advanced traveler information systems - home | … words 18. distribution statement its impacts,...

Intelligent Transportation SystemsField Operational TestCross-Cutting Study

Advanced TravelerInformation Systems

September 1998

Prepared for: By:U.S. Department of Transportation Booz·Allen & HamiltonFederal Highway Administration Highway & Vehicle Technology GroupWashington, D.C. McLean, Virginia

Notice

This document is disseminated under the sponsorshipof the Department of Transportation in the interest of

information exchange. The United States Governmentassumes no liability for its contents or use thereof.

Technical Report Documentation Page1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No.

FHWA-JPO-99-0384. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date

INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS FIELD OPERATIONAL TEST September 1998CROSS-CUTTING STUDY ADVANCE TRAVELER INFORMATION SYSTEMS 6. Performing Organization Code

Booz•Allen & Hamilton Inc.7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No.

Jennifer Noonan, Oliver Shearer9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)

Booz•Allen & Hamilton Inc.8201 Greensboro Drive 11. Contract or Grant No.Suite 609McLean, Virginia 22102 DTFH61-94-C-00207

12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period CoveredCross-Cutting Study

U.S. Department of Transportation November 1997 - September 1998Federal Highways AdministrationIntelligent Transportation System 14. Sponsoring Agency CodeJoint Program Office400 Seventh Street, SW, Room 3422 HVH-1Washington, DC 20590

15. Supplementary Notes

Contracting Officer’s Technical Representative (COTR) - Joe Peters, Room 3416

16. Abstract

Advanced Traveler Information Systems (ATIS) Cross-Cutting report summarizes and interprets the resultsexclusively of several Field Operational Tests (FOTs) that have traveler information components. The FOTsconsidered in this report include: Atlanta Kiosk, Genesis, Seattle Wide-Area Information For Travelers, TravInfo,TravLink, Trilogy, Atlanta Driver Advisory Service, Advanced Driver and Vehicle Navigation, Driver Information RadioExperimenting With Communication Technology, Herald II, Idaho Storm Warning System, TravTek, Travel-Aid andTransit En-Route Information. The analysis and results presented in this report are categorized as impacts, userresponse, technical lessons learned, institutional challenges and resolutions and cost to implement. The Travelerinformation systems faced a wide variety of institutional challenges. This report highlights the successes andproblems these tests encountered while attempting to develop the technologies appropriate to establishing andimplementing ATIS.

17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement

ITS Impacts, ATIS, Traveler Information, ITS Lessons No restrictions. This document is available to theLearned, FOTs, Field Operational Tests, Cross-Cutting public through the National Technical Information

Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161.19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price

Unclassified Unclassified 27

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................1

2.0 REPORT BACKGROUND ...............................................................................................2

3.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................2

FIELD OPERATIONAL TESTS CONSIDERED IN THIS ANALYSIS ...........................................4

Atlanta Kiosk .............................................................................................................4Genesis .......................................................................................................................5Seattle Wide-Area Information For Travelers ........................................................5TravInfo .....................................................................................................................5Travlink ......................................................................................................................6Trilogy ........................................................................................................................6Atlanta Driver Advisory Service ...............................................................................6Advance Driver and Vehicle Navigation ...................................................................7Driver Information Radio Experimenting with Communication Technology ........7Herald II .....................................................................................................................8Idaho Storm Warning System ...................................................................................8TravTek ......................................................................................................................8Travel-Aid ..................................................................................................................8Transit En-Route Information ..................................................................................8

4.0 FINDINGS .......................................................................................................................9

IMPACTS ............................................................................................................................9USER RESPONSE ..............................................................................................................11TECHNICAL LESSONS LEARNED .......................................................................................13

Personal Communications Devices .........................................................................13In-Vehicle Devices ....................................................................................................13Personal Computers ................................................................................................13Kiosks .......................................................................................................................14En-Route Systems ....................................................................................................14

INSTITUTIONAL CHALLENGES AND RESOLUTIONS ...........................................................15

Legal Issues ..............................................................................................................15Business Processes Issues .........................................................................................16Public-Private Partnership Issues ...........................................................................16

COST TO IMPLEMENT ......................................................................................................18

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

5.0 SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................19

6.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY ...........................................................................................................21

U.S. Department of Transportation September 1998Federal Highway Administration Booz·Allen & Hamilton

Advanced Traveler Information Systems Field Operational Test Cross-Cutting Study1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In America's highly mobile society, travelershave an increasing desire and need for accurate,timely information to help them decide on theirdestinations and reach them quickly and safely.Advanced Traveler Information Systems (ATIS)can serve this need. Traveler information fallsinto two broad categories: pre-trip and en-route.This information may be distributed usingseveral existing and evolving communicationstechnologies. Public agencies have historicallycollected the real-time information, althoughinformation distribution may be by either publicor private channels. This report summarizes andinterprets the results of several Field OperationalTests (FOTs) that have traveler informationcomponents.

Both pre-trip and en-route traveler informationhad generally positive impacts. The availabilityof pre-trip information has increased driverconfidence to use freeways and allowedcommuters to make better informed transitchoices. En-route information and guidancesaves travel time, helps a traveler avoidcongestion, can improve traffic networkperformance, and is more efficient than papermaps or written instructions. Unfortunately,studies have shown that many people are stillunaware of the existence of ATIS.

Users had positive responses to the pre-tripinformation services and liked and found valuein the en-route information. Pre-trip informationsystems that are very portable and easy to useenjoyed greater market value than fixed orcumbersome systems did. Users appreciatedtraffic information that gave them a choice ofroutes but often did not change their travelbehavior. Commercial users responded verypositively to the availability of the information.Users found en-route systems to be generallysafe to use -- particularly voice-directionsystems, and beneficial in saving time andavoiding congestion.

The technical performance of these systemsvaried greatly depending on the type of system.Most pre-trip systems did not introduce cutting-edge technology but rather new configurationsof existing technologies. These newconfigurations worked well after some initialdata integration problems were rectified. En-route systems had a wider range of technologies.Some personal communication devices weredifficult to read because of poor back lighting.The in-vehicle devices tested performed well.The personal computers (PCs) used in vehiclesalso functioned as intended, although someproblems arose in connecting the devices to thevehicles. Other en-route systems were moreakin to prototypes than commercial products andexhibited a prototype's gestation problems.

Traveler information systems faced a widevariety of institutional challenges. Thesechallenges included legal issues, businessprocess issues, and the partnering roles of thepublic and private participants. Common legalissues included protecting copyright andproprietary information, tort liability for theaccuracy of the information, and licensing andconfidentiality agreements. Many testsencountered challenges in forging an effectivepartnering arrangement between the public andthe private participants because of differingviews on the form of the partnership and itsguiding principles.

Those tests that addressed the issue of costsreported information that is now somewhatoutdated. In general, users indicated awillingness to pay for the systems andinformation as long as they perceived value inwhat they were purchasing.

This report highlights the successes andproblems these tests encountered whileattempting to develop the technologiesappropriate to establishing and implementingATIS.



REPORT BACKGROUND

In 1991, the U.S. Department of Transportation(USDOT) initiated a new program to address theneeds of the emerging Intelligent TransportationSystems (ITS) field. This program solicited andfunded projects, called FOTs. The tests weresponsored and supported by severaladministrations of the Department, including theFederal Highway Administration (FHWA), theFederal Transit Administration (FTA), and theNational Highway Traffic Safety Administration(NHTSA).

The FOTs demonstrated potentially beneficialtransportation products, technologies, andapproaches. The FOTs implemented theseproducts, technologies, or approaches on alimited scale under real-world operationalconditions. These tests were an interim stepbridging the gap between conventional researchand development (that formed the idea), andfull-scale deployment (that would see wide-spread use of the idea). FOTs typically includeda local or regional transportation agency, as wellas the FHWA, as partners in the project. Thepartners often included private sector providersof the equipment, systems, and servicesinterested in demonstrating their idea. TheFOTs concentrated on user service areas needinga “proof of concept” in order to achievedeployment goals.

A fundamental element of each test was anindependent, formal evaluation. The evaluationproduced a final report that detailed the test’spurpose, methods, and findings. The evaluationaspect of the test was intended to assess whetherthe product, technology or approach providedeffective solutions at acceptable levels of cost,schedule, and technical risk.

As the sponsoring organization and a partner inmany of the FOTs, the FHWA played a centralrole. FHWA supported the tests by providing astandardized set of evaluation guidelines and byhelping coordinate and promote the relationships

among test partners. The FHWA also acted asthe communications clearing house collectingreviewing, and disseminating information aboutthe tests.

Among the more than 80 FOTs, several testsencompassed the same or similar areas ofinterest. The FHWA is preparing several “cross-cutting” studies that compare or synthesize thefindings of multiple tests within a particular areaof interest. The purpose of this series of studiesis to extract from the separate tests the commoninformation and lessons learned that are ofinterest to ITS practitioners and that couldimprove the testing and deployment of futureapplications of the subject technology.

This study focuses on the topic of AdvancedTraveler Information Systems (ATIS). INTRODUCTION

Advanced traveler information includes staticand real-time information on traffic conditions,and schedules, road and weather conditions,special events, and tourist information. It can beoffered with value added options like sportsscores, stock quotes, yellow pages and currentnews. ATIS is classified by how and whentravelers receive their desired information (pre-trip or en-route) and is divided by user servicecategories. Operations essential to the successof these systems are the collection of traffic andtraveler information, the processing and fusingof information - often at a central point, and thedistribution of information to travelers.Important components of these systems includenew technologies applied to the use andpresentation of information and thecommunications used to effectively disseminatethis information.



Traveler information systems distributeinformation using several communicationstechnologies. The most widely used are wirelessbroadcast, electronic data lines to remoteterminals, and telephone advisory messages.Traveler information is displayed as icons onmap databases, as alphanumeric text messages,and as recorded messages accessed by phone. Collecting traffic information has historicallybeen the task of public authorities althoughprivate firms distributing traffic information toradio and TV often use their own means tocollect information. Public authorities usingvarious combinations of loop detectors, cameras,probes, and data from other authorities cangenerally access more comprehensive and/oraccurate traffic information and centralize it in aTraffic Management Center (TMC). Thegrowing trend in traveler information systems isto fuse the public sector data with value addedprivate sector data/services and disseminate itfrom a central point. There are a variety ofbusiness models being discussed among bothpublic and private participants across thecountry.

Apart from transit based ATIS systems, mostsystems rely on the quality and availability ofother ITS infrastructure components. Thepresence of Advanced Traffic ManagementSystems (ATMS), where data is gathered andfused, is essential for effectively disseminatingreal-time traveler information to the public. Inmany ways issues involved in ATMSdevelopment also have a direct effect on thesuccess of comprehensive ATIS systems.

Pre-trip is traveler information is provided as atrip is being planned or about to be embarkedon. En-route traveler information is delivered totravelers in private vehicles and en-route transitinformation is provided to travelers using publictransportation.

A pre-trip travel information service allowstravelers to access real-time intermodal

transportation information at home, work, andother major sites where trips originate.Information on traffic conditions, ride matchingand reservations are conveyed through thesesystems to provide travelers with current travelconditions and to offer options to help plan theirtravel. Based on this information, travelers canselect their preferred departure time, route andmodes of travel, or perhaps decide not to makethe trip at all.

Advanced pre-trip traveler information systemdevices focus on providing real-time trafficinformation but often bundle it withtransportation and traveler services information.Traveler services include transit schedules, routeguidance and yellow pages. Many pre-tripinformation systems can also be accessed en-route.

The content of en-route information as describedby the ITS National Program Plan shouldprovide driver advisories to convey informationabout traffic conditions, incidents, construction,transit schedules, and other mode choice optionsto drivers of personal, commercial, and publictransit vehicles. This service also includes in-vehicle signing, which provides the same typesof information found on highway signs todaybut would be displayed directly in the vehicle.Full deployment of in-vehicle signing wouldalso include customized information, such aswarnings of hazardous road conditions (e.g., fog,ice) or the safe speed for a specific type ofvehicle (e.g. , autos, buses, large trucks). 1

An en-route transit information system providesinformation to transit riders after their trips havestarted. This information includes arrival anddeparture times, information on transfers andconnections, information on other regionaltransportation services, and information on

1 National ITS Program Plan, Vol. II, March 1995,p.5



related services, such as park-and-ride lotavailability. This information can be providedon-board a transit vehicle, at a transit stop ortransit center, and at other locations, such aspark-and-ride lots, through various media.2

Pre-trip and en-route traveler informationservices share many overlapping issues withcommon solutions applicable to both. There arealso some unique aspects to each service. TheFOT initiatives have provided a platform toisolate and study these measurable issues. Thispaper will focus on the lessons learned fromFOT’s that addressed these issues.

This report was prepared using material gatheredas part of Booz Allen & Hamilton’s work toprovide evaluation oversight support for theFHWA’s ITS FOTs. This material includespublished and unpublished reports prepared bythe test personnel and evaluators as well asinformation gathered in meetings andconversations with test personnel. Booz •Allen& Hamilton was not directly involved in theconduct of the tests. The reports prepared by thetest personnel and evaluators present thefindings, results, and conclusions of the tests.

This report interprets the results of a group oftests that have common themes in an attempt toextract lessons that cut across the group of tests.Because it draws from the results of the tests asa group, this report may offer lessons andconclusions that are not found in the materialfrom the individual tests.

When specifically focusing on pre-trip travelerinformation findings this report includes theFOTs: Atlanta Kiosk, TravInfo, Trilogy,Genesis, Seattle Wide-Area Information forTravelers (SWIFT) and TravLink. The nature ofmany of the products these tests used todisseminate pre-trip information is such that

2 Review and Assessment of En-Route TransitInformation Systems, April 1995, p.14

they could also be used en-route via cell phone,personal digital assistant, or pager.

Other FOTs, namely, Advance Driver andVehicle Navigation (ADVANCE), TravTek andAtlanta Driver Advisory Services (ADAS) testedthe feasibility of the technologies enabling en-route dynamic route guidance. They alsostudied various aspects of traveler behavior withimproved information. These tests looked at thefeasibility of communication to vehicles fromwide area advisories, two-way messaging andlocal area advisory systems. Another FOT,Driver Information Radio Experimenting withCommunication Technology (DIRECT) is alsostudying low-cost methods of communicating tomotorists and tracking modified travel behavior,but has not finalized its evaluation.

The FOTs, HERALD II, Idaho Storm WarningSystem, and Travel-Aid focused oncommunicating weather and road conditioninformation en-route. HERALD is studying thefeasibility of AM subcarrier broadcast totransmit information in challenging terrain andpotentially interfering environmental conditions.Idaho Storm Warning System and Travel-Aidcommunicated visibility, road and weatherconditions via Variable Message Signs (VMS)and were focused on obtaining reliable data fromsensors to report accurate conditions and safespeed limits.

FOTS CONSIDERED IN THIS ANALYSIS

The following descriptions include six ITS FOTsthat included pre-trip traveler informationfindings. A few tests continued in some form ofoperation after the test period.

Atlanta Kiosk

The Atlanta Kiosk project began as part of theITS deployment effort in Atlanta that coincidedwith the 1996 Olympic Games. The AtlantaTraffic Management System now known asNAVIGATOR links information from the traffic



surveillance system and the Atlanta ITSShowcase server. The Kiosk project installedcomputer systems in kiosks located in publiclocations mainly in Atlanta but also at varioustraveler information centers on Georgia’sinterstate highways. The kiosks display trafficinformation from the ATMS/transit schedule andstatus information from the Metropolitan AtlantaRapid Transit Authority (MARTA) TransitInformation Center (TIC). They also displaytraveler information from the Atlanta TravelerInformation Showcase server, airlines, theWeather channel, the Atlanta RegionalCommission, and the Georgia Department ofIndustry, Trade and Tourism.

Over 115 of the projects original 140 kiosks arecurrently deployed and maintained byGeorgiaNet, a state agency that marketselectronic access to public information. Testpersonnel conducted data collection during the1996 Olympic Games period in July and Augustof 1996. Since the evaluation ended, the entiresystem has been overhauled and is no longeroperating from individual modem links, butfrom a web browser on the internet. Newevaluation data is being collected assessing thenew system and a final evaluation report is beingfinalized.

Genesis

This test was the second of three MinnesotaGuidestar tests that shared traffic informationfrom the Minnesota Department ofTransportation (Mn/DOT) TMC in downtownMinneapolis. The Genesis project was todetermine the effect of real-time trafficinformation on traveler behavior. Incidents,congestion, and planned events were broadcastto commercially available pagers and PersonalDigital Assistant (PDA) users in a portion of theTwin Cities area of Minnesota. The coveragearea was later expanded. The raw traffic datafrom the Mn/DOT TMC was also provided tothe Travlink and Trilogy FOTs. Operation ofthis system ended in January 1996.

Seattle Wide-Area Information ForTravelers (SWIFT)

The primary goal of the project was to assess theperformance of a large-scale, urban ATIS in theSeattle area. Traveler information servicesincluded traffic, incident reports, ridesharematching, and transit schedules. SWIFTprovided travel information via FM-subcarrierhigh speed data systems to travelers carrying oneof three user devices. Testing ended inSeptember 1997.

The three user devices included digital watches,in-vehicle devices, and PCs. The digital watchesprovided personalized SWIFT traffic dataincluding expected delay times based on theusers’ normal commuting routes. SWIFT iscurrently broadcasting to a limited number oftest watches, and eventually expects Seiko todeploy a commercial watch with this service.The in-vehicle navigation units received trafficincident data and filtered out incidents notrelevant to the current trip. The navigationsystem included a Global Positioning System(GPS) that determined vehicle location andprovided relative directions to a selecteddestination chosen from its yellow pagedirectory. The notebook PCs displayed a mapshowing incident icons and text descriptions thatdetailed the incident type, roadway affected, anddirection. Bus schedules and locations andrideshare matching were also available from thePCs.

TravInfo TravInfo is an open-access traveler informationsystem for the San Francisco Bay Area.TravInfo provides a free public service of real-time traffic information through a phone line.Data is also disseminated in a digitized formthrough both modem-based landline data serverand FM subcarrier-based wireless data broadcastsystems. The project is based on an openarchitecture philosophy, and there are very fewrestrictions to participation.



Additional services are available through radiobroadcast and the internet by way of informationservice providers. Traffic information is drawnfrom multiple public and private sources.Commuters can also access multi-modalservices, including transit and rideshareinformation. The project’s objectives are toprovide benefits to traffic operations andtravelers, and to stimulate the deployment ofprivately offered advanced traveler informationproducts and services. The test is ongoingthrough December 1998 and a permanentdeployment is being negotiated.

Travlink

Travlink used Automatic Vehicle Location(AVL), Computer-Aided Dispatch (CAD), andAutomatic Vehicle Identification (AVI) systemson Metropolitan Council Transit Operations(MCTO) buses in Minneapolis and surroundingsuburbs, to collect and distribute real-time busschedule information and traffic information.

The goal of Travlink was to increase theefficiency and use of transit services along the I-394 corridor and to measure the feasibility offull deployment of a CAD AVL transit systemthroughout the metropolitan area. The projectcorridor was a newly reconstructed freeway thatwas designed to include transit and ridesharingcapabilities. A primary objective of the projectwas to test the extent to which improvements inthe quality and availability of transit informationcan positively influence individuals to considertransit alternatives. The test concluded in 1996.

Travlink disseminated data to a computer on-line service using videotext terminals and PCs,as well as “smart” kiosks, electronic signs, anddisplay monitors. Under the Orion project, aseparate CAD AVL transit management systemis being deployed in the Minneapolis area usinglessons learned in the test, but travelerinformation will be disseminated through aprivately run center. This system was given toDuluth, Minnesota where Mn/DOT is assessing

the costs of reconditioning it and deploying it inthe Duluth area.

Trilogy

Trilogy demonstrated in-vehicle systems andFM-subcarrier data technologies that providedtraffic information to drivers in the Twin Citiesarea of Minnesota. The project provided real-time travel information about the condition ofthe metropolitan highway system to a sample ofcommercial delivery fleets, bus transit operators,and private citizen commuters via in-vehiclenavigation devices. It evaluated the effects ofthe information and devices on the users and thesurface transportation system.

Trilogy used a graphically oriented, map displayin-vehicle system. This dash-board mountedsystem displayed a moving map showingincident and traffic information icons as well asreal-time traffic volume and occupancy data.Although the project has ended, the project’sdata source will be made available if a marketfor travel and traffic information should develop.Using lessons learned in the Trilogy test, a radiobroadcast, a cable TV broadcast, and theSidewalk web page all continue to distributeMn/DOT’s real-time traffic data.

The following are brief descriptions of the eightFOTs evaluated for en-route travelerinformation systems.

Atlanta Driver Advisory Service (ADAS)

The ADAS was a comprehensive ATIS. TheADAS was designed to provide informationincluding congestion, incidents, weather, sportsscores, current movies, traveler services, in-vehicle signing, and two-way messaging. Theproject provided information to drivers ofapproximately 170 specially equipped vehiclesin the Atlanta, Georgia, metropolitan area. Themain objective of the test was to evaluate theperformance of the wide area driver advisory



system, the two-way messaging system, and thelocal area driver advisory system.

A major part of the information provided to thevehicles was generated by the ATMS operatedby the Georgia Department of Transportation(GDOT). The ATMS monitored trafficconditions and incidents occurring on severalkey interstates. The ATMS used a system ofvideo imaging detection cameras. Congestionand incidents were disseminated to travelersusing the Atlanta Showcase resources. Duringthe data collection period, some of the detectiondevices did not operate reliably so much of thedata collection was done manually. ADASoperators entered additional informationincluding weather, sports scores, and movies.

The components that made up the overall systemincluded a system controller in the TMC, theSubcarrier Traffic Information ChannelSubsystem, the Two-Way MessagingSubsystem, the Local Area TransceiversSubsystem, and the In-Vehicle Subsystem.

The ADAS demonstrated a technical capabilityto:

• The ADAS successfully presented trafficinformation in the vehicles. ADAS couldaccept congestion and incident informationfrom the ATMS and use that information tocalculate traffic conditions for a particularsegment of the highway system. ADASsuccessfully transmitted this informationusing an existing FM radio station. The in-vehicle receiver was able to decode anddisplay the traffic information on the screenin the car.

• The ADAS was also successful in displayingtraveler services maps in the vehicles. TheADAS developed and coded the mapsshowing what services were available at anintersection. The system could determine amoving vehicle's position and send theappropriate map to the vehicle. The in-

vehicle receiver successfully received themap and displayed it at predeterminedlocations.

Advance Driver and Vehicle Navigation(ADVANCE)

The ADVANCE FOT demonstrated the use ofan in-vehicle advanced traveler informationsystem in the northwest suburbs of Chicago,Illinois. It was expected to be the first large-scale dynamic route guidance systemdeployment in the U.S., resulting in thedistribution of 3,000 in-vehicle devices. TheADVANCE system provided drivers with a fastroute to their destination over the arterial streetsusing an in-vehicle traveler information androute guidance system. The system providedroute guidance information using a staticdatabase of travel times and dynamicinformation on traffic conditions.

In late 1994, based primarily on the projectedmarket limitations of what was likely to be anexpensive system, the project partners scaledback the project scope and agreed on a targeteddeployment of 75 prototype in-vehicle systems.Operational testing took place using 30 vehiclesbetween June 1995 and December 1995.

Driver Information Radio Experimentingwith Communication Technology(DIRECT)

The DIRECT test is deploying and evaluatingseveral alternative low-cost methods ofcommunicating travel information to motoristsin the Detroit, Michigan metropolitan area. Thesystem sends travel information to a group oftest vehicles and then tracks the vehicles duringtheir commute. The tracking information will beanalyzed to understand actual traveler behaviorand the modifications travelers make based onimproved knowledge. The field evaluationphase of the test began in April 1996. The FinalEvaluation Report is anticipated by October1998.



Herald II

The Herald II project is an ATIS in the remote,rural and harsh environmental conditions inColorado and Iowa. The project disseminatesimportant traveler information in difficult-to-reach areas using a subcarrier on an AMbroadcast radio station. The objective is to buildand test an AM stereo infrastructure throughwhich 4-5 traveler messages will be tested.Herald II will not test the accuracy andtimeliness of traveler information, but thefeasibility of the communications media. PhaseI of the test consisted of a communicationtechnology feasibility study funded entirely bythe ENTERPRISE group. Phase II is the actualFOT and began operation in April 1998 for sixweeks. A final report by year end 1998.

Idaho Storm Warning System

This rural test is evaluating a system that warnsmotorists about adverse weather conditions. Thesystem consists of a group of sensor systems thatprovide visibility and weather data coupled to aset of VMS located along the highway. Thesystem operates along a stretch of Interstate 84in Idaho and northern Utah. The primary goal ofthe system is to reduce the number and severityof visibility-related multiple-vehicle accidentsalong this section of I-84. Testing of the systemcomponents began in 1994. Due to a lack ofvisibility events in the early winters of the testand because of equipment operation problems,the data collection period has been extended.An Interim Report is expected in the Fall of1998 and the Final Report is due August 31,2000.

TravTek

The TravTek FOT contained a series of fieldtests, experiments, and analytical studies focusedon ATIS and ATMS concepts. Three maincomponents were: 100 specially-equippedvehicles, information collected and processed atthe Orlando TMC, and customer information

and services provided by the TravTekInformation and Services Center (TISC). Eachin-vehicle system had a two-way communicationlink to the TMC and the TISC via a hands-freecellular phone. The vehicles received abroadcast of traffic information from the TMCand broadcast to the TMC their locations andtravel times across TravTek traffic links. Thevehicles were configured three ways: providingyellow pages services only, providing addedroute guidance and planning capabilities, orincluding all services and navigation featuresplus display of real-time traffic information androute planning around congestion. The test wasconducted in Orlando, Florida, from November1991 to June 1994.

Travel-Aid

This operational test’s objective is to improvesafety and reduce accidents across the 40-mileSnoqualmie Pass along I-90 north of Seattle,Washington. Accident rates in this area duringthe winter months have been recorded five timeshigher than the average throughout the year.Travel-Aid transmits suggested speed limitsalong with traveler advisory messages via VMS.An in-vehicle system was initially planned aspart of the operational test, but has beendiscontinued. The Travel-Aid weather stationsand radar detectors provide information to theTMC and augment the existing travelerinformation system of advisory radio, 1-800SNOW INFO, and the Washington Departmentof Transportation (WSDOT) web page.Preliminary field testing is currently underway,with a final evaluation report expected inSeptember 1998.

Transit En-Route Information

En-route transit information systems are startingto be developed in the U.S. as theimplementation of AVL systems with improvedcollection and distribution of data make real-time information available. Projects integratingtraffic and transit information, particularly to



promote the shift from Single OccupantVehicles (SOV) to High Occupancy Vehicles(HOV), include the FOT Travlink and theCalifornia Smart Traveler project. One way toencourage modal shift is by providing driverswith guidance to park and ride lots and includingreal-time information on public transit services.

European studies have identified that service“reliability and punctuality are perhaps the mostimportant requirements influencing theperception of a public transport system.” Thepresence of en-route traveler informationsystems can significantly contribute to thisperception.3

FINDINGS

The following sections present the findings ofthis report organized in five categories: • Impacts–whether the results of the tests

caused changes

• User Response–how test participantsreacted

• Technical Lessons Learned–conclusionsabout the ease of use, applicability,transferability, and safety of the testedtechnologies

• I n s t i t u t i o n a l C h a l l e n g e s a n dResolutions–conclusions about therelationships among the test partners,institutional barriers, and legal issues

• Cost To Implement–how the costs mayaffect the potential development anddeployment of the technologies.

3 Ibid., pg. 60

IMPACTS

The impacts and effects of real-time pre-trip anden-route traveler information have generallybeen positive with a few exceptions. Real-timepre-trip traffic conditions in Minneapolis gaveusers more confidence to use the freeways,which they had inaccurately perceived to beconstantly congested. Fewer drivers chosealternate arterial routes due to the accuratefreeway information they previously could notaccess. Non-commuters with a fixed destination use pre-trip traffic information in conjunction with otherservices. Tourists and locals in the Atlanta areaaccess traveler information for choices such astourist attractions, restaurants and hotels, as wellas their choice of route or mode oftransportation. SWIFT’s hand held computerswith real-time bus schedules were popular withSeattle’s transit riders. These riders have nochoice of alternate route but appreciatedknowing if they needed to take the local bus thathad just arrived or if an express bus would soonfollow.

ADVANCE evaluators concluded that turn-by-turn navigation is not only an effective methodof information presentation, but that by allowingmore efficient navigation and less off route orlost time, such systems can potentially reduce adriver’s exposure, thereby reducing overall crashrates.

TravTek saved users time en-route by providingturn-by-turn route guidance directions. In threefield experiments comparing turn-by-turn routeguidance to consulting a paper map or atranscribed list of instructions, the routeguidance was found to reduce travel time byapproximately 12 percent. TravTek participantswho could access real-time traffic informationdid not measure actual travel time savings butevidence suggested they were more successful inavoiding congestion.



En-route traveler information systems have beenprojected to improve overall traffic flow.TravTek showed that with improvements totraffic information infrastructure, in-vehicleroute guidance systems have the potential tomeasurably improve traffic networkperformance, in part because drivers will usesuch systems. Modeling suggested that non-users will also experience substantial benefits ifTravTek-like systems reach even modest levelsof market penetration. In tests where travelers received information en-route there are a limited number of measuredimpacts, mainly from tests using in-vehiclesystems. En-route in-vehicle systems as a wholewere determined as safe or safer thanconventional driver information sources such aspaper maps and written directions. The advisorysign tests are still in the process of beingdeployed, yet already using preliminary datagathered, they have identified specific risks inadverse conditions that intended travel warningsigns could substantially mitigate.

En-route tests compared the variety of devicesfor their safety in the vehicle and then comparedcharacteristics among them to assess the safestcombinations (i.e. voice prompts with maps,turn-by-turn directions with symbols). The turn-by-turn guidance display used in TravTekmeasurably reduced demands on drivers’ visualattention. Users perceived that the voice guidehelped them drive more safely and as asupplement to the visual display the voice guideimproved driver performance. In the growing number of cities where real-timepre-trip and en-route traveler information isavailable to the public, many people are stillunaware of its existence and its potentialbenefits. Increased public awareness and morewidespread availability of phone services,kiosks, and other pre-trip traveler informationproducts may produce measurable changes intraveler behavior and in traffic patterns.

One test conducted a survey of over 200commuters, the majority of whom were unawareof the test’s phone service. Of those who knewabout the service, nearly 75 percent had nevercalled. This survey concluded that individualincidents did not affect traveler behaviorsignificantly. Although a fair proportion ofcommuters obtain traffic information, fewactually utilize it. The conclusions of the surveygive the explanation that commuters generallydo not believe that changing their travel planswill result in shorter travel times.4

The following evaluation findings were madebased on the individual tests:

• In the ADVANCE project dynamic routeguidance was demonstrated to provide thepotential for motorists to reduce travel timesby 4 percent and potentially more underconditions of non-recurrent congestion.

• The TravTek studies projected a 37 percentreduction in wrong turns and 32 percentreduction in vehicle stops using the system.Other projected benefits of the TravTeksystem included an approximate 5 percentreduction in travel distance, an 11 percentreduction in fuel consumption and a 6percent reduction in emissions.

• The Idaho Storm Warning project in itsPhase I evaluation established that in lowvisibility situations, vehicle speeds declineby approximately 10 mph on average andmore as visibility decreases. They alsofound that there is a greater variety ofindividual vehicle speeds during lowvisibility or that standard deviations ofindividual speeds are higher by 2-3 mphcompared to those during normal conditions.Although drivers slow down, they do notslow down uniformly and the variation in

4 R. Koo, et. al, TravInfo Evaluation TravelerResponse Element: Phase 1 Results of the TargetStudy, December 1997



speed creates more risk in low visibility.This data is expected to have implicationson the use of VMS messages during PhaseII, to reduce variability among individualvehicle speeds as well as reducing theoverall mean speeds in low visibilityconditions.

• The ADVANCE safety evaluation measuredsignificant eye glance data to support theirfinding that the Mobile Navigation Assistant(MNA) in-vehicle device did not adverselyaffect driving safety when compared toconventional navigation methods (i.e. papermaps or direction lists). Users ranked boththe MNA without auditory and the MNAwith auditory above conventional directionsbased on their relative safety.

USER RESPONSE Available evaluations from the tests studied theeffectiveness of real-time information to altertravel behavior, the ease of accessinginformation using various devices, theusefulness of information in daily life, andtravelers willingness to pay for information. User responses to using pre-trip travelerinformation systems were generally positive.Some responses were influenced by early systemrelated technical problems and minor ergonomicproblems. The following evaluation findingswere made based on the individual tests:

• Users are generally appreciative of trafficinformation that gives them a choice tomake decisions regarding their travelbehavior as long as they perceive theinformation to be accurate, timely andinexpensive. Of the Travlink PC users, 57percent agreed or strongly agreed that theinformation was accurate and reliable, and34 percent were neutral. Others felt that theinformation was not as good, or not anybetter than what they could receive viatelevision and radio traffic reports.

• Genesis project users with personal digitalassistants reported they were generally easyto use. Sixty-five percent said they used thesystem daily.

• Pre-trip information systems will be usedmore by people who regularly travel as partof their everyday activity. In particular,commercial users, who use the road networkas part of their jobs, responded to theinformation attributes very positively. TheTrilogy project’s information became thenumber one source of traffic informationamong the project’s commercial users.

• Pre-trip information doesn’t necessarilycause people to change their travel behavior.Knowing the conditions may give travelersmore confidence in their original travelplans instead of chancing alternate routes.Trilogy users reported taking alternateroutes less frequently than before because ofreliable information that the freeway was infact the better choice. They believed thatTrilogy gave them better information tomake intelligent route choices, yet ironicallyit was frequently not to change route at all.

• The consumer electronics product costs forkiosks, VMS, pagers, phones, PCs, PDAsand in-vehicle systems will each be affectedby trends in communications, electronics,and the computer industry. Communica-tions technology and its costs affect how thisinformation will be disseminated. Sometraveler information will always be free tothe public, but value added informationbundled to include services like customizedtraffic reporting, movie listings, sportsscores, stock quotes and/or news may havesubscription fees.

The trends in car computer systems willchange the way all these devices are used inthe vehicle and could evolve into combinedunits with multiple capabilities.



• There is a willingness to pay for some travelinformation systems; however, marketpenetration by “high-end” systemsaccording to FOT results, would be limiteduntil costs decrease. Mean price estimatesfor the Dynaguide II system used in theTrilogy project from May 1995 throughDecember 1996, ranged from $425 to $522with monthly service charge estimatesaround $28. Willingness to pay these pricesranged from 16 percent in the early surveyto 24 percent in post surveys and increasedwith exposure to the system among high-usedrivers. The chart below shows current in-vehicle systems on the market and theirapproximate prices (See Table 1).

Current prices as of April 1998 availablein limited areas and vehicle models.Accura Satellite $2000BMW On-Board $2800JAMES, Journey Assistance & MappingExploration System

$2995

Lexus Navigation System $2250Mercedes Benz Navigation System $2495GuideStar Information System $2800Alpine Voice Guidance NavigationSystem

$2910

PathMaster $1995CARin $2500Table 1 — Commercial In-Vehicle NavigationSystems

• For the Atlanta Kiosk, no comparisons weremade between the kiosk and other systemswith regard to absolute or comparativevalues. Respondents clearly showed somewillingness to pay a small amount (25-50cents) for information per kiosk use. Thiswillingness increased with the availability ofa printed product. The Travlink evaluationdid not provide any value data.

Users liked using many of the en-route systemsand found value in using them. Tests gave

documented time and effort savings. Travelersavoided congested areas more often when theycould access real-time traffic information. En-route systems as a whole fared as safe as or saferthan conventional driver information such aspaper maps and backseat drivers. Voiceprompts and clear symbol displays were favoredover detailed maps. The following evaluationfindings were made based on the individualtests: • User acceptance of traffic information via

PCs was mixed. Negative opinions fromusers are believed to be a result of technicaland data throughput problems. Userresponses indicate that, for PC-basedsystems to be accepted and paid for, theymust be perceived as more accurate andtimely than pre-trip information provided bytelevision and radio traffic reports.

• TravTek participants regularly used thesystem on over 40 percent of their trips.One study showed that rental car users reliedon the TravTek system for up to 80 percentof their total trips taken. The evaluationreported that while users viewed localinformation, navigation, and route guidancefunctions as useful, they did not perceive thetraffic information provided by TravTekhelped them avoid congestion.

• ADVANCE drivers stated that they feltmore aware of their surroundings whenusing the mobile navigation assistant withvoice than with any other driving condition.

• The ADAS project found that better trainingand a clearer understanding of what theywere trying to accomplish might havecreated more interested participants.Without clear understanding, poorperformance of the system during its initialstages also seemed to discourage somedrivers. These findings were collectedbefore the project finished and report theapparent user’s perspective on ADAS



system performance, not a user acceptanceanalysis.

TECHNICAL LESSONS LEARNED

Pre-trip traveler information systems are notintroducing cutting-edge technology into theworld of traffic and transportation. They areintroducing new technical configurations andsystem integration concepts to the transportationcommunity. As a result, cross-cuttingevaluation addresses system performance issuesby device types, including device reliability,availability, and performance issues directlyrelated to system development. Findings include the following:

• The systems used for pre-trip informationare generally reliable and perform well. Thetest systems were generally based on provendesigns that had been previously usedsuccessfully in other markets.

• In a few cases, these systems were fieldedfor testing before all of the technicalproblems were solved. Problems that didarise were generally attributed to systems ordata integration, which plagued the earlytests, due to complexities of data fusion andsystem integration.

• Traveler information system design shouldensure that users will not be burdened withmessages they do not wish to receive orread.

The following paragraphs discuss the findingsrelated to specific device types. Personal Communications Devices The personal communications device tests,which were adaptations of products that werecommonly available on the market, performedvery well. Personal communication devicesinclude pagers, handheld computers, watches

and cell phones. The pagers in Genesis werevery reliable; however, the personal digitalassistants, which required significantmodification for this test, were never completelyoperational to satisfy their intended purpose.Thus far, the SWIFT project watches have notexperienced any significant problems. The onlyrecurring condition that affected handheld orportable systems was a need for backlightingwhen trying to read data characters in brightlight conditions. One problem with SWIFT that was alsoobserved to some extent with Genesis andTrilogy is user-identified problems with deletingmessages or data. The designs for these systemsappear to have not fully taken into account theneed for data to be cleared after a certain amountof time or based upon other criteria.

In-Vehicle Devices The in-vehicle devices in the Trilogy andSWIFT test performed very well. With Trilogyand SWIFT, there was an early recurringproblem with deleting old messages; the overallsystem design allowed for a memory bufferinput rate that could not be dumped fast enough. A critical item with regard to technicalperformance of in-vehicle systems appears to beinstallation, which must be done carefully toavoid erroneous connections. Different cars canpose different levels of difficulty installing thesetypes of systems correctly.

PCs The PCs used in Travlink and SWIFT performedsatisfactorily when treated as stand-alonesystems. There were some technical problemsthat occurred in both of these tests that aretypical of new development efforts. For SWIFTPCs, user feedback identified connectionproblems with some machines. In Travlink,there were a number of videotext errors thatcreated negative feedback with a small number



of users. It is not known whether these weredevelopment-related, or caused by faultycomponents. Kiosks Neither Atlanta Kiosk nor Travlink tests haveprovided any direct results on the technicalperformance of their kiosk systems. No numericdata on performance or reliability is available foreither test. Atlanta deployed 140 kiosks for the test and 104are currently operational as a legacy program.There were some early problems with systemcomponent and communications failures;however, there is no indication that anycomponents of the kiosks in Atlanta areinherently defective. The Travlink project deployed less than 10kiosks. The Final Evaluation Report does notindicate specific technical problems. There areplans to re-use the kiosks in Duluth as part of theMn/DOT Guidestar Orion project for Duluthpublic transit.

En-Route Systems

The en-route test results had many successfultechnical accomplishments although most of thein-vehicle units tested were closer to prototypesand will be significantly altered as commercialproducts. Some of the specific findings arelisted: • The Herald II project demonstrated that AM

subcarrier broadcast has very good receptionin the mountains as well as in urban areasalthough they found that lightning was asignificant challenge to the AM broadcasts.

• ADAS demonstrated the technical capabilityto send a two-way message (simulatedmayday) from a vehicle to a computer in theTMC, and to send a response from the TMCto the vehicle while in motion although theinformation delivered in the test at times

lacked complete coverage of the area’straffic congestion.

• TravTek technical results included thefollowing issues:

Reliability was largely attributable to thedistributed architecture. The availabilityof the system was in excess of 96 percentthroughout the project across allsubsystems. Yet, lacking timely incidentinformation, the system was oftenunaware or late in posting incidents.

TravTek partners invested significantlymore time and effort into supporting theaccuracy of the navigation databases thanthey had originally planned. At the timeof the test, no infrastructure was in placeto support sharing resources such as anup-to-date map database, planned roadconstruction data, and parking lot data.

The evaluators recommended that ITSdevelopers should schedule end-to-endtesting of the systems before they arereleased to the public. As an example, theTravTek system shake-down took threemonths more than anticipated, partiallybecause end-to-end testing had not beenaccomplished before the date the fieldtest began.

• The ADVANCE evaluation concluded that:

Advances in technology will be requiredto meet the requirements of similarsystems in the future, particularlyrelating to speed of user interface,transmitting high amounts of data,improving how trips are planned, andproviding technology that works in thevariety of environments found invehicles.



More research is needed with respect todata fusion, incident detection and routeplanning algorithms.

In dynamic route guidance, relativelyfew probes are needed to accuratelycharacterize traffic conditions on a givenlink on an arterial network (less than 5per 5-min period).

• For a full implementation of en-route transitinformation systems, areas must haveinstallation of and experience with advancedpublic transportation systems, specificallyadvanced vehicle location systems. Theircustomer needs must also be wellunderstood. The operational tests identifiedin the User Services Development Planunder the National ITS Program Plan arenot operating on a regular basis.

I NSTITUTIONAL C HALLENGES AND

RESOLUTIONS

ATIS has a wide and varied set of institutionalchallenges. The most fundamental issuesrevolve around the public-private partnershipsand the dissemination of data among them. Thebusiness models workshops and other forumsthat bring together regional ATIS initiativesarticulate the most progressive issues and thesuccesses to date in deployment, but there aresome significant lessons learned in the FOTs. ITS projects have fostered many newinstitutional relationships and ways of doingbusiness for transportation agencies and privatesector partners. Institutional issues addressedhere include legal issues, business processes,and public-private partnerships. Legal Issues Legal issues unique to pre-trip travelerinformation systems were not required to beaddressed in the evaluation reports, yet commonproblems within various tests included copyright

and proprietary information issues, licensingagreements, and confidentiality agreements.Two other legal issues that continue to arise aresafety in using systems while driving and theproper use of publicly collected trafficinformation when distributed by privateinterests. These issues have been prevalent inother types of ITS projects as well.

One significant legal issue being faced is thepotential tort liability for distributed informationthat is either false, inaccurate, or unreliable andmay be blamed for a particular accident ordamages of some kind. TravInfo realizedpossible tort liability regarding use of thecontent of the database by registeredparticipants. The question was whetherregistered participants that access the databasemight attempt to hold the project liable in theevent of erroneous, unreliable or lost data.TravInfo protected itself by includingdisclaimers of liability and a warranty in theterms and conditions of the RegisteredParticipant Agreement. Since the TravInfodatabase is in the public domain, a potentialproblem exists if information is accepted from aprivate source. The Contracts departments of the state agenciesand private firms were not designed to handle“partnership agreements” that did not have thebinding power of a contract. This caused otherlegal issues regarding responsibilities, productdeliverables and enforcement of agreements. Another issue questioned the ownership andproprietary nature of data for further use once ithas been processed at the public agency level.Transportation agencies are beginning to take ahard look at how they will conduct business inthe future. This is because traffic andtransportation information (accidents, incidents,construction), normally collected by publicagencies for internal use, is now being deliveredin various forms to private hands for re-saleunder commercial market conditions.



Obstacles in carrying out agreements for theTravlink project pertained to proprietary issuesand property rights, copyright and ownership,license agreements and confidentiality, and theability to carry out the agreements underMinnesota enabling legislation.

Business Processes Issues Business processes addressed a paradigm shift inthe way public transportation agencies conducttheir operations, and whether that change is forthe public good. A business issue specific to TravInfo was thedecision to make the California Department ofTransportation (CalTrans) Traffic OperationsSystem (TOS) the primary source of informationinstead of pursuing a more independent anddiversified path.Schedule problems with the TOS have delayedmajor operations deployments. Complicationsin CalTrans contracting procedures have sloweddown full development of the TOS.

The issue of publicly funded collection of trafficinformation packaged for re-selling bycommercial agencies for a profit raised aquestion of whether benefits to the publicoutweigh any potential economic motives. Inthe TravInfo scenario, collecting trafficinformation at public expense for re-sale versusno-cost public access via an affordable mediumsuch as a telephone advisory service was a majorissue. Some participants did not want theinformation made available to the public withoutbeing re-packaged and sold via the market.Others, primarily in the public sector, supportedpublic access. Test partners in TravInfodecided that the public sector would collect andprocess the data, and the private sector wouldadd value, including privately collected data andthe development of consumer products andservices. The TravInfo Traffic AdvisoryTelephone Service (TATS) would remain free ofcharge.

One of the lessons learned in the Genesis projectwas developed through the participants’experience in the negotiation process.Participants felt that the freeform negotiationprocess that was used could have proceededmore smoothly if the parties had a betterunderstanding of each other’s contracting historyand mindset, as well as what they wanted toderive from the project. Factors that surfacedwere differing contracting requirements and/orperspectives of federal and state agencies, andthe fact that the partners may not share acommon framework for negotiation.

Public-Private Partnership Issues Public-private partnership issues revealedthemselves in various ways in these tests.Different perspectives of the public and privatesector were manifest in the form of issues andstumbling blocks that interfere with smoothproject administration. Discrepancies typicallyarose over forms of organization, managementstructure, and implementation tools. In a newapproach for many participants, projects havebeen structured with both public and privatepartners as part of the project management team. Each side of a public-private partnership needsto understand the principles and ideals thatgovern the other. There is a need for team-member consensus regarding developmentapproach and the technical tools to be used. Anunderstanding of the full range of technicalobstacles, specifically with regards to systemsdisplays and integration is vital. The following perspectives were commonlyamong many of the tests. Although technologyand methods of delivery were different, all werefocused on the same basic mission of providingpre-trip traveler information to individual users. • State and local transportation and planning

agencies in certain areas were anxious toexplore the concept of providing travelerinformation.



• All six pre-trip projects were under theoversight of state transportation agencies;two under the auspices of the Mn/DOT, twounder the CalTrans, one under WSDOT andone under the GDOT.

• The tests were managed by public agencies,but they existed under written partnershipagreements with private firms.

• Under the test arrangements, the bulk ofexpenditures were borne by public agencyfunds (federal, state and local). A smalleramount came from the private firms. Non-public entities contributed a set amount of“in-kind” funding not based on cash outlays,but was considered a contribution to projectcosts. In some cases, private firms donatedor allowed their systems to be used on atemporary basis, or donated staff labor.

• The private sector partners were generally

involved to get a better idea of the marketpotential for traveler information. They alsowanted to establish stronger businessrelationships with the DOTs and to enhancetheir experience base in ITS. Theresponsibility of the private sector entitieswas to develop, field, and test the systems,while assessing the potential value andbenefits of these systems from both a publicand private viewpoint. The public sectorwas interested in feasible benefits to thetransportation network.

• The private sector perspectives were oftennot clear to the public sector, and few of theprivate sector participants had any realexperience understanding the public sector’sroles. Differing approaches had as much, oreven more influence on the course of theprojects as other factors such as technicaldevelopment or feedback from system users.Issues arose over written agreements,enforcement, roles and responsibilities, anddeliverables that delayed development and

test schedules. Successful public-privatepartnerships must address issues incontracting terms and conditions;enforcement of agreements with partners;proprietary nature of data; and expectationsfrom the arrangement.

• The FHWA perspective focused onsponsorship, program, and evaluationsupport in accordance with the ITS programand Federal Transportation legislation.FHWA provided up to 80 percent of thefunding and the balance was provided bystate agencies and other project partners.

Genesis was one of the first tests to experimentwith public-private partnerships. An earlylesson learned with this test was that theviability of the partners needs to be determinedin advance. For example, a supplier of the earlyPDAs proposed for the project becameinsolvent, which caused problems for thedevelopment contractor. Travlink’s interviews revealed positive andnegative impacts of using a partnership approachcompared to tradit ional contractingarrangements. The positive benefits included: • Creativity and flexibility

• The ability to share information andresources

• The ability to share risks

• The ability to test leading-edge technology

• The funding potential associated withprivate sector contributions

Negative impacts included: • The inability to control the private vendors

and enforce their end of the agreement

• The lack of profit for private vendors



• The difficulties associated with team

decision making • The length of time involved in developing

and executing the agreements. SWIFT also experienced hurdles with regards topublic-private partnerships and conflicting goals,expectations and perceptions. Other issues thatimpeded the SWIFT project included patents,copyrights, roles, and responsibilities.

TravInfo’s experience lends itself to a variety ofpublic-private partnership discussions. TravInfopromoted wide participation, but also created alayered management structure that has, at times,made progress laborious. The project reliesheavily on a cooperative and non-adversarialworking culture, which is noteworthy given thesize and scope of the project and the level ofpublic-private participation.

Specifically, in addition to the projectmanagement, TravInfo was influenced by aManagement Board (public representation only),a Steering Committee (public and privaterepresentation), and an Advisory Committee(public and private representation). TheIndependent Evaluator’s opinion is that thisorganization is effective; however questionshave been raised regarding the authorityboundaries of the Management Board and theSteering Committee. For Travlink, administrative stumbling blocksincluded turnover of key staff in the middle ofthe project, internal staff resource problems,buy-in from senior level management, as well asthe structure of project management. Often thecollective decision-making process requiredexcessive time to execute agreements.

General recommendations based on the TravTekevaluation lessons learned included a selectionof sufficient and quality leadership, not only inidentifying a program manager, but also leaders

of technical and evaluation efforts and the onsitesystem manager in charge of 24-hour operations.They suggest that good leaders will seriouslyconsider the lessons learned by others andcapitalize upon them. Leadership helps theindividual partners focus on group objectivesand fosters a cooperative, team approach towardobtaining them.

The TravTek evaluation results also suggestedthat evaluation considerations should beincluded from the beginning of a system design.It strongly recommended that system designersand builders share a vision of what will maketheir system a success. Evaluation can be usedto enable the design team to think in terms ofmeasurable success criteria. Success criteriacould then be selected to include considerationof partner objectives, but also of the needs of theITS community for knowledge necessary tosuccessful deployment. Institutional issuesrecommendations drawn from the ADVANCEproject include providing the greatest effortpossible to make sure that key project leadersare retained from the point of project conceptionto completion; making the project manager’srole distinct and separate from those of theproject partners; and organizing administrative-type committees among the major parts that canhandle important non-engineering issues. COST TO IMPLEMENT

Since the FOTs began in 1991, new issues havecome into focus such as identifyingcommunications technologies and the feasibilityof ATIS. Funding outside of the FOTinitiatives, including the Federal ModelDeployment Initiative awards have promotedfurther development of ATIS systems and haveaddressed developing issues as well as newissues not currently addressed by FOTs. Theprivate sector has shown interest in developingbusiness models to use advance travelerinformation as part of several profit makingproducts and services.



The TravTek evaluation noted that the privatesector should anticipate the costs to maintainaccurate navigation databases and localjurisdictions must work together if informationinfrastructures that can support cross-jurisdictional traffic management initiatives areto succeed.

The need to collect public sector life cycle costshas been identified among all ATIS services. Ascommercial products begin to emerge, theprivate sector has been reluctant to discuss costs.

Participants who used the TravTek system saidthey would pay for it if it were available.Median estimates of willingness-to-pay for aTravTek-like system in a new car were about$1,000. This data becomes more meaningfulwhen it can be assessed with the currentproducts on the market that provide similarservices.

SUMMARY The following paragraphs summarize severallessons learned from the ATIS field tests. Theselessons may be considered by participants infuture deployment efforts.

• The pre-trip traveler information systemsprojects reviewed in this evaluation weresuccessful demonstrations of varioustechnologies and configurations oftechnologies that can be deployed to providepre-trip traveler information to largenumbers of users.

• Users generally reacted favorably to havingthe capability to receive accurate, real-timetraffic information before they began trips.Frequency of use will depend on thesystem’s portability, accuracy, timeliness,and daily cost. Increased public awarenessof these options will increase the number ofusers of available services and makeevaluation of these services more accurate.

• Pre-trip traveler information systems thathave been introduced in these projectsappear to perform well technically.However, pre-deployment developmentpractices (systems testing and integration)need to be more efficient to minimizetechnical risk in order to succeedcommercially.

• Each side of a public-private partnershipneeds to understand the principles and idealsthat govern the other. There is a need forteam-member consensus regardingdevelopment approach and the technicaltools to be used. An understanding of thefull range of technical obstacles, specificallyin regards to systems displays andintegration is vital.

• The appropriate role of public agencies inproviding traffic information for re-sale bycommercial interests is still withoutcomplete consensus. Lessons will be drawnas present business models mature, asfederal grant money ceases, and as futuremodels are proposed.

• Public-private partnerships can work butthey are difficult and costly to implement.Project management structure may be acontributing factor since it influences thequality and timeliness of most decisions.

• ITS system tests and current deploymentsprovide new models of intra-agencyworking relationships, and innovative waysof doing business with commercial firms.

• Market research, user-system prototypingand user training should be included in ITSprojects to ensure the systems are wellreceived.



• Communication between designers,developers and integrators is essential as iscommunication between partners bothpublic and private.

• En-route data has the potential to reduce theperceived barriers for customers or potentialcustomers to use public transit and to shiftSOV drivers to public transit or HOVs.

• ADVANCE and TravTek havedemonstrated the feasibility of in-vehicletraveler information. Turn-by-turn routeguidance with voice prompts ranked highestin user ease, popularity and safety over theother combinations of in-vehicle devicestested.

• Idaho Storm Warning System and Herald IIare continuing their work to alert drivers tosafe speeds in adverse conditions. Both theVMS and the AM subcarrier broadcast areproving to be successful media. DIRECTshould contribute significant evaluationresults later this spring.



BIBLIOGRAPHY

R. Koo, et. al, TravInfo Evaluation TravelerResponse Element: Phase 1 Results of the TargetStudy, December 1997

R. Koo, et. al, TravInfo Evaluation TravelerResponse Element: Phase 1 Results of the TargetStudy, December 1997

Booz •Allen & Hamilton, (for FHWA) GenesisField Operational Test Final Evaluation Report,September 1997

C. Thorton, for the Kiosk Project PartnersGeorgia’s ATIS Kiosk System (TravLink) UserAcceptance Test Report September 1997

B. Wetherby, “SWIFT Evaluation PreliminaryResults”, presentation, July 1997

The Trilogy Test Plans 1 & 3 Interim Report,March 1997

Argonne National Laboratory, et. al., (forFHWA) The ADVANCE Project: FormalEvaluation of the Targeted Deployment, Vol. 1-3, January 1997

P. Shannon, et. al, (for Idaho TransportationDept. and FHWA) Idaho Storm WarningSystems ITS Operational Test Phase I InterimReport January 1997

Volpe National Transportation Systems Center,(for US DOT) Intelligent TransportationSystems An Update of the Commercial ATISMarket, January 1997

Charles River Associates Inc., (for FHWA) UserAcceptance of ATIS Products and Services:What Do We Currently Know? Interim ReportOctober, 1996

R. Hall, et. al, TravInfo Evaluation InstitutionalElement Phase 2 Results, August 1996

V.W. Inman, J.I. Peters TravTek GlobalEvaluation and Executive Summary, March1996

Battelle, Atlanta Traveler Information ShowcaseFinal Report, 1996

C. Schweiger, (for Volpe NationalTransportation Systems Center) Review andAssessment of En-Route Transit InformationSystems April 1995

G. Euler and H. Robertson, National ITSProgram Plan Vol. I and II, March 1995

R. Hall, et. al, TravInfo Evaluation InstitutionalElement Phase 1 Results, February 1995

Castle Rock Consultants, (for MinnesotaGuidestar) An Assessment of Rural MinnesotaTravelers’ Needs, Final Report, April 1994

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. (for the MinnesotaDepartment of Transportation) TravlinkOperational Test Institutional Analysis

L. Anderson, Legal and Procurement Issues inForming Public-Private Partnerships inMinnesota, Minnesota Department ofTransportation, St. Paul, MN

To access an electronic version of this publicationand other ITS related publications visit the

ITS Electronic Document Library (EDL):http://www.its.fhwa.dot.gov/cyberdocs/welcome.htm

EDL Document Number 6323

Visit Our ITS WEB SiteITS Joint Program Office: http://www.its.dot.gov

Publication No. FHWA-JPO-99-038HVH-1/9-98

advanced traveler information systems - home | … words 18. distribution statement its impacts,...

Documents