtown or U of M comprise 34% of commuters destination with suburbs at 66%.

71% had favorable opinions about ramp metering to 28% having unfavorable.

Estimated average wait at a ramp meter is five minutes

60% of respondents said that Mn/DOT is doing enough about Metro traffic management.only 4% of respondents said that Mn/DOT was doing too much with Metro trafficmanagement.

A-9 12/98

User Acceptance of ATIS Products and Services: A Report of Qualitative Research;Interim Report, January 1997

Minnesota’s Rural ITS Deployment – Building Upon the Minnesota Guidestar RuralScoping Study, April 1994

Public Attitudes and Opinions about Transportation in Minnesota – Report of the1996-1997 Statewide Omnibus Survey

Polaris – Minnesota Traveler Wants and Needs, April 1996

Report #1: User Acceptance of ATIS Products and Services: A Report of QualitativeResearch; Interim Report

Methodology:

12 focus groups

Survey Respondents:

Two focus groups were conducted in each of the following locations with the following

Categories of topics:

General travelers by both public and private transportation (Boston and Philadelphia)

• A “polar transit case” of transit users in the New York metropolitan area, stratifiedby suburban commuters and central city tripmakers

• A “polar congested highway case” of private vehicle drivers in Orange County,California, stratified by “slow commuters” and “heavy travelers”

• “Road warriors with upscale new vehicles”: recent purchasers of high-end vehicles,with extensive private vehicle travel and an orientation towards high-tech equipment,stratified by commuters and driving occupations (Los Angeles and Washington DC)

A-10 12/98

Goals or Focus of the Research:

The goals and focus of the research is twofold:

Explore ITS product concepts with the focus groupsA pre-trip travel information system with several possible means of accessA public transportation information system providing up to the minute serviceinformation at terminalsAn in vehicle static navigation system, providing the most sophisticated features ofcurrently available units but not real time traffic conditionsAn in vehicle dynamic navigation system with the same features as the static system butwith real time capabilitiesA simple in vehicle “mayday” device that can contact emergency personnel with theexact location of the vehicle, and operating automatically when the airbag is deployed

The focus groups had two principle objectives:

• To improve our understanding of current consumer reactions to these ATIS productconcepts

• To help develop improved methods for subsequent quantitative customer acceptancesurveys

Findings:

The following statements are highlights taken from the report text:

• Many respondents do pay attention to traffic/transportation reports on the broadcastmedia, before starting a trip or while en route. The information is judged to beworthwhile, but also often incorrect, outdated, insufficiently specific, or limited ingeographic coverage.

• New technologies seen as having the highest value are those that takes the smallestamount of effort on the part of the traveler.

In viewing new visually based technologies, focus groups conveyed the followingworries:

• They thought that pre-trip traffic information would be stale by the time their trip wasbeing made

• The proactive efforts necessary to access the information (navigating telephone, cableTV, computer menus, etc) were seen as significantly more onerous than turning onthe radio or television

• In vehicle systems had current (January, 1997) software and hardware limitations thataffected interest: too large for portability, yet too small and indistinct to be usedregularly in a vehicle

A-11 12/98

• To be used, pre trip information must offer a significant improvement – in scope,detail, and or quality – over that available over the broadcast media. There was someskepticism over the feasibility of such improvement

Several conclusions were made from the focus groups:

• Saving personal travel time by avoiding delays was the primary focus of peoplesthinking.

• The attributes of ATIS products that appear to be of most value to people include:• Accuracy• Timeliness• Reliability• Costs (people want to pay for the level of their usage)• The level of personalization of the decision guidance• The ease of access of the specific information needed• The perceived safety implications

Other statements taken from the text:

• Unanticipated delays are more troublesome than the chronic (expected) delaysexperienced every day

• Good deal of fatalism when it comes to attitudes toward traffic. As stated in one LosAngeles group, “There’s death, taxes, and traffic”

• People like low engagement sources such as radio or television – People will not seekadditional information unless they perceive the value of it to be high enough

Report #2: Minnesota’s Rural ITS Deployment (Rural IVHS Scoping Study) –Building Upon the Minnesota Guidestar Rural Scoping Study

Methodology:

15 focus groups conducted statewide and 505 telephone surveys conducted statewide.

Survey Respondents:

• 9 regional focus groups consisting of transportation officials.• 6 focus groups consisting of rural citizens.• Telephone survey of 505 people statewide.

Goals or focus of the research:

This study focused on the ITS needs of the state’s rural communities. It was designed todetermine the needs of travelers throughout rural Minnesota and to understand what typesof ITS technologies both area residents and transportation officials would consider viablein meeting those needs.

A-12 12/98

This research is guided by five tasks:

• Compile a description of a rural Minnesota traveler• Identify rural traveler needs, and strategies for meeting those needs• Reviewing the available ITS technologies• Identifying key issues concerning each technology• Developing concepts for future projects

Findings:

The study began by addressing two tasks: compiling a profile of Minnesota’s ruraltraveler, and determining that traveler’s transportation needs.

Task #1: Minnesota’s rural traveler

Defined as that area outside of the seven county area comprising Minneapolis/St. Paul.

• 48% of Minnesota’s population is rural• 89% of Minnesota’s roads are found in rural areas.• 53% of vehicle miles traveled in the state occur on rural roadways.• 73% of all fatal crashes occurred on rural roadways.

Task #2: The rural traveler’s transportation needs

Methodology #1 – 9 regional meetings with transportation professionals including: transitproviders, government officials, ambulance drivers, fleet operators, and others. Sevenareas of need emerged from the meetings:

Information: especially regarding weather and road conditions, construction zones, andtourist inquiries.

Congestion: during weekends or peak tourist seasons, or during special communityevents.

Safety: such as the desire for crash avoidance technology, problems with impaired orinattentive drivers, and hampered visibility caused by roadside obstructions or weatherconditions.

Emergency medical services: to more effectively coordinate these services, and provideassistance for stranded vehicles.

Transit: to assist non-drivers as well as to provide service to metropolitan areasCommercial vehicle: to increase the efficiency of procedures involved in crossing stateand country borders.

A-13 12/98

Economic Development: to increase the use of the existing roadway network as a meansof expanding a regions economic growth.

Methodology #2 – 6 focus groups held in rural Minnesota with rural citizens to determinethe needs of the rural travelers. Group members were chosen by random selection fromthe population. Four areas of need emerged from the meetings:

Information: especially concerning weather and road conditions, construction zones, andthe locations of emergency services.

Transit: to assist non-drivers as well as to update general transit services, costs, and routeinformation.

Safety: such as a desire for crash avoidance technology, problems with impaired orinattentive drivers, and hampered visibility caused by roadside obstructions or weatherconditions.

Emergency medical services: to assist stranded vehicles

Methodology #3 – 505 telephone survey respondents consisting of rural and non-ruralMinnesotans, including both drivers and non-drivers. Three areas of need emerged fromthe survey:

Information: especially about weather and road conditions, help in choosing a route,locations of special events, and tourist interests.

Safety: specifically, problems with impaired or inattentive drivers, and crash avoidancetechnology.

Emergency medical services: to assist stranded vehicles.

Conclusions of task 2:

Two major issues emerged among all 3 methodologies: transportation information thesafety.

In response to how people would like to obtain pre-trip and en-route information, 70%stated rest areas as the preferred center with other locations being truck stops, gasstations, and cafes.

Three technologies ranked high as likely to be used: special radio channel, changeablemessage signs, and an information telephone line.

Technologies less favorably ranked as likely to be used included cellular telephones,computerized information centers, and in vehicle TV monitors.

A-14 12/98

In response to who should pay for the technologies, the responses were as follows:

• 39% indicated that the user should pay for the technology• 54% believed that the cost should be shared among users, government and private

business

In response to how user fees should be collected, the responses were:

• 76% indicated that users should be assessed a fee for usage• 14% believed that fees should be collected through taxes• 8% stated that a combination of the two is preferred

Task #3: Reviewing Available ITS Technologies

This task investigated other ITS projects taking place in the U.S. and England and appliedthe possibility of pursuing similar projects in Minnesota.

Task #4: Identifying Key Issues Concerning the Technologies

Three key issues to applicable technologies to be used.

Communications requirements: the type of communications equipment most applicablein a rural setting includes fiber optics, telephone lines, satellites, and radio subcarriers.The specific applications range across three categories:

For communications between a central control area and permanent stations, technologieswould include kiosks, changeable message signs, variable speed limit signs, in-fieldweather stations, and roadside call boxes.

For communication using personal mobile devices, technologies would include telephonesystems, commercial radio systems, personal computers and on-board route guidancedevices, mayday beacons, and automatic vehicle locators.

For communication between permanent stations and in-field equipment, technologieswould include weather sensors, loop detectors, video cameras, ramp metering, and trafficsignal timing control.

The staffing and operations requirements involved in maintaining ITS applications weredetermined to be significant, frequently demanding a number of full-time, speciallytrained employees.

Concern for compatibility between rural and urban applications so technology can beshared.

A-15 12/98

Task #5: Developing Concepts for Future Projects

Development by Minnesota Guidestar of ITS projects for future application in Minnesota.The following is a brief description of ten project concepts:

Inclement Weather Trip Avoidance: provides travelers with real time pre-trip anden-route weather information enabling them to avoid or alter travel plans duringdangerous weather.

Assistance During Trips under Adverse Weather Conditions: provides services tomotorists driving during inclement weather.

Notification of Spot Hazardous Conditions: Provides real-time warnings of icy conditionsat locations prone to early icing.

Assistance for Road Maintenance and Construction Areas Crews: Researches weatherrelated maintenance and construction activities to inform road maintenance crews of idealtimes for maintenance and construction work.

In-Vehicle Mayday devices: provides emergency requests to appropriate services via anin-vehicle computer system

En-route Tourist Information: provides tourists with information such as lodging, scenicroutes, entertainment, and area attractions.

Collision Avoidance at Unsignalized Intersections: assists drivers in avoiding collisionsat unsignalized intersections by warning them of hazardous conditions with a yellowwarning light.

Construction Zone Assistance: advises travelers of both existing delays and impendingdelays due to construction.

Transit Application of ITS: determines the potential for ITS related transit services toassist non-drivers.

Tourist Traffic Control: reduces or prevents congestion in a small rural area using trafficcontrol devices normally used in urban areas.

A-16 12/98

Report #3: Public Attitudes and Opinions about Transportation in Minnesota – Reportof the 1996-1997 Statewide Omnibus Survey

Methodology:

Telephone survey of 800 Minnesota residents. Overall response rate of 65%.

Survey Respondents:

Respondents were randomly selected throughout the state of Minnesota. All respondentswere over the age of 18.

Goals or Focus of Study:

This was the thirteenth annual omnibus survey conducted on a statewide approach.Questions targeted topics such as road information, telecommuting, travel time anddistance to work, public transit availability, and construction zone issues.

Findings:

In regard to road information, the following findings came from this study:

75% of Minnesota citizens are either “somewhat” or “very satisfied” with the travelerinformation available before and after they have begun traveling by car on majorhighways.

Information regarding winter travel received satisfaction ratings in the 92-94% range.

Road construction and maintenance delay information received the lowest satisfactoryratings with a 76-80% satisfaction rating.

For respondents who were “not very” or “not at all” satisfied with road information statedreasons on perceptions of delay and inaccuracy of the information.

Report #4: Polaris – Minnesota Traveler Wants and Needs, April 1996

Methodology

11 (146 participants) focus groups and 901 telephone interviews – both conductedstatewide

Survey respondents (audience)

Focus groups

A-17 12/98

Drivers who were over 21, represented a variety of travel modes, and those who wereemployed and unemployed.

Sessions were conducted in Minneapolis (3 sessions of general audience and 1 session ofprofessional drivers), Brooklyn Park, Rochester, St. Cloud, Mankato, Canby, DetroitLakes, and Duluth.

Telephone respondents were 18 years or older and made one trip a week outside of theirhome by motorized vehicle or bicycle.

Goals or focus of the study (if stated)

This research effort identified the most important transportation needs and servicerequirements of a cross section of typical Minnesota travelers. The research sought todefine transportation needs that were free of implementations or solutions.

Findings

Findings can be separated into two categories: Qualitative and Quantitative

Qualitative findings:

• Participants were asked to describe their positive experiences with the currentMinnesota transportation system. The most frequent responses were as follows (# inparenthesis represent number of responses from the 146 participants):

• Freedom, convenience, independence of private auto (60)• Roadways are well maintained, especially in winter (52)• Ability to arrive at destination quickly (50)• Good road design and information signage (46)• Convenient, easy access to freeways and major highways (41)• Clean, scenic roadways and parkways (29)• Accessible, convenient public transit (26)• Ability to get help quickly for breakdowns or emergencies (19)• Travel safety and security (16)• Bike lanes and trails allow a bicycle to be a safe, alternative transportation mode (16)• Multiple transportation modes and alternatives to driving are available (16)• Availability of HOV lanes/carpools reduce commute time/cost (14)• Opportunity to choose alternate routes to avoid delays (11)

Negative experiences:

• Increased stress and reduced safety due to poor driver behavior and insufficient lawenforcement (83)

• Poor road design/striping and poor signage contribute to stressful travel experiences(64)

A-18 12/98

• Poor road maintenance causes vehicle damage and/or makes driving hazardous (50)• Difficulties using public transit (46)• Extended travel time due to congestion and delays (45)• Road construction disrupts traffic and slows travel time (39)• Lack of turn lanes/signals cause congestion and hazardous situations (13)

Minnesota traveler wants and needs:

• Choice of travel modes• Best route plan based on specific criteria• Travel mode is available whenever needed• Travel mode is available wherever needed• Timely, accurate accident, traffic and congestion information• Timely, accurate weather and road conditions information• Clear, timely directions to follow desired route• Get to destination directly without unnecessary stops, delays• Safe from accident, injury, theft or violence• Timely information on alternatives to avoid delays• Easy access to comprehensive travel services and information• Timely, accurate road construction, maintenance information• Free of stressful experiences• Able to make good use of travel time• Good value for cost• Get help quickly in event of accident, emergency or breakdown• Comfortable and easy to use• Fair, aggressive law enforcement• Easy access for everyone• Not disruptive to environment or communities

Benefits desired from the Minnesota Transportation system

• Improved safety of the entire transportation system (92)• Faster travel/shorter commute time (58)• Reduced energy consumption/preserved natural resources (57)• Reduced travel expense/cost of vehicle ownership/maintenance (48)• Reduced stressful travel experiences (47)• Improved transportation accessibility/availability (35)• Economic growth/improved productivity (28)• Reduced congestion (28)• Ability to go anywhere at any time without need to drive or own vehicle (23)

A-19 12/98

Quantitative Results

The following list is a rank order of traveler wants and needs for all telephoneparticipants. The score is the average response on a 1-10 scale.

Score Category of wants and needsSafe

Available whenever neededGet help quickly in emergencyAvailable whenever neededComfortable, easy to useFair, aggressive law enforcementDirectly without delaysGood value for costFree of stressful experiences

Timely road/weather information

7.79 Clear, timely directions7.47 Timely information on construction/maintenance7.09 Timely traffic/incident information6.78 Timely alternatives information6.63 Access to travel service information6.32 Best route plan5.95 Good use of travel time5.55 Choice of travel modes

Conclusions

These conclusions were taken from the ITS Architecture Wants and Needs Analysis, May1996.

There are overall:

• High leverage opportunity areas were those which reduce stress and provide a senseof driving security

• Moderate opportunity areas were those which address the need for travel informationsuch as congestion delays, route plans, and “yellow pages” information

• Incremental opportunity areas were those which address more intrinsic needs such assafety, value, availability, and comfort

Overall top ten wants and needs opportunities are:

• Fair aggressive law enforcement• Timely, accurate construction, maintenance, information

A-20 12/98

• Free of stressful experiences• Get help quickly in event of accident, emergency, or breakdown• Timely, information on alternatives to avoid delays• Timely, accurate accident, traffic and congestion information• Timely, accurate weather and road conditions information• Safe from accident, injury, theft, violence• Best route plan based on specifies criteria• Choice of travel modes

Report # 5 Motorists Information Study for Minnesota Department of Transportation,August-September 1995

Methodology

Telephone survey of 300 men and women drivers who represent the “heavy users” of thefreeeways in the metro area during morning rush hours.


• 300 men and women who lived in the 8 county area that comprise the metro area.These people met the following criteria:

• drive a car or truck to work at least 3 days per week between 6 a.m. and 9 a.m.• Drove alone (92%) or as a car pool driver (8%)• Used the freeway for part of the trip• Experienced traffic congestion regularly (57%) or sometimes (43%)• Took more than 15 minutes for the trip (average 29.5 minutes)• And did not work for Mn/DOT, bus company, market research or ad firm, media, met

council, or a city/county public works department.


Purpose was to describe the traffic information needs of these drivers with the intent ofhelping Mn/DOT measure its current radio broadcast effectiveness (KBEM) and provideinput for future planning.

Findings

Traffic reports in general

98% of drivers know about traffic reports and 86% of drivers have their radio on in thecar.

A-21 12/98

Drivers listed the following as their source for traffic information:

• WCCO 22%• KQRS 16%• KBEM 15%• 53% of drivers were aware of KBEM’s existence• 19% unaided• 33% aided• 44% of drivers listen to traffic reports on the radio before they leave their home in the

morning.• 8 out of 10 watch or listen to television or radio as a daily routine.• 88% claim that they would use an alternate route if they knew about a traffic problem

on their existing route before they left their home.• 63% would use an alternate route if they heard about a traffic problem while they

were en-route while 27% said they would keep going and hope the traffic problemwould be solved by the time they arrived at their destination.

• 73% stated that they felt that radio reports were accurate and reported fast enough tobe useful.

KBEM specifically

• 55 drivers had listened to KBEM radio. Of this group the following info was found:• 47% listen frequently• 38% listen occasionally• 15% listen rarely• Half of drivers listen to KBEM radio because of the traffic reports while 44% listen

because of the traffic reports and the jazz music.• 78% of drivers viewed KBEM as being more accurate and timely than other stations

with 2% saying they were less accurate.• 70% said that they had seen the KBEM road signs.• 18% knew that the station was sponsored by Mn/DOT

Motorist information delivery options

• 55% said that electronic signs on freeways were very useful with 69% saying thatthey have taken an alternate route because of what an electronic sign said.

• 54% (of all respondents) said that a full time traffic radio station would be useful with74% of KBEM listeners saying this would be a good idea.

• Other ideas that were considered to be less useful (20% range) were cable TV trafficchannels and phone number to call for traffic reports.

A-22 12/98

Types of information wanted

• Morning traffic conditions ranked highest• Blocked lanes, closed lanes, slippery/icy road conditions ranked next in line after

morning traffic conditions• Not blocked but slowed lanes, congestion in normally high traffic areas, current

speeds, and waiting time at ramp meters.• Of less importance were parking availability at park and ride lots.

Report # 6 2nd Annual Perception Tracking Study Regarding Metro Area TrafficManagement, May 1997

Methodology

600 telephone interviews of individuals in the eight county metro area


Survey respondents had the meet the following criteria to participate:

• Had to be over the age of 18• Could not be employed by Mn/DOT or a bus company• Could not be employed by a met council, city or county public works• Could not be employed by a market research firm or media station


The goal of the report is to find how the public perceives current freeway conditions andhow it gauges Mn/DOT’s effectiveness in managing these conditions.

Findings

• 70% of drivers commute to work or school• 90% drive alone• 8% carpool• 2% take the bus• 90% of commuters drive during at least one of the rush hours with 2 out of 3 using

the freeway• 80% feel that metro traffic congestion has increased over the past 5 years.• Tolerance for traffic congestion is unchanged from the last survey

A-23 12/98

The following chart gives a description of Mn/DOT’s traffic management tools, %awareness, and a ranking of importance from 1 to 10:

Activity % Aware Rating, 1 to 10

Highway helpers 74% 8.6Park and ride lots 94% 8.2Overhead electronic signs 96% 8.0KBEM 56% 7.5By-pass ramps 72% 7.3Express lanes 93% 7.0Paragon TV 25% 6.9Mn/DOT web page 6% 6.3Ramp metering 99% 6.1

81 % of drivers commute on average 5 days of week.65% of commuters use the freeway

Of those who commute, they estimate (average) that they spend 465 of their time on thefreeway.

Downtown or U of M comprise 34% of commuters destination with suburbs at 66%.71% had favorable opinions about ramp metering to 28% having unfavorable.Estimated average wait at a ramp meter is 4.96 minutes60% of respondents said that Mn/DOT is doing enough about Metro traffic managementonly 4% of respondents said that Mn/DOT was doing too much with Metro trafficmanagement

1. executive summary/introduction

Documents