In Reply Refer To: 

HOTM-1

Dear Colleague,

The Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Office of Planning, Environment, and Realty, 

Office of Operations, the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA) Office of Planning and 

Environment, along with professionals in the planning and operations communities nationwide, 

are pleased to present three significant new products that work together to advance an outcomesdriven, performance-based approach in the area of Planning for Operations. These three products, 

“Advancing Metropolitan Planning for Operations: An Objectives-Driven, Performance-Based 

Approach – A Guidebook,” “Advancing Metropolitan Planning for Operations: The Building 

Blocks of a Model Transportation Plan Incorporating Operations – A Desk Reference,” and 

“Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A 

Reference Manual” have been developed to act as a companion package of documents and reflect 

the strong continuing collaboration among FHWA, FTA, and professionals in the planning and 

operations communities nationwide. 

The Advancing Planning for Operations Guidebook provides an approach focused on 

operations outcomes that metropolitan area transportation planners and operators can utilize 

to advance performance-driven regional thinking for metropolitan areas. This Guidebook 

utilizes requirements for the Congestion Management Process (CMP) and Management and 

Operations that are contained in the Federal legislation, “Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient 

Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users” (SAFETEA-LU). 

The Model Transportation Plan Desk Reference is intended to be a “toolbox” document that 

provides to planners and operators types of possible operations objectives, with associated 

performance measures, data needs, and strategies, that a metropolitan area can utilize as a 

starting point towards advancing Planning for Operations in their area. In addition to providing 

types of operations objectives to advance, the document includes an illustrative plan to 

visually show “how the pieces fit together,” incorporating outcomes-driven operations into 

the metropolitan planning process. This document was developed in close collaboration with 

a number of metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) from across the country and it is 

intended to be an easily accessible reference document. 

The Statewide Opportunities Reference Manual is designed to assist managers and staff within 

State DOTs to integrate their functions and to partner with other agencies, such as metropolitan 

planning organizations (MPOs), transit agencies, and local jurisdictions to more effectively 

integrate operations, safety, and planning. Specifically, this manual is designed as a “how to” 

reference that provides practical information on implementing these opportunities, and case 
study examples with “toolkits” to help get started. This document also expands the focus of 

integration to include planning, operations, and safety in a multimodal context. This document 

was developed working closely with the support of a number of State DOT organizations, as well 

as AASHTO, to create a product that is intended to be a readily accessible resource document for 

promoting this Statewide collaboration.

Each of these three documents can be viewed electronically by visiting our U.S. DOT website on 

Planning for Operations at “http://www.plan4operations.dot.gov.” On this website one can also 

find additional associated resources for advancing an outcomes-driven, performance-based approach as part of the Planning for Operations program. 

We look forward to receiving your feedback, reactions, and experiences in implementing this 

concept and utilizing these resources. Please direct any comments, questions, and suggestions to 

any of the following members of our staff:

Richard E. Backlund at richard.backlund@dot.gov, 202-366-8333;

Egan Smith at egan.smith@dot.gov, 202-366-6072; or

John Sprowls at john.sprowls@dot.gov, 202-366-5362.

Sincerely yours,
Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) 

1. Report No. 

FHWA-HOP-10-028 

2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. 

4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date 

May 2010 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal 

Planning: A Reference Manual 6. Performing Organization 

Code 

7. Authors 

Michael Grant (ICF), Beverly Bowen (ICF), Keith Jasper (Delcan), Michelle 

Maggiore (Delcan), Elizabeth Wallis (ICF) 

8. Performing Organization 

Report No. 

 

9. Performing Organization Name and Address 

ICF International, Inc. 

9300 Lee Highway 

Fairfax, VA 22031 

Delcan, Inc. 

8618 Westwood Center Drive, Suite 450 

Vienna, VA 22182 

Under subcontract to AECOM Consult. 

10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) 

 

11. Contract or Grant No. 

DTFH61-04-D-00015 

12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 

United States Department of Transportation 

Federal Highway Administration 

1200 New Jersey Ave. SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

13. Type of Report and Period 

Covered 

14. Sponsoring Agency Code 

HEPP 

15. Supplementary Notes 

Mr. Egan Smith, Federal Highway Administration, COTM 

16. Abstract 

This publication is a reference manual designed to provide “how to” information to assist transportation 

professionals in taking actions to integrate these activities. It identifies and describes opportunities at various levels 

of decisionmaking – statewide, regional, corridor, and project – and the benefits of these approaches. It also 

highlights overarching themes such as the important role of multidisciplinary teams; data collection, sharing, and 

analysis; and broad use of performance measures within each of these levels.

17. Key Words 

Statewide transportation planning, integration, 

multimodal, management and operations, safety, rural 

planning, tribal planning, transit 

18. Distribution Statement 

No restrictions. This document is available to the 

public from the National Technical Information 

Service, Springfield, VA 22161. 

19. Security Classif. (of this 

report) 

Unclassified 

20. Security Classif. (of this page) 

Unclassified 

21. No. of Pages 22. Price 

N/A 

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

This document was developed with input from many individuals from State departments of transportation 

(DOTs) across the country, and active participation and support from the American Association of State 

Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). FHWA and FTA would specifically like to thank the 

following individuals for their contributions that helped to shape this reference manual: 

Al Arana, California DOT

Elizabeth Birriel, Florida DOT 

Katherine Boyd, Washington State DOT 

Mark Bush, AASHTO 

Mary Deitz, Maryland State Highway Administration

Michael Floberg, Kansas DOT

Barbara Fraser, Oregon DOT

Douglas Frate, South Carolina DOT

Susan Gorski, Michigan DOT

John Leonard, Utah DOT

Mena Lockwood, Virginia DOT

Amy Tang McElwain, Virginia DOT, Northern Region Operations 

Michelle Maggiore, AASHTO 

Michelle May, Ohio DOT 

Lori Morel, Texas DOT 

Eileen Ogan, Pennsylvania DOT

Pat Ott, New Jersey DOT

Peggy Reichert, Minnesota DOT 

Elizabeth Robbins, Washington State DOT

Jeff Roecker, Pennsylvania DOT

John Quatman, Pennsylvania DOT

Brian Smith, Washington State DOT 

David Wasserman, North Carolina DOT

Pippa Woods, New Jersey Transit 
Table of Contents 

Table of Contents 

Executive Summary _____________________________________________________________________ i

Section 1 Introduction ________________________________________________________________ 1

1.1 Purpose...................................................................................................................................................1

1.2 Why Integrate Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning? ...............................................................1

1.3 Getting Started – How to Use This Reference Manual...........................................................................5

Section 2 Creating an Environment for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning __ 9

2.1 Develop Multidisciplinary Teams/Initiatives ..........................................................................................10

2.2 Use an Objectives-Driven, Performance-Based Approach...................................................................13

2.3 Use A Strategic Business Plan To Focus on Integration of Operations, Safety, and Planning............16

2.4 Foster Multimodal Coordination ............................................................................................................19

2.5 Self-Assessment Checklist: Creating an Environment for Integration ..................................................21

Section 3 Statewide Level Opportunities ________________________________________________ 23

3.1 Develop Statewide Operations & Safety Goals and Objectives ...........................................................25

3.2 Develop Performance Measures and Targets in the SLRTP................................................................28

3.3 Collect Data and Monitor System Performance....................................................................................33

3.4 Develop Strategies and Programs to Support Established Goals and Objectives ...............................37

3.5 Take Full Advantage of the Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) ....................................................40

3.6 Develop Operations or Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) Plans .................................................43

3.7 Incorporate Operations and Safety into Multimodal Plans and Other Related Plans...........................47

3.8 Link Statewide Planning Efforts with Programming ..............................................................................50

3.9 Self-Assessment Checklist: Statewide Opportunities ...........................................................................52

Section 4 Regional Level Opportunities_________________________________________________ 53

4.1 Develop Regional Initiatives and Programs..........................................................................................54

4.2 Support Data Sharing and Analysis Tools for Use by MPOs................................................................57

4.3 Support Integration for Federal Lands, Native American Tribes, and Rural Areas ..............................60

4.4 Self-Assessment Checklist: Regional Opportunities.............................................................................62

Section 5 Corridor and Sub-Area Level Opportunities _____________________________________ 63

5.1 Utilize Operations/Safety Data and Tools with Corridor Studies ..........................................................64

5.2 Develop Operations and Safety Strategies within Corridor Plans ........................................................67

5.3 Develop Corridor System Management Plans......................................................................................70

5.4 Self-Assessment Checklist: Corridor and Sub-Area Opportunities.......................................................72

Section 6 Project Level Opportunities __________________________________________________ 73

6.1 Incorporate Operations and Safety into Project Planning.....................................................................74

6.2 Incorporate Operations- and Safety-Related Traffic Management / Transportation Demand 

Management Strategies during Project Construction ...........................................................................77

6.3 Self-Assessment Checklist: Project Opportunities................................................................................82

Appendix A: Relevant Plans for Identifying Opportunities for Integration _____________________ 83

Appendix B: Agency Self-Assessment Checklist _________________________________________ 85

Executive Summary 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual i

Executive Summary 

State departments of transportation (DOTs) face a wide range of challenges in their missions to provide safe 

and efficient transportation systems. In the United States, roadway fatalities and serious injuries – to vehicle 

occupants, bicyclists, and pedestrians – continue to be unacceptably high. Traffic congestion continues to 

challenge our Nation’s transportation system, resulting in billions of gallons of wasted fuel, hours of wasted 

time, and costs to the economy. Affordable and safe options for transit, bicycling, and walking are still limited 

in many communities, and the public wants transportation to support more livable, economically vibrant, and 

sustainable communities. While the needs for transportation investments to support all these goals are 

substantial, the reality is that funding for needed improvements is limited. Consequently, State DOTs are 

increasingly seeking innovative ways to get the most out of their investments. 

Although all parts of the DOT organization work in support 

of the agency mission and goals, the areas of planning, 

operations, and safety have all too often functioned 

separately, and the perspective of those who work in these 

areas can be quite different largely due to their day-to-day 

responsibilities. Multimodal planning must consider not only 

the existing needs of the system but also long-term 

forecasted needs for infrastructure investments. In contrast, 

system operation focuses primarily on the short-term 

response to system needs utilizing technology and staff 

solutions. Transportation safety focuses on reducing 

highway fatalities by making our roads safer through a datadriven, systematic approach and addressing all “4 E’s” of 

safety: engineering, education, enforcement, and emergency 

medical services. Each of these functions holds an essential 

role in meeting the larger agency mission. 

Integration of operations, safety, and multimodal 

transportation planning offers great potential for helping 

State DOTs stretch their limited dollars, maximize the value 

of their investments, and achieve positive outcomes for the 

transportation system. While new infrastructure takes a long 

time to plan and construct, operations strategies are often 

available in the near term to help address mobility needs at 

lower cost. Moreover, it is estimated that more than half of 

congestion experienced by travelers is caused by 

nonrecurring events, such as weather conditions (e.g., snow, 

ice, rain), work zones, special events, and major incidents 

and emergencies, that are not directly addressed through 

adding infrastructure capacity. 

This reference manual is designed to provide “how to” 

information to assist transportation professionals in taking 

action to integrate these activities. It identifies and describes 

opportunities at various levels of decisionmaking – statewide, 

regional, corridor, and project level – and the benefits of these approaches. It also highlights overarching 

themes such as the important role of multidisciplinary teams; data collection, sharing, and analysis; and broad 

use of performance measures within each of these levels. The term “operations” is applied differently across 

State DOTs: here it refers to an integrated program to optimize the performance of State roadways and transit 

systems by implementing projects and programs that will improve the throughput, as well as the security, safety 

and reliability of the transportation system. 

Win-Win Solutions 

Integrating operations, safety, and 

multimodal planning offers a win-win 

approach that maximizes cost-effective 

solutions for the transportation system: 

• Multidisciplinary teams help craft 

plans and programs that 

simultaneously improve safety and 

system operations while meeting 

community, environmental, and 

economic goals. 

• Sharing operations and safety data 

helps planners pinpoint locations for 

the investments that get the biggest 

bang for the buck. Data from 

Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) 

and crash reporting, for instance, can 

be used to better understand the 

sources of congestion and focus on the 

most cost-effective investments. 

• Collaboration is multimodal, 

accounting for a full range of 

technology and capital investments. 

For instance, bus transit signal priority 

and “next bus” information can be 

integrated into corridor improvements. 

ITS components can be integrated into 

road and transit investments, helping 

to provide more effective traveler 

information and improved incident 

detection and response. 
Executive Summary 

 ii Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Organizing Structure 

A structured approach is present throughout the reference manual to allow users to easily navigate this 

information and find what is most appropriate for their needs. Section 1 (Introduction) introduces the 

underlying importance of integration for each functional area and organization of the reference manual. Each 

of the subsequent sections contains information on specific opportunities, arranged in the following format. 

 Opportunity fact sheets: Describe the individual opportunities along with associated challenges, benefits, 

and who is involved, and recommended steps to implement. 

 Relevant case studies: Illustrate how some DOTs have approached integration, and include contact 

information for further support. 

 Toolkits: Provide useful takeaway information that may be a helpful starting point for practitioners in 

implementing an associated opportunity. 

 Self-assessment checklist: Helps identify where the agency may have current practices in place to 

support integration, and where more focus may be needed. 

It is important to remember that these opportunities or steps are often not independent of each other. Instead, 

opportunities often build upon one another and link together. Users should explore the entire manual to 

identify connections and relationships as well as take advantage of what they are already doing. Selfassessments may be useful to consider early in the process or to assess achievement over time. This feature 

supports a “gap analysis” that may quickly guide the user to the greatest need. The toolkits contain references 

to other supporting information outside of the reference manual itself. 

Top-Down and Bottom-Up 

Integration of operations, safety, and multimodal planning within a State DOT requires leadership from 

executives and managers. However, integration does not necessarily require large-scale change within the 

organization. Efforts to coordinate among functional areas can be undertaken by individuals at all levels within 

the organization. 

Role of Leadership – At the executive level, even a simple statement of intent provides support for efforts 

to break down silos. Setting policies and strategies toward implementation through agency-wide plans will 

move the agency further along this path. Ultimately, an environment within the agency that supports 

enhanced cross-functional collaboration in conjunction with policy statements provides the most sustained 

support for this intent. The presence of a champion to encourage others toward implementing a new policy 

or action is strongly supportive. 

Staff Level Actions – At the same time, staff working within the agency are critical to fully implement and sustain 

an integrated approach. In many cases, staff with a strong sense of the potential benefits can propel the concept 

forward. The case studies included in the manual in many instances began with actions at the staff or supervisor 

level. Staff within State DOTs can also use the reference manual to provide recommendations to managers. 

Opportunities Across Multiple Levels of Decisionmaking 

To provide a user-friendly reference, this document is divided into sections that enable users – from 

operations, safety, and planning functional areas – to go directly to appropriate sections based on the focus of 

their efforts at different levels of decisionmaking. 

Section 2 (Creating an Environment for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning) of 

the reference manual focuses on business processes, institutional issues, and human resource considerations 

that can support agency-wide change led at the executive level. It also is a useful starting point for readers who 

wish to gain a high-level appreciation of opportunities before reading other sections of this document. The 

opportunities described in section 2 are cross-cutting in supporting integration at the statewide, corridor and 

sub-area, regional, and project levels. 

Section 3 (Statewide Level Opportunities) supports integrating operations, safety, and multimodal planning 

at the statewide level and may enhance integration at other levels. The statewide level provides an opportunity 

to establish goals, objectives, and strategies that support the larger agency mission. Required planning 

documents can form the basis for programming and demonstrate accountability by setting performance 

measures. Opportunities for integration can occur by developing links between safety-focused efforts (such as 
Executive Summary 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual iii

the Strategic Highway Safety Plan), operations-focused efforts (such as operations or ITS plans), and other 

multimodal transportation planning efforts with the State Long Range Transportation Plan. This is particularly 

true when interdisciplinary teams, performance measures, and data collection and analysis methods are brought 

into these efforts. 

Section 4 (Regional Level Opportunities) focuses on interaction between the State DOT – often at a 

regional or district-level office – to address operations, safety, and planning in coordination with Metropolitan 

Planning Organizations (MPOs), rural planning organizations, Federal lands agencies, tribal governments, 

transit agencies, and other partners. Data sharing and analysis tools provide key opportunities for advancing 

integration at this level. 

Section 5 (Corridor and Sub-Area Level Opportunities) considers integration at the corridor and sub-area 

level both within planning studies and corridor system management and operations activities. Best practices 

that have developed within this planning level tend to be highly inclusive of many partners and stakeholders as 

well as consider a wide range of potential solutions. Key opportunities at this level include use of 

operations/safety data and tools in planning studies and multidisciplinary teams to develop solutions that 

include operations and safety strategies. Corridor System Management Plans directly tie together operations, 

safety, and planning through coordinated system monitoring and evaluation, demand management, traveler 

information, operational improvements, and planning for needed capacity enhancements.

Section 6 (Project Level Opportunities) considers integration at the project level, where representatives of 

each function commonly interact. Within project development are opportunities to effectively address 

operations, safety, and multimodal planning needs. Strategies can also be developed to address traffic 

management and system performance issues during project construction. 

Conclusion 

Integrating operations, safety, and multimodal planning within a State DOT is a way to increase both efficiency 

and effectiveness of transportation decisionmaking. This reference manual is designed to support transportation 

professionals toward integrating their functions and partnering with other agencies, such as MPOs, transit 

agencies, and local jurisdictions, resulting in a safer, more reliable, multimodal transportation system. 
Executive Summary 

 iv Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual
Section 1: Introduction 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 1

Section 1

Introduction

1.1 Purpose 

Transportation agency missions are changing and expanding to meet new needs and new requirements; 

however, reduction of congestion and safe operation of the system remain the highest priorities. As congestion 

becomes more widespread and places more demand on the transportation system, funding for needed 

transportation improvements is increasingly insufficient to meet all identified needs. To address this dynamic, 

State departments of transportation (DOTs) are seeking innovative ways to make the most of investments in 

the transportation system. 

The DOT is often one of the largest public agencies in a State, with hundreds of employees supporting both 

short- and long-term needs of the traveling public and movement of freight. Each part of the agency has a 

different role in support of this mission; however, the direct responsibility to address system capacity, mobility, 

access, and safety lies with multimodal planning, system operations, and safety. Because the agencies are so 

large and complex, staff in each of these functional areas is often not aware of the plans and actions of the 

other parts of the organization. In some cases this lack of integration may lead to inefficiencies and duplication 

of effort, or may even involve working at cross purposes. In either instance, the agency is not taking advantage 

of opportunities to increase both efficiency and effectiveness in decisionmaking. 

This reference manual on Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning is intended 

to assist managers and staff at State DOTs in their efforts to more effectively integrate operations, safety, and 

planning. The manual builds on a previous Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) document, Statewide 

Opportunities for Linking Planning and Operations: A Primer. While the primer identifies broad opportunities for 

State DOTs to integrate planning and operations, the reference manual extends this information to provide 

practical instruction on how to implement these opportunities and others along with case study examples and 

“toolkits” to help get started. The reference manual also expands the focus of integration to include operations, 

safety, and planning in a multimodal context. 

1.2 Why Integrate Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning? 

Highway fatalities and serious injuries are at unacceptably high levels in the United States. Although great 

strides have been made in improving highway safety, in 2008 there were 37,261 roadway fatalities in the United 

States, including vehicle occupants, bicyclists, and pedestrians.1 Traffic congestion continues to challenge our 

Nation’s transportation system. It is estimated that traffic congestion costs the Nation 2.8 billion gallons in 

wasted fuel and 4.2 billion hours of wasted time per year.2 While communities are increasingly focusing on 

quality of life and livability, affordable and safe options for transit, bicycling, and walking are still limited in 

many places. 

Integration of operations, safety, and multimodal transportation planning offers great potential for helping 

State DOTs stretch their limited dollars, maximize their investments, and achieve positive outcomes for the 

transportation system. These benefits can be system-wide and enable more effective decisionmaking. 

 

1 FHWA, Office of Safety. Web site available at: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/. 

2 Texas Transportation Institute, 2009 Urban Mobility Report. Citing data for 2007. 
Section 1: Introduction 

 2 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Traditionally, transportation planning and programming have focused largely on increasing system capacity to 

meet travel demand. However, there is neither the funding available nor the widespread support needed to 

build all the lane-miles and transit infrastructure 

needed to accommodate demand. New infrastructure 

takes a long time to plan and construct and is often 

disruptive to communities. In addition, it is estimated 

that more than half of congestion experienced by 

travelers is caused by nonrecurring events, such as 

weather conditions, work zones, special events, and 

major incidents and emergencies that are not directly 

addressed by adding infrastructure capacity.3 With 

increased communication technologies, travelers have 

come to expect more choices for travel and better 

information with which to make those choices. 

Transportation system management and operations 

(M&O) strategies are designed to optimize the 

performance of the transportation system and 

provide a more immediate response to traveler needs 

than capacity projects. However, these strategies have 

not been routinely considered in system-wide 

improvements identified in transportation planning. 

In contrast, safety has always been a key 

consideration in transportation planning. 

Introduction of the Strategic Highway Safety Plan 

(SHSP) supports integration of safety more 

comprehensively in the planning process. When 

safety issues are considered in setting of goals and 

selecting plan scenarios, projects selected for 

programming in the State Transportation 

Improvement Program (STIP) are more likely to 

address safety needs. Safety enhancements that 

reduce crashes also address nonrecurring congestion, 

and therefore result in improved transportation 

system operations. Efforts to improve system 

operations, such as through better work zone 

management, weather information, and traveler 

information, can also improve safety by helping 

travelers avoid unexpected roadway and traffic 

conditions that can lead to crashes. 

When operations and safety issues and strategies are 

considered comprehensively along with capacity 

additions, the mobility, security, safety, and reliability 

of the multimodal transportation system can be 

enhanced more quickly and cost-effectively. 

Benefits to the individual functions are summarized 

in exhibit 1. 

 

3 FHWA. Traffic Congestion and Reliability: Linking Solutions to Problems. Estimates based on past and ongoing congestion research studies. 

Benefits of Operations and Safety Strategies

• Traffic signal optimization can decrease 

delay substantially (13–94%) while 

improving safety (by reducing speeding and 

red-light running), at a fraction of the cost of 

infrastructure capacity expansion. The Texas 

DOT’s Traffic Light Synchronization Program 

reduced delay by 25%, resulting in a 

benefit-to-cost ratio of 62:1. 

• Roundabouts are a strategy that can be 

used at unsignalized intersections that are 

experiencing high rates of right-angle, rearend, and turning crashes. They can decrease 

fatalities at an intersection by 90%, reduce 

injuries by 76%, and reduce all crashes by 

35%. They also help to improve traffic flow.

• Traffic incident management can decrease 

incident duration by 30–40%. Combined 

traveler information and incident 

management systems can increase peak 

period freeway speeds by 8–13%, reduce 

crash rates, and improve trip time reliability 

by 1–22%. 

• Road weather information systems can 

reduce traveler delay and lower crash rates 

by 7–83%. 

• Electronic Toll Collection (ETC) can yield 

substantial savings in travel time. A 10–30% 

participation rate in electronic toll collection 

yielded benefit-to-cost ratios from 2:1 to 3:1. 

• Managed lanes provide an option for more 

reliable travel and can significantly improve 

transit service speeds. Express lanes on I–95 in 

Miami resulted in express bus route travel times 

falling from 25 to 8 minutes on a 7.5-mile 

section, and a 30% increase in route ridership. 

• Transit signal priority (TSP) can yield a 2– 

18% saving in transit running time, and can 

reduce the number of buses needed in service. 

Sources: USDOT, Intelligent Transportation Systems Joint 

Program Office, Investment Opportunities for Managing Transportation 

Performance through Technology. January 2009. 

FTA, Miami Urban Partnership Agreement (UPA) Project: Phase 1A – 

Transit Evaluation Report, November 2009. Transit Cooperative 

Research Program Report 118: Bus Rapid Transit Practitioners 

Guide, 2007. 
Section 1: Introduction 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 3

Exhibit 1: Roles and Benefits of Integration to State DOT Operations, Safety, and Planning Functions 

Operations Safety Planning 

Roles 

“Operations” refers to those 

organizational areas responsible for 

transportation system M&O such as 

traffic engineering, ITS and work 

zone management. Operations staff 

focus on active management of the 

existing transportation system using 

real-time data, analysis, and 

monitoring of dynamic system 

performance. Operations activities 

focus on daily movement of vehicles 

through use of technology including 

incident management systems, ITS, 

and traveler information systems. 

Operations staff coordinate with law 

enforcement, toll authorities, transit 

agencies, and others to respond to 

incidents, weather conditions, and 

special events. 

Safety is the highest priority for a 

transportation system. The mission of 

safety personnel is to reduce highway 

fatalities by making roads safer 

through a data-driven, systematic 

approach and addressing all “4 E’s” of 

safety: engineering, education, 

enforcement, and emergency medical 

services. Increasing awareness of the 

need for roadway safety 

improvements is important for 

development of plans and programs 

that improve transportation safety. 

Safety staff strive to provide 

decisionmakers with important 

information, tools, and resources that 

will improve the safety roadways. 

Safety should be considered every 

time and at every stage of a project. 

Safety data is relied on by both 

planning and operations staff for their 

individual responsibilities. 

By Federal mandate, multimodal 

planning considers both the existing 

deficiencies of the system and the 

forecasted long-range (20-year) needs. 

Planners consider potential strategies 

in response to identified needs in order 

to select and prioritize improvement 

strategies and projects. State DOT 

planning staff often coordinate with 

MPOs, transit agencies, tribal 

governments, and local governments. 

These actions are incorporated into 

multiple planning documents: 

 Statewide Long-Range 

Transportation Plan (SLRTP); 

 Statewide Transportation 

Improvement Program (STIP); 

 Modal plans and other statewide 

plans and studies including transit 

plans, freight plans, and other 

plans; and 

 Corridor and sub-area plans. 

Benefits of Integration

 Improve understanding of the 

long-range planning process and 

programming in support of 

operations activities. 

 Identify how operations activities 

fit into the context of statewide 

priorities and goals. 

 Provide a systems-level structure 

that helps prioritize individual 

operations goals and projects. 

 Direct attention to the value of 

operations efforts in meeting both 

short-term and long-term goals. 

 Include operations considerations 

in project planning and design in 

order to leverage scarce project 

funding to meet operational needs. 

 Build safety considerations into 

system planning efforts to ensure 

safety goals, objectives, and strategies 

from the SHSP are integrated into 

statewide planning efforts. 

 Build safety considerations into 

system operations activities, such as 

through traffic, work zone, and 

incident management. 

 Ensure that statewide investment 

priorities are aligned with safety and 

operations goals for the system. 

 Provide access to detailed systemwide travel data to better 

characterize existing system 

performance and travel conditions, 

as well as to identify the most 

critical transportation needs in 

order to prioritize funding. 

 Support better analysis of issues 

such as reliability, security, and 

safety that are difficult to analyze 

with traditional planning methods. 

 Provide a greater understanding of 

ways that operations and safety 

strategies can address 

transportation needs and identify 

the most effective strategies for 

achieving intended outcomes. 
Section 1: Introduction 

 4 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Benefits for System Users

Ultimately, greater integration of operations, safety, and planning provides direct benefits to users of the 

transportation system, including the traveling public and freight shippers. Rather than having uncoordinated 

safety programs, operations programs, and multimodal investment plans, an integrated approach yields 

investments and strategies that simultaneously result in safety benefits, improve system operation, and enhance 

traveler choices. When integration is effective, it results in transportation system improvements that may be 

implemented more quickly using available funding to meet multiple needs. 

Transportation infrastructure investments will build in operations components, such as ramp metering, transit 

signal priority, and technology to monitor real-time traffic flow, as well as safety enhancements addressing 

issues such as intersection safety and pedestrian and bicyclist safety. Operations and safety programs will 

reduce crashes and improve incident response time, resulting in fewer injuries and reduced traveler uncertainty 

and delay, while also accounting for multimodal planning considerations, such as nonmotorized access, transit 

access, and community livability. 

Outcomes for system users include: 

 Fewer crashes, injuries, and fatalities on the transportation network; 

 Improved transportation system reliability and reduced traveler delay; and 

 More multimodal options, enhanced mobility, support for economic vitality, preservation and protection of 

the environment, and other benefits to communities. 

Challenges of Integration

While there are many benefits to integration, State DOTs also face several key challenges. 

 State DOT long-range planning has traditionally been concerned with identification of needed 

infrastructure, and less frequently incorporates consideration of operational improvements. The 

SLRTP may recognize the importance of system operations and safety as goals for the transportation 

system; however, this is typically at the policy level and may not be tied to specific investment decisions. 

State DOTs may not have a systematic process for prioritizing investments in operations, safety, and 

infrastructure projects. Decisions may be based on data and fiscal analyses to focus on achieving 

performance objectives. There has generally been a lack of tools and performance measures to enable 

consideration of traffic and transit operations strategies alongside more conventional highway 

infrastructure investments. 

 DOT programming within the STIP relies on funding programs that often apply to very specific 

types of improvements. These programs are most commonly directed to the addition of infrastructure 

rather than operational improvements. The narrow definitions of these programs may inhibit the ability to 

integrate funding across the functional areas. 

 When operations or safety work is performed, it is often targeted to specific locations, without a 

systems perspective or incorporation of long-term system-wide planning goals and objectives.

Traditionally, operations and safety efforts have focused on specific problem points rather than on 

developing long-term and system-wide goals, objectives, and strategies. The division of operational and 

safety responsibilities within various parts of the State DOT, county and local transportation agencies, and 

nontransportation agencies (e.g., law enforcement) can inhibit consensus on a long-term direction. The 

Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) 

requirement to develop an SHSP creates a new framework for advancing all of the State’s safety activities 

in a coordinated manner, consistent with the overall SLRTP goals. However, there is no legislative mandate 

for a similar system-wide plan for operations. 

 Large agencies often have difficulty making connections across different functional areas. This 

may be due to dispersed staff locations or a strong focus on meeting individual missions without the 

opportunity for regular collaboration. Moreover, some State DOTs are decentralized, making it difficult to 

tie together operations, safety, and planning efforts. 

 Daily job requirements provide a different perspective for each of the functional areas. While 

planners typically focus on the long-range future of the transportation system, operations and safety staff 
Section 1: Introduction 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 5

focus on the more immediate needs. These different outlooks create challenges in getting operators and 

safety experts involved in long-range planning. 

 Planning and safety have dedicated funding resources to draw on. The operations function within 

the State DOT is funded from many different resources without ongoing consistency. This situation makes 

it difficult for operations staff to work outside the primary mission in order to collaborate across functions. 

Efforts to integrate operations, safety, and planning should recognize these challenges and consider ways to 

overcome them. There is no simple “fix”; however, there are a range of opportunities that can be explored. 

Opportunities to Advance Integration 

Integration of operations, safety, and multimodal planning within a State DOT requires leadership from 

executives and managers to foster an environment within the organization that supports greater integration. 

However, it also requires participation among staff at all levels within the organization. 

Management and Political Support – Having high-level management and elected official support is 

important to create an environment for advancing integration efforts. At the executive level, even a simple 

statement of intent provides support for advancing integration. Setting policies and strategies toward 

implementation through agency-wide plans will move the agency further along this path. Experience suggests 

that having a champion at a high level in the agency and decisionmaker support is often critical. 

Staff Level Actions – At the same time, all members of the DOT play an important role in the success of any 

management-initiated effort. Staff-level employees often play a key role in advancing efforts to foster 

collaboration among functional areas through informal or formal relationships. In many cases, staff with a 

strong sense of the potential benefits can propel the concept forward. 

Overarching themes include the important role of the following elements: 

 Building relationships / developing integrated teams – Effective integration stems from building 

relationships among the functional areas within a State DOT, as well as between the DOT and MPOs, 

transit agencies, local transportation agencies, toll authorities, and law enforcement. Many of the 

opportunities described in this manual demonstrate ways in which relationships are developed. Developing 

integrated teams that include operations, safety, and planning staff often is a critical component of 

developing goals, objectives, and performance measures that support investment decisionmaking. 

 Data collection and sharing – A large amount of data on traffic and transit conditions are collected and 

used by operations staff and safety specialists. Data presents an important opportunity for planners to better 

understand travel-time reliability and other operations and safety performance issues in order to develop 

more effective solutions. Many of the opportunities described in this reference manual rely on data sharing. 

 Use of performance measures and analysis tools – Performance measures addressing reliability, 

nonrecurring congestion, incidents, crashes, and other operational and safety issues help to draw attention 

to operational strategies for improvement. As noted throughout this manual, performance measures can be 

applied at all levels to identify system deficiencies. Performance measures also can be used to support 

tracking progress over time and can enable planners to compare and prioritize investment strategies in 

order to communicate the benefits to decisionmakers. 

 Linking planning and programming – Integrating planning, operations, and safety will not yield 

measurable benefits unless planning and programming are closely linked. Funded projects and programs need 

to support the agency goals and performance objectives as identified in planning documents. Consequently, 

the programming and budgeting processes are critical elements for attaining the benefits of integration. 

1.3 Getting Started – How to Use This Reference Manual 

Select the Appropriate Sections Based on Your Role in the Agency 

In this reference manual, opportunities for integration are organized into sections according to the levels at 

which specific opportunities for integration can be realized: statewide, corridor, regional, and project levels. 

This structure will help practitioners identify specific sections of the document that correspond to their roles 

and responsibilities: 
Section 1: Introduction 

 6 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

 Section 2. Creating an Environment for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning 

reviews broad-level opportunities for integration that exist within State DOTs at all levels. These 

opportunities involve fostering practices that advance integration across the DOT and are cross-cutting in 

supporting integration at the other levels. This section will be particularly helpful for senior and mid-level 

management, as it focuses on business processes, institutional issues, and human resource considerations. 

It also is a useful starting point for readers who wish to gain a high level of appreciation of opportunities 

before reading other sections of this document. 

 Section 3. Statewide Opportunities focuses on integration opportunities and challenges that exist at the 

statewide level, applying a statewide perspective of safety and operations that can be incorporated into 

planning and programming. This section addresses the SLRTP, other statewide plans, STIP, and the 

linkages between these documents and efforts. It should be noted that many of the statewide opportunities 

and activities will influence opportunities at other levels, as the SLRTP and other statewide planning efforts 

form the basis for corridor, regional, and project-level efforts. 

 Section 4. Regional Level Opportunities highlights opportunities such as initiatives within DOT 

regional or district offices that bring together planners, operators, and safety personnel for data sharing and 

consideration of operational strategies with MPOs, rural areas, tribal governments, and Federal lands. 

 Section 5. Corridor and Sub-Area Level Opportunities discusses opportunities and challenges 

surrounding integrating safety and operations into corridor and sub-area planning activities and in corridor 

system management and operations. 

 Section 6. Project Level Opportunities discusses opportunities that may arise when integrating 

operations, safety, and planning considerations at the project level within project development and design, 

as well as traffic management and demand management strategies incorporated into project construction. 

Review Specific Opportunities for Integration 

Within each section, specific opportunities or steps for integration are identified and described. It should be 

noted that these opportunities or steps are often not independent of each other. They often build on other 

opportunities and link together. Therefore, while the user may scan this reference manual to identify different 

opportunities, it is recommended that consideration be given to information about the various 

opportunities within a specific level – and across levels – to see the connections.

Each opportunity is explained in three parts: 

A “fact sheet” that includes the following information: 

 Brief description of the opportunity or linkage between operations, safety, and planning; 

 Associated benefits and challenges; 

 Who is involved; and 

 Recommended implementation actions. 

It should be noted that because steps will vary from one State DOT to another, this information is intended to 

provide some direction on how to implement the opportunity, but is not intended to be prescriptive or imply 

that every State should follow the same procedures. Since the various opportunities are often inter-related or 

linked, these steps often refer to or repeat steps that may be identified under other opportunities. 

Following the summary description are case study examples of State DOTs that have either begun 

implementing or have successfully realized the opportunity. These case study examples are intended to provide 

more detail on how to implement the opportunity listed, along with sources for additional information. 

To provide practitioners with useful takeaway information, “toolkits” have been included following many of 

the opportunities. The toolkits are designed to provide users with helpful information on beginning to 

implement integration efforts. The toolkits are not comprehensive but should help users develop ideas 

regarding implementation. Available and pertinent references to resources also are included. 
Section 1: Introduction 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 7

A Quick Reference for Getting Started

1. Select Appropriate Sections – Based on your role 

within the State DOT, identify the most 

appropriate sections of the document for review. 

2. Review Specific Opportunities – Start by 

reading the section introductions and selfassessment checklists; these may help provide 

direction to specific opportunities. For each 

opportunity, read the fact sheets and 

corresponding information to determine what 

opportunities offer the most potential for your 

specific responsibilities. 

3. Consider How these Opportunities Can Be 

Fostered – Use the self-assessments to assess 

current activities and areas of potential increased 

integration. Review toolkits, resources, and case 

studies to identify what is most applicable. 

4. Share the Information – Share information with 

appropriate management and other staff to create 

buy-in to the concept. Refer to the “Benefits” and 

“Challenges” noted for each opportunity. 

5. Implement – Meet with appropriate management 

and other staff to develop a working group to 

explore specific opportunities, or to build these 

practices into ongoing or upcoming efforts (e.g., 

development of statewide plans, corridor plans, 

ITS program plans, SHSPs, etc.). Refer to the 

information in “Who Is Involved” and 

“Recommended Implementation Steps.” 

“Self-assessment checklists” are provided at 

the end of all sections. The self-assessments are 

designed to help the reader assess progress in 

integrating operations, safety, and planning. A 

self-assessment can be used in the following way: 

 After reading the section content – To 

evaluate the user’s agency success in 

achieving integration in the opportunities 

outlined within the section’s fact sheets. 

 Prior to reading the section content – 

Based on a user’s response to the questions 

asked, the self-assessment can serve as a 

roadmap to direct the user to those 

opportunities that are most relevant to 

promoting integration efforts within his or 

her agency. 

In addition, Appendix A lists relevant plans in 

which integration efforts can be incorporated to 

encourage cross-over efforts between different 

parts of the agency. Appendix B provides a 

compilation of all the self-assessment checklists 

from each section, and may be a helpful starting 

point for some users. 
Section 1: Introduction 

 8 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual
Section 2: Creating an Environment for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 9

Section 2 

Creating an Environment for Integrating Operations, 

Safety, and Multimodal Planning

Section 2 focuses on integration opportunities at an agency-wide level, rather than on specific transportation 

plans or geographic areas within a State. It is unrealistic to expect that these opportunities can be implemented 

without support of high-level DOT management. As a result, this section is primarily targeted at senior and 

mid-level management within an agency. The motivation for these approaches must be sufficient to initiate the 

implementation actions required. In addition, these opportunities will require a greater long-term commitment 

on the part of the agency, as well as a degree of change management that is not necessary in many other 

opportunities identified in the reference manual. 

The existence of a champion within the agency to facilitate the integration of planning, operations, and safety 

can provide strong support for approaches that involve institutional change. Individuals within the organization 

who have adopted practices in support of integration can be enlisted as advocates or resources. Because these 

opportunities may reflect significant change within the agency, to be successful the approaches will require buyin at all levels of staff. The self-assessment provided at the end of section 2 may be useful at the outset to 

evaluate the existing climate within the agency with regard to significant change. In some cases it would be 

feasible for lower-level staff within the agency to create less formal working arrangements that meet some of 

the integration opportunities. Staff may also consider approaching their supervisors and others with ideas and 

recommendations to formalize integration working arrangements into standard operating practices. 

The opportunities described in this section may be viewed as overarching or cross-cutting themes that are 

important within an organization and affect decisions that are made at multiple levels. These opportunities have 

the potential to provide an agency-wide culture of integration that in turn will facilitate the likelihood of 

integration in specific activities within each of the levels described in the other sections of this document – 

statewide, regional, corridor and sub-area, and project. 

Section Content 

This section describes four overarching opportunities: 

 Develop Multidisciplinary Teams/Initiatives 

 Use an Objectives-Driven, Performance-Based Approach 

 Use a Strategic Business Plan to Focus on Integration of Operations, Safety, and Planning 

 Foster Multimodal Coordination 

Collaboration across functional areas is essential to moving beyond handoffs of data and information to the 

integration of goals and objectives as well as strategies and programs. The first two opportunities in particular 

reflect themes that recur frequently in opportunities described in subsequent sections of this document. 

Establishing multidisciplinary teams and a performance-based approach to planning at all levels will result in 

the setting of realistic and measurable objectives as well as improved and focused data collection. The second 

two opportunities relate to the DOT’s strategic focus and structure. In all cases, if these themes are pervasive 

within the agency, it will benefit decisionmaking at all levels. 
Section 2: Creating an Environment for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning

 10 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Develop Multidisciplinary Teams / Initiatives 

Description The use of multidisciplinary teams is intended to provide an understanding of multiple 

perspectives and achieve consensus on approaches and solutions. Team members can 

extend beyond the State DOT headquarters planning, safety, and operations offices to 

include regional offices, transit agencies, MPOs, and local transportation agencies, as well 

as State and local law enforcement officials, freight shippers, and other stakeholders. 

Multidisciplinary teams can be utilized to advance integrated approaches at various levels 

and are identified throughout the other sections of the document as an implementation 

step. There will be a need to ensure inclusiveness of ideas and a willingness to understand 

different perspectives. Multidisciplinary teams require a sense of trust among team 

members in order to work together effectively and achieve desired outcomes, as well as a 

strong sense of support from agency management. Management may formalize the 

multidisciplinary teams in a working group or other structure, or it is possible for teams 

to function on a more informal basis through initiation at the staff level. 

Examples of multidisciplinary teams include working groups that may be established to 

develop the SLRTP, SHSP, corridor planning studies, performance measures initiatives, or 

integrated operations and safety programs. 

Benefits  Brings in different perspectives and can help build off the expertise of different staff. 

 Can yield more efficient and effective use of resources. 

Challenges  A commitment to the process from top agency officials is required since it may 

require staff to go outside their standard job responsibilities. 

 Since personnel may change over time, there may be a need to develop a formal 

process, team, or working group to sustain communication and collaboration. 

 Startup activities may be needed to build understanding of different roles and 

responsibilities among team members. 

 Relevant staff may be in different locations, which may make it difficult to collaborate. 

Who Is 

Involved 

The composition of multidisciplinary teams will depend on the particular initiative that 

is being undertaken. For instance, development of the SLRTP will involve staff and 

stakeholders who bring a statewide perspective regarding safety, operations, and 

planning, while project-level planning activities will involve a different set of staff 

involved in project planning, design, and operation. 

Recommended 

Implementation 

Steps 

1) Identify the purpose of the team or initiative; specifically, what it is setting out to 

accomplish. It is important to have clear goals so the team understands what it is 

intending to achieve. 

2) Identify who should be involved, from what disciplines and organizations, based on 

the purpose of the effort. 

3) Convene and maintain a multidisciplinary team of operations, safety, and planning 

staff. 

4) Develop formal processes as necessary to establish ground rules for participation. 

5) Develop a methodology to review the performance of the multidisciplinary team 

approach. 

6) Monitor progress and prepare periodic reports. 

2.1 
Section 2: Creating an Environment for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 11

Relevant Examples 

Examples of multidisciplinary teams are described throughout this document within the sections on statewide, 

regional, corridor and sub-area, and project level opportunities. The two examples below highlight initiatives 

that involve collaboration among operations, safety, and planning staff from State DOT headquarters and 

district offices along with local governments and other stakeholders. 

Florida DOT: Transportation System Management and Operation Program 

Florida DOT’s (FDOT) Transportation System Management and Operation (TSM&O) program is establishing 

partnerships among the FDOT district offices, county transportation agencies, transit agencies, MPOs, and 

FDOT planning and operations offices. The goal is to reduce congestion through real-time active management 

and operation of the State’s existing roadways. Its main components include performance measures, network 

composition, data collection and analysis associated with the performance measures, management/operation 

strategies, and resource planning. The program includes user-based performance measures, which reflect the 

priorities of the State roadways’ main user groups (commuters, freight/goods movers, etc.). These performance 

measures will be used to assess management effectiveness, return on investment, and the cost effectiveness of 

future investment. They will ultimately be applied over a well-defined transportation system network, including 

arterials, interstates, public transportation, and other components. 

Interagency partnering is highly critical to the success of TSM&O because transportation networks, and 

therefore the deployment of the TSM&O program, fall under the jurisdiction of various public and private 

entities with potentially different management priorities. Partnering efforts will include effective 

communication, coordination, and collaboration. FDOT is assisting partnership development efforts through a 

series of workshops where the major components of TSM&O will be explained in further detail. The first 

workshop was held in District Four and included representatives of the Broward County Traffic Engineering 

Division, Broward County Transit, Broward County MPO, FDOT planning offices, FDOT Office of Modal 

Development, and FDOT Traffic Operations. If successful, the resulting partnerships could ultimately lead to 

greater support for performance-driven management and increased interest in, and political support for, 

TSM&O strategies and investment. 

More information is available at Editorial Corner—A Change in the Way We Solve Urban Transportation Problems, 

http://www.dot.state.fl.us/trafficoperations/Newsletters/2008/08_2008/08_2008.shtm. Contact: Mark Plass, 

District 4 Traffic Operations Engineer, Mark.Plass@dot.state.fl.us, (954) 777-4399, or Melissa Ackert, TSM&O 

Program Manager, Melissa.Ackert@dot.state.fl.us, (954) 777-4156. 

Virginia DOT: Strategically Targeted Affordable Roadway Solutions 

Planners and engineers from the Virginia DOT (VDOT), various Virginia MPOs, the Governor’s Highway 

Safety Office, and local government officials joined together to form the innovative Strategically Targeted 

Affordable Roadway Solutions (STARS) program. Funding for the program comes from the Highway Safety 

Improvement Program (HSIP), in the form of either designated funds or in coordination with planned 

maintenance improvements. VDOT’s planning division initially began the STARS program as a way to 

eliminate bottlenecks. The program involves State and local transportation planners, traffic engineers, and 

operations staff who work together to identify “hot spot” areas along State roadways where safety and 

congestion issues overlap and where short-term operational improvements are feasible. Planners began by 

mapping the highest crash locations along State roadways together with those segments with low Level of 

Service (LOS). Potential problem areas were identified as those segments where the data overlapped. 

Planners create maps from the available data for each of VDOT’s five regions. Each region has a 

multidisciplinary team that is tasked with validating the data, conducting Road Safety Assessments, and 

suggesting feasible low-cost, high-benefit improvements that will target safety and congestion problems. The 

types of countermeasures considered include access management, reconfiguration/reconstruction of 

intersections (roundabouts, realignment, signaling), bicycle and pedestrian accommodations, installation of 

medians or shoulders, ITS, signage and road striping and turn lanes. These short-term safety and operational 

improvements are then applied to the corresponding roadway sections. A key component to the program is an 

innovative, Geographic Information System (GIS)–-based methodology that analyzes roadway locations within 

Virginia’s five Systems Operations Regions to identify and prioritize those areas where improvements in safety 

and congestion would be most effective. 
Section 2: Creating an Environment for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning

 12 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Sample improvements that have been made as a result of the STARS program include traffic signal 

modernization, construction and/or extension of turn lanes, extending acceleration or deceleration lanes on 

ramps, assisting with access management by consolidating entrances, closing crossovers, improving interparcel 

access, improving sight distance, reconfiguring or reconstructing intersections by installing roundabouts, 

realigning approaches, installing signal systems, installing shoulders or medians, and installing traffic control 

devices such as signs and pavement markings. 

The program’s final recommendations under Phase I for roadway improvements have been incorporated into 

the 2035 State Highway Plan, which was completed in early 2010. While that plan identifies long-term 

transportation improvements to Virginia’s Federal functional roadways, the STARS program focuses on 

Virginia’s interState and primary highway systems to identify short/mid-term operational and safety 

improvements that: 

 Are low cost (less than $5 million for interstates, $2 million for primaries); 

 Address identified severe crash hot spots and/or congestion problems; 

 Require minimal preliminary engineering and right-of-way; and 

 Can be implemented quickly (12–24 months). 

Phase 2 of the project will focus on reviewing the hot spots identified by the program and outlining 

countermeasure strategies that would be appropriate to implement. In Phase 3, staff will review the data and 

select those hot spots that will be focused on for improvements. 

More information is available at Spotlight: Virginia’s STARS Program,

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/newsletter/safetycompass/2008/sept08_v2/. Contact: Robin Grier, Assistant 

Division Administrator for Transportation and Mobility Planning for VDOT, Robin.Grier@vdot.virginia.gov, 

(804) 786-2964, or Mena Lockwood, ITS Development for Operations and Security Division, VDOT, 

Mena.Lockwood@vdot.virginia.gov, (804) 371-0849. 
Section 2: Creating an Environment for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 13

Use an Objectives-Driven, Performance-Based Approach 

Description An objectives-driven, performance-based approach to transportation planning and system 

operation provides a strong foundation for integration. A critical component of this 

approach is development of specific, measurable objectives for transportation system 

performance that inform investment decisions. These objectives may relate to mobility, 

reliability, safety, access, traveler information, incident management, transit operations, or 

other issues. Performance measures are used to measure progress in meeting objectives 

and help to: 

 Understand deficiencies in system performance; 

 Prioritize competing investments; 

 Demonstrate progress toward meeting objectives; and 

 Communicate among the DOT, policymakers, and the public. 

The objectives and performance measures established at the statewide level can help to 

inform objectives and performance measures used at lower levels. 

Benefits  The approach provides a more objective (rather than subjective) way to allocate 

resources and screen improvement strategies. 

 Through development of safety and operations objectives and performance 

measures, the approach helps to engage the operations and safety communities, as 

well as law enforcement, freight, and private sector, in transportation planning. 

 The result is a focus on both short-range and long-range needs related to the 

safety and operation of the transportation system. 

 Performance measures provide increased accountability with the public and 

stakeholders. 

Challenges  The wide range of transportation system operators, jurisdictions, and stakeholders 

involved can make it difficult to develop consensus on appropriate system-level 

performance objectives. 

 Data and analysis capability limitations may make it difficult to develop 

appropriate performance measures or use them for planning applications. 

Who Is 

Involved 

Development of objectives and selection of performance measures should be 

conducted in collaboration with DOT planners, operations, and safety specialists, as 

well as other stakeholders, such as transit agencies, MPOs, law enforcement 

agencies. Operations and safety staff can help identify data that can be used to 

support tracking performance measures. 

Recommended 

Implementation 

Steps 

1) Maintain or convene a multidisciplinary team of operations, safety, and planning 

staff for the planning effort (e.g., developing the SLRTP, modal plan, or 

operations plan). 

2) Develop objectives – specific, measurable statements of performance related to 

operations and safety – that will lead to accomplishing goals. 

3) Develop performance measures considering data availability and adequacy to 

monitor the measures. 

4) Using a systematic approach, analyze transportation performance issues and 

recommend strategies. 

5) Select strategies within available funding to meet objectives. 

6) Implement strategies, including program investments, collaborative activities, 

and projects. 

7) Monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of implemented strategies and track 

progress toward meeting objectives. 

2.2 
Section 2: Creating an Environment for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning

 14 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Relevant Examples 

Examples of objectives and performance measures are described throughout this document within the sections 

on statewide, regional, corridor and sub-area, and project level opportunities (particularly sections 3.1 to 3.4). 

The two examples below highlight performance measure frameworks that are being used across multiple levels 

within State DOTs. 

California DOT: Smart Mobility Framework 

California DOT (Caltrans) has developed the Smart Mobility Framework, which will serve as an implementation 

action plan for the current adopted 2030 California Transportation Plan. This planning framework will be used to 

assess plans, programs, and projects to evaluate their success in addressing challenges associated with mobility and 

sustainability in the Caltrans surface transportation system. The framework is comprised of a series of place types 

(e.g., urban centers, close-in compact communities, suburbs, rural towns) and performance measures that evaluate 

the success of strategies aimed at solving the identified mobility and sustainability challenges. 

The framework itself is concerned with six principles: location efficiency, reliable mobility, health and safety, 

environmental stewardship, social equity, and robust economy. These principles are integrated into policies, 

planning, and project development activities through place types and performance measures focused on 

achieving the following five objectives: 

1) Multimodal focus 

2) Speed suitability 

3) Activity connectedness 

4) Network management 

5) Land use efficiency 

The 17 measures associated with the principles and objectives above emphasize travel choices; healthy, livable 

communities; reliable travel times for people and freight; and safety for all users. Some of the smart mobility 

performance measures are listed below: 

Smart Mobility Performance Measures4

Smart Mobility Measure 

Health and Safety 

 Pedestrian and Bicycle Mode Share 

 Design and Speed Suitability 

 Multimodal Safety 

Reliable Mobility 

 Multimodal Travel Mobility 

 Multimodal Travel Reliability 

 Multimodal Service Quality 

Robust Economy 

 Congestion Effects on Productivity 

 Network Performance 

 Efficient Use of System Resources 

 Return on Investment 

Environmental Stewardship  Climate and Energy Conservation 

 Emissions Reduction 

Social Equity  Equitable Distribution of Impacts 

 Equitable Distribution of Benefits 

Location Efficiency

 Support for Sustainable Growth 

 Transit Mode Share 

 Accessibility and Connectivity 

 

4 “Smart Mobility 2010: A Call to Action for the New Decade” PowerPoint presentation to the Joint Project Management Team Technical Advisory Committee. November 19, 

2009. http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/ocp/smf.html. Accessed February 5, 2010. 
Section 2: Creating an Environment for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 15

An important component of the Smart Mobility Framework is its inclusion of multimodal considerations that 

emphasize evaluating the concerns of all transportations system users regardless of travel mode. The metrics 

used to evaluate multimodal considerations include the following: 

 Percentage of trips within a corridor or region occurring by bus, rail, or other form of high-occupancy 

vehicle 

 Accessibility and connectivity (e.g., number of households within a 30-minute transit ride of a major 

employment center, within walking distance of schools, etc.) 

 Travel times and costs by mode between representative origins and destinations, aggregated over corridor 

or region 

 Day-to-day variability of travel times between representative origins and destinations by mode, aggregated 

by region 

 Mode-specific and blended LOS measures of pedestrian and bicycle accommodation and comfort, transit 

availability and reliability, and auto travel efficiency 

 Collision rate and severity by travel mode and facility 

 Percentage of trips within a corridor or region occurring by walking or cycling 

 Comparative travel times and costs by income groups and by minority and nonminority groups for 

work/school and other trips 

 Time lost to congestion by trips that are economically productive and/or sustain essential mobility, 

measured as vehicle hours of delay (VHD) 

 VHD per capita, per lane-mile, per private vehicle-mile, per freight vehicle-mile, per transit revenue-mile, 

and in total 

More information is available at http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/ocp/smf.html. Contact: Chris 

Ratekin, Senior Transportation Planner, Chris_Ratekin@dot.ca.gov, (916) 653-4615. 

Florida DOT: Mobility Performance Measures Program 

FDOT developed a framework for performance measurement designed to characterize mobility in a manner 

understandable to the general public and decisionmakers. The performance measures describe the following 

dimensions of mobility: 

 Quantity of travel (reflects the magnitude of the use of a facility or service); 

 Quality of travel (describes travel conditions and the effects of congestion); 

 Accessibility of service (the ease with which customers can use the service and engage in their community’s 

activities); and 

 Utilization (the amount of the service’s capacity that is used). 

FDOT uses the mobility performance measures in three basic types of applications: functional systems (e.g., 

interstates), area-wide systems (facilities and services that are defined by geographical boundaries), and 

corridors. Examples of mobility “quality” measures for highway systems include average speed, average delay, 

average travel time (distance/speed), reliability (percentage of travel times that are acceptable), and 

maneuverability (vehicles per hour per lane); measures for metropolitan transit systems include auto/transit 

travel time ratio (door-to-door trip time) and reliability (on-time performance). Estimation of measures is based 

on data collected by local transit agencies, and in some cases (such as reliability) special data collection 

strategies, although FDOT is moving toward incorporating data collected through ITS. 

The performance measures are used in the Florida Transportation Plan as well as systems planning and 

metropolitan planning. 

More information is available at http://www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/statistics/mobilitymeasures/. Contact: 

Doug McLeod, FDOT Systems Planning Office, Douglas.McLeod@dot.state.fl.us, (850) 414-4932. 
Section 2: Creating an Environment for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning

 16 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Use a Strategic Business Plan to Focus on Integration of Operations, Safety, and Planning 

Description Many State DOTs have Strategic Business Plans.5 The content and format of a plan 

may vary depending on its purpose and audience. The audience could include State 

legislators, customers, and employees. Such plans typically State the organization’s 

vision, mission statement, goals, and objectives for a given period of time. The plan will 

likely include specific actions that will allow the agency to achieve each objective. The 

Strategic Business Plan offers the opportunity to encourage integration in several ways: 

 Integration can be defined as a vision for the agency, allowing goals and objectives 

to be defined to support that vision, as well as performance measures; 

 Goals and performance measures in the Strategic Business Plan can be tied to those 

in the SLRTP; 

 Action plans can be developed for individual departments that are consistent with the 

overall agency goals but tailored to suit each department’s functions; and 

 Action plans can be tied to employee performance reviews.

Given that many State DOTs already have Strategic Business Plans, enhanced 

collaboration could be a feature that is added during the established plan updating process.

Benefits  Helps create a consistent perspective of collaboration across agency functions and a 

focus on key objectives related to safety and/or operations. 

 Provides an effective way to engage and communicate with stakeholders and 

citizens on an agency’s commitment to collaboration. 

 Provides a basis to tie employee performance to collaboration. For instance, staff 

job descriptions and periodic employee performance reviews can reflect that 

collaborative practices are expected. 

Challenges  Requires top-level management support/champion to initiate, and plan needs to be 

tied to internal performance tracking. 

 Potential resistance to modified job descriptions and increased responsibilities 

and/or accountability. 

 Where a Strategic Business Plan does not currently exist, establishing a new plan 

will be necessary. 

Who Is 

Involved 

Top-level management support is needed to either modify an existing plan or initiate a 

new plan. The Human Resources (HR) department will need to update job descriptions 

of operations, safety, and planning staff, and possibly modify the performance review 

process to ensure linkage with collaboration. Management staff will likely lead the 

rollout and supervisory staff will need to be trained to ensure that affected staff 

understand the linkage between their responsibilities and the agency’s intent. 

Recommended 

Implementation 

Steps 

If a Strategic Business Plan already exists: 

1) Core team of operations, safety, and planning staff propose to senior management 

that plan be modified to embrace collaboration. 

2) Consider the linkage between established vision, goals, objectives, and employee 

job descriptions, as well as linkages with SLRTP goals and objectives, and identify 

the need for changes to any of the above. 

3) Develop modifications to the plan to embrace collaboration. 

4) Engage HR department and develop modified job descriptions. 

 

5 http://www.transportation.org/sites/quality/docs/AASHTO%20SCoQ%20Presentation%20052407%20Draft%20v10%20Present.ppt#358,1,So, What’s the Big Deal About 

Strategic Planning? Accessed April 22, 2010. 

2.3 
Section 2: Creating an Environment for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 17

5) Develop rollout, implementation, and maintenance processes. HR rollout of 

changes to job descriptions and performance review process. Leadership 

representing the operations, safety, and planning functions will be involved to guide 

and support the activities of HR staff. 

6) Implement and train supervisors and staff. 

7) Clearly define and track roles and responsibilities of those affected, as well as the 

actual performance of the plan toward increased collaboration. 

If a Strategic Business Plan does not exist: 

1) Core team of operations, safety, and planning staff agree to develop informal plan 

to embrace collaboration to bring to management, or a case for the value of 

developing a Strategic Business Plan. 

2) Leadership agrees to develop a Strategic Business Plan. 

3) Follow steps 1 to 7 listed above. 

Relevant Examples 

Maryland State Highway Administration 

Within the Maryland DOT, the Maryland State Highway Administration (MDSHA) publishes its own business 

plan. The Fiscal Year 2008 Through Fiscal Year 2011 Business Plan (2007) identifies the agency’s mission, vision, 

and values, and includes a set of objectives and performance measures designed to achieve the agency’s goals. 

The business plan includes a “Safety” section, which includes eight objectives, and a “Mobility and Congestion 

Relief” section, which includes six objectives. Each objective includes a number of associated performance 

measures used for tracking progress. Examples of the objectives in these two sections include: 

 Reduce the annual number of traffic fatalities on all roads in Maryland from 651 in 2006 to fewer than 550 

by December 31, 2010 (16% reduction), and reduce the annual number of persons injured on all roads in 

Maryland from 53,615 in 2006 to fewer than 50,000 (7% reduction); 

 Reduce the annual number of pedestrian fatalities on all roads in Maryland from 93 in 2006 to fewer than 

85 by December 31, 2010 (9% reduction), and reduce the annual number of pedestrians injured on all 

roads in Maryland from 2,594 in 2006 to fewer than 2,300 (11% reduction); 

 Reduce the annual number of temporary traffic control zone (TTC) traffic fatalities on all roads in 

Maryland from 11 in 2006 to fewer than 11 by December 31, 2010 (10% reduction), and reduce the annual 

number of TTC traffic injuries on all roads in Maryland from 1,070 in 2006 to fewer than 1,000 by 

December 31, 2010 (7% reduction); 

 Reduce incident congestion delay to achieve a user cost savings of at least $580 million annually; 

 Reduce delay along State roadways by an average of 5% annually for all mobility improvement projects; and 

 Provide reliable and accessible real-time traffic information to travelers and other stakeholders at all times. 

While the business plan does not specifically discuss integration of safety and operations considerations into 

planning, it notes that the plan will be used to make decisions about policies, programs, and allocation of 

resources, and it includes budget information where possible to identify particular sources of funding to support 

objectives. The business plan also identifies objectives and performance measures related to organizational 

effectiveness, environmental stewardship, and customer communications and service satisfaction. 

More information on the business plan is available at http://www.sha.maryland.gov/index.aspx?PageId=691, 

SHA Business Plan. Contact: Cathy Rice, Chief, SHA Performance Excellence Division, CRice@sha.state.md.us, 

(410) 545-0413, or Allison Hardt, Office of Policy and Research, AHardt@sha.state.md.us, (410) 545-2916, or 

Steven Gaudio, Office of Policy and Research, SGaudio@sha.state.md.us, (410) 545-0343. 

Michigan Department of Transportation 

The Michigan DOT (MDOT) has developed internally a statewide strategic business plan that aims to manage 

the State transportation system’s assets more effectively by increasing integration across the entire MDOT 
Section 2: Creating an Environment for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning

 18 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

organization. The most recent version of the plan was developed from the bottom up, a different approach 

than the top-down approach of previous years. It focuses on policy changes that can be applied to the 

organization as a whole so that integration efforts can be promoted within various agencies of the department. 

The plan also includes a data business plan component to support integration and organizational efforts. The 

plan integrates considerations from a variety of existing statewide plans, including goals and objectives from the 

SLRTPs and performance measures from the performance management plans. The performance measures 

included in the plan are revised each time a new edition of the plan is developed. They include considerations 

beyond planning, including operations and safety, that are quantifiable and can be measured across the system. 

Some sample measure categories include safety, customer stakeholder involvement, work zone management, 

and mobile connectivity. 

Representatives from all departments (from the central as well as regional offices) have been involved in the 

plan development effort, which has increased the plan’s value as well as its effectiveness. One of the first 

members of the plan development team was the Department of Safety, and its involvement with the State’s 

planning efforts has helped to increase the plan’s effectiveness. All MDOT employees (beyond Planning 

Department employees) are required to be familiar with the plan and to “buy in” to the process. 

More information is available at http://www.michigan.gov/mdot/0,1607,7-151-9622_11045-220589--,00.html. 

Contact: Susan Gorski, Section Manager, Statewide & Urban Travel Analysis Section, gorskis@michigan.gov. 

Ohio Department of Transportation 

The Ohio DOT’s (ODOT) most recent version of its business plan, 2010–2011 Business Plan, continues a 

strong focus on safety and multimodal planning, as well as including many other important initiatives. The plan 

outlines the department’s overall vision for ODOT, includes updated project selection criteria and 

prioritization policies, details statewide initiatives, and describes the budget for the upcoming year. 

The updated business plan includes a revised vision for ODOT as the agency moves into the 21st century. One 

of the significant changes from the 2009 business plan to the 2010 business plan is creation of the Division of 

Transportation System Development, which is responsible for developing a complete, multimodal, 21st century 

transportation system. ODOT also notes its creation of the new Office of Innovation, Partnership, and 

Energy, which identifies new transportation technologies, policies, and public-private partnerships, and the new 

Office of Multi-Modal Planning, which is tasked with “leading ODOT’s statewide comprehensive efforts to 

develop a strategic and holistic transportation futures plan.” 

ODOT’s projects are selected through a nine-member Transportation Review Advisory Council (TRAC), 

which was created in 1997 to help prioritize ODOT’s largest investments. The updated project selection criteria 

are split as follows: 55% for transportation factors that emphasize multimodalism, 25% to community 

economic growth and factors that emphasize economic development, and 20% for local and investment 

factors, focusing on innovative financing. The transportation factors will evaluate projects according to their 

contribution to road intermodal freight, public transit, and intercity passenger rail. Scoring will also take into 

consideration intermodal connectivity, and whether or not projects will connect transportation modes. 

There is a strong safety focus in the business plan. The first initiative listed is “Target: Zero—Focus on safety 

in the workplace, on the construction site, and with the traveling public to ensure ZERO tolerance for any 

safety hazard.” Plans to accomplish this goal include using new technologies to increase safety for the traveling 

public, using rumble stripes on highways, installing reflective backplates on traffic signals at select intersections, 

updating median barrier warrants, and adding safe work zone policies to the current list. Following the 

multimodal focus, ODOT’s third initiative is “All Systems Go: Identify critical freight and passenger 

transportation corridors by mode and prioritize public investment to facilitate the seamless, safe, efficient 

movement of people and goods.” The plan discusses securing additional funding to increase multimodal 

options and assisting private and public sector entities through new financing tools. 

More information is available at: http://www.dot.state.oh.us/policy/2010-2011businessplan/pages/default.aspx. 

Contact: Paul Staley, Policy Coordinator, Paul.Staley@dot.state.oh.us, (614) 728-5078.
Section 2: Creating an Environment for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 19

Foster Multimodal Coordination 

Description Traditionally, State DOTs have had a limited role with regard to planning and operating 

public transportation. Although public transportation divisions, sections, and agencies 

may be part of a DOT, they have often functioned largely independently, with limited 

interaction with highway operations, safety, and/or planning functions. While public 

transportation divisions often play a very important role in rural transit, they have not 

often been well-integrated with other State DOT planning functions. With increasing 

recognition of the importance of a balanced, multimodal transportation system, there are 

opportunities to build transit, bicycle, pedestrian, and freight considerations more 

effectively into all DOT functions. For instance, statewide priorities can emphasize the 

safe, efficient movement of people through transit. Corridor studies can more effectively 

consider strategies to advance transit efficiency (e.g., transit signal priority), manage 

demand, and create safer bicycling and pedestrian options. Operations activities, such as 

work zone management and traveler information systems, can more fully incorporate 

transit alternatives and information about transit system performance. Highway safety 

projects can also involve improvements that support safe and efficient transit, bicycling, 

and pedestrian activity. Each of these functions can also involve coordination to improve 

freight connections, high-speed rail, and aviation. For instance, diversion of freight from 

road to rail can be a strategy to address traffic congestion and safety. 

Benefits  Advances transit, bicycle, and pedestrian safety and efficiency as part of operations, 

safety projects, and planning efforts. 

 Supports sustainability, livability, and transportation choices. 

 Improves effective use of resources (financial, personnel, infrastructure). 

Challenges  Traditional functional separation of transit and highways (and secondary role of 

transit) at the State DOT level. 

 Public transportation divisions have traditionally been primarily grants-related 

divisions, with limited long-range planning. 

 Engineering, planning, and operations have traditionally focused primarily on 

vehicle movements rather than personal mobility. 

Who is 

Involved 

 Policymakers will assist in incorporating transit into statewide policy to help realize 

greater coordination among the various internal functions. 

 Public transportation staff can help identify opportunities for transit to address 

mobility, economic, and climate change goals, and to be incorporated into 

operations and safety programs. 

 Operations, safety, and planning staff will work with public transportation staff and 

others to ensure full consideration and integration of these issues. 

Recommended 

Implementation 

Steps 

1) Convene or maintain a multidisciplinary team of operations, safety, planning, and 

public transportation staff. 

2) Consider possible future roles of public transportation and approaches for 

enhanced integration into traditional planning and operations approaches. 

3) Integrate these interdisciplinary and multimodal considerations into the SLRTP and 

other statewide planning efforts, including operations plans and the SHSP. Identify 

strategies, policies, and programs to advance safety and operations as they relate to 

public transportation and freight. 

4) Consider relevant examples and recommendations from research projects, other 

States’ experiences, and existing studies to inform decisions. 

5) Clearly define and track roles and responsibilities of those involved. 

6) Monitor progress and prepare periodic reports. 

2.4 
Section 2: Creating an Environment for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning

 20 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Relevant Examples 

Iowa DOT: Long-Range Transportation Plan 

The Iowa DOT’s latest update of its long-range transportation plan includes a strong focus on multimodalism. 

Among the top priorities listed, “balance” between the transportation systems and services being provided is 

noted. “Modal Key Points” highlight main focus areas in the system. For bicycles and pedestrians, these key 

points are to provide funding for recreational trails and ensure that bicycle improvements are considered when 

designing highways and improvements. For transit, the identified key points are to provide support for public 

transportation, particularly in those areas with disadvantaged populations, to focus on services running between 

cities, balance the availability of service in both rural and urban areas, purchase additional buses and vans, and 

provide more assistance for commuter services. 

The plan has a section devoted to transit, which outlines guidelines the agency will follow in striving to achieve 

the key points it outlined earlier in the plan. These guidelines are: 

 Safety—Enhance safety by continued replacement and upgrading of transit vehicles, equipment, and 

facilities. 

 Preservation—Support preservation of existing services that are essential for the transportationdisadvantaged. 

 Efficiency—Focus on efficiency through support of coordinated, cost-effective transportation services. 

 Balance—Ensure balance by supporting transit services in both rural and urban areas, as well as providing 

alternative transportation choices. 

The plan notes that it is supported by modal implementation plans, which include performance measures to 

evaluate program success. 

More information is available at: http://www.iowadot.gov/iowainmotion/pub_trans.html and 

http://www.iowadot.gov/iowainmotion/state.html. Contact: Craig O’Riley, Office of Systems Planning, 

Craig.ORiley@dot.iowa.gov, (515) 239-1669. 

Minnesota DOT: Minneapolis Urban Partnership Agreement 

The planning for the Minneapolis-St. Paul area’s Urban Partnership Agreement shows a strong connections 

between highway and transit planning, with a focus on improving multimodal system operations. The effort 

involves a wide range of partners, including the Minnesota DOT (Mn/DOT), the Metropolitan Council, Metro 

Transit, the Minnesota Valley Transit Authority, city of Minneapolis, county governments, and transportation 

management organizations. As part of this grant, Mn/DOT is converting narrow, bus-only shoulder lanes 

along the northbound portion of I–35W into downtown Minneapolis to wider priced dynamic shoulder lanes 

(PDSL). Buses and high-occupancy vehicles operate at no charge in the PDSLs, and single-occupant vehicles 

that pay a toll are allowed to use the lanes during peak times, with toll prices set to ensure free-flow travel. The 

PDSLs will create a new option for drivers for a more reliable travel time, and will enable bus speeds to 

increase to 50 mph from the bus-only shoulder lane speeds of 35 mph or less. The plan is for the PDSLs to 

link with new, dynamically-priced high-occupancy toll (HOT) lanes on I–35W, resulting in a new, 15-mile, 

dynamically priced managed-lane corridor connecting downtown Minneapolis with communities to the south, 

including the Mall of America, Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport, and the University of Minnesota. 

Dynamic message signs provide information on transit alternatives to allow comparisons with the time and cost 

of driving alternatives. In and around the I–35W corridor, a bus rapid transit (BRT) network is being created, 

including new BRT stations, priority for transit vehicles at signalized intersections, and electronic signs at 

stations with estimated bus arrival times. Additional park-and-ride spaces have also been created. 

Buses purchased by MetroTransit for the corridor also are fitted with technology, developed at the University 

of Minnesota, which relies on both visual and physical signals to assist drivers in making quick and intelligent 

decisions that are critical to maintaining highway safety. It surrounds bus operators with tools that will help 

them keep the bus centered in the lane. 

More information is available at: http://www.upa.dot.gov/agreements/minneapolis.htm and 

http://www.dot.state.mn.us/upa/. 
Section 2: Creating an Environment for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 21

Self-Assessment Checklist: Creating an Environment for Integration 

The following checklist may be used as a self-assessment to identify opportunities for creating an environment 

for integrating operations, safety, and multimodal planning. The user should consider the questions, whether or 

not the State DOT is undertaking the activity, and what can be done to improve integration. 

Checklist: Creating an Environment for Integration 

Question Yes No If no, what can be added or improved? 

Relevant 

Subsection

Does the agency currently have multidisciplinary teams 

involving staff from operations, safety, and planning? 

 2.1 

Has the agency developed specific, measurable 

objectives to measure its success? 

 2.2 

If so, are objectives for system operations (e.g., 

congestion, reliability) and safety used to support 

planning and investment decisions? 

 

2.2 

Has the agency developed performance measures 

related to operations and safety that can be measured 

using available data and used to support planning? 

 

2.2 

Does the agency have a completed strategic business 

plan? 

 2.3 

If so, does the strategic business plan foster integration 

of operations, safety, and multimodal planning? 

 2.3 

Is public transportation represented in a number of 

multidisciplinary agency efforts? 

 2.4 

Are public transportation choices, and the efficient 

operation and safety of transit, identified as priorities 

in the SLRTP? 

 

2.4 

Do operations and safety programs consider 

implications for multimodal options, including 

transit, bicycling, and walking? 

 

2.4 

2.5 
Section 2: Creating an Environment for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning

 22 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 23

Goals and Objectives

Performance Measures

Policies, Strategies &

Programs 

Statewide 

Transportation 

Improvement Program 

(STIP) 

Statewide Long-Range

Transportation Plan 

(SLRTP)

Section 3

Statewide Level Opportunities

This section focuses on opportunities for integrating operations, safety, 

and multimodal planning at the statewide level. Greater integration at 

the statewide level should flow into strengthened integration of 

operations, safety, and planning at the lower levels, particularly when 

interdisciplinary teams and performance measures are brought into 

these efforts. 

There are a number of required documents as part of the 

transportation planning process, including the SLRTP, SHSP, and 

STIP. State DOTs may also develop other specialized plans focusing 

on specific issues, such as operations, transit, bicycle and pedestrian 

activity, and freight. Opportunities for integration occur by developing 

links between safety-focused efforts (such as the SHSP), operations-focused efforts (such as operations or ITS 

plans), and other multimodal transportation planning efforts with the SLRTP, and ultimately in influencing 

projects and investments that are programmed in the STIP. These opportunities are briefly described below. 

Statewide Long-Range Transportation Plan 

The SLRTP sets the direction for investments and should be a focus for DOTs that wish to integrate 

operations, safety, and multimodal planning. The statewide transportation planning process varies widely across 

the country. Unlike metropolitan transportation plans, the SLRTP is 

often a policy document or investment strategy and therefore does not 

contain information on specific projects and programs. A 

recommended approach to integrate operations and safety in the 

SLRTP involves the following steps: 

 Develop goals and objectives that relate to operations and 

safety in order to fully integrate these considerations into 

statewide priority setting – These goals and objectives 

should draw from goals and priorities developed in the 

SHSP, as well as efforts being undertaken to develop goals 

and priorities for system management and operations. 

Objectives should be specific and measurable statements 

related to attaining goals. 

 Develop operations and safety performance measures – 

Performance measures can be used as part of the SLRTP 

process to help track progress in meeting objectives and to 

prioritize investments. Developing and using multimodal 

performance indicators that address operations and safety 

draws attention to performance in these areas and helps to 

prioritize investments. 

 Develop strategies and programs to attain stated objectives

– The SLRTP should identify strategies, policies, programs, 

and/or projects that are tied to attainment of operations and 

safety objectives. Broad policies and strategies can lead to more specific corridor, sub-area, or regional 

studies and investment plans, and projects that are programmed in the STIP (discussed further below). 

 Monitor system performance and evaluate implemented strategies – Tracking performance measures 

for the transportation system will help to identify trends and analyze the effectiveness of investments in 

meeting objectives. These efforts can in turn help to support revisions to goals and objectives. 

Overarching Themes 

 Bringing together multidisciplinary 

teams 

 Developing and using performance 

measures 

 Utilizing operations and safety data in 

tracking performance measures 

 Tying planning to programming 

 Ensuring that various statewide plans 

relate back to the SLRTP 
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

 24 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Other Statewide Plans 

There are a range of statewide plans that State DOTs develop outside of the SLRTP (see appendix A for a 

list). These plans should be linked to the SLRTP goals and policies. Development of specialized plans 

focusing on safety and operations provides opportunities for integration of these issues into long-range 

planning. Examples include: 

 Strategic Highway Safety Plans – The SHSP is a statewide-coordinated safety plan that provides a 

comprehensive framework for reducing highway fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads, and is 

required to be developed in each State. It strategically establishes statewide goals, objectives, and key 

emphasis areas developed in consultation with Federal, State, local, and private sector safety stakeholders. 

The goals and objectives of the SHSP should be reflected in the SLRTP to ensure full integration of safety 

goals as a component of the transportation plan as well as operations strategies that relate to safety. The 

SHSP also can be used to identify recommendations for projects that can be carried forward and funded. 

 Statewide operations and/or Intelligent Transportation System Plans – Statewide operations plans 

are not required. However, these plans can provide an effective mechanism for focusing on operations 

issues and long-term strategic priorities, building on the expertise of system operations staff. These plans 

can build on the statewide ITS architecture and inform development of other plans. 

 Modal plans (e.g., transit plans, rail plans), freight plans, and other planning documents – These 

documents include State DOT plans as well as needs analyses sponsored by Governors’ offices, State 

legislatures, and the business community. While these plans typically focus primarily on infrastructure 

needs, improvements identified ideally include safety and operations elements. Plans should be influenced 

by the SLRTP and coordinated with identified priorities in operations plans and strategies in an SHSP 

action plan. 

Statewide Transportation Improvement Program 

The STIP is the programming document for the State DOT, and identifies the projects to be implemented in 

order to reach the vision for the State’s transportation system and services. It represents a commitment for 

Federal-aid transportation and transit funding. The Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) from each of 

the State’s metropolitan areas flows directly into the STIP; however, the STIP also contains projects from other 

sources, including non-metropolitan areas of the State. 

Linking planning and programming is key to ensuring achievement of intended outcomes. If investments are 

not programmed to support the plan vision and specific objectives, it is likely that intended outcomes will not 

be achieved. Linking planning and programming occurs when projects in the STIP originate from strategies in 

the SLRTP. Fiscal constraint and a realistic assessment of available funding may raise awareness of costeffective operations and safety strategies. 

Section Content 

Eight opportunities for integration of operations, safety, and multimodal planning at the statewide level are 

identified in this section: 

 Develop Statewide Operations & Safety Goals and Objectives 

 Develop Performance Measures and Targets in the SLRTP 

 Collect Data and Monitor System Performance 

 Develop Strategies and Programs to Support Established Goals and Objectives 

 Take Full Advantage of the SHSP 

 Develop Operations or ITS Plans 

 Incorporate Operations and Safety Into Multimodal Plans and Other Related Plans 

 Link Statewide Planning Efforts With Programming 

As noted above, these opportunities are linked and may be considered steps in an overall approach to integration. 
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 25

Develop Statewide Operations & Safety Goals and Objectives 

Description Goals represent desired outcomes for the transportation system as a whole. Objectives 

are specific, measurable statements that identify what is to be accomplished in order to 

attain goals. An ideal objective starts with an action (e.g., “reduce,” “increase,” “attain,” 

“maintain”) and contains specific targets (e.g., “reduce fatalities by 10% by 2020,” 

“increase the share of trips on nonmotorized modes to 30% for work trips statewide”). 

At a minimum, a statewide plan that seeks to integrate operations, safety, and 

multimodal planning should reflect the importance of operations and safety within the 

goals in the SLRTP. Ideally, these goals should be multimodal. Establishing supporting 

objectives in the SLRTP should yield more focus on operations and safety investments. 

Benefits  Communicates and demonstrates to the public the importance of operations and 

safety in the transportation system. 

 Places increased emphasis on operations and safety in project and program 

decisionmaking. 

 Can increase multimodal integration if goals and objectives are written in ways that 

emphasize multimodal considerations. 

Challenges  May be difficult for operations and safety staff to participate in the long-range 

transportation planning process, and for planners to engage these staff due to 

limited resources to meet the individual missions. 

 May be difficult to develop robust operations and safety objectives that are 

measurable and specific, particularly if data are limited. 

 Developing agreement on objectives with targets may be challenging. 

 Process may get bogged down if trying to incorporate too many goal areas. 

Who Is 

Involved 

Planning staff working collaboratively with staff from operations and safety are essential 

to establishing goals and objectives. In order to effectively collaborate, each functional 

area will require a clear understanding of the planning process as well as the interests 

and responsibilities of the other functions. 

Recommended 

Implementation 

Steps 

1) Establish a working group with representatives from safety, operations, transit, and 

planning to discuss development of the SLRTP and the overall planning process. 

2) Utilize the working group to identify and/or develop goals at the statewide level 

(e.g. efficiency, integration, increased economic development, and balanced 

investment priorities). A key consideration is keeping it simple. It has been found 

that, in general, plans with four to six goal areas were easier to understand and 

abide by than those with numerous or obtusely named elements.6

3) Utilize the working group to develop specific, measurable objectives in relation to 

the goals. Objectives may include specific targets. Developing measurable 

objectives requires examining what data are available for tracking performance. 

Operations and safety staff may be able to identify data (on travel times, crashes, 

incident delay, etc.), which may not otherwise be accessible to planners. 

4) Ensure that the established goals and objectives (including the operations and 

safety-focused ones) reflect the overall State vision. They should also reflect those 

in the SHSP and collaborative efforts of the transportation operations community. 

5) Ensure that the established objectives carry forward and are used in helping to 

prioritize investment decisions (see opportunities 3.2, 3.3, and 3.4). 

 

6 Wilbur Smith Associates. “State Long-Range Transportation Plan 2005-2030: Goals, Objectives, and Performance Measures Report.” Prepared for the Michigan Department of 

Transportation. November 2006. Available at: http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdot/MDOT_SLRP_rept_Goals_Objectives_Performance_Report_11-17-06l_180916_7.pdf. 

Accessed June 29, 2009. 

3.1 
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

 26 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Relevant Examples 

Oregon DOT Transportation Plan: “Management of the System” and “Safety and Security” Goals 

The Oregon DOT’s Oregon Transportation Plan , updated in 2006, is the overarching policy document among a 

series of plans that together form the State transportation system plan. One of the plan’s seven goals focuses 

on system management: to improve the efficiency of the transportation system by optimizing the existing transportation 

infrastructure capacity with improved operations and management.

7 This goal provides a direct linkage to operations 

strategies with a focuses on a combination of both supply and demand management strategies to improve 

operational efficiency through activities such as: 

 Techniques that reduce peak period travel to help shift traffic volumes away from the peak period and 

improve traffic flow. Some examples include high occupancy vehicle lanes with express transit service, 

truck-only lanes, van/carpools, park-and-ride facilities, parking management programs, telework, flexible 

work schedules, peak period pricing, ramp metering, traveler information systems, traffic signal 

optimization, route diversion strategies, incident management, and enhancement of rail, transit, bicycling 

and walking. 

 Advanced traveler information devices, incident management, speed management, improvements to signaling 

systems, and other technologies to extend the efficiency, safety and capacity of transportation systems. 

 Evaluating the benefits of constructing tolled express lanes for purposes of ensuring consistent trip 

reliability in congested corridors. 

The plan also includes a “Safety and Security” goal, “to plan, build, operate, and maintain the transportation 

system so that it is safe and secure,” along with corresponding policies. The plan outlines a “Safety Policy” 

focused on improving safety leadership in government, and public and private entities, and developing a 

Strategic Transportation Safety Action Plan to more effectively use resources to remedy system problems. 

Safety goals will be achieved through planning, education, engineering, enforcement, and emergency response 

efforts. Planning efforts include addressing safety and security issues through “planning, design, construction, 

operation, and maintenance of new and existing transportation systems, facilities, and assets.” 

More information is available at www.oregon.gov/ODOT/TD/TP/ortransplanupdate.shtml. Contact: Robert 

A. Maestre, Long-Range Planning Manager, Robert.A.Maestre@odot.state.or.us, (503) 986-4165. 

Michigan State Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP): Goals, Objectives, and Performance Measures 

The Michigan DOT’s (MDOT) SLRTP, MI Transportation Plan Moving Michigan Forward: 2005-2030 State LongRange Transportation Plan, adopted June 2007, directly supports efficient and effective operations. Its vision 

specifically states that Michigan’s future transportation system will be: 

 Prioritized: Capacity improvements will be needed, but the first priority will be physical or technological 

improvements to enhance efficiency, mobility, and access. 

 Coordinated: All transportation providers will work together to address the system’s needs holistically. All 

modes will be maintained, preserved, operated, and protected as one system, one of the State’s most 

important physical assets. 

 Safe: Safety will be a primary goal. It will be addressed as each improvement is planned and implemented. 

Personal and system wide security will be enhanced, including border security. 

One of the plan’s goals is: to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the transportation system and 

transportation services and expand MDOT’s coordination and collaboration with partners. This goal reflects 

MDOT’s desire to optimize the performance from Michigan’s existing transportation system, with objectives 

focusing on the application of technology, stronger coordination and cooperation with public and private 

sector partners, and improved intermodal transfers. Another goal is: Continue to improve transportation safety 

and ensure the security of the transportation system. The plan also lists those projects that are prioritized under 

each goal. Measuring performance for all modes, with a focus on highway operations, safety, and the condition 

 

7 Oregon Department of Transportation, Oregon Transportation Plan (OTP), Adopted September 20, 2006. http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/TD/TP/ortransplanupdate.shtml. 

Accessed January 14, 2009. 
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 27

and performance of other modes, is identified as a strategy, and the separate Goals, Objectives, and 

Performance Measures Report provides a detailed discussion of the plan’s four goals and associated objectives. 

More information is available at www.michigan.gov/slrp or 

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdot/MDOT_SLRP_rept_Goals_Objectives_Performance_Report_1

1-17-06l_180916_7.pdf. Contact: Susan Gorski, Section Manager, Statewide & Urban Travel Analysis Section, 

gorskis@michigan.gov. 

Toolkit: Sample Operations- and Safety-Focused Goals and Objectives 

Sample Goal Types Sample Objectives 

Mobility and Travel 

Options 

 Improve personal mobility and access to transportation. 

 Increase the share of trips by transit, carpooling, bicycling/walking. 

 Improve transit travel time compared to auto travel time in major travel corridors. 

 Increase the share of population with access to high-frequency transit services. 

System Efficiency  Reduce delay experienced by travelers on highways and transit. 

 Reduce the share of highways that are congested during peak hours. 

 Reduce the number of hours per day that highways exceed LOS F. 

 Reduce the cost of congestion on the transportation system. 

 Increase average vehicle occupancy for work trips. 

 Increase transit load factors and fare-box recovery ratio. 

System Reliability  Improve travel time reliability on the freeway system. 

 Improve travel time reliability on the freight network. 

 Improve on-time performance for transit services. 

Safety  Reduce the number of total fatalities on the transportation system. 

 Reduce the number of injuries on the transportation system. 

 Reduce the number of pedestrian fatalities and injuries. 

 Reduce the number of fatalities and injuries in traffic accidents involving heavy-duty trucks. 

 Reduce the number of alcohol-related fatalities and injuries. 

Innovation / New 

Technology 

 Improve the training and professional capacity of traffic signal operations and maintenance 

staff through stewardship of regional training programs. 

 Provide the capability to monitor transit vehicle location using an Automated Vehicle Location 

System. The location data can be used to determine real-time schedule adherence and update 

the transit system’s schedule in real-time. 

Traveler 

Information 

 Ensure that reliable, multimodal, real-time traveler information is disseminated consistently 

throughout the region. 

 Provide roadway operations data (e.g., speed, travel times) to real-time traveler information 

services to better inform the public in real time.8

Work zone 

management 

 Reduce the number of work zones (e.g., through system preservation/preventative 

maintenance, combining of work zones) or duration of work zones (e.g., full road closures, 

completion time incentives). 

 Coordinate planned projects to facilitate improved traffic flow through construction zones and 

minimize traffic impacts. 

Relevant Resources 

Federal Highway Administration, Office of Operations and Office of Planning, Planning for Operations, 

http://plan4operations.dot.gov/index.cfm. 

National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), Report 546: Incorporating Safety into Long-Range 

Transportation Planning, http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_546.pdf.

 

8 FHWA. “Model Transportation Plans for Operations and Safety: Preliminary Operations Objectives and Performance Measures.” July 2008. 
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

 28 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Develop Performance Measures and Targets in the SLRTP 

Description Incorporating performance measures into the SLRTP serves an important function for 

communicating and coordinating between a DOT’s decisionmakers, policymakers, and 

the public and for assessing progress toward achieving the goals and objectives outlined 

in the SLRTP. Performance measures focused on safety and operations issues, such as 

reliability, access to traveler information, incident management, and transit operations, 

will help to focus attention on these issues and enable tracking performance. Combined 

with data and analysis tools, performance measures serve an important role in helping to 

provide a basis for prioritizing investments. 

When coordinated with planned operations activities such as the implementation of ITS 

infrastructure, the data collection efforts required for performance measures can be 

supported with limited additional cost. These performance measures can then be 

utilized in other documents, including operations plans, the SHSP, and modal plans, as 

well as regional and corridor planning efforts. 

Benefits  Elevate attention to specific issues (e.g., pedestrian fatalities, nonrecurring delay) 

that may not otherwise receive the same level of attention. 

 Enable the agency to track success toward goals and objectives. 

 Help in communicating agency work with the public and other stakeholders, 

including the benefits of investment. 

 Provide an internal accounting system that allows the agency to gauge where 

resources (staffing and financial) are most needed. 

 Create an opportunity for improved data, data collection, and estimation 

procedures when there is strong reliance on this information. 

 Result in more effective use of resources (financial, personnel, infrastructure). 

Challenges  Expanding the traditional highway LOS, pavement condition, and other 

engineering-oriented performance measure to include multimodal measures, 

measures addressing nonrecurring delay, and specific safety issues can be difficult. 

 Data and analysis capability limitations (coverage, quality, needs, accessibility, 

transfer between agencies) may limit use of performance measures. 

 Gaining agreement on appropriate targets to set can be difficult. Performance 

targets should be realistic, but it may be difficult to determine what is an 

appropriate target for fatalities or injuries (given an ultimate goal is to have zero 

deaths and debilitating injuries in the transportation system). 

Who is 

Involved 

 Operations, safety, and planning staff should work together to identify and develop 

performance measures to support goals and objectives. 

 Operations and safety staff in particular can help identify data that can be used to 

support tracking the performance measures. 

 Policymakers will assist in incorporating performance measures into statewide 

policy to help realize greater coordination among the various internal functions. 

Recommended 

Implementation 

Steps 

1) Maintain or convene a multidisciplinary team of operations, safety, and planning 

staff focused on developing performance measures. 

2) Consider vision, goals, and objectives that have been established in order to select 

appropriate performance measures that relate to these objectives. 

3) Evaluate data availability and adequacy to monitor performance measures. 

4) Ensure that performance measures capture the impacts of operational or ITS 

strategies on system reliability and safety considerations such as incident management 

and road fatalities as well as planning objectives and system long-term needs. 

3.2 
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 29

5) Consider relevant examples and recommendations from research projects, other 

states’ experiences, and existing studies (see toolkit and resources below). 

6) Develop and implement the established performance measures. 

7) Clearly define and track roles and responsibilities of those involved in the 

performance measurement as well as the actual performance of the system. 

Relevant Examples 

New Hampshire DOT Transportation Plan: Mobility and Safety Objectives and Performance Measures 

The New Hampshire DOT’s transportation plan, A Framework for Transforming Transportation in New Hampshire 9

(public draft, May 2008) is built on a vision, goals, objectives, and strategies, which lead to performance measures 

that are used to assess progress. The plan’s vision and goals were developed by the Community Advisory 

Committee through a facilitated, consensus-based process and appear to put a high emphasis on operations and 

safety. The vision indicates that transportation in New Hampshire provides safe and secure mobility and travel options for all the 

state’s residents, visitors, and goods movement; it is well maintained, efficient and reliable; and provides seamless interstate and 

intrastate connectivity. Under the goal of “Mobility and Modal Choice,” selected objectives include: 

 Meet and maintain system-specific level of service targets on the interstate highway and State 

roadway systems. 

 Improve the reliability of the freight and passenger transportation networks. 

 Expand the emphasis on transportation systems and demand management measures in lieu of 

system expansion. 

 Increase connectivity between transportation modes for passenger and freight modes. 

Under the goal of “Safety,” objectives include: 

 Reduce the number of transportation-related fatalities and injuries. 

 Increase the quality and availability of traveler information. 

 Implement the SHSP recommendations in a timely fashion for the NHDOT emphasis areas. 

A key initiative in the SLRTP is use of performance measurements to allow the DOT to track and 

communicate the effectiveness of policies, programs, and investments. For each goal area, the plan identifies 

performance measures categories and draft “dashboard” metrics. Examples of these include reliability (travel 

time variability, transit on-time performance), traveler safety (number of fatalities, fatality rate, serious injury 

crash rate), incident response (incident response and clearance duration), and customer satisfaction (overall 

satisfaction from annual customer surveys). 

The New Hampshire DOT is currently in the process of finalizing updates to its 2008 SLRTP. This updated 

draft includes some minor edits that continue to emphasize and strengthen the areas of safety, operations, and 

multimodal planning, as well as strengthen discussions on security, climate change, and financial challenges. 

This plan is anticipated to be completed in fall 2010. 

More information is available at http://www.nh.gov/dot/org/projectdevelopment/planning/lrtbp.htm. Contact: 

Bill Watson, Planning and Community Assistance Administrator, bwatson@dot.state.nh.us, (603) 271-3344. 

 

9 New Hampshire Department of Transportation. A Framework for Transforming Transportation in New Hampshire. 2008. 

http://www.nh.gov/dot/org/projectdevelopment/planning/lrtbp.htm. 
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

 30 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Minnesota DOT Statewide Transportation Plan: Incorporating Operations Policies, Measures, and Targets10

Mn/DOT’s recently updated transportation plan from 2009, Minnesota Statewide Transportation Policy Plan 2009-

2028: Your Destination...Our Priority, focuses on statewide efforts to achieve a new vision that “is broad and farreaching... [and] speaks to transportation as a critical ingredient for the continued economic vitality of the 

entire state and livability of its communities.” Previously, Mn/DOT addressed operations as a separate policy 

within its long-range plan, but, in the new plan, operations is emphasized as a strategy to help effectively 

manage the transportation system, particularly as it relates to congestion in Minnesota’s major metro area, the 

Twin Cities. The 2009 plan update highlights safety, operations, and transit as areas within which transportation 

improvements will be made in order to achieve their long-range planning vision. 

One of the opportunities Mn/DOT outlines for improvement, “new approaches to safety and congestion,” 

notes using a systematic, data-driven approach to help solve safety and congestion problems. It highlights a 

new approach where the funding priority will be elevated for those projects that are low-cost, high-benefit, and 

utilize innovative solutions that are both effective and can be implemented in the short term. Mn/DOT has 

already begun to implement some of these solutions, which include rumble strips, cable-median barriers, highoccupancy toll lanes, expanded capacity through shoulder lane conversions, and lane remarkings within existing 

rights of way. 

Complementing its discussion of opportunities to improve safety and congestion, Mn/DOT identifies a 

number of policies for realizing these opportunities, which are further supported by performance measures to 

keep Mn/DOT accountable and transparent to the public. Policy 1, Traveler Safety, focuses on improving safety 

by “reduc[ing] the number of fatalities and serious injuries for all travel modes.” Policy 5, Statewide Connections, 

focuses on statewide travel and improving the connections between major centers of commerce within the 

State. Mn/DOT has supported this by developing corridor-wide average travel speed performance targets 

specifically for the Greater Minnesota Interregional Corridor (IRC), one of the State’s main connectors. Policy 

6, Twin Cities Mobility, emphasizes effective management and operations, focusing on transit, within the Twin 

Cities. Due to the limited potential for capacity expansion within the cities, Mn/DOT notes the priority for 

projects that are high benefit and low cost, reduce incident duration to help reduce congestion, and improve 

traveler communication efforts. Policy 7, Greater Minnesota Metropolitan and Regional Mobility, focuses on 

improving travel outside of metro regions, at the subregional level, through improved coordination between 

jurisdictions and decisions regarding land use and transportation. 

Performance measures associated with these policies include: 

Performance Measure 

Relevant 

Policy 

Annual number of vehicle-related fatalities on all State and local roads Policy 1 

Annual number of severe or incapacitating injuries on all Minnesota roads Policy 1 

Annual number of bicycle- and pedestrian-related fatalities and injuries Policy 1 

Dollars spent on Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) stand-alone safety projects Policy 1 

Percent of Greater Minnesota IRC miles meeting or within 2 mph of target speed Policy 5 

Percent of Level 1 and 2 Regional Trade Centers with scheduled intercity bus service Policy 5 

Twin Cities’ ranking among metropolitan areas for peak to off-peak travel times Policy 6 

Percent of freeway miles congested in weekday peak periods Policy 6 

Number of transit passengers served in the Twin Cities region Policy 6 

Miles of bus-only shoulder lanes Policy 6 

Average clearance time for urban freeway incidents Policy 6 

Metro signal retiming frequency on arterial routes Policy 6 

Total miles covered by the Freeway Incident Response Safety Team Policy 6 

Number of park-and-ride spaces in the Twin Cities region Policy 6 

Total number of public transit bus service hours provided compared to the total number of hours 

needed to meet transit demand 

Policy 7 

Number of counties in Greater Minnesota with county-wide transit service Policy 7 

Percentage of Minnesota workers commuting by a mode other than automobile Policy 7 

 

10 Mn/DOT. Minnesota Statewide Transportation Policy Plan 2009-2028: Your Destination...Our Priority 2009. http://www.dot.state.mn.us/planning/stateplan/index.html. 

Accessed February 5, 2010.
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 31

The Plan’s framework of opportunities and policies is supported by a variety of plans: Greater Minnesota Transit 

Implementation/Investment Plan, Greater Minnesota Transit Plan, Intercity Bus Study, and the Statewide Freight and 

Passenger Rail Plan. 

More information is available at http://www.dot.state.mn.us/planning/stateplan/background.html. Contact: 

Peggy Reichert, Director, Minnesota DOT Statewide Planning Unit, Peggy.Reichert@state.mn.us, (651) 284-0501.

Toolkit: Sample Operations and Safety Performance Measures11

Type Measure Definition 

Sample Units of 

Measurement 

Satisfaction 

with 

transportation 

system 

operations, 

safety, and 

service quality 

Customer 

satisfaction 

Qualitative measure of customers’ opinions related to 

roadway and/or transit management and operations 

services. 

Very satisfied 

Somewhat satisfied 

Neutral 

Somewhat dissatisfied 

Very dissatisfied 

Don’t know / Not 

applicable 

Extent of 

congestion—

spatial 

Miles of roadway within a predefined area and time 

period where average travel times are congested (30% 

longer than unconstrained times). 

Lane miles of congested 

conditions 

Percent of congested 

roadways 

Extent of 

congestion—

temporal 

Measure of time during which more than 20% of the 

roadway sections in a predefined area are congested 

(see definition above). 

Hours of congestion 

Recurring Delay Repetitive vehicle delays for the current time frame 

(time of day, day of week, day type). 

Vehicle-hours 

Non-recurring 

delay 

Vehicle delay in excess of recurring delay for the 

current time frame (time of day, day of week, day type). 

Vehicle-hours 

Speed Average speed of vehicles measured in a single lane 

for a single direction of flow, at a specific location on 

the specified roadway. 

Miles per hour 

Feet per second 

Kilometers per hour 

Throughput 

(Person) 

Number of persons traversing a roadway section in a 

specified direction in a given unit of time (includes 

vehicle occupants, pedestrians, and bicyclists). 

Persons per hour 

Throughput 

(Vehicle) 

Number of vehicles traversing a roadway section in a 

specified direction in a given unit of time. 

Vehicles per hour 

Travel Time—

Link 

Average time required to traverse a section of 

roadway in a single direction. 

Minutes per trip 

Travel time—

Reliability (Buffer 

time) 

Buffer time is the additional time that must be added 

to a trip (measured according to the “travel time” 

definition above) to ensure that travelers making the 

trip will arrive at their destination at, or before the 

intended time at least 95% of the time. 

Minutes 

Percent of total trip time 

Index 

Mobility 

Travel Time—

Trip 

The average time required to travel from an origin to 

a destination on a trip that might include multiple 

modes of travel. 

Minutes per trip 

Incident Duration Time between incident notification and complete 

incident clean-up. 

Vehicle-hours 

Incident 

Management Incident Clearance 

Time 

Average clearance times for major (90+ minutes) 

incidents on identified roadway. 

Minutes 

 

11 U.S. Department of Transportation. “Data Collection and Sharing.” Available at: http://www.plan4operations.dot.gov/data_coll.htm. Accessed July 7, 2009. 
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

 32 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Toolkit: Sample Operations and Safety Performance Measures11

Type Measure Definition 

Sample Units of 

Measurement 

Traffic Fatalities Number of traffic fatalities. Number of fatalities 

Pedestrian/Bicycle 

Fatalities 

Number of pedestrian and bicycle fatalities. Number of fatalities 

Transit Fatalities Number of fatalities for passengers on transit 

services. 

Number of fatalities 

Fatality rate Number of fatalities per 100 million vehicle or 

passenger miles (for each mode). 

Number of fatalities per 

vehicle mile or 

passenger mile 

Injuries Number of serious injuries (for each mode). Number of injuries 

Injury rate Number of serious injuries per 100 million vehicle or 

passenger miles (for each mode). 

Number of injuries per 

vehicle mile or 

passenger mile 

Safety 

Crashes Number of (fatal and non-fatal) crashes. Number of crashes 

Connectivity to 

Intermodal 

Facilities (driving) 

Number of miles away from an identified intermodal 

facility. 

% within 5 miles (1 mile 

for metropolitan areas) 

Dwelling Unit 

Proximity 

Number of miles away from identified dwelling units. % within 5 miles,1 mile 

for metropolitan areas 

(driving), % within 1⁄4 

mile (walking) 

Employment 

Proximity 

Number of miles away from identified places of 

employment. 

% within 5 miles, 1 mile 

for metropolitan areas 

(driving), % within 1⁄4 

mile (walking) 

Percentage of 

Miles With Bicycle 

Accommodations 

Number of miles on identified roadway with bicycle 

accommodations. 

% miles with bike 

lane/shoulder coverage 

Connectivity 

Percentage of 

Miles With 

Pedestrian 

Accommodations 

Number of miles on identified roadway with 

pedestrian accommodations. 

% miles with sidewalk 

coverage 

Service Coverage 

(walking/biking) 

Number of transit stops within walking distance (less 

than 1⁄4 mile) and/or biking distance (less than 2 miles) 

for an identified percent of the local population. 

Number of transit stops 

Relevant Resources 

Federal Highway Administration, Operations Performance Measures, http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/ 

perf_measurement/index.htm. 

Federal Highway Administration, Office of Safety, A Primer on Safety Performance Measures for the Transportation 

Planning Process, http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/tsp/fhwahep09043/cs4.cfm. 

Federal Highway Administration, Traffic Safety Performance Measures for States and Federal Agencies (DOT HS 811 

025), August 2008, Available at: http://www.nhtsa.gov/. 

National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Synthesis 311: Performance Measures of Operational Effectiveness for 

Highway Systems and Segments. Transportation Research Board. 2003. Available at: 

http://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_syn_311.pdf. 

National Transportation Operations Coalition. Performance Measurement Initiative: Final Report. July 2005. Available 

at: http://www.ampo.org/assets/40_ntocfinalreport.pdf. 
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 33

Collect Data and Monitor System Performance 

Description Once performance measures have been established, agencies should collect data and 

develop a tracking system to evaluate progress in relation to these measures. 

Performance measure tracking can also be used to identify deficiencies, which can feed 

into regional and corridor and sub-area planning. 

Data are a critical element of the analysis that serves as the foundation for safety and 

operations planning. For many years, the quality and timeliness of crash data were 

lacking, constraining the ability of safety and transportation planners to understand 

what was happening on the road network. Similarly, the quality and availability of data 

on travel time reliability, incidents, and the sources of non-recurring delays have been a 

gap in knowledge regarding the system. The advent of geographic information systems 

(GIS) and global positioning systems (GPS) has provided much more effective and 

efficient ways of handling data. Many states are now requiring common police crash 

reporting forms so that data are consistent from one part of the State to another. Some 

states are using new communications technologies to provide crash information within 

a few days of the crash having occurred.12 ITS technologies now provide a wealth of 

real-time data on travel speeds and volumes 7 days per week, 24 hours per day, allowing 

greater information on reliability problems and the sources of delay. Integrating these 

and other improvements in data management into planning help in prioritizing 

investments and more effectively address operations and safety strategies. (See 

opportunities 4.2 and 5.1. ) 

Benefits  Enables the agency to track success toward goals and objectives. 

 Allows for a more data-driven approach to identifying system deficiencies and 

prioritizing specific projects and programs. 

 Provides an effective format for communicating an agency’s progress in various 

areas to internal users as well as the public, and for evaluating the effectiveness of 

implemented strategies. 

Challenges  Transferring data in a format that is useful to planners can be difficult. The vast 

amount of data potentially available requires coordination to determine who will 

use the data and how, what data are needed, in what format, and for what periods. 

 Tying performance measures to investment decision making and programming can 

be a gap. It may be difficult to make tradeoffs between competing investments, 

particularly those with long-term and short-term impacts. 

Who Is 

Involved 

 Operations, safety, and planning staff should work together to identify data and 

develop system monitoring plans using established performance measures. 

 Operations and safety staff in particular can help identify data that can be used to 

support tracking the performance measures. 

Recommended 

Implementation 

Steps 

1) Develop a working group to define data needed to support performance measures in 

planning applications and potential availability from operations and safety divisions. 

2) Convene the working group to discuss evaluation criteria for each of the established 

performance measures as well as an appropriate schedule for performance measure 

evaluation. Draw on other states’ experiences. 

3) Implement procedures for effectively sharing and tracking data. 

4) Publicly or internally report on the status of established performance measures, 

as appropriate. 

 

12 FHWA, “Implementing the Strategic Highway Safety Plan.” Transportation Planning Capacity Building Program, Hosted by Institute of Transportation Engineers, March 20, 

2006. Available at:: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/scp/impstrhwsp.htm. 

3.3 
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

 34 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Relevant Examples 

Maryland DOT: Annual Attainment Report on Transportation System Performance 

Since 2002, the Maryland DOT (MDOT) has published the Annual Attainment Report on Transportation System 

Performance.

13 The report details MDOT’s tracking efforts to date for evaluating Maryland’s transportation 

network performance. The performance measures outlined in the report directly link back to the goals and 

objectives of the Maryland Transportation Plan (MTP). This tracking tool is particularly useful for Maryland’s 

transportation agencies when they are determining their overall management strategies. The report outlines 

current performance measures, their evaluation, and future performance strategies. 

For example, in the “System Preservation and Performance” section, performance measures for the 2010 

report include user cost savings for the traveling public due to incident management and operating cost per 

passenger trip, which evaluates Maryland Transit Administration’s (MTA) ability to effectively and efficiently 

meet passenger needs on various travel modes such as bus, light rail, metro service, light rail service, and 

paratransit and taxi services. 

In the “Connectivity for Daily Life” section, performance measures include the percent of freeway lane-miles 

and arterial lane-miles with average annual volumes at or above congested levels, percentage of state-owned 

roadway centerline miles within urban areas that have sidewalks, percentage of state-owned roadway centerline 

miles with a Bicycle Level of Comfort (BLOC) grade “D” or better and mileage of MDSHA-owned highways 

with marked bike lanes, annual vehicle revenue miles of service provided (measures miles on bus, light rail, 

metro service, light rail service, and paratransit and taxi services), and average weekday transit ridership. 

The “Safety and Security” section includes performance measures such as customers perceptions of safety on 

the MTA system while riding, waiting at stops, and while walking to a vehicle in an MTA parking lot, 

preventable accidents per 100,000 vehicle-miles, and the number and rate of bicycle and pedestrian fatalities 

and injuries on all Maryland roads. 

More information is available at http://www.mdot.state.md.us/Planning/Plans%20Programs 

%20Reports/Index.html, Annual Attainment Report on Transportation System Performance. Contact: Mike Haley, 

Office of Planning and Capital Programming, MHaley@mdot.state.md.us, (410) 865-1011. 

Virginia DOT: Data Business Plan for System Operations 

VDOT completed the Data Business Plan for System Operations in June 2008 to support data operations 

within the maintenance and operations functional area, and to ensure that investments in data coincide with 

VDOT’s business needs. VDOT decided to develop the plan after performing an internal assessment of data 

collection and data use within the department. It found that while data sharing occurred in the areas of 

planning and environment and construction, in all other sectors of the department, data use was not integrated 

and often duplicated. The data business plan has been used to evaluate the contribution of data to VDOT’s 

operations, establish a programmatic approach to planning for future investments in data collection, provide an 

understanding of available data resources across all levels of the maintenance and operations directorate, 

identify data needs, and define the roles and responsibilities related to data collection. 

VDOT is also encouraging data stewardship as a way to improve accountability for data quality and data 

management and encourage collaboration among user groups, executives, information technology personnel, 

and other stakeholders related to data needs. 

In developing its plan and facilitating the associated stewardship, VDOT aims to achieve the following: 

 Make more effective investments in data collection efforts and technologies; 

 Focus on data and business process rather than systems as the key component of data collection; 

 Eliminate duplicate data collection efforts by creating a data warehouse where useful and usable data is 

stored and is available to all within the department who need to use it; 

 Effectively manage data; and 

 Foster communication on data needs and improvements to the data collection process. 

 

13 Maryland Department of Transportation. 2009 Annual Attainment Report on Transportation System Performance. http://www.e-mdot.com/Planning/Plans%20Programs%20Reports/ 

Index.html#Attainment_Report. Accessed 2/6/09. 
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 35

This plan will ultimately integrate data collection as a business process integral to the operation of the VDOT 

business itself. 

More information is available at http://webservices.camsys.com/trbcomm/2009PresPap.htm, VDOT’s 

Approach to Aligning Data Program. Contact: Jeff Price, Assistant Director—Operations Planning Division, 

VDOT, Jeff.Price@vdot.virginia.gov, (804) 786-2826. 

Washington State DOT: Gray Notebook

The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) is a known leader in system performance 

measurement and transportation systems operations. WSDOT began developing the Gray Notebook (formerly

titled Measures, Markers, and Mileposts)14 in 2001 to communicate agency and system performance to legislators 

and citizens alike. The publication links performance measures from the agency’s Strategic Plan policy direction 

from the State’s legislative and executive branches, and Federal reporting requirements. This type of aggressive 

reporting is an important step to transportation planning accountability, which will likely become a key part of 

the next surface transportation bill. (An example of a performance dashboard is shown on the next page.) 

The Gray Notebook presents articles in a way that makes the topics’ relationship to the five Legislative policy 

goals – and WSDOT’s own strategic goals –clear. The notebook is organized into five sections devoted to 

those strategic goals, each marked by a page that recaps WSDOT’s goals for Safety, Preservation, 

Mobility/Congestion Relief, Environment, and Stewardship. The first four sections feature quarterly and 

annual reports on key agency functions, providing regularly updated system and program performance 

information. The Stewardship section reports on delivery of capital projects funded by the three main State 

funding programs and the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). They contain summary 

tables, detailed narrative project summaries, and financial information. The information in these articles can be 

used by planners to update priorities and focus investments where performance improvements are needed. 

Among the 23 subjects addressed in the Gray Notebook are: 

 Commute options; 

 Congestion on State highways; 

 Traffic operations on State highways; 

 Travel information; and 

 Truck freight. 

The system performance updates are rotated over four quarters based on data availability and relevant data 

cycles. Annual reports provide in-depth analysis of topics and associated issues. Examples of mobility measures 

include average clearance times for major (90+ minute) incidents on key Puget Sound corridors, percentage of 

Washington State Ferries trips departing on time, percentage of Amtrak Cascades trips arriving on time, and 

annual weekday hours of delay statewide on highways compared to maximum throughput (51 mph). 

The Gray Notebook uses several important styles to better convey its performance to the reader: “no surprises 

reporting”, “performance journalism,” and good graphing technique. “No surprises” refers to a philosophy of 

reporting on news both good and bad so that decisionmakers can be well informed. “Performance journalism” 

refers to using a journalistic writing style to aid in conveying detailed and sometimes complex performance 

information to a reader that they will be able to understand and utilize. Finally, the notebook emphasizes good 

graphing technique to ensure that data is correctly, fairly, and clearly displayed to convey performance, whether 

using charts, tables, or maps. 

Each edition of the Gray Notebook, as well as each performance measure going back to 2001, is archived 

quarterly on WSDOT’s Accountability Web site at www.wsdot.wa.gov/accountability. 

 

14 Washington State DOT. “The Gray Notebook: Quarter Ending March 31, 2009.” May 2009. Available at: www.wsdot.wa.gov/accountability/. Accessed June 30, 2009. 
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

 36 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Performance Dashboard 

Source: Washington State DOT. “The Gray Notebook.” March 2010. Available at: http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/BD26D6F0-

B554-497C-9D0E-35C546BF179F/0/GrayNotebookMar10.pdf. Accessed June 23, 2010. 

More information is available at www.wsdot.wa.gov/accountability. Contact: Tyler Winchell, Performance 

Specialist, Washington DOT Strategic Assessment Office, WincheT@wsdot.wa.gov, (360) 705-7907. 
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 37

Develop Strategies and Programs to Support Established Goals and Objectives 

Description Goals and objectives identified in the SLRTP, SHSP, and other planning documents 

should lead to development of policies, strategies, programs, and investments that 

support attainment of objectives. Performance measures are a useful tool to help 

prioritize investments because they provide a means to identify system deficiencies 

where investments are warranted. In this way funding can be allocated based on 

investment priorities that are measurable and can be tracked over time. Analysis tools 

can also be used to help develop tradeoffs between different kinds of strategies. 

Benefits  Goals, objectives, and performance measures assist in justifying and prioritizing 

projects. 

 Provides for an avenue where projects that will result in system-wide improvements 

will receive funding priority, and result in a more effective use of available funds. 

Challenges  Given the variety of goals and objectives, it can be difficult to make tradeoffs. 

 Need to better understand the impacts of operations and ITS strategies in relation 

to policy goals and objectives. 

 Strategies, projects, and policies included in plans might not get funded or 

implemented; it is important to tie planning with fiscal programming. 

Who is 

Involved 

 High-level decisionmakers typically determine statewide investment priorities based 

on recommendations and data presented by staff. 

 Traditionally this consideration in the SLRTP has been supported by planning staff, 

but should include operations and safety as well. Planners, operators, and safety 

specialists should work together to identify effective approaches (e.g., policy, 

programs, projects) to address objectives. 

Recommended 

Implementation 

Steps 

1) Utilize a multidisciplinary working group with representatives from safety, 

operations, transit, and planning that has been involved in development of the 

SLRTP in order to identify strategies, policies, programs, and investments to meet 

goals and objectives. 

2) Consider funding and fiscal constraint in developing implementation strategies in 

order to ensure that the identified strategies are realistic. 

3) If useful, develop a specific plan or plans addressing key issues (e.g., operations, 

transit, freight) that involves more detailed data analysis and/or modeling in order 

to help identify and prioritize projects for funding. 

4) Develop a comparison matrix that can be used by decisionmakers to see the 

tradeoffs and benefits of transportation systems management and operations 

strategies in relation to SLRTP goals and objectives. 

Relevant Examples 

New Jersey Transportation Plan: Strong Transit and Intermodal Operations Focus 

New Jersey’s SLRTP, called Transportation Choices 2030 (October 2008)15 is developed jointly by the New Jersey 

Department of Transportation (NJDOT) and NJ Transit. This policy plan provides broad direction for the 

transportation system, with a heavy emphasis on integrating transportation-land use planning (smart growth) to 

support transit, walking, and biking. It also emphasizes the importance of ITS to improve operations; facilities 

to move more freight by rail and policies that support moving freight during nonrush hours; travel demand 

management measures to shift travel out of cars and shift travel times; and strategic improvements to address 

bottlenecks in the highway system. The New Jersey SLRTP supports continued implementation of NJDOT’s 

 

15 New Jersey Department of Transportation. New Jersey Department of Transportation Long-Range Transportation Plan: Transportation Choices 2030.

http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/works/njchoices/. Accessed 2/8/09. 

3.4 
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

 38 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Source: Virginia DOT. Northern Virginia ITS Architecture.

http://vdot-itsarch.com/planningprocess/planningprocess.html. 

Accessed April 26, 2010. 

ITS Master Plan, which calls for significantly expanding the number of closed-circuit television cameras, 

electronic message signs on the state’s highways, and continually improving the NJ511 free phone and Web 

service for transportation information. In addition, NJ Transit is applying ITS to improve safety, including 

Automatic Train Control (ATC) to monitor speed and apply brakes automatically if necessary. 

One of the plan’s goals is to “Improve Mobility, Accessibility, and Reliability,” through operational and 

multimodal strategies such as improving the speed and reliability of bus service by establishing bus priority 

corridors and implementing preferential treatments for buses to reduce delays due to congestion; sustain efforts 

to improve the on-time performance and reliability of all public transit services; and aggressively pursue 

transportation demand management by giving greater emphasis to the work of transportation management 

associations. Another goal is to “Operate Efficiently” through strategies such as providing customers with realtime travel information about current conditions and the availability of choices; reducing the duration of 

incidents through increased coverage of emergency service patrols and increased coordination with local 

emergency responders; improving traffic signal operations; and making transit fare payment easier and more 

seamless. 

More information is available at http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/works/njchoices/. Contact: Brent 

Barnes, Director of Statewide Planning, brent.barnes@dot.state.nj.us, (609) 530-2866. 

Virginia DOT: Northern Region Operations Program 

Development 

VDOT’s Northern Region Operations (NRO) has 

pioneered an integrated, full-cycle process for investing 

in, implementing, maintaining, evaluating, and enhancing 

ITS and operations projects. Over the course of several 

years, NRO developed and refined a process that can 

serve as a model for public agencies all across the United 

States. This integrated process flows from initial 

strategic program-level planning to tactical project 

planning and prioritization, investment decisions, ITS 

architecture and FHWA Rule 940 compliance, through 

project implementation, evaluation, and feedback to the 

ongoing strategic planning process. Along the way, some 

sophisticated approaches and methodologies developed 

by VDOT NRO are utilized to ensure that a highquality, robust, and well-ordered ITS program is 

delivered to its customers. 

In a resource-constrained environment with increased 

calls for accountability and growing mobility and safety 

needs, the delivery of the operations program requires 

VDOT NRO to make sound investment decisions between various projects with competing priorities. VDOT 

NRO’s Planning and Program Delivery (PPD) Process consists of five phases: Planning, Program 

Development, Fiscal Programming, Program Delivery, and Program Evaluation. 

VDOT NRO uses a three-step process for its annual Program Development phase: (1) identify program and 

project needs, (2) develop the Annual Strategic Focus, and (3) prioritize the system needs based on the 

identified annual goals and objectives. NRO begins by identifying its program and project needs through the 

objectives and goals of the long-range plan and Strategic Plan, and use of the ITS Decision Support Tool 

(www.vdot-itsdst.com) and ITS Device Master Plans. Once the program and project needs have been 

identified, NRO develops its Annual Strategic Focus, an identified subset of the goals and objectives 

contained in the Strategic Plan. The goals and objectives from the plan are assigned weights by NRO section 

managers during the Annual Program Planning Workshop. The weights are based on the current strategic 

focus, each manager’s experience, recent technological advances, direction from administrators within the 

District and Central Office, and other factors. The weights are compiled and a rank order for the goals and 

objectives is established for the upcoming fiscal year. The result of the 2009 Annual Strategic Focus for 

Fiscal Year 2010 is on the next page. 
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 39

FY-10’s Annual Strategic Focus – Weighting of NRO’s Strategic Plan Goals 

Source: Virginia DOT. NRO FY2010 Strategic Investment Program Plan (SIPP). 

Available at http://www.vdot-itsarch.com/docsandfiles.html. 

Following the Annual Strategic Focus process, projects are mapped back to their associated goals and 

objectives, and the weights of each associated goal and objective are applied, resulting in a project prioritization 

score. This score provides a guideline for allocation during the fiscal programming phase when projects are 

linked with eligible funding sources. 

More information on projects in Northern Virginia is available http://www.vdot-itsarch.com/ 

planningprocess/planningprocess.html. Contact: Amy Tang McElwain, Northern Region Operations, 

AmyTang.McElwain@VDOT.Virginia.gov.
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

 40 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Take Full Advantage of the Strategic Highway Safety Plan

Description Each State must develop an SHSP as mandated in SAFETEA-LU, 23 USC 148. An SHSP 

is a statewide-coordinated safety plan that provides a comprehensive framework for 

reducing highway fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. The SHSP strategically 

establishes statewide goals, objectives, and key emphasis areas developed in consultation 

with Federal, State, local, and private sector safety stakeholders, and should be directly 

linked to the SLRTP and STIP. The SHSP must address engineering, education, 

enforcement, and emergency services elements of highway safety as key factors in 

evaluating highway projects. Through the establishment of statewide goals and objectives, 

the SHSP and SLRTP have a natural synergy. By collaborating on the setting of goals, 

planning and safety functions are integrated at the highest level within the organization. 

Linked goals and objectives allow the setting of strategies and monitoring that reinforce 

the relationship, and provide a mechanism for integrating safety considerations into longand short-range transportation planning. The SHSP also can provide a potential 

opportunity for integrating operations considerations with safety. 

Benefits  Integrated statewide goals and objectives for safety, and operation. 

 Greater integration in strategies, monitoring, and identified improvements. 

 Data on crashes collected for the SHSP can also be used to help advance 

operations strategies related to incidents and incident management, along with 

infrastructure and educational strategies. 

Challenges  Update schedules for the SHSP and SLRTP may not be aligned. 

 Separate financial resources to support each plan may result in a disconnect in 

focus, which requires coordination. 

Who is 

Involved 

 Safety staff and stakeholders – Collaborative relationships among safety partners, 

including State and local transportation agencies, law enforcement, and others, are 

vital to developing a successful SHSP. 

 Planning staff – Planners ensure that the safety goals and objectives in the SHSP 

and SLRTP are aligned to support projects funded in the STIP. 

 Operations staff – Operators can identify opportunities to align operations 

considerations with SHSP goals and objectives. 

Recommended 

Implementation 

Steps 

1) Establish a multidisciplinary working group of safety partners, operators, and 

planners to consider existing goals and objectives in the SHSP and SLRTP. 

2) Identify potential overlap, synergies, and commonalities. Incorporate SHSP goals 

and objectives into the SLRTP, or update new goals and objectives for each plan 

based on a collaborative understanding. 

3) Determine the overlap between existing safety and operations problems. 

4) Identify relevant and appropriate strategies, policies, action plans, and 

countermeasures that will help remedy safety and operations problems. Examine 

potential future safety and operations issues. 

5) When updated plans are adopted, monitor system performance in each area to 

identify improvements. 

6) Prioritize projects, programs, and policies according to data analysis and funding 

availability. 

7) Ensure that safety priorities are adequately reflected in funded projects and 

programs in the STIP, and built into project development. 

3.5 
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 41

Relevant Examples 

Virginia DOT’s Strategic Highway Safety Plan 

The Virginia SHSP includes a section, “Transportation Safety Planning,” that recognizes the important role of 

integrating safety within the transportation planning process. It notes: “Individual jurisdictions, as well as state 

and regional agencies have widely varied transportation safety planning practices...To make informed decisions 

about highway crash trends, state, regional, and local agencies need current data and analysis for accurate 

problem identification. With good crash records, strategies can be implemented to address the causes of 

crashes. In addition, safety between modes of transportation needs to be more fully addressed.”16

The SHSP also makes a tie between highway safety and operations. For instance in an emphasis area focusing 

on preventing roadway departures, Virginia’s plan notes that the Commonwealth aims to improve the 

operations, maintenance and design process to incorporate safety reviews and to facilitate better design 

decisions. The plan also includes a section focusing on work zone safety, which includes operations strategies. 

Some examples of strategies in the SHSP that integrate operations, safety, and planning include: 

 Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety—Target infrastructure improvements around areas with existing nonmotorized travel and high density such as: schools and community facilities, commercial development, 

mixed use development, and public transit stops. 

 Intersection Safety—Focusing capacity and traffic control upgrades on the top 5% of high-crash 

intersections in each jurisdiction each year. 

 Roadway Departures—Improve the operations, maintenance and design project process to incorporate 

safety reviews and to facilitate better design decisions. 

 Work Zone Safety— 

o Provide motorists real-time work zone information and traffic conditions through the use of Smart 

Travel technology on high volume roadways. Up-to-date queue lengths, travel times, or delays provide 

advance warning enabling motorists to choose another route and reduce congestion. 

o Deploy speed display trailers in high-volume, high-speed construction projects and coordinate 

increased enforcement with the Virginia State Police. The combined use of speed display trailers and 

the presence of law enforcement should reduce excessive speeds and tailgating. 

More information is available at: http://www.virginiadot.org/info/hwysafetyplan.asp. Contact: Mike Sawyer, 

Assistant Division Administrator, VDOT Central office, Traffic Engineering Division, 

Mike.Sawyer@VDOT.Virginia.gov, (804) 786-4196. 

Ohio DOT’s Strategic Highway Safety Plan 

ODOT’s SHSP identifies its focus on integration up front. In the Introduction, it notes that the SHSP “is 

considered comprehensive because it asks government agencies and safety advocates to work across jurisdictional 

boundaries to address crash problems regardless of where they occur.”17 Examples of strategies included in the 

SHSP that relate to operations and planning include: 

 Highway/Railroad Crossings—Market existing programs that expand the use of alternative crash 

prevention methods, such as improved street lighting at approaches, rumble strips, warning signs and 

flashing lights. 

 Incident and Congestion-Related Crashes—Target congested highway segments for improvements, 

including adding roadway capacity and Intelligent Transportation Systems, as well as deploying access 

management techniques. 

 Work Zone Crashes—Utilize new and innovative ITS technologies to obtain traffic count data, verify 

traffic queue lengths in order to deploy a reliable traffic alert system. 

ODOT has developed comprehensive efforts to integrate operations, safety, and planning, which include a 

multidisciplinary safety review committee that includes representatives from roadway design, traffic operations, 

 

16 Virginia SHSP http://www.virginiadot.org/info/hwysafetyplan.asp. Accessed February 4, 2009. 

17 Ohio Department of Transportation. “Ohio’s Road Map to Fewer Fatalities.” Available at: http://www.dot.state.oh.us/Divisions/TransSysDev/ProgramMgt/CapitalPrograms/ 

Documents/Safety/SHSP/SHSP%20january%202008.PDF. Accessed July 1, 2009. 
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

 42 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

and safety planning and data analysis. This committee is directly involved in project selection for projects that 

are funded through the Safety Program (largely the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) as well as 

other funding sources). 

Additional integration efforts include ODOT’s statewide Systematic Signal Timing & Phasing Program 

(SSTPP), which was launched in 2008 and is designed to evaluate and update the timing and phasing of signal 

systems in congested, high-crash corridors where signal timing can be linked to crashes. The program was 

developed based on a number of national studies that demonstrated a link between improved signal timing and 

significant reductions in crashes, travel times, fuel costs, and air quality improvements. The program is funded 

through Ohio’s Safety Program (HSIP as well as State and local funding). Once the analysis is complete, 

ODOT uses this information to make decisions regarding improvements. 

ODOT has made efforts to link its SHSP with other efforts such as its project development process, which 

now requires a work zone design review by the Ohio State Highway Patrol in major construction zones. This 

review will provide ODOT with input on how the work zone design could be improved in order to encourage 

safer speeds and to facilitate enforcement efforts during construction. 

More information is available at: 

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/Divisions/TransSysDev/ProgramMgt/CapitalPrograms/Pages/SHSP.aspx. 

Contact: Jennifer Townley, Systems Planning and Program Management Administrator, 

Jennifer.Townley@dot.state.oh.us, (614) 466-7493. 

Toolkit: Sample Operations-related Strategies to Consider in the SHSP 

Focus Area Operations Strategies

Aggressive drivers  Speed cameras 

 Message signs about enforcement 

Work zone safety 

 Real-time work zone information and traffic conditions 

 Variable speed limits 

 Incident alert system for work zones 

Intersection safety  Traffic signal improvements 

Roadway safety 

 Speed management 

 Access management 

 Traffic signal coordination 

 Incident management 

 Traveler information systems, including road weather information 

Transit bus safety  Traveler information system 

 Demand management programs 

Pedestrian and bicycle 

safety 

 Count down crosswalk signals 

 Speed management 

 Traffic signal timing 

Relevant Resources: 

AASHTO and NCHRP Project 17-18, Implementing the Strategic Highway Safety Plan,

http://safety.transportation.org/. 

Federal Highway Administration, Office of Safety, Strategic Highway Safety Plan, 

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/shsp/. 

Federal Highway Administration, Office of Safety, Strategic Highway Safety Plans: A Champion’s Guide to Saving 

Lives, Interim Guidance to Supplement SAFETEA-LU Requirements. 

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/safetealu/toc.htm. 
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 43

Develop Operations or Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) Plans 

Description Operations and/or Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) plans are developed to 

provide a statewide framework for enhancing the operational performance of the 

transportation system. The plan enables State DOTs to assess challenges they may 

experience in managing and operating the State’s transportation infrastructure, goals 

and objectives for effective management and operations (M&O), and strategies. In 

order to maximize the opportunity for integration with the planning process, an 

operations/ITS plan should be developed with the intention of complimenting other 

existing statewide planning efforts and should be linked to the SLRTP. It can build off 

of the ITS Architecture. The operations/ITS plan can also include performance 

measures or analysis to help support regional and corridor plans and investment 

decision making. Although this type of plan is not required by statute, it can build upon 

the model of the SHSP as a comprehensive planning effort that ties into the SLRTP. 

Benefits  Brings together a diverse set of operators to develop an overall strategic vision, 

goals, and objectives related to the short- and long-term performance of the 

transportation system. 

 Forms a basis for integrating operations goals, objectives, and strategies into the 

broader statewide planning context, and can directly tie to regional and corridor 

specific plans. 

 May assist in identifying needed funding for operational improvements. 

Challenges  Operations staff tend to focus on near-term issues, and changing technologies and 

other factors makes it difficult to plan over a long-range time period. 

 It may be difficult to get a diverse set of operations staff and agencies to the table 

to develop the plan. 

 Even when an operations plan is developed, there is a need for data and analysis to 

better understand the impacts of operations and ITS strategies in relation to 

infrastructure strategies in helping to attain statewide goals and objectives. 

Who Is 

Involved 

 Operations staff and stakeholders play a primary role in developing goals, 

objectives, and strategies to improve the efficient operation of the transportation 

system. A broad range of operations staff and stakeholders should be involved, 

including emergency medical services (EMS), law enforcement, highway 

maintenance, toll authorities, DOT staff at a headquarters and district level, transit 

agencies, and local transportation agencies. 

 Planning staff provide an understanding of the long-range planning process and the 

SLRTP vision and goals. 

 Safety staff should also be involved to draw connections between operations 

strategies and safety goals. 

Recommended 

Implementation 

Steps 

1) Define “operations”; obtain buy-in from top-level managers to develop such a plan. 

2) Establish a working group made up of staff/managers from long-range planning and 

traffic operations, and bring in a broader set of operations partners and stakeholders. 

3) Provide educational opportunities for those involved: 

- Planners can educate operators on the long-range planning process; 

- Operators can educate planners on the short-range operations considerations. 

4) Identify operations goals and objectives, and both short-range and long-range 

operations needs and investments. Utilize data and analysis to help enable more 

effective consideration of operations strategies in comparison to other types of 

investments in attaining performance objectives. 

3.6 
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

 44 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Relevant Examples 

Pennsylvania DOT: Transportation Systems Operations Plan (TSOP) 

The scale and magnitude of investment made in Pennsylvania’s existing infrastructure compelled the 

Pennsylvania DOT (PennDOT) to start thinking “operationally.” The agency’s initial steps toward creating a 

more operations-oriented system began with its Transportation Systems Operations Plan (TSOP), which was

developed in 2005 to direct project development in ITS and operations. It provided a coordinated approach to 

operations under a statewide framework that defined project areas and set up guidelines for including 

operations projects within PennDOT’s capital program. TSOP was intended to be considered before projects 

were planned, funded, and procured. As projects were developed, TSOP was intended to be considered in the 

development stage so that projects would ultimately emphasize information sharing among transportation 

stakeholders to ensure all relevant information was used in generating a solution. 

TSOP was replaced in 2008 with the statewide ITS Strategic Plan, which in turn generated the Intelligent 

Transportation Program. This program was developed through coordination between the maintenance, planning, 

and research divisions within PennDOT, and focuses on identifying future ITS needs, increasing communication, 

and streamlining potentially duplicate project effort among various departments within the agency. The program 

is run by a working group made up of representatives from a number of bureaus within PennDOT including 

Business Solutions and Services, Construction and Materials, Design, Highway Safety and Traffic Engineering, 

Infrastructure and Operations, Maintenance and Operations, and Public Transportation. The group meets weekly 

to discuss recommendations and strategies to how to implement strategies and develops roadmaps for taking 

projects from the planning stages to gaining dedicated funding and approval. Due to program organization, which 

guarantees extensive involvement from various bureaus within PennDOT, projects are developed efficiently with 

input from all stakeholders from the very beginning of the process. 

The program is currently being developed further and the Bureau of Highway Safety and Traffic Engineering is 

currently putting together a program plan. Moving forward in the future, the program will work to accurately 

assess needs within Pennsylvania’s transportation system and coordinate data sharing efforts among the 

bureaus within PennDOT as well as between statewide and local and county level efforts. As a result of this 

program, PennDOT has seen a greatly improved relationship between their business department and ITS 

division, as well as a more efficient use of financial and staff resources. 

More information is available at http://www.dot.state.pa.us/Internet/Bureaus/PennDOTROP.nsf/ 

defaultTSOP?OpenPage and http://www.dot.state.pa.us/Internet/Bureaus/pdBHSTE.nsf/ 

BHSTEHomepage?OpenFrameset. Contact: Douglas Tomlinson, Acting Chief, ITS Division, PennDOT 

Bureau of Highway Safety and Traffic Engineering, DTomlinson@state.pa.us, (717) 787-3657. 

Minnesota DOT: Highway Systems Operation Plan 

The Mn/DOT Highway Systems Operation Plan (HSOP) was developed in 2005 to help the agency better 

understand the operations and maintenance needs of its highway system. The HSOP identifies the relevant 

ways that Mn/DOT operations programs connect to its strategic directions and statewide transportation plan 

policies. The HSOP uses performance measures to help capture how different levels of investment impact 

operations and maintenance activities and overall system performance. The HSOP aims to: 

 Document major trends and key factors that directly affect and/or influence operations work activities; 

 Identify linkages between operations activities and Minnesota’s Statewide Transportation Plan and District 

20-year plans; 

 Identify performance measures in the operations area, and gather supporting data for tracking Mn/DOT’s 

progress toward achieving the performance measures; 

 Based on identified trends and present performance levels, identify funding gaps and/or changes in 

maintenance operations activities to meet performance measures; 

 Based on different levels of investment, identify, if possible, level of service changes and/or priorities for 

various maintenance operations work activities; and 

 Provide guidance and strategies to Mn/DOT Districts and Offices for implementing the plan. 
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 45

More information is available at http://www.dot.state.mn.us/planning/program/hsop.html. Contact: 

Timothy Henkel, Division Director, Modal Planning and Program Management, 

Tim.Henkel@dot.state.mn.us, (651) 366-4829 or Mitch Webster, Mn/DOT Office of Investment 

Management, Mitch.Webster@state.mn.us, (651) 366-3787. 

Wisconsin DOT: Traffic Operations Infrastructure Plan 

To better integrate operations projects into long-range planning, the Wisconsin Department of Transportation 

(WisDOT) developed a Traffic Operations Infrastructure Plan (TOIP) in collaboration with several partners. 

The TOIP is a long-range planning effort undertaken by the Bureau of Highway Operations with the following 

goals: (1) to develop a methodology to evaluate operations projects in the same manner as traditional 

infrastructure projects, and (2) to integrate operations into the WisDOT planning process. It outlines 

Wisconsin’s statewide traffic operations infrastructure needs and opportunities, resulting in a set of operational 

technology recommendations and associated costs. Recommendations are given on a statewide level and are 

further broken out by corridor. 

In developing TOIP, it was recognized that the plan had to be based on traditional WisDOT planning 

perspectives, and had to speak to bureaus within WisDOT’s Central Office, as well as the Region Planning 

staff. Consequently, input was gathered from the Central Office and all five regions, including staff from 

planning, programming, and operations. The plan also built on the structure of the 2030 update to the 

Wisconsin Long Range Plan, which used a strategic corridor approach that segmented the State trunkline 

system into 37 multimodal corridors. 

The basis of the TOIP is a quantitative, data-driven methodology used to assess transportation corridors and 

determine levels of necessity for operations improvements. In this methodology, ten operationally oriented 

criteria were selected addressing recurring and nonrecurring congestion, including safety-related considerations, 

using both traditional and nontraditional data sources such as weather conditions and the number of major 

special events. These factors include ADT, LOS, as well as crash rate, crash severity index, a weather index, and 

a special event rating. The result of this assessment was a score that prioritized corridors for different 

intensities of operations technology improvements. The results were then incorporated into Wisconsin’s Long 

Range Plan, fostering inclusion of operations needs within planning activities such as feasibility studies and 

environmental analyses. 

Sample of Roadway Segment Scoring 

7,500 

and 

15,000 

15,001 

and 

< 22,500 

>12% LOS F

LOS E

> 131K

158 

to 316

30 

to 59”

< 20%

>10

High Medium Low Baseline

Mobility Safety

Developmental 

Pressures

Deployment

Density Link

Score

Criterion Thresholds

ADT 

Forecast 

Year

HC ADT 

Base 

Year

LOS 

Forecast 

Year

Crash 

Rate

Crash 

Severity 

Index

Weather 

Index

ADT 

Growth 

Special 

Event 

Rating

LOS 

Base 

Year

ADT 

Base 

Year

Criteria and Weights

10% 7% 4% 12% 12% 15% 13% 9% 7% 11%

50% 40% 10%

7,500 

and 

15,000 

15,001 

and 

< 22,500 

>12% LOS F

LOS E

> 131K

158 

to 316

30 

to 59”

< 20%

>10

High Medium Low Baseline

Mobility Safety

Developmental 

Pressures

Deployment

Density Link

Score

Criterion Thresholds

ADT 

Forecast 

Year

HC ADT 

Base 

Year

LOS 

Forecast 

Year

Crash 

Rate

Crash 

Severity 

Index

Weather 

Index

ADT 

Growth 

Special 

Event 

Rating

LOS 

Base 

Year

ADT 

Base 

Year

Criteria and Weights

10% 7% 4% 12% 12% 15% 13% 9% 7% 11%

50% 40% 10%

Source: Hedden, Christopher. Wisconsin DOT ITS Sketch Plans: Corridor Sketch Plan Methodology.. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 

October 2008. Available at http://www.dot.state.oh.us/engineering/OTEC/2008%20OTEC%20Presentations/48A-Hedden.pdf. 

Accessed April 26, 2010. 

By creating a long-term vision for statewide investment in traffic operations infrastructure, the TOIP allows 

WisDOT to prioritize locations for operations deployment and more efficiently allocate limited resources. It 

also makes it easier to compare operations needs within the entire transportation network that WisDOT 
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

 46 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

manages, and has facilitated communication and collaboration between WisDOT’s central and regional offices 

since all staff now use the same basis when conducting more detailed corridor analyses. 

More information is available at http://www.topslab.wisc.edu/workgroups/toip.html or Wisconsin DOT ITS 

Sketch Plans: Corridor Sketch Plan Methodology, http://www.dot.state.oh.us/engineering/OTEC/2008%20OTEC 

%20Presentations/48A-Hedden.pdf. Contact: John Corbin, State Traffic Engineer, John.Corbin@dot.wi.gov or 

Peter Rafferty, ITS Program Manager, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Traffic Operations and Safety Lab, 

PRafferty@wisc.edu, (608)890-1218. 

Toolkit: Sample Statewide Operations and Safety Strategies 

Considerations 

Strategy Operations Safety Applicability 

Access management Improves traffic flow Improves safety through 

reduced potential vehicle 

entry/exits 

 Arterials 

Active traffic management 

(e.g., variable speed limits, 

managed lanes, advanced 

signal systems) 

Increases throughput Decreases accident rate  Freeways 

 Arterials 

Incident management Improves traffic flow 

and reliability 

Reduces potential for 

secondary crashes 

 Freeways 

Transit signal priority Improves transit 

operations, may encourage 

mode shift to transit 

Mode shift to transit may 

improve safety, since transit 

tends to be a safer mode 

 Transit 

 Arterials 

Transportation demand 

management 

Improves mobility and 

may reduce congestion 

May improves safety 

through less vehicle 

exposure (i.e., for measures 

that result in reduced 

vehicle travel) 

 Freeways 

 Arterials 

Traveler information Improves mobility, 

reduces unexpected 

travel delay 

Improves safety by advising 

the public of adverse 

weather, work zones, and 

other potential safety hazards 

 Freeways 

 Arterials 

Relevant Resources 

 

Federal Highway Administration, Office of Operations, Facilitating Integrated ITS Deployment Program, 

http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/int_its_deployment/index.htm. 

Federal Highway Administration, Office of Safety, Transportation Safety Planning,

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/tsp/. 

Transportation Research Record, Number 2065: Regional Transportation Systems Management and Operations; Managed 

Lanes 2008, December 2008, http://www.trb.org/OperationsTrafficManagement/Blurbs/ 

Regional_Transportation_Systems_Management_and_Ope_160506.aspx. 

Research and Innovative Technology Administration, National ITS Architecture, http://www.iteris.com/itsarch/. 
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 47

Incorporate Operations and Safety Into Multimodal Plans and Other Related Plans 

Description There are a range of statewide plans that State DOTs develop outside of the SLRTP. 

While these additional plans should have a linkage to the overall SLRTP goals and 

policies, the development of specialized plans offers opportunities to integrate planning, 

operations, and safety considerations. These specialized plans include freight plans, 

bicycle/pedestrian plans, and transit plans. 

Benefits  Incorporating operations and safety considerations helps to broaden the focus of 

these plans from simply infrastructure to also consider how the system will operate 

in the future. 

 May result in consideration of new strategies and approaches (e.g., pricing, demand 

management, etc.). 

 Results in more effective use of financial resources. 

Challenges  Effectively linking these specialized plans with the overall SLRTP and statewide 

investment strategy may be a challenge; making tradeoffs can be difficult in these plans. 

 Developing performance measures and objectives to accompany these plans can 

present a challenge, as many of the plans contain visionary goals. 

Who is 

Involved 

Developing a specialized plan benefits greatly from multifunctional and 

multijurisdictional collaboration. 

 Planning staff can use their knowledge of the planning process to educate staff 

from other functional areas such as operations and safety on the planning 

process—specifically as it relates to the modal plan being developed. 

 Operations and safety staff can begin to identify areas where operations and safety 

strategies/programs/policies could help to achieve some of the goals outlined in 

the specific plan. 

 The public and other stakeholders (e.g., transit agencies, freight shippers, etc.) 

should also be involved, based on the focus of the plan, to help provide a sense of 

current deficiencies in the transportation system and what improvements would be 

most important to its most frequent users. 

Recommended 

Implementation 

Steps 

1) Develop a working group comprised of operations, safety, and planning personnel 

to support development of the plan, in order to integrate all of these 

considerations. 

2) Initiate the plan development process. 

3) Ensure that the plan incorporates a variety of functional areas (safety, operations, 

planning) and addresses fiscal constraints. 

Relevant Examples 

South Carolina DOT: Statewide Transit Plan18 

The South Carolina DOT (SCDOT) recognizes that transit alternatives cannot be an either/or proposition 

when considered with highway construction. The State’s transportation infrastructure could greatly benefit 

from improvements in both areas. In order to incorporate transit to the greatest extent possible in new 

construction projects, the State analyzes opportunities for transit at the environmental stage of highway 

projects before the project’s construction funding has been determined. Considerations include Transportation 

Demand Management–based alternatives such as bus pullouts, queue-jumping capabilities, and transit vehicle 

 

18 South Carolina Statewide Transit Plan. Prepared for the South Carolina Department of Transportation by URS and TranSystems. February 2008. http://www.scdot.org/inside/ 

multimodal/pdfs/StatewideTransitPlanExecutiveSummary.pdf. Accessed 1/29/09. 

3.7 
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

 48 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

HOV lanes that would support existing or future BRT service within the right-of-way. In addition to BRT, the 

State is also considering implementing high-speed rail along various corridors as well as supporting a more 

extensive commuter rail service. The increased transportation network will be evaluated alongside planning 

efforts in an effort to align increased density with increased transit service. As of yet, no State or local funding 

has been identified to address the capital needs for increased transit service. 

The transit plan outlines particular goals in the areas of improving the viability and accessibility of transit, 

increasing economic growth, and using transit as a way to increase sustainable land use decisions. When it 

comes to improving the viability and accessibility of transit, SCDOT plans to address cost allocation among 

operations to facilitate greater coordination and cooperation. The State’s needs assessment indicates that transit 

can and will play a larger role in maintaining mobility by providing alternatives to increasingly congested 

roadways and increasing the options for transit-dependent populations. 

More information is available at http://www.scdot.org/inside/multimodal/transit-coord-plans.shtml 

#StatewideTransitPlan. Contact: Douglas Frate, Statewide Intermodal Planner, FrateDW@dot.state.sc.us, 

(803) 737-1436. 

The Texas Metropolitan Mobility Plan (Texas Department of Transportation, TxDOT) and the Texas 

Transportation Needs Summary (Texas 2030 Committee) 

The Texas Metropolitan Mobility Plan (TMMP) and follow-up Texas Transportation Needs Summary provide an 

example of long-range transportation planning19 that includes both planning for operations and using operations 

data to plan. Developed outside of the SLRTP process itself, the TMMP Program, led by the Texas Department 

of Transportation (TxDOT), is a compilation of regional TMMPs for Texas’ largest metropolitan areas. TMMPs 

were developed by Texas’ Metropolitan Planning Organizations under the direction of TxDOT to show the effect 

on spending to reduce congestion, and to quantify the magnitude of each region’s funding shortfalls and unmet 

needs. The outcome of the TMMP was to show what can be done to develop goals and objectives related to 

congestion reduction and match those goals to a total cost. Performance goals were set in TMMP development 

using regional travel time index and a congestion index. The TMMPs were used by the metropolitan areas to 

characterize unfunded congestion needs documented as the elimination of level-of-service F. 

In addition to the aggressive congestion-reduction goal-setting that the TMMPs supported, the analysis also 

provided a backdrop for the initial incorporation of transportation system management and operations 

(TSMO) strategies into the planning processes. The Texas TMMP analysis provided the basis of a more recent 

30-year needs summary developed by the 2030 Committee under the direction of Texas Governor Rick Perry 

and Texas Transportation Commission Chair Deidre Delisi. Led by the Texas Transportation Institute, this 

unique needs analysis incorporates TxDOT’s original TMMP analysis to estimate the costs necessary to allow 

each Texas urban region to have a mobility level: 

 To maintain economic competitiveness; 

 To prevent worsening congestions; and 

 To reduce congestion.20

While the original TMMP analysis relied heavily on the use of highway construction costs as a proxy for 

congestion relief, the 2030 needs summary allows the effects of TSMO strategies to be modeled, including 

ramp metering, incident management, signal coordination, and access management. This analysis allows for 

infrastructure enhancements to be compared to operations improvements, essentially helping State leadership 

better understand the importance of TSMO strategies in supporting the economic health of the state. 

More information is available at http://www.nctcog.org/trans/mtp/tmmp/. Contact: Michael Burbank, 

MBurbank@nctcog.org, (817) 695-9251. More information on the Texas Transportation Needs Summary is 

available at http://texas2030committee.tamu.edu/. 

 

19 It should be noted that these activities are not part of Texas’ SLRTP and were developed outside the long-range transportation planning process. 

20 Texas 2030 Committee. Texas Transportation Needs Summary. http://texas2030committee.tamu.edu/. Accessed 1/24/09. 
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 49

Toolkit: Sample Operations & Safety Strategies to Consider for Specialized Plans 

Type of Plan Sample Strategies 

Freight Plans  Adjust truck speeds on common freight routes. 

 Vary the speed limit for cars versus trucks. 

 Measure truck sensitivity to toll rates. Potentially adjust tolling for trucks along 

common freight routes to encourage use of particular routes over others. 

 Implement electronic toll collection for trucks. 

 Increase weight enforcement efforts on routes parallel to freeways commonly used by 

freight traffic. 

Transit Plans  Develop bus lanes with intermittent priority to enhance bus transit by reducing 

travel time. 

 Install bike racks at transit stops to encourage/facilitate bike riding rather than driving 

among transit riders. 

 Install transit information panels at transit stops to alert passengers of upcoming 

transit vehicle. 

 Implement bus rapid transit. 

Bicycle / Pedestrian Plans  Install pedestrian crosswalks in (major) intersections with audible messaging systems 

for hearing-impaired persons. 

Relevant Resources 

Transit Cooperative Research Program, Report 84: Improving Public Transportation Technology Implementation and 

Anticipating Emerging Technologies, http://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_rpt_84v8.pdf. 

Federal Highway Administration, Office of Operations, Freight Management and Operations: Technology and 

Operations, http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/technology/index.htm. 

Federal Transit Administration, Transit Safety, http://transit-safety.fta.dot.gov/Safety/Safety.asp. 

Federal Highway Administration, Office of Safety, Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety, 

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/. 
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

 50 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Link Statewide Planning Efforts With Programming 

Description Integrating planning and programming is essential to ensuring that the SLRTP and 

other statewide plans are realistic in their assessments of available resources and that 

they result in the identification of implemented projects that support goals and 

objectives. Programming at the statewide level in order to produce the STIP requires 

the careful balancing of projects identified to meet system needs with the appropriate 

funding resource. Funding available from both federal and State sources has specific 

requirements in the ways in which it can be used. Although the federal resources apply 

across all states, each State will have different restrictions on its transportation funding. 

This requires action at the statewide level, which has implications for each region and 

proposed project. 

Because the SLRTP is often a policy plan or investment strategy, it relates indirectly to 

the identified projects by establishing goals and objectives as well as criteria for 

prioritizing projects. A strong relationship between the SLRTP and STIP will allow 

available revenue to most effectively meet the goals and objectives. When this 

relationship is strong, it will also support the “trickle down” effect of regional TIPs 

supporting statewide goals as well as those specific to the region. 

Benefits  Funded projects and programs that support goals and objectives. 

 Projects are prioritized through a more objective process that relates to the 

attainment of goals. 

Challenges  There may be limited availability of statewide data and analysis to support 

performance measurement. 

 There may be limited models and tools for prioritizing projects for funding with 

respect to all strategies. 

Who Is 

Involved 

Planning and programming staff, along with technical experts in operations and safety, 

are central for making the link between planning and programming, but it is also 

important to bring in operations and safety staff to help identify potential performance 

measures related to operational and safety goals and objectives as well as the data 

needed to support these measures. 

Recommended 

Implementation 

Steps 

1) Start with goals and objectives for the transportation system. These should be the 

foundation for planning and programming decisions. 

2) Early in the planning process, bring in an understanding of the reality of funding 

limits within individual funding categories. Assess needs in the context of 

available funding. 

3) Develop a system for the prioritization of projects that address the adopted goals, 

objectives, and priorities within the SLRTP. 

4) Identify performance measures and available data that can support system 

monitoring to evaluate the success in meeting the goals and objectives. 

5) Apply prioritization and performance measurement strategy and evaluate success 

on a regular basis. 

3.8 
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 51

Relevant Example 

North Carolina DOT: Program and Resource Plan 

The North Carolina DOT (NCDOT) is currently finalizing its Program and Resource Plan, which will help it 

determine the appropriate funding allocation for their programs. The plan includes a strategic planning element 

as well as a financial element. The strategic planning element includes identified objectives and needs developed 

from discussions with internal divisions and business units as well as input from MPOs and Rural Planning 

Organizations. Project prioritization is based on the evaluation of performance measures using planning, 

operations, and safety related data. The financial element includes a forecast of available funds and 

expenditures, a trend analysis of previous years’ commitments and revenues, as well as a budget that considers 

constrained funding and fund distribution. The Program and Resource Plan projects funding over a 10-year 

timeframe and is updated every 2 years. 

Funding is assigned by grouping programs together into related categories. The program categories include 

the following: 

 Construction and engineering 

 Maintenance 

 Operations 

 Administration 

 Other (debt service, transfer to others) 

Major construction project are classified according to their primary purpose (safety, mobility, and infrastructure 

health), the appropriate component of the State system (statewide, regional, and subregional), and mode 

(highway, rail, public transportation, ferry, aviation, and bicycle and pedestrian). As implementation of the 

department’s first Program and Resource Plan is still in development, an initial sample of the organization tool 

to show funding for project categories is illustrated below. 

In order to determine funding for program groups, each one is associated with specific objectives and goals, as 

outlined in the SLRTP. The objectives and goals are assigned weights in terms of priority for addressing 

challenges facing the state’s surface transportation system. Performance measures are used to evaluate the 

expected return on investment of various strategies used by individual programs to help achieve these 

objectives and goals. 

NCDOT’s first Program and Resource Plan is anticipated to be approved in June 2010. 

More information is available at http://www.ncdot.org/performance/reform/. Contact: David Wasserman, 

NCDOT Strategic Planning Office of Transportation, DSWasserman@ncdot.gov, (919) 715-1273. 
Section 3: Statewide Level Opportunities 

 52 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

 

Self-Assessment Checklist: Statewide Opportunities 

The following checklist may be used as a self-assessment to identify statewide opportunities for integrating 

operations, safety, and multimodal planning. The user should consider the questions, whether or not the State 

DOT is undertaking the activity, and what can be done to improve integration. 

Checklist: Statewide Level Opportunities 

Question Yes No If no, what can be added or improved? 

Relevant 

Subsection 

Are operations and safety staff involved in the 

development of the SLRTP? 

 3.1 

Does the SLRTP include a vision and goal(s) that 

address operational and safety considerations? 

 3.1 

Is there recognition of the importance of linkages 

between operations and safety considerations in 

the SLRTP? 

 

3.1 

Are there specific objectives in the SLRTP that 

relate to system operation and safety? 

 3.1 

Have system-wide performance measures been 

developed in the SLRTP, including those focused 

on operations and safety? 

 

3.2 

Are performance measures for livability, multimodal 

choice, and other planning considerations utilized in 

operations and safety programs? 

 

3.2 

Are performance measures being tracked? 3.2 

Are safety and/or operations data being utilized to 

monitor system performance? 

 3.3 

Are operations and safety strategies, policies, and 

programs highlighted in the SLRTP? 

 3.4 

Are the SHSP’s goals, objectives, and priorities 

reflected in the SLRTP? 

 3.5 

Has an effort been undertaken to develop statewide 

operations goals and priorities, such as development 

of a statewide operations or ITS plan? 

 

3.6 

Do other plans outside of the SLRTP (e.g., modal 

plans, freight plans, etc.) relate back to the 

overarching goals and objectives in the SLRTP? 

Do these plans include operations and safety 

considerations? 

 

3.7 

Are goals and objectives helping to inform 

projects that are programmed in the STIP? 

 3.8 

Are fiscal constraints being considered in the 

development of the SLRTP and other plans? 

 3.8 

3.9 
Section 4: Regional Level Opportunities 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 53 

Section 4

Regional Level Opportunities

State DOTs work to support regional planning, operations, and safety efforts, focused on both urban and rural 

areas. Regions may be identified by common interests or perspectives, political influence, or geography. 

In urban areas, there is a structured metropolitan transportation 

planning process in accordance with federal planning regulations. The 

Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) plays a lead role in this 

process, and also provides a structure that may facilitate collaboration 

among transportation system operations staff, including transit 

agencies. MPO planners usually have an established relationship with 

the regional DOT planning staff. Regularly scheduled meetings and 

committees provide opportunities for the sharing of ideas to meet 

common needs. In particular the requirement for larger MPOs to have 

a congestion management process (CMP) provides a natural interface 

point for operations, safety, and planning. 

In rural areas, Rural Planning Organizations (RPOs) and/or Tribal DOTs may play a role in integration 

efforts by providing a structured forum for the consideration of transportation needs. If an RPO or Tribal 

DOT is not present, an initiative may be needed to focus on advancing operations, safety, and planning 

goals. Rural transit or human service providers may offer a regional structure that may support a larger 

initiative. Because county governments partner with these agencies, there is an established interface with 

local governments that can further enhance transportation groups and initiatives. 

Many states have major destinations such as national parks that are located in primarily rural areas. High traffic 

volumes are often associated with these venues on highways that do not have sufficient capacity. This type of 

traffic represents a surge effect, and is well suited to traffic management in the absence of the ability to increase 

capacity. This is a strong opportunity for cooperation between operations, safety, and multimodal planning. 

Many areas have found transit to be a strong resource for addressing these needs. 

Operations personnel are usually the most familiar to local entities, as most DOTs operate the system through 

regional, division, and/or district offices. The regional operations staff is the front line interface with the local 

stakeholders whether these are the public, transportation providers, citizen advocacy groups, or special interest 

groups. These professionals represent the problem solvers in a region because their actions usually address an 

immediate need. If DOT planning support is not located in the regional office, interface with the operations 

and safety staff will need to be initiated. However, whether or not the functions are co-located, this relationship 

offers the ability to develop solutions for both near term and long range system needs that consider operations 

and safety as well as system capacity. 

One challenge to the incorporation of operations and safety solutions for specific transportation needs is a 

difference in analytical methods. As the primary transportation planning tool, the travel demand model does 

not provide the finer scale of analysis needed to consider operational strategies. In recent years, the 

transportation industry has been attempting to overcome this disconnect through more extensive use of meso 

and micro analysis tools for transportation planning at the regional level. 

Section Content 

Three opportunities have been identified for integrating operations, safety, and multimodal planning at the 

regional level. 

 Develop Regional Initiatives and Programs 

 Support Data Sharing and Analysis Tools for Use by MPOs 

 Support Integration for Federal Lands, Native American Tribes, and Rural Areas 

Overarching Themes 

 Bringing together multidisciplinary 

teams 

 Utilizing operations and safety data 

in planning 

 Coordination between the State DOT 

operations and planning staff with 

MPOs, transit agencies, tribal 

governments, and other partners. 
Section 4: Regional Level Opportunities 

 54 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Develop Regional Initiatives and Programs 

Description In order to more fully collaborate on common transportation interests and needs within 

a region, it can be advantageous to formalize a regional initiative. A regional initiative 

will involve many partners including the regional DOT staff, and can focus on 

coordinated efforts to address transportation system operations and safety while 

considering a broad range of solutions. For instance, a regional initiative may involve 

development of an integrated safety and incident management program through 

collaboration of system operators and law enforcement. A regional group can work on a 

“regional concept of transportation operations” (RCTO), which helps to define a 

vision, goals, operations objectives, and strategies for a specific operational issue, such 

as work zone management or incident management, and can be integrated into regional 

planning activities. Participation of both local and State DOT planning staff is often 

important to ensure inclusion of identified strategies in plans and programs consistent 

with regional and statewide goals.

Benefits  Regional initiatives focus on a well defined set of common interests, and offer 

potential for local funding to support solutions of value to the region. 

 The presence of a regional group can assist the DOT when projects are in development.

Challenges  In many States, DOT regional boundaries do not match MPO planning boundaries. 

 Rural areas have no formal boundaries although there may be common interests. 

 DOT staff may find it difficult to attend meetings on a regular basis. 

Who Is 

Involved 

Regional initiatives can be started by any transportation or stakeholder group that 

identifies common interests. 

 It is important to include all relevant transportation agencies and providers as well 

as the DOT regional staff from operations, safety, and planning. 

 Local / regional planners often play an important role in this group. 

 Other relevant stakeholders, such as police and fire officials, EMS officials, 

emergency managers, and port authority managers may be important, depending on 

the focus of the initiative. 

 In some areas local citizen groups such as the Chamber of Commerce are strong 

advocates. 

Recommended 

Implementation 

Steps 

1) Identify a common interest or need in the regional transportation system. 

2) Identify a broad group of potential participants and hold an initial meeting. 

3) Formalize the group structure and mission through a memorandum of 

understanding or some other document. 

4) Continue meeting regularly and publicize meetings to encourage broad participation. 

5) Identify potential funding sources such as grants, public-private partnerships, 

matching or in-kind funds, special DOT programs that assist short term 

implementation of solutions. 

4.1 
Section 4: Regional Level Opportunities 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 55 

Relevant Examples 

Arizona DOT: AZTechTM Partnership 

AZTechTM is a partnership of Federal, State, local, and private entities led by the Maricopa County Department 

of Transportation and Arizona DOT (ADOT) to address a variety of regional operations issues in the Phoenix 

metropolitan area. The group is closely connected to regional transportation planning and includes many of the 

same agencies represented in the Maricopa Association of Governments’ ITS Committee. 

AZTechTM began in 1996 when partners in the Phoenix region were awarded the ITS Metropolitan Model 

Deployment Initiative (MMDI) grant from the U.S. Department of Transportation. Guiding the direction of 

AZTechTM and the implementation of its programs is the AZTechTM Executive Committee, which meets every 

other month. In addition, AZTechTM members participate on an operations committee, an advanced traveler 

information systems (ATIS) working group, and a TMC operators working group that all meet on a regular 

basis to share information and carry out joint initiatives. 

Joint initiatives that the region is pursuing include center-to-center communications, traffic signal optimization, 

and freeway and arterial incident management, traffic management, joint ITS procurements, and improving 

traveler information and system performance measurement. The traffic management system relies on a data 

exchange between the Phoenix Fire Department, Maricopa County Department of Transportation, and ADOT 

to help inform public safety efforts in the Phoenix metropolitan area. This data sharing effort is intended to be 

expanded so that real-time transit data will be integrated with the AZTechTM Regional Archived Data Server. 

The ongoing study investigating this opportunity is considering the following aspects: “availability of real-time 

data transit data attributes; hardware and software requirements; potential ATIS applications and/or services; 

requirements for ongoing public agency staff support, and initial and ongoing costs.”21

To assist in freeway and arterial incident management, AZTechTM has developed a new system called the 

Emergency Vehicle Infrastructure Integration system, which works to assist emergency-responder vehicles by 

researching and developing new technologies. Research efforts include investigating ways that emergency 

vehicles could share real-time data with other emergency vehicles in order to reduce the number of crashes. 

More information is available at http://www.aztech.org/. Contact: Faisal Saleem, ITS Branch Manager, 

Maricopa County Department of Transportation, faisalsaleem@mail.maricopa.gov, (602) 506-1241. 

Missouri and Kansas DOTs: Kansas City Scout 

In 1999, planners and district engineers from the Missouri DOT (MoDOT) and Kansas DOT (KDOT), the 

Mid-America Regional Council MPO, FHWA representatives from both States, ITS personnel, and local 

government representatives formed a planning committee to collaborate on the development of a bi-state 

comprehensive traffic and incident management system. At the first meeting, the members considered how to 

place the necessary funding in each State’s STIP. The committee used the three to five year transportation plan 

for construction projects that would start in 2001 to determine the amount of federal earmarked funds each 

State would receive and the amount each State would have to match. It took approximately two years to 

construct the effort and put it into the STIP. The cost was $50 million with 80% Federal funding and 20% 

State funding shared between the two States. This was the first program with designated ITS funding. 

The Kansas City Scout (KC Scout) program began operating in 2003, and by 2004 it was fully operational. Initially 

the system addressed traffic on 75 miles of contiguous freeways in the Kansas City metropolitan area. By 

December 2008, the program had expanded to cover more than 100 miles of contiguous highway and fed 

information to electronic message boards, the Scout Web site, and the radio system. The Traffic Management 

Center operators continually communicate with MoDOT’s Motorist Assist Programs and the Kansas Highway 

Patrol to respond to thousands of incidents per year including clearing vehicle accidents and disabled vehicles in a 

timely manner, and alerting motorists of travel times, weather conditions, scheduled roadwork and Amber alerts. 

The Scout program was designed consistent with the concepts of the USDOT’s National ITS Architecture, 

which provides a common framework for planning, defining, and integrating ITS. A regional ITS architecture 

 

21 AZTech Partnership. Data Exchange with Transit. http://www.aztech.org/trafmgmt/data_transit.htm. Accessed February 4, 2010. 
Section 4: Regional Level Opportunities 

 56 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

developed by the MPO already exists, which was based on existing conditions and projections for what the 

region would look like in the future. 

Working across State lines was particularly challenging considering each state’s separate budgets and everyone 

had to be comfortable with the amounts that were programmed into the STIP. Operational costs were 

established based on the amount of infrastructure being built. Each DOT decided to provide their own full 

time employees rather than consultants in order to manage staff more effectively. 

The DOTs are conducting a cost benefit analysis using the ITS Deployment Analysis System; however, they 

have already seen tremendous improvements with an estimated 8:1 benefit back to the taxpayers. The success 

of the program is dependant on the active participation in operations among all partner agencies including, 

MoDOT Motorist Assist, Kansas Highway Patrol, local law enforcement and incident management agencies, 

and internal DOT maintenance/construction personnel. The strategic plan and the business plan are 

continually updated and expansion of the Scout project is programmed through 2010. 

More information is available at www.kcscout.net. Contact: Jason Simms, Traffic Center Manager, 

ervin.sims@modot.mo.gov. 

Indiana DOT: Indiana Traffic Incident Management Effort (IN-TIME) 

The Indiana Quick Clearance Working Group was formed in 2008 to develop and recommend policy and 

operational protocols for the safe and efficient mitigation of traffic incidents. The Group takes a 

multidisciplinary approach to addressing traffic incidents and has worked to develop a common framework for 

the development of traffic incident management policies and training programs across the various responder 

disciplines. The Group is comprised of public and private sector stakeholders, and is jointly led by the Indiana 

State Police, Indiana Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Indiana Department of 

Homeland Security, and the Indiana Department of Emergency Management. Others they hope to get involved 

include insurance companies, the Department of Education, the Coroner’s office and any other organization 

that has a stake in the improved operation and safety of Indiana roads. Members of the Working Group were 

divided into three multidisciplinary task forces to focus on specific issues including emergency management 

systems, law enforcement, transportation, towing/recovery, health/environment, and homeland security. Each 

task force was then asked to document common practices and provide recommendations for improving traffic 

incident management policies and training programs across the various responder disciplines. 

The Quick Clearance, later renamed the Indiana Traffic Incident Management Effort (IN-TIME), is modeled 

after the FHWA Traffic Incident Management program (TIM), which is the organized cooperative effort of 

multiple agencies to detect and verify incidents, respond and mange the scene, and manage traffic. IN-TIME 

also uses “Quick Clearance,” which is the practice of safely and rapidly removing temporary obstructions from 

the roadway. Because Indiana traffic incident responders from all disciplines (ISP/LE, INDOT, 

Fire/Rescue/EMS, and Towing recovery cleanup) respond differently to incidents, the objective is to get all 

first responders to follow agreed-upon multilateral policies and procedures to provide the traveling public 

safety by reducing congestion and the higher risks of secondary crashes by clearing vehicles, victims, and debris 

from the travel lanes of all Indiana roadways. Policy changes and training are the two biggest challenges for the 

future. Many opportunities to address these challenges will likely be captured through improved legislation and 

improved standard operating procedures, which do not necessarily require funding. 

The Working Group is starting to reach out to the planning community, but have not yet gotten them on 

board, however, a representative from the Fort Wayne MPO attends the monthly meeting. Although IN-TIME 

is not funded through the long-range plan, it is an excellent example of a cooperative effort that looks to be 

successful in managing traffic incidents to reduce congestion and improve highway safety without using funds 

that are then available for other transportation needs. 

More information is available at www.indianaquickclearance.org/. Contacts: Guy Boruff 

(GBORUFF@indot.IN.gov), Jay Wasson (JWASSON@indot.IN.gov), Kimberly Peters (kpeters@indot.IN.gov), 

Jason Sewell (JLSEWELL@idem.IN.gov), Karen Stippich (Karen.Stippigh@fhwa.dot.gov). 
Section 4: Regional Level Opportunities 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 57 

Support Data Sharing and Analysis Tools for Use by MPOs 

Description Data collection for support of regional analysis is a major effort for the planning staff, 

whether this staff resides within the DOT, an MPO, or a local planning agency. State 

DOTs’ operations and safety divisions often have a great wealth of data from Intelligent 

Transportation System (ITS) technologies and crash reporting systems that can help to 

advance planning, specifically focused on congestion and safety, at the MPO level. 

The MPO Congestion Management Process (CMP), required for transportation 

management areas (TMAs), represents a substantial opportunity for considering 

operations and safety data and analysis in planning. The CMP requires development of 

congestion objectives, a definition of congestion, development of congestion objectives, 

performance monitoring and data collection, identification of strategies, and analysis of 

strategy effectiveness. Operations and safety data can be used to help identify 

congestion problems (including recurring and non-recurring congestion), to support 

performance measures, and to evaluate the effectiveness of implemented strategies. 

State DOTs can also support planning in metropolitan areas through the development 

of tools and procedures for analyzing operations strategies. Since regional travel 

demand forecasting models are primarily geared toward capacity analyses, there is a 

need for effective analysis techniques to analyze and predict the effectiveness of 

operations strategies. Strategies developed within the CMP should be integrated into the 

metropolitan transportation plan and Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), 

which is incorporated into the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). 

Benefits  Helps facilitate more effective analyses of congestion problems, including both 

recurring and non-recurring congestion caused due to incidents, work zones, 

weather, and other factors. 

 Helps to support statewide goals for mobility and safety identified in the SLRTP. 

 Can be an effective and efficient use of existing resources, including ITS 

technologies that are already capturing travel information for real-time operations 

support that can be used for planning applications. 

Challenges Operational data are often collected to support technology and analysis requirements 

that are very different from those used by the planning staff. Sharing of completed 

analysis may be necessary rather than the raw data. This may require operations staff to 

perform analysis not required for their specific function, impacting the staff workload. 

Who is 

Involved 

 Operations, safety, and planning staff at any level in the organization. 

 MPO staff, transit agencies, and other organizations involved in regional planning. 

Recommended 

Implementation 

Steps 

1) Establish interface between operations, safety, and planning staff to identify data 

being collected and available for use. 

2) Identify ways in which existing data may support planning efforts as well as data 

needs that are not currently collected. 

3) Consider how individual technologies or analyses may enhance both perspectives. 

4) Based on the level of need, resource requirements, and the overall opportunities for 

improvement, operations staff may provide the required data analysis for use by the 

planning staff. 

5) Ongoing collaboration on data needs and availability. 

4.2 
Section 4: Regional Level Opportunities 

 58 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Relevant Examples 

New York State DOT: Data Sharing and Coordination with Albany MPO 

During the 2007 update to the Albany, New York long-range regional transportation plan, called “New Visions 

for a Quality Region”, the Capital District Transportation Committee (CDTC) convened five working groups 

to address emerging issues and help staff analyze those that required further study. One of the groups, Working 

Group B,22 focused on investigating expressway function and operational needs as well as physical 

infrastructure needs and projected costs. Working Group B was made up of representatives of the Capital 

District Transportation Authority – the designated MPO for the Albany-Schenectady-Troy metropolitan area, 

New York State DOT (NYSDOT), the New York State Thruway Authority and a Quality Region Task Force 

member. Working Group B noted the expressway system was in need of repair, yet estimated costs just to 

maintain the system were much greater than the anticipated funding. At the same time, increasing traffic 

volumes and congestion were expected to lead to increasingly longer congested peak periods. Working Group 

B also found “that incident related delay is more severe and more unacceptable than recurring delay.” 

However, traffic congestion related to incident delays and the magnitude of its effect on congestion could not 

be predicted using the MPO’s standard data and travel demand model.23 

In an effort to address these congestion issues, the CDTC analyzed the Management Information System for 

Transportation (MIST) data routinely collected by the NYSDOT. MIST provides real-time speed, volume, and 

incident data on each lane of a designated expressway segment every 15 minutes throughout the year. The data 

were also used to reconstruct incidents and understand how they were handled.24 CDTC staff used the MIST 

data to model future demand under two growth scenarios in an attempt to qualify and quantify how the 

expressway system operated during incidents and identify alternative strategies and solutions. The results 

showed that no feasible capital improvements such as widening would eliminate the daily recurring congestion 

in peak hours. However, it also concluded “that ITS, incident management and operational improvements were 

the most effective strategies for expressway congestion management.” ITS improvements on arterials would 

also have direct benefits to expressway travel by providing alternative routes during expressway incidents. 

The process of using existing data routinely collected by NYSDOT Operations and providing it to the CDTC 

has allowed the MPO to take a more holistic approach to planning that addresses the day-to-day operations of 

the expressway system. Armed with this information, the MPO can facilitate building consensus among 

operating agencies about priorities and project programming within their limited budgets. A bi-product of the 

data exchange has been the proactive collaboration between NYSDOT and CDTC and other participants, to 

give the interpretation of the data meaning and legitimacy.25 This collaboration is being continued with the 

CDTC Regional Operations Committee, which also includes cities and towns and their operations 

departments. The NYSDOT Regional Director has been supportive of operations data exchange between 

CDTC and NYSDOT, which has led to cooperation at the staff and management levels at both agencies.26

More information is available at http://www.cdtcmpo.org/rtp2030/b-materials.htm. Contact: Mary Ivey, 

Regional Director, New York State DOT, MIvey@dot.state.ny.us, (518) 388-0388 or Mary Anne Marriotti, 

P.E., Regional Asset Manager, New York State DOT Region 1, MAMariotti@dot.state.ny.us, (518) 388-0439. 

Virginia DOT: Data Sharing and Coordination with Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization 

(HRTPO) 

The Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization (HRTPO), the MPO for the Hampton Roads 

metropolitan area, aggressively compiles and uses operations data (including crash data, incident data, 

continuous count data, and volumes for both CMP and non-CMP roadways) from the Virginia DOT (VDOT) 

to identify congested locations, which ultimately influences its Congestion Management Process (CMP). 

HRTPO was the first MPO in its region to complete a comprehensive travel time study using global 

positioning system (GPS) technology for data collection and geographic information system (GIS) technology 

for data analysis. Travel time data was collected on more than 1,100 miles of roadway. HRTPO compiled this 

 

22 The final Working Group B report is available at http://www.cdtcmpo.org/rtp2030/materials/wb-doc.pdf. 

23 Capital District Transportation Committee. Working Group B Report : Expressway System Options. April 2007. 

24 Bryan Menyuk, New York State Department of Transportation. Telephone interview with C. Paulsen, ICF on Jan. 30, 2009. 

25 Ibid. 

26 Christopher O’Neill, Capital District Transportation Committee. Email to L. Wallis, ICF on January 19, 2009. 
Section 4: Regional Level Opportunities 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 59 

data on its GIS maps using a customized ArcView application to generate travel time contour maps, which they 

ultimately used to assess the performance of the area’s transportation system. HRTPO also compared travel 

time contour maps from previous studies to determine improvements or degradation in travel time for each 

area. HRTPO is planning to begin collecting ITS data from VDOT and local jurisdictions included within the 

planning district area to conduct travel time analysis on a system-wide basis. The MPO will also be using 

Automated Vehicle Location (AVL) data from express transit routes to support this effort. HRTPO anticipates 

that this analysis will be complex, and will be constrained by the pace of ITS infrastructure deployment. One 

issue with which they are grappling is that of accuracy; loop detectors can malfunction frequently enough to 

skew the data collected. VDOT currently operates a regional Transportation Operations Center, which 

provides ITS coverage for 120 miles of the interstate system. Volume and speed data from the Center is 

archived by VDOT and made available to outside parties for research purposes. 

HRTPO has created an incident management plan for the region, and also developed a Regional Concept of 

Transportation Operations (RCTO) in coordination with VDOT. The RCTO states the shared regional 

objective for transportation operations and what is needed to achieve that objective – physical improvements, 

relationships and procedures, and resource arrangements. The RCTO process helps to coordinate between 

regional planners and transportation operations managers. Hampton Roads’ motivation for developing an 

RCTO came from high profile incidents at bridges/tunnels and within other high traffic volume corridors that 

caused major delays and led the HRTPO Board to request HRTPO staff and VDOT find ways to improve

incident management. The RCTO’s guiding principles include broadening operational cooperation, elevating 

Quick Clearance principles, expanding and enhancing existing MOUs, and reducing congestion caused by 

crashes and disabled vehicles. Hampton Roads uses clearance time, lane blockages, and diversion response as 

performance measures. The final RCTO is a document that describes common procedures and concepts, 

focusing on incident management.27 

More information is available at http://www.hrtpo.org. Contact: Stephany Hanshaw, Hampton Roads Smart 

Traffic Center, Stephany.Hanshaw@VDOT.Virginia.gov, (757) 424-9907 or Mike Corwin, Regional Traffic 

Engineer for the Hampton Roads District, Mike.Corwin@VDOT.Virginia.gov, (757) 925-6020 or Keith 

Nichols, Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization, KNichols@hrpdcva.gov, (757) 420-8300. 

Florida DOT: FITSEVAL Planning Tool 

Florida DOT (FDOT) developed an analysis tool called FITSEVAL that is designed for regional sketch 

planning analysis to assess the benefits of ITS strategies. The tool is a collaborative effort between FDOT’s 

System Planning Office and its ITS Section, and was created to support assessment of ITS scenarios together 

with infrastructure investments within regional long-range transportation planning. The tool can be used in 

connection with regional travel demand forecasting models to analyze a wide range of ITS deployments, 

including ramp metering, signal control, transit vehicle signal priority, emergency vehicle signal priority, transit 

electronic payment systems, smart work zones, and road weather information systems. The modeler inputs 

information on deployment locations and other parameters, and the tool provides outputs in terms of savings 

in delay (vehicle hours), safety (fatalities, injuries, property damage only), fuel consumption, and vehicle 

emissions, as well as a monetized estimate of benefits. The default ITS impact parameters were derived from a 

review of previous evaluation studies, the U.S. Department of Transportation’s ITS benefits database, and the 

values used in existing ITS sketch planning tools. The user is also able to change the default ITS impact 

parameters and perform sensitivity analysis. 

More information is available at http://www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/ and http://www.dot.state.fl.us/ 

trafficoperations/ITS/ITS.shtm. Contact: Vidya Mysore, Systems Planning Office, vidya.mysore@dot.state.fl.us, 

(850) 414-4924. 

 

27 AASHTO Congestion Management Workshop: Meeting Report. Prepared for FHWA by ICF International, November 15, 2007. Presented by Keith Nichols, Hampton Roads 

Planning District Commission. 
Section 4: Regional Level Opportunities 

 60 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Support Integration for Federal Lands, Native American Tribes, and Rural Areas 

Description Rural areas, national parks and other tourist destinations, and Native American tribal 

lands often experience unique congestion and safety challenges. For instance, national 

parks may have major traffic congestion issues during vacation periods for several weeks 

or months of the year. These traffic congestion problems often also create safety issues, 

but are not effectively addressed through highway capacity solutions, given environmental 

and aesthetic issues, and limited periods of high volumes. Transportation system 

management strategies and planning, through use of transit shuttles, park-and-ride lots, 

and traveler information systems often are particularly effective in this context. Tribal 

lands also often have unique transportation and coordination challenges that can benefit 

from improved collaboration with State DOT operations, safety, and planning functions. 

Benefits  Reduced congestion without the need to increase capacity, and improved modal 

options. 

 Increased safety for motorists. 

 Improved air quality and environmental outcomes. 

Challenges  Limited relationships and on-going coordination may exist with key entities, such as 

Native American tribes, and federal lanes, in comparison to with MPOs. 

 These organizations may have limited staff and resources. 

Who is 

Involved 

DOT operations, safety, and planning staff must work together with the organizations 

or agencies responsible for the region, such as tribal governments, federal lands, and 

local governments. Transit providers may be a resource for providing service or 

assistance in identifying appropriate infrastructure. 

Recommended 

Implementation 

Steps 

1) As applicable, meet with Rural Planning Organization (RPO), Tribal DOT, or 

venue management agency or organization to establish full understanding of the 

needs, issues, resources, and other potential partners. 

2) Identify full list of potential solutions by holding discussions among functional areas. 

3) Vet solutions with venue management and other local partners as well as DOT 

management to eliminate solutions which cannot be supported. 

4) Engage the local public for review of potential solutions and input. 

5) Identify preferred solution and develop planning documents. 

6) Submit solution to appropriate organization/ agency for TIP or other funding. 

Relevant Examples

South Dakota DOT: Safety Study with Local Tribes28

Safety issues continue to be a concern for both the State and Tribes, as South Dakota has one of the highest 

motor vehicle crash rates in the country. Road-specific safety issues have traditionally been addressed at the 

annual STIP process, with Tribes presenting information on unsafe roadways in their area to SDDOT officials. 

However, recent research of motor vehicle crash reporting on South Dakota’s nine reservations identified 

opportunities for increased coordination with the State to more effectively report crashes and use crash data to 

identify hazardous roadways across both the State and IRR systems. The Lower Brule Sioux Tribe proposed 

that SDDOT fund a statewide study to investigate the extent of crash underreporting, identify factors 

contributing to underreporting, and recommend ways to encourage and enable more complete reporting. 

SDDOT agreed that a multiyear crash reporting analysis was necessary and procured consultants for the study. 

 

28 South Dakota Department of Transportation. Public Involvement Plan. July 2009. http://www.sddot.com/docs/PublicInvolvementPlan7102009.pdf. Accessed February 4, 2010. 

4.3 
Section 4: Regional Level Opportunities 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 61 

The final recommendations from the study identified a need for the South Dakota Department of Public Safety 

(SDDPS) to provide training tailored to Tribal law enforcement; for SDDOT and SDDPS to work with Tribal 

councils and governments to establish crash reporting as a priority for tribal and BIA law enforcement; for 

SDDPS to provide funding opportunities for tribes to improve crash reporting and tracking; and for SDDPS to 

make reporting as easy as possible for tribes. Since the research was completed, SDDOT has emphasized crash 

reporting in its ongoing Tribal consultation process, and SDDPS has initiated collaborative efforts and grants 

to improve manual crash reporting and to enable Tribes to use the state’s automated crash reporting system. 

Contact: David Huft, Research Program Manager, South Dakota DOT, Dave.Huft@state.sd.us, (605) 773-

3358 or James Carpenter, Office of Highway Safety, South Dakota Department of Public Safety, 

James.Carpenter@state.sd.us, (605) 773-4949. 
Section 4: Regional Level Opportunities 

 62 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Self-Assessment Checklist: Regional Opportunities 

The following checklist may be used as a self-assessment to identify regional opportunities for integrating 

operations, safety, and multimodal planning. The user should consider the questions, whether or not the State 

DOT is undertaking the activity, and what can be done to improve integration. 

Checklist: Regional Opportunities 

Question Yes No If no, what can be added or improved? 

Relevant 

Sub-Section

Are operations, safety, and planning staff working 

together to address regional challenges, such as 

incident management, work zone management, or 

emergency management? 

 

4.1 

Has a regional concept for transportation 

operations (RCTO) been developed? 

 4.1 

Are operations and/or safety data being shared with 

MPOs, transit agencies, and other agencies 

responsible for regional planning? 

 

4.2 

Are State DOT planners, operations, and safety 

staff participating in the Congestion Management 

Process? 

 

4.2 

Are congestion and safety challenges in rural areas, 

tribal lands, and national parks being addressed 

through a cooperative approach involving State 

DOT operations and safety staff? 

 

4.3 

Is coordination with tribal governments, federal 

lands, transit agencies, and other agencies on 

planning and investment studies incorporating 

operations and safety considerations? 

 

4.3 

4.4 
Section 5: Corridor and Sub-Area Level Opportunities 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 63 

Section 5

Corridor and Sub-Area Level Opportunities

Corridor and sub-area, or sub-regional, planning represents a highly flexible aspect of long range planning. 

Best practices that have developed within this planning level tend to be highly inclusive and consider a wide 

range of potential solutions. Another basis for this flexibility is the ability to apply the term to many different 

types of studies: urban or rural and/or large geographic areas or relatively small congestion “hot spots.” 

Regardless of the specific study area under consideration, it is highly beneficial to consider all potential 

strategies for improving mobility, providing access, or relieving congestion. 

Sub-regional planning also offers a wide range of opportunities to 

integrate operations, safety, and multimodal planning, largely due to 

the finer scale at which potential improvements can be considered and 

the greater potential for more short-term action. 

Considering opportunities for improvement supports the inclusion of 

many partners and stakeholders. The creation of a multidisciplinary 

team is highly recommended for integrating operations and safety into 

planning, and is very appropriate at the sub-regional level. In addition, 

the opportunity for public-private partnerships is most obtainable at the corridor level where stakeholders can 

see a more direct impact and are willing to support a positive change. 

There are several challenges to integration of operations and safety into multimodal planning at the subregional level. Some examples are: 

 Operations staff is stretched very thin on directly supporting their mission and have little time to devote to 

providing planning assistance. 

 Planning staff are often unfamiliar with the analysis and tools used to support the use of operational strategies. 

 Operations and safety data may not be compatible with planning analysis needs. 

 The regional travel demand model may not be sufficient to support corridor operations and safety analysis. 

Section Content 

Three opportunities or steps are described for integrating operations, safety, and multimodal planning at the 

corridor and sub-area level. 

 Utilize Operations/Safety Data and Tools within Corridor Studies 

 Develop Operations and Safety Strategies within Corridor Plans 

 Develop Corridor System Management Plans 

While these opportunities can be considered individually, they are best considered in combination. The 

development of Corridor System Management Plans (CSMPs) is a strategic application of data and tools, and 

identification of operations and safety strategies. Several of these strategies may be adjusted to both the 

regional and project levels given that corridor planning spans the gap between these two levels of planning. The 

following sections describe these opportunities as well as supporting information on implementation. 

Overarching Themes 

 Bringing together multidisciplinary 

teams 

 Developing and using performance 

measures 

 Utilizing operations and safety data in 

tracking performance measures 
Section 5: Corridor and Sub-Area Level Opportunities 

 64 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Utilize Operations/Safety Data and Tools Within Corridor Studies 

Description Operations and safety data are continuously collected for a variety of specific purposes. 

For example, traffic cameras are placed to continuously record in areas of ongoing high 

congestion for real-time traffic monitoring and incident response. These data – addressing 

issues such as the number and type of crashes, amount of incident-based delay, and 

variability in speeds – can be used within corridor and sub-area studies to identify the key 

sources of congestion, causes of safety problems, and to pinpoint problem areas. These 

data, and tools for analyzing data, can be used to help identify potential solutions, 

including operations and safety strategies that may not commonly be considered in the 

planning process.

Benefits  Real-time data provides a better understanding of the baseline condition needed for 

long range planning. 

 Supports the ability to establish trend lines with respect to crash history, 

congestion, and other traffic flow attributes. 

 Provides a baseline for comparison of existing and future conditions, including 

support for systematic safety improvements. 

 Operations technology provides a more detailed analysis of traffic flow 

characteristics, including addressing reliability and issues such as incident-based, 

work-zone, and weather-related delays.

Challenges  Data collected by operations and safety staff is intended for specific uses within 

those functions. Using this data more broadly may require the data to be 

reformatted or otherwise adjusted to support planning needs and interests. 

 In addition to the need for data manipulation, it may be necessary for planners to 

receive training or otherwise rely on operations staff for analysis that uses this data.

Who is 

Involved 

Data collection and management personnel within each of the functional areas will be 

needed to share a full understanding of data available as well as data needs. Staff who 

use the data should be included to validate the usefulness of the data identified for 

planning use. 

Recommended 

Implementation 

Steps 

1) Operations and safety provide a detailed list of available data, its attributes, and 

relevant timeframe. 

2) Operations and safety identify available tools and technology that are currently used 

to support analysis using this data. 

3) Planners consider how identified data and analysis techniques may be used to 

support planning level analysis/information needs. 

4) Conduct a multidisciplinary meeting to discuss data sharing and potential 

collection and analysis activities. Future data collection can be informed by this 

exchange of information. 

5) Consider cross-training or internal collaboration on data analysis to allow full use of 

collected data and analysis methods.

5.1 
Section 5: Corridor and Sub-Area Level Opportunities 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 65 

Relevant Examples 

Virginia DOT: Virginia Tech I-66 Congestion Tracking Application 

VDOT’s Real-Time Freeway Performance Monitoring System provides an example of the type of operations 

information that planners and senior managers can use to make better investment decisions. VDOT partnered 

with Virginia Tech to implement this system and deploy the congestion tracking application in Northern 

Virginia. Data and performance information are now available on I-66 and I-395. 

The system provides transportation performance information such that the operators can make critical realtime decisions, including the reversal of HOV lanes. Data are provided on network links (generally 1 to 2 miles 

in length) and include speed, volume, occupancy, and flow for the current time as well for each hour for the 

previous 3 hours. In addition, travel time, delay, and vehicle-miles traveled can be viewed in real time, but can 

also be compared to yesterday or any day last week, last month, or last year. Data has been archived since the 

system was implemented. 

This application provides an opportunity to support transportation planning efforts by strengthening the 

understanding of congestion on these facilities in the present as well as identify those operational strategies 

which may help to relieve congestion. The lessons learned may be applicable to similar areas outside of this 

specific corridor. While VDOT views this tool as critical to facilitating real-time systems management and 

operations, the types of data collected and processed have important planning implications as well. These data 

can be used to easily understand the before-and-after measurements of programmed improvements and can 

help make the case for additional operational enhancements. 

More information is available at Short Presentations from Transportation Agency Committee Members on Hot Topics or 

Research/Development Needs, Virginia DOT, http://www.trb-freewayops.org/reports.html. Contact: Ling Li, 

VDOT Northern Virginia Regional Operations Center, Ling.Li@VDOT.Virginia.gov. 

California DOT: Freeway Performance Measurement Project and Performance Management System (PeMS) 

The Performance Measurement System (PeMS) is the result of a research project partnership involving the 

University of California, at Berkeley, California DOT (Caltrans), California Partners for Advanced Transit and 

Highways (PATH), and Berkeley Transportation Systems. The intent of this project is to create and refine a 

performance measurement system that receives and preserves real-time data from all automated traffic sensors 

located on the State Highway System. The PeMS then uses the real time data to calculate a variety of 

performance measures. More specifically, the PeMS is used to determine the exact location and extent of delay 

and to investigate potential causes of delay. The PeMS also offers the added benefit of assisting in determining 

the operating performance of Caltrans’ roadway data collection and dissemination systems. 

The data that are gathered and the resulting information provided are critical for conducting timely, detailed 

analyses on historical State Highway performance as well as for pinpointing bottlenecks to assist in determining 

the potential impact of strategies to alleviate bottlenecks either by operations strategies or investing in capital 

improvements. With PeMS, Caltrans managers can instantaneously obtain uniform and comprehensive 

assessments of State Highway System performance measures at each detector location. Measures include 

vehicle miles traveled, vehicle hours traveled and delay. The PeMS also provides vital information from other 

data sources including the California Highway Patrol (CHP) Incident Collection, which publishes incidents on 

its web page, which is updated every few minutes and the Traffic Accident Surveillance and Analysis System 

(TASAS), which is an accident database created and maintained by Caltrans. 

The data are transferred through the Caltrans wide area network (WAN) to which all districts are connected. 

Traffic engineers are able to both determine operational inefficiencies and base operational decisions by using 

knowledge of current conditions. The system also helps to evaluate optimal placement for traffic control 

equipment, such as ramp-metering devices, variable message signs, and/or active traffic management devices. 

In short, PeMS serves to provide the data and information that is critical for assessing the need for and guiding 

the deployment of ITS. 

The PeMS obtains 30-second loop detector data in real-time from each Caltrans District Transportation 

Management Center (TMC) that has automated detector data. The 30-second data received by PeMS consist of 

traffic count (number of vehicles crossing a loop), and occupancy (the average fraction of time a vehicle is 
Section 5: Corridor and Sub-Area Level Opportunities 

 66 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

present over a loop). The software processes the data in real-time, performs diagnostics on the data to 

determine if a loop detector is faulty; calculates speed for each lane; imputes for any missing data; and 

computes performances measures. 

In an effort to assist engineers and planners alike in taking advantage of the PeMS capabilities, Caltrans 

frequently offers PeMS training where individuals from the Planning and Operations Divisions are encouraged 

to come together to better understand each other's data and informational needs and the technologies and 

techniques used to acquire them. A separate PeMS training has also been used to support Corridor System 

Management Plans development (see section 5.3). The system is particularly beneficial for Web users, the 

primary target audience for the PeMS data, because it allows personnel from various job types to access the 

data and use it for a variety of purposes. 

More information is available at: http://pems.dot.ca.gov/. Contact: Dr. Nick Compin, PeMS Operations 

Branch, Caltrans Division of Traffic Operations, Nicholas_Compin@dot.ca.gov, (916) 651-1247. 

Toolkit: Sample Data for Monitoring System Performance 29

Data System Associated Data 

Traffic monitoring and detection 

systems 

 vehicle volume 

 speed 

 travel time 

 classification 

 weight 

 position trajectories 

Traveler information systems  current traffic conditions (e.g., travel time, speed, level of congestion) 

 traffic incidents 

 work zone and/or lane closures 

Traffic control systems  time and location of traffic control actions (e.g., ramp metering, traffic signal 

control, lane control signals, message board content) 

Incident and emergency 

management systems 

 location 

 cause 

 extent 

 time history of roadway incident/emergency detection and clearance 

Advanced public transit systems  transit vehicle passenger boardings by time and location (using automatic vehicle 

location (AVL) or global positioning system (GPS)) 

 route travel time (time spent in-transit versus dwell time) 

 passenger origins and destinations 

 percentage of seats occupied (capacity utilization) 

 schedule adherence 

 automatic passenger counts (APCs) to measure the number of people that board 

at each stop 

 percentage of residences within a specified distance from a transit stop 

Relevant Resources 

Federal Transit Administration, Transit Performance Monitoring System, http://www.fta.dot.gov/publications/ 

reports/other_reports/publications_5677.html. 

Federal Highway Administration, Corridor Traffic Management, http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/program_areas/ 

corridor_traffic_mgmt.htm. 

Research and Innovative Technology Administration, Integrated Corridor Management Systems,

http://www.its.dot.gov/icms/index.htm. 

 

29 U.S. Department of Transportation. “Data Collection and Sharing.” Available at: http://www.plan4operations.dot.gov/data_coll.htm. Accessed July 7, 2009. 
Section 5: Corridor and Sub-Area Level Opportunities 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 67 

Develop Operations and Safety Strategies Within Corridor Plans

Description At the corridor study level, there is the potential to effectively integrate operations and 

safety strategies and to address a full range of solutions to congestion, access, or 

mobility issues. This opportunity can be supported through the use of multidisciplinary 

teams from the outset of sub-regional planning, and use of performance measures, data 

analysis, and tools (see section 5.1). To ensure integration, it is useful to make corridor 

studies broadly visible within the DOT and identify a full list of both internal and 

external participants.

Benefits  Offers potential for a wider range of solutions to be considered. 

 Helps to address the most pressing needs through improvements that can be quickly 

implemented. 

 May reduce the need for additional capacity both in the short and long term. 

Challenges Operations and safety staff have heavy workloads and specific missions which are 

outside of the planning effort. Including these individuals in planning efforts may put 

an additional workload burden on staff. Participation may be hampered by other 

responsibilities. 

Who is 

Involved 

Mid-level management or supervisory staff is the most useful interface for this 

opportunity in each of the functional areas as well as local staff and stakeholders. 

Recommended 

Implementation 

Steps 

1) Develop a list of internal functional representatives / units to be notified when a 

sub-regional study is initiated. 

2) Convene a working group of both internal and external participants to guide the study.

3) Hold a scoping meeting and encourage all study participants to identify data, plans, 

analysis available within the study area. 

4) As the group considers the existing information, identify all potential solutions to 

address needs.

Relevant Example 

North Carolina DOT: U.S. Route 64 Corridor Study 

NCDOT’s study on the US 64 corridor is part of its Strategic Highway Corridors initiative to improve mobility 

and connectivity, foster economic development, and promote environmental stewardship. The purpose of the 

study is to develop a master plan to preserve and enhance mobility and safety along US 64, while balancing 

community access and interests. This plan will be used to guide development and improvements along the 

corridor in this rapidly growing area. NCDOT is partnering with the MPO, local towns, and counties along the 

corridor in order to reach consensus on the study recommendations. 

The master plan includes two distinct components to improve mobility, safety and pedestrian accessibility at 

major intersections: a short-term plan, which focuses on operational strategies and includes modifications to 

medians, constructing turn lanes, and improving traffic signals coordination through the use of such designs as 

the superstreet intersection concept; and a 30-year long-term plan, which is focuses on strategies needed to 

serve the anticipated amount of traffic in the year 2035 and later, primarily by converting many of the major 

intersections to interchanges or overpasses. The intent is to implement the short-term solutions first to take 

advantage of the congestion relief, safety, and access management benefits that they offer. When these 

solutions can no long serve the amount of traffic, the proposed long-term solutions will be considered for 

implementation. This approach puts system operation ahead of capacity additions, and can be implemented 

with considerably less funding. In the event these operational strategies are no longer adequate in the future, 

infrastructure needs can be programmed for the period when the need is present. In addition to allowing 

5.2 
Section 5: Corridor and Sub-Area Level Opportunities 

 68 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

existing funding to be applied to the more direct needs, this approach supports the realistic scheduling of 

transportation improvements in the STIP. 

More information is available at: www.ncdot.org/~us64study. Contact: Dan Thomas, North Carolina DOT 

Transportation Planning Branch, danthomas@ncdot.gov, (919) 715-5482 ext. 389. 

Toolkit: Sample Strategies to Consider in Corridor and Project-Level Planning 

Considerations 

Strategy Description Operations Safety Applicability 

Access 

management 

Controls and manages the level of 

access permitted to adjacent land 

use based on the intended 

function of the highway that 

supports this use. This strategy can 

be considered in the design of a 

new facility or can be 

implemented through strategic 

changes to an existing roadway 

and adjacent development. 

Can improve 

traffic flow on 

major roadway by 

reducing turning 

movements, but 

can create traffic 

issues at the more 

limited number of 

access points 

Can improve safety by 

limiting the number of 

conflict points 

Arterials 

Traffic signal 

coordination 

Coordinating traffic signals so 

that stops are minimized and 

vehicles can move efficiently 

through the system. 

Improves mobility 

and trip duration. 

Could improve safety by 

reducing rear-end 

accidents at intersections; 

should consider 

implications on 

pedestrian/bicycle 

crossings 

Arterials 

Transit 

HOV/HOT 

lanes 

HOV is an acronym for High 

Occupancy Vehicle. Lanes 

designated to be HOV are only 

open to vehicles carrying a 

specified number of persons 

(generally 2 or 3). HOT is an 

acronym for High Occupancy 

Toll. HOT lanes are HOV lanes 

that allow vehicles carrying less 

than the specified number of 

persons to travel in the lane by 

paying a toll. 

Promotes carpool 

and transit usage 

by offering 

reduced travel 

time. Works to 

maximize lane 

capacity. 

Improves safety by 

reducing congestion and 

the potential for crashes. 

Freeways 

Ramp metering Using traffic signals at freeway onramps to control the rate at which 

vehicles enter the freeway. Proven 

success in the areas of congestion 

reduction, reduced travel time, and 

increased safety. 

Works to optimize 

freeway flow and 

to minimize 

congestion. 

Adjustable system 

that can respond to 

local or systemwide conditions. 

Increases safety by 

regulating the flow of 

vehicles onto freeways. 

Able to adapt to incident 

management conditions 

and regulate traffic flow. 

Freeways 

Pedestrian 

signals 

Illuminated “WALK” and 

“DON’T WALK” symbols to 

indicate when pedestrians can 

cross intersections. To assist 

persons with disabilities, audible 

pedestrian signals emit specific 

sounds denoting north-south or 

east-west crossings. 

Encourages and 

facilitates 

pedestrian use of 

the system. 

Reduces pedestrian 

injuries and fatalities by 

clearly notifying drivers 

and pedestrians alike 

when an intersection is 

safe to cross. 

Arterials 
Section 5: Corridor and Sub-Area Level Opportunities 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 69 

Toolkit: Sample Strategies to Consider in Corridor and Project-Level Planning 

Considerations 

Strategy Description Operations Safety Applicability 

Variable 

message signs 

An electronic traffic sign that 

alerts travelers about special 

events and traffic conditions. 

Improves mobility 

by giving travelers 

advanced warning 

about system 

conditions related 

to delay. 

Notify travelers of 

necessary reductions in 

speed due to congestion, 

construction, and 

location of incidents. 

Adaptable to changes in 

the system. 

Freeways 

Arterials 

Bus priority 

strategies 

Can shorten travel time on buses 

by applying a bus priority network 

control either through extending a 

green light or providing an early 

green light for buses. Can 

accommodate changes in traffic 

conditions. 

Can reduce trip 

duration and 

improve congestion 

by ensuring that 

buses move 

efficiently 

throughout the 

system. 

Increases safety by 

regulating the flow of 

buses along arterials. Can 

adapt to incident 

management conditions. 

Transit 

Relevant Resources 

Federal Highway Administration, Corporate Research and Technology, Integrated Corridor Management Systems 

Program Plan, http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/crt/roadmaps/icmprgmplan.cfm. 

NCHRP, Project 05-58: Development of a Multimodal Statewide Corridor Planning Guidebook, http://144.171.11.40/

cmsfeed/TRBNetProjectDisplay.asp?ProjectID=934. 

NCHRP, Report 435: Guidebook for Transportation Corridor Studies: A Process for Effective Decision-Making,

http://pubsindex.trb.org/view.aspx?id=639918. 
Section 5: Corridor and Sub-Area Level Opportunities 

 70 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Develop Corridor System Management Plans 

Description A Corridor System Management Plan (CSMP) is a comprehensive, integrated 

management plan for increasing transportation options, decreasing congestion, and 

improving transportation system performance in a transportation corridor. A CSMP can 

address the entire network of travel options and technologies in a defined corridor – 

freeways, managed lanes, parallel arterials and connecting roadways, and public transit, 

along with technologies and operations programs such as ramp metering, coordinated 

traffic signals, variable message signs, and incident management. CSMPs are typically 

multijurisdictional, and provide for the integrated management of travel modes and 

roadways. A CSMP involves an analysis of existing and future traffic conditions, and 

considers how to best meet identified needs through current and near-term 

management strategies, operational improvements, and additions to capacity. The 

CSMP will build on the coordination with the MPO and other partners in this process. 

Benefits  Takes a more comprehensive view of near-term and long-term strategies involving 

operations strategies, safety programs, and capital enhancements. 

 Addresses a network of systems (road infrastructure, technology, transit services) 

rather than just individual components or jurisdictions. 

 Assists in the decision making process to identify which improvements should be 

funded and in what priority order. 

Challenges  Requires support / consensus from potentially large number of stakeholders. 

 System performance data may be complex and take time and funding to utilize 

effectively. 

Who is 

Involved 

 Operations and safety staff, who will provide performance data, inventory existing 

management strategies, and participate in development of plan. 

 Planning staff at the State DOT, MPOs, RPOs and other stakeholders. 

 Transit providers, who operate services and bring planning perspectives. 

 Freight companies, major employers, bicycle and pedestrian interests, and other 

stakeholders who use the corridor. 

Recommended 

Implementation 

Steps 

1) Identify which corridors will be considered for developing a plan, based on 

existing information on mobility challenges (potentially through a CMP). 

2) Identify appropriate partners/stakeholders to be included in the process and 

establish a multijurisdictional, multimodal, and multifunctional team. 

3) Analyze existing and future year traffic conditions for a clear understanding of 

present and future deficiencies. 

4) Identify potential solutions for the short term and long term for addressing 

mobility challenges. Along with the potential solutions, the team should consider 

the impacts these solutions have on multiple planning goals (e.g., environmental, 

community development) and the resources (both financial and staffing) that will 

be needed to implement the solutions. 

5) Engage the public. Public comments, impacts, and necessary resources should all 

be considered when the team compares alternative solutions. 

6) Compare alternative solutions in order to identify preferred set of solutions. When 

all criteria have been evaluated, the team should select which solutions will be 

implemented, their order of prioritization, and how solutions will be monitored. 

7) Implement solutions following established prioritization. 

8) Monitor on-going system performance, and set in place on-going mechanisms to 

adapt the plan over time. 

5.3 
Section 5: Corridor and Sub-Area Level Opportunities 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 71 

Relevant Example 

California DOT: Multimodal Integrated Corridor Management Through Corridor System Management Plans 

Multimodal Integrated Corridor Management represents a new California DOT (Caltrans) policy implemented 

through Corridor System Management Plans (CSMPs) in each District.30 The idea of integrated management is 

based on the linkage of system planning and systems operation management. Caltrans uses system planning in 

its long-range transportation planning process to determine the current State and the future needs of its 

statewide transportation system. The system planning process takes into account the entire transportation 

system on and off the State Highway System (SHS)., including highways and arterials, inter- and intra-city 

transit services, railroads, airports, seaports, as well as bicycling, walking, goods movement, ITS, and local land 

use. The information provided by this evaluation process is used to make recommendations regarding 

necessary improvements that are needed to maintain mobility. 

Systems operation management uses existing methods and technologies that have been proven to maximize the 

efficiency and effectiveness of the existing statewide transportation infrastructure. The methods and 

technologies that are used are generally low-capital in comparison with added infrastructure—ramp metering, 

traffic information collection and distribution, incident management, high occupancy vehicle lanes, increased 

use of local arterial roadways that parallel service within an existing corridor, and demand management 

strategies including transit and rideshare marketing, flexible work hour schedules, and telecommuting. In 

addition to more efficiently and effectively using existing resources and planning activities, CSMPs assist in the 

decision making process to identify which improvements should be funded and in what priority order. 

Development of each CSMP involves a system 

management approach, which can be visualized 

through Caltrans’ Mobility Pyramid, depicting the 

major types of actions necessary to manage the SHS 

in a systematic way (above). Improvements, 

including system expansion, are recommended by 

evaluating each part of the corridor, from 

infrastructure conditions to operations needs. 

Supporting this strategy are several key technology 

components, including large scale traffic 

management centers. As a part of development of 

the CSMP detection projects are implemented early. 

Twenty-six corridors are currently in the planning 

process with seven detection projects underway.31

Within systems planning, Caltrans uses several types 

of tools along with sketch-planning and travel 

demand modeling which are typically used in 

operations such as HCM-based capacity analysis, 

signal optimization, and simulation. The range of 

tools used by Caltrans helps to ensure that the selected transportation solutions have a sound objective basis. 

Caltrans has also been working with the University of California at Berkeley and other related institutions to 

develop a real time performance measurement system (PeMS), which uses data obtained from detectors along 

the state’s freeways to provide historical and real-time information on freeway performance (see section 5.1). 

The information that is gathered is useful for conducting rapid, detailed response analyses on historical freeway 

performance. This system provides the foundation for the CSMP development. 

More information is available at http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist3/departments/planning/corridorplanning.html. 

Contact: John Wolf, Assistant Division Chief, Traffic Operations, John.Wolf@dot.ca.gov. 

 

30 California Department of Transportation. Corridor System Management Planning Website. http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist3/departments/planning/corridorplanning.html. 

Accessed 1/31/09. 

31 Wolf, John. California Corridor Congestion Management Practices. http://www.dot.ca.gov/newtech/modal/micm/micm-jwolf.ppt#281,33,CSMP Status. Accessed 2/1/09. 

Source: California DOT. District 4: Corridor System Management Plans. 

http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist4/transplanning/csmp.htm. Accessed April 26, 2010. 
Section 5: Corridor and Sub-Area Level Opportunities 

 72 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Self-Assessment Checklist: Corridor and Sub-Area Opportunities 

The following checklist may be used as a self-assessment to identify corridor and sub-area opportunities for 

integrating operations and safety into multimodal planning. The user should consider the questions, whether or 

not the State DOT is undertaking the activity, and what can be done to improve integration. 

Checklist: Corridor and Sub-Area Level Opportunities 

Question Yes No If no, what can be added or improved? 

Relevant 

Subsection

Are operations and/or safety data being used in 

assessing corridor system performance? 

 5.1 

Are reliability and other operations considerations 

(e.g., incident management, traveler information) as 

well as safety being considered within corridor studies?

 

5.2 

Is analysis being conducted to assess the benefits of 

operations and safety strategies? 

 5.2 

Are analysis tools being applied, such as simulation, to 

assess reliability and other operations considerations? 

 5.2 

Are operations and safety strategies and multimodal 

options being included in corridor plans? 

 5.2 

Do corridor system management and operations 

activities link back to planning efforts? 

 5.3 

5.4 
Section 6: Project Level Opportunities 

 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 73 

Section 6

Project Level Opportunities

Introduction 

The project development process provides opportunities to bring together operations, safety, and planning 

considerations. At this level, representatives of these functions commonly interact in order to consider detailed 

information and take more immediate action. Often this interaction is through a handoff in responsibility as 

each functional area applies the level of expertise necessary to develop a transportation improvement project. 

True integration would greatly enhance the steps throughout the project development phase. This begins with 

the concept of a multidisciplinary team, which is a cornerstone of integration of operations, safety, and 

planning. Project planning differs greatly from long range planning; 

however, the long range planning considerations of system-level effects 

and community considerations are essential to a successful project. 

At the project level, based on support for the project purpose and 

need, operations and safety staff often have a more established role 

than planning staff. The present condition of the facility identified for 

improvement requires an understanding of the level of service as well 

as the crash history. Operational improvements, such as ITS 

infrastructure, that are under consideration, can be identified and 

included in project planning. The consideration of project alternatives 

involves the consideration of both the short and long term benefits of 

the improvement. 

There has been a focus for many years on linking the planning and project development phases, and a great 

deal of guidance has been developed to support this interest. Many of the concepts for integrating planning 

into the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process also apply to integrating operations and safety 

into planning. Multimodal considerations are specifically addressed at the project level. 

Potential benefits to integrating operations, safety, and planning at the project level include: 

 Increased options for sharing identified funding—ultimately results in more cost-effective project. 

 Reduced need for additional/multiple projects with a solely operations or safety focus—more efficient, 

effective use of resources (funding, construction time and resulting delay, project development staff time). 

 Increased efficiency of the overall transportation system during project construction. 

 Reduced inconvenience to the system’s users by minimizing disruption and improving traffic flow. 

 Reduced potentially negative effects on businesses’ operations and sales through improved access. 

 Depending on the traffic management strategies selected, increase in work zone safety. 

Section Content 

Integration of operations and safety into each of the previously identified levels of planning sets the stage for 

successful integration at the project level. This section outlines project level opportunities in two particular areas: 

 Incorporate Operations and Safety into Project Planning 

 Incorporate Operations- and Safety-Related Traffic Management/Transportation Demand Management 

Strategies During Project Construction 

Overarching Themes 

 Bringing together multidisciplinary 

teams 

 Incorporating multimodal 

considerations into projects 

 Integrating fiscal considerations into 

project development 

 Incorporating operations- and safetybased strategies into projects 
Section 6: Project Level Opportunities

 74 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Incorporate Operations and Safety Into Project Planning 

Description In the project development process, there are several opportunities for linking planning, 

operations, and safety beginning with the scoping stage where operations and safety 

considerations can be incorporated. Operations considerations could include 

consideration of pricing, ramp metering, traveler information systems, and other ITS 

components. Safety considerations could include installing signs and pavement 

markings and maintaining visibility along roadways. Moreover, these considerations 

should include transit services and other multimodal aspects, such as bicycle, pedestrian, 

and transit access, safety, and efficiency of operations. Including these components 

from the very beginning of the project design and development process ensures that 

operations and safety considerations will have an identified, important role. 

Collaboration allows each functional area to benefit from projects and improvements 

being considered within other areas that already have identified funding.

Benefits  Increases options for combining identified funding—ultimately results in more 

cost-effective and comprehensive projects, addressing mobility and other 

community needs. 

 Reduces the need for additional/multiple projects with a solely operations, safety, 

or transit focus—more efficient, effective use of resources (funding, construction 

time and resulting delay, project development staff time). 

Challenges  Flexing funds from different functional areas for planning purposes may not be 

possible and pose a barrier to collaboration. 

 Gaining consensus from all stakeholders that project considerations encompass 

identified needs, are necessary, and will improve the system. 

Who is 

Involved 

 Project development and environmental staff. 

 Operations and safety staff can offer insight on including nontraditional planning 

considerations that can make projects more effective and potentially reduce the 

need for additional projects in the future. 

 Planning staff, to link planning goals and considerations into project development. 

 Transit, bicycle, and pedestrian specialists to consider these aspects. 

Recommended 

Implementation 

Steps 

1) Identify a project need using the SLRTP. At the State level, projects are often 

selected that will help maintain the overall transportation system, improve mobility, 

or increase safety. 

2) Prepare initial and final scoping document. As part of this preparation process, 

develop a multifunctional team to provide input on scoping components. The team 

should be composed of planners, operations staff, and safety staff to ensure that 

multifunctional considerations are incorporated initially in the process. 

3) Secure funding. The multifunctional team members should offer insight on 

operations of safety projects with secured funding. This will result in cost-effective 

solutions. 

4) Prepare environmental documentation. 

5) Gain public input on project characteristics. 

6) Gain consensus from all stakeholders (planners, operations staff, safety staff, and 

public) on project characteristics. 

7) Begin project construction. This stage lends itself to operations and safety strategies. 

6.1 
Section 6: Project Level Opportunities 

 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 75 

Relevant Examples 

Virginia DOT and the Northern Regions Operation Staff: ITS Tools and Plans in Support of Project 

Development 

VDOT NRO staff has made some significant progress in integrating operations components into the planning 

process for “nonoperations” or conventional transportation projects. This is primarily due to the outreach 

efforts of operations planning staff to proactively engage transportation planners, construction design staff, and 

other regional stakeholders with VDOT NRO’s plans and tools. VDOT NRO is a meld of planning and 

operations regions that includes the Virginia portion of the Metropolitan Washington MPO and the 

Fredericksburg MPO. The operations staff has significant ITS and signal-timing optimization experience and 

knowledge that can greatly enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of nonoperations alternatives and projects. 

One tool developed by operations planning staff is the ITS Decision Support Tool (www.vdot-itsdst.com). The 

tool helps transportation professionals identify potential ITS solutions for conventional transportation 

problems. Within this tool, ITS alternatives are centralized and organized to facilitate the identification of ITS 

solutions in response to transportation needs. This tool considers hundreds of various solutions and then uses 

cost-benefit information to help inform decision-making. When used within the planning process, the ITS 

Decision Support Tool helps bridge the gap between ITS awareness and the decision-making knowledge 

required by project-level staff. Additionally, it guides transportation professionals and practitioners in the 

consideration of ITS solutions when developing design alternatives. 

In addition to the ITS Decision Support Tool, VDOT NRO staff also developed ITS Device Master Plans for 

Dynamic Message Signs (DMS), Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Cameras, and Detection. These master 

plans can be overlaid with construction plans to identify opportunities to include ITS deployments in 

construction projects. VDOT NRO staff is also looking to complete master plans for other devices such as 

ramp metering, RWIS, and other active traffic management (ATM) strategies. All plans are consolidated in GIS. 

With these tools and through cooperation between operations planning staff and transportation planners and 

traffic engineers, VDOT’s NRO division is able to consider potential low-cost and effective ITS strategies that 

improve safety and increase the capacity of the existing transportation network. 

At this time, most of VDOT NRO’s success has been limited to engaging stakeholders at the project 

development level. Project funding supports full consideration of opportunities to include the addition of ITS 

enhancements in defined projects as well as the ability to take advantage of planned construction activities to 

install or upgrade ITS devices. The travel demand model, as the primary tool for long-range planning, does not 

interface well with the more micro-level analysis that supports operations planning. This deficiency can be most 

easily overcome at the corridor level, and the operations planning staff has sought opportunities to become 

involved at that level. The NRO operations staff has taken advantage of opportunities to participate in 

planning activities, as well as raise awareness throughout the region of the value that their tools and the ITS 

Master Plans can bring to the planning and implementation of conventional transportation projects. 

More information is available at http://www.vdot-itsarch.com. Contact: J.D. Schneeberger, Northern Region 

Operations Planner, John.Schneeberger@VDOT.Virginia.gov or Amy Tang McElwain, Northern Region 

Operations, Amytang.Mcelwain@VDOT.Virginia.gov or James Witherspoon, Northern Region Operations, 

Planning and Programming, James.Witherspoon@VDOT.Virginia.gov. 

Utah DOT: Operational Safety Report Process 

The Operational Safety Report (OSR) was traditionally solely used to provide information on the safety-related 

aspects of a proposed project, but these safety considerations did not play a role in the development of the 

scope of projects. After listening to feedback received from those using the report, Utah DOT (UDOT) 

decided the OSR information could play an important role much earlier in the project development process—

during the concept development and scoping phase. 

The process has been refined so that now, once the Traffic and Safety Operations Engineer has completed the 

OSR, a copy will be sent to the Project Manager overseeing the project for the particular region. The Project 

Manager reviews the OSR recommendations for inclusion into the project. If the recommendations are not 

included in the project, the decision is documented through the UDOT design exception process. 
Section 6: Project Level Opportunities

 76 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

The ultimate goal of aligning these processes is to provide the Project Manager with the valuable safety 

information contained in the OSR while the final concept and scope for a project is being developed. It is 

hoped that this will lead to safer projects and minimize project re-evaluation or design exceptions. 

More information is available at: http://www.udot.utah.gov/main/f?p=100:pg:0:::1:T,V:2938. Contact: Robert 

Hull, Traffic and Safety Engineer, rhull@utah.gov, (801) 965-4273. 
Section 6: Project Level Opportunities 

 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 77 

Incorporate Operations- and Safety-Related Traffic Management / Transportation Demand Management 

Strategies During Project Construction

Description Construction on roadways with existing high traffic demand presents a challenge in 

the short term in terms of maintaining safe and efficient travel conditions during the 

construction period. Work zone safety is often a major concern, as well as 

maintaining mobility and access during the construction period. Coordination among 

project development, operations, safety, and planning staff on project scheduling and 

funding for construction mitigation can help to minimize adverse impacts to the 

transportation system. 

There are many traffic management/transportation demand management strategies that 

can be implemented to help minimize the negative effects of construction on system 

users and simultaneously address operations and safety concerns. These include variable 

message signs, dynamic lane closure system, coordinating with adjacent construction 

sites, incident/emergency response plans, and ridesharing/carpooling incentives, and 

marketing and implementation of transit services. If fully integrated, some of these 

short-term strategies, such as transit services and demand management programs, could 

also be considered for inclusion in longer-term corridor management. 

Benefits  Increase the efficiency of the overall transportation system during project 

construction, while reducing inconvenience to system users and improving safety. 

 Reduce potentially negative effects on businesses’ operations and sales through 

improved access. 

Challenges  Major, long-term projects (“mega projects”) may require substantial resources for 

effective traffic management. 

 It may be difficult to balance multiple objectives, such as reducing construction 

time and minimizing lane closures during peak periods. While night-time 

construction is often helpful, this needs to be considered in the context of issues 

such as construction noise on adjacent communities. 

Who Is 

Involved 

 Operations staff will play a key role in identifying opportunities for implementing 

strategies to improve system efficiency. They should be consulted on simple, costeffective ways to improve mobility in work zones and on ways to minimize delay by 

maximizing lane capacity. 

 Safety staff can offer insight on ways to combine operations and safety strategies to 

maximize the safety benefits. 

 Planning staff will offer assistance on how best to incorporate safety and operations 

strategies into local and statewide plans. 

Recommended 

Implementation 

Steps 

1) Identify potential impacts on the system resulting from construction. Once a project 

scope has been identified and the project characteristics are known, estimate the likely 

impacts that will result by analyzing data on project characteristics. Based on these 

impacts, identify what scope of traffic management strategies should be considered. 

2) Develop goals and objectives to be achieved by the traffic management strategies. 

3) Develop a team of involved groups and interested parties to evaluate potential 

strategies to be implemented. 

4) Select traffic management strategies to be implemented. 

6.2 
Section 6: Project Level Opportunities

 78 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Relevant Examples 

Colorado DOT: I-25 and I-225 Reconstruction / Construction Demand Management32

In an effort to confront congestion along I-25, the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) and 

Regional Transportation District (RTD) initiated a multimodal design-build project called the Transportation 

Expansion Project, or T-REX. The T-REX Project was a $1.67 billion venture that transformed the way people 

in the metro Denver area travel along the southeast corridor of Interstates 25 and 225. The T-REX project 

added 19 miles of light rail and improved 17 miles of highway through southeast Denver, Aurora, Greenwood 

Village, Centennial and Lone Tree with capacity and safety improvements. T-REX construction began in fall 

2001 and finished on-time and within budget in 2006. 

The contractor hired to complete the T-REX Project, Southeast Corridor Constructors, made it a primary goal to 

reduce inconvenience to the public. As a result, $3 million of the budget was set aside for Transportation Demand 

Management activities during construction. Due to the fluid nature of a design-build project and the foresight of 

those involved, a number of project features were deployed to manage travel demand during construction. In 

November 2002, T-REX opened a temporary bus/HOV lane on I-25 to promote the benefit of higher 

occupancy modes. In May 2003, T-REX launched a real-time instant email alert system utilizing project ITS 

components as they became operational. Transportation Solutions partnered with other organizations in the area 

to provide outreach and incentives to encourage motorists to use alternative modes of transportation.33

TransOptions built on the success of the TMAs and TMOs and established demand-side programs implemented 

by local jurisdictions including the Denver Regional Council of Government’s RideArrangers. 

More information is available at http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/mitig_traf_cong/denver_case.htm. 

Contact: Reza Akhavan, Region 6 Transportation Director, Reza.Akhavan@dot.state.co.us, (303) 757-9459. 

Iowa DOT: Demand Management Strategy for I-235 Reconstruction34

A comprehensive transportation demand management (TDM) strategy was part of the reconstruction of I-235 in 

Des Moines. Based on local public input and traffic count data showing that congestion was only an issue during 

the morning and afternoon peak periods, the decision was made to do a limited build rather than a more 

expensive full build project, and to establish a goal to reduce travel demand by 10% during peak hours by the year 

2020 in order to maintain roadway performance. As part of the reconstruction, the Iowa DOT helped implement 

the Transportation Management Center and a Transportation Management Association (TMA) in 2002 to reduce 

traffic during the reconstruction project and to implement the long-range TDM plan. The TMA was tasked with 

promoting strategies such as flexible work hours, carpools, vanpools, and mass transit. Changes were also made to 

transit services, including adding routes, increasing park-and-ride services, and publicizing the rideshare program 

and other incentive programs. The TMA is now funded by the Des Moines Area Regional Transit Authority, city 

of Des Moines, Downtown Community Alliance, and Des Moines Area MPO. 

More information is available at http://www.iowadot.gov/i-235/. Contact: Lorne Wazny, District 1 

Transportation Planner, Lorne.Wazny@dot.iowa.gov, (515) 239-1996. 

Utah DOT: Using Technology and Demand Management Approaches During Reconstruction of I-1535

UDOT reconstructed 17 miles of I-15 in July 2001 using a design-build approach in order to rebuild the entire 

corridor before the 2002 Olympic Games. The project was completed in four and a half years at a cost of about 

$1.52 billion, with an initial ATMS investment of $70 million. An integral component of reconstruction 

involved enhancing the capacity of I-15 by adding two general purpose lanes, two HOV lanes and auxiliary 

lanes between interchanges. The project also involved improving access to downtown Salt Lake City, providing 

 

32 Transportation Solutions. T-REX Project and Southeast Light Rail. http://www.transolutions.org/?q=trex. Accessed 1/28/09. 

33USDOT, Federal Highway Administration, Office of Operations. I-25 & I-225 Reconstruction – Denver, CO. http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/mitig_traf_cong/ 

denver_case.htm. Accessed 1/16/09. 

34 American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Combating Congestion through Leadership, Innovation, and Resources: A Summary Report on the 2007 

National Congestion Summits. September, 2007. p. 30. 

35 US DOT, Federal Highway Administration Office of Operations. I-15 Reconstruction—Salt Lake City, UT. http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/mitig_traf_cong/slc_case.htm. 

Accessed 1/16/09.
Section 6: Project Level Opportunities 

 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 79 

railroad grade-separations, replacing deficient bridges and utilizing single-point interchange design. The project 

mitigated conflicting merging traffic movements and significant traffic congestion. 

UDOT used a combination of demand-side strategies to maintain traffic during reconstruction, one of which 

was the ITS system, CommuterLink. CommuterLink consists of a Traffic Operations Center, control software, 

and field equipment (VMS signs, cameras, and signal controllers). The comprehensive system includes a 511 

Traveler Information Line, coordinated signals, ramp meters, and speed, volume, weather and pavement 

sensors. UDOT installed the bulk of the $70 million worth of ATMS equipment using a design-build 

procurement method. CommuterLink was funded mostly by State funds ($52 million) with local ($1 million) 

and federal ($17 million) contributions. 

ATMS technology enabled jurisdictions to monitor construction impacts, respond to traffic accidents faster, 

and communicate with the motoring public. The UDOT TOC is directly linked to both the Salt Lake City and 

Salt Lake County Traffic Control Centers and the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) Radio Center to provide 

seamless communication between jurisdictions. UDOT also undertook a marketing campaign recognizing that 

one of the best ways to minimize traffic conflicts and delays on the interState during reconstruction was to 

reduce the number of vehicles on the road. Employers and employees were encouraged to participate in 

ridesharing opportunities provided by UTA and commuter transit services, the Telecommuting Directive, and 

the Corridor Business Program. Informational services included the use of the internet, highway advisory radio, 

media outlets, signing, seminars and open houses. 

The ATMS was put to the test for the 2002 Winter Olympic Games. After the conclusion of the games, 

program components were assessed. It was determined that by adjusting daily working hours, increased transit 

use, carpools, and utilizing alternate routes, the needs of residents, athletes, and spectators were successfully 

met. Beyond the games, CommuterLink has proven to be a very effective tool. During its first years of 

operation, it was attributed with the following successes: 

 Increased peak hour freeway speeds by 20%; 

 Decreased freeway delay by 36%; 

 Decreased traffic signal stops by 15%; and 

 Decreased Intersection delay by 27%. 

Overall, CommuterLink is estimated to save Utah more than $100 million annually. 

More information is available at http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/mitig_traf_cong/slc_case.htm. 

Contact: Christina Davis, Utah DOT I-15 Core Project Communications Manager, ChristinaDavis@utah.gov, 

(801) 341-6426. 

Toolkit: Work Zone Management Strategies by Category 

I. Temporary Traffic Control 

A. Control Strategies B. Traffic Control Devices[2] 

C. Project Coordination, Contracting, 

and Innovative Construction Strategies 

IA1. Construction phasing/staging 

IA2. Full roadway closures 

IA3. Lane shifts or closures 

 Reduced lane widths to maintain number 

of lanes (constriction) 

 Lane closures to provide worker safety 

 Reduced shoulder width to maintain 

number of lanes 

 Shoulder closures to provide worker safety 

 Lane shift to shoulder/median to 

maintain number of lanes 

IA4. One-lane, two-way operation 

IA5. Two-way traffic on one side of divided 

facility (crossover) 

IA6. Reversible lanes 

IA7. Ramp closures/relocation 

IB1. Temporary signs 

 Warning 

 Regulatory 

 Guide/ information 

IB2. Changeable message signs (CMS) 

IB3. Arrow panels 

IB4. Channelizing devices 

IB5. Temporary pavement markings 

IB6. Flaggers and uniformed traffic control 

officers 

IB7. Temporary traffic signals 

IB8. Lighting devices 

IC1. Project coordination 

 Coordination with other projects 

 Utilities coordination 

 Right-of-way coordination 

 Coordination with other transportation 

infrastructure 

IC2. Contracting strategies 

 Design-build 

 A+B bidding 

 Incentive/disincentive clauses 

 Lane rental 

IC3. Innovative construction techniques 

(precast members, rapid cure materials) 
Section 6: Project Level Opportunities

 80 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

IA8. Freeway-to-freeway interchange closures 

IA9. Night work 

IA10. Weekend work 

IA11. Work hour restrictions for peak travel 

IA12. Pedestrian/bicycle access improvements 

IA13. Business access improvements 

IA14. Off-site detours/use of alternate routes 

II. Public Information 

A. Public Awareness Strategies B. Motorist Information Strategies 

IIA1. Brochures and mailers 

IIA2. Press releases/media alerts 

IIA3. Paid advertisements 

IIA4. Public information center 

IIA5. Telephone hotline 

IIA6. Planned lane closure web site 

IIA7. Project web site 

IIA8. Public meetings/hearings 

IIA9. Community task forces 

IIA10. Coordination with media/schools/businesses/ emergency services 

IIA11. Work zone education and safety campaigns 

IIA12. Work zone safety highway signs 

IIA13. Rideshare promotions 

IIA14. Visual information (videos, slides, presentations) for meetings and web

IIB1. Traffic radio 

IIB2. Changeable message signs (CMS) 

IIB3. Temporary motorist information signs 

IIB4. Dynamic speed message sign 

IIB5. Highway advisory radio (HAR) 

IIB6. Extinguishable signs 

IIB7. Highway information network (web-based) 

IIB8. 511 traveler information systems (wireless, handhelds) 

IIB9. Freight travel information 

IIB10. Transportation management center (TMC)

III. Transportation Operations 

A. Demand Management 

Strategies 

B. Corridor/Network 

Management Strategies 

C. Work Zone Safety 

Management Strategies 

D. Traffic/Incident 

Management and 

Enforcement Strategies 

IIIA1. Transit service 

improvements 

IIIA2. Transit incentives 

IIIA3. Shuttle services 

IIIA4. Ridesharing/carpooling 

incentives 

IIIA5. Park-and-ride promotion 

IIIA6. High-occupancy vehicle 

(HOV) lanes 

IIIA7. Toll/congestion pricing 

IIIA8. Ramp metering 

IIIA9. Parking supply 

management 

IIIA10. Variable work hours 

IIIA11. Telecommuting 

IIIB1. Signal timing/coordination 

improvements 

IIIB2. Temporary traffic signals 

IIIB3. Street/intersection 

improvements 

IIIB4. Bus turnouts 

IIIB5. Turn restrictions 

IIIB6. Parking restrictions 

IIIB7. Truck/heavy vehicle 

restrictions 

IIIB8. Separate truck lanes 

IIIB9. Reversible lanes 

IIIB10. Dynamic lane closure 

system 

IIIB11. Ramp metering 

IIIB12. Temporary suspension of 

ramp metering 

IIIB13. Ramp closures 

IIIB14. Railroad crossings 

controls 

IIIB15. Coordination with 

adjacent construction site(s) 

IIIC1. Speed limit 

reduction/variable speed limits 

IIIC2. Temporary traffic signals 

IIIC3. Temporary traffic barrier 

IIIC4. Movable traffic barrier 

systems 

IIIC5. Crash-cushions 

IIIC6. Temporary rumble strips 

IIIC7. Intrusion alarms 

IIIC8. Warning lights 

IIIC9. Automated Flagger 

Assistance Devices (AFADs) 

IIIC10. Project task 

force/committee 

IIIC11. Construction safety 

supervisors/inspectors 

IIIC12. Road safety audits 

IIIC13. TMP monitor/inspection 

team 

IIIC14. Team meetings 

IIIC15. Project on-site safety 

training 

IIIC16. Safety awards/incentives 

IIIC17. Windshield surveys 

IIID1. ITS for traffic 

monitoring/management 

IIID2. Transportation 

management center (TMC) 

IIID3. Surveillance [ClosedCircuit Television (CCTV), loop 

detectors, lasers, probe vehicles] 

IIID4. Helicopter for aerial 

surveillance 

IIID5. Traffic screens 

IIID6. Call boxes 

IIID7. Mile-post markers 

IIID8. Tow/freeway service patrol

IIID9. Total station units 

IIID10. Photogrammetry 

IIID11. Coordination with 

media 

IIID12. Local detour routes 

IIID13. Contract support for 

incident management 

IIID14. Incident/emergency 

management coordinator 

IIID15. Incident/emergency 

response plan 

IIID16. Dedicated (paid) police 

enforcement 

IIID17. Cooperative police 

enforcement 

IIID18. Automated enforcement 

IIID19. Increased penalties for 

work zone violations 
Section 6: Project Level Opportunities 

 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 81 

Sample Portions of Table B.1 TMP Strategy Matrix – Mobility/Safety Improvement and Considerations for 

Implementation 

I. Temporary Traffic Control (TTC) Strategies 

Management 

Strategy 

Mobility Improvement Motorist Safety Improvement Worker Safety Improvement 

Triggers for 

Consideration Potential Pros 

Potential 

Challenges 

Other 

Considerations 

A. Control Strategies 

IA12. Pedestrian/ 

bicycle access 

improvements 

9 9  Long project duration 

 Significant pedestrian/ 

bicyclist activities 

 Existing sidewalks 

traverse the work zone 

 A school route traverses 

the work zone 

Safer for pedestrians 

and bicyclists 

Additional cost to 

build alternate paths 

for pedestrians/ 

bicyclists 

C. Project Coordination, Contracting and Innovative Construction Strategies 

IC1 Project coordination 

IC1. Coordination 

with other projects 

9 May be beneficial to any 

project  Reduces motorist 

delay 

 Minimizes impacts 

to potentially 

affected businesses 

and communities 

 Reduces exposure 

time to road work 

 May increase 

efficiencies 

May be difficult to 

identify potential 

projects to 

coordinate with 

Routine agency 

meetings may 

address coordination 

at the project level, 

corridor level, 

district region level, 

and at the State level 

Source: Federal Highway Administration. Developing and Implementing Transportation Management Plans for Work Zones. June 2009. 

Available at: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/wz/resources/publications/trans_mgmt_plans/app_b_t1.htm. Accessed July 13, 2009. 

Relevant Resources 

Federal Highway Administration, Office of Operations, Work Zone Mobility and Safety Program, Developing and 

Implementing Transportation Management Plans for Work Zones, 

http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/wz/resources/publications/trans_mgmt_plans/index.htm, and appendix B,

http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/wz/resources/publications/trans_mgmt_plans/app_b_t1.htm. 
Section 6: Project Level Opportunities

 82 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Self-Assessment Checklist: Project-Level Opportunities 

The following checklist may be used as a self-assessment to identify project-level opportunities for integrating 

operations and safety into multimodal planning. The user should consider the questions, whether or not the 

State DOT is undertaking the activity, and what can be done to improve integration. 

Checklist: Project-Level Opportunities 

Question Yes No If no, what can be added or improved? 

Relevant 

Subsection

Are operations and safety components being 

incorporated into project planning and design? 

 6.1 

Are transit operations and service considerations, and 

other multimodal aspects (e.g., bicycles, pedestrians) 

considered in project planning and design? 

 

6.1 

Are operations and safety components being 

incorporated into project construction mitigation? 

 6.2 

Are project-level operations activities (e.g., demand 

management during construction) being considered 

as opportunities for broader planning initiatives to 

address operations and safety within corridors? 

 

6.2 

6.3 
Appendix A: Relevant Plans for Identifying Opportunities for Integration 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 83

Appendix A: Relevant Plans for Identifying Opportunities for Integration

 Statewide Plans 

• Statewide Long-Range Transportation Plan (SLRTP) 

• Strategic Business Plan 

• State Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) 

• Emergency Management Plan 

• Operations Plan 

• Incident Management Plan 

• Statewide Transportation Improvement Plan (STIP) 

• Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) Strategic Plan 

• Modal Plans: 

− Transit 

− Freight 

− Rail 

− Waterways 

− Nonmotorized Vehicles 

− Aviation 

 Regional Plans 

• Regional Transportation Plan 

• Congestion Management Plan 

 Corridor Plans 

• Re-Signalization Plan 

• Corridor System Management Plan 

• Corridor-Level Traffic Management Plan 
Appendix A: Relevant Plans for Identifying Opportunities for Integration

 84 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual
Appendix B: Agency Self-Assessment Checklist 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 85

Appendix B: 

Agency Self-Assessment Checklist 

Self-assessment checklists are located at the end of each section for users to answer questions regarding their agency’s 

success toward integrating safety, operations, and planning. Each of the checklists have been compiled below to provide 

users with the option of completing the checklists before reading the document, and then turning to those sections 

where their agency may desire more information on integration opportunities. 

Creating an Environment for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning 

Checklist: Creating an Environment for Integration 

Question Yes No If no, what can be added or improved? 

Relevant 

Subsection

Does the agency currently have multidisciplinary 

teams involving staff from operations, safety, 

and planning? 

 

2.1 

Has the agency developed specific, measurable 

objectives to measure its success? 

 2.2 

If so, are objectives for system operations (e.g., 

congestion, reliability) and safety used to support 

planning and investment decisions? 

 

2.2 

Has the agency developed performance measures 

related to operations and safety that can be measured 

using available data and used to support planning? 

 

2.2 

Does the agency have a completed strategic 

business plan? 

 2.2 

If so, does the strategic business plan foster integration 

of operations, safety, and multimodal planning? 

 2.3 

Is public transportation represented in a number of 

multidisciplinary agency efforts? 

 2.4 

Are public transportation choices, and the efficient 

operation and safety of transit, identified as 

priorities in the State long range transportation plan? 

 

2.4 

Do operations and safety programs consider 

implications on multimodal options, including 

transit, bicycling, and walking? 

 

2.4 

Statewide Level Opportunities

Checklist: Statewide Level Opportunities 

Question Yes No If no, what can be added or improved? 

Relevant 

Subsection 

Are operations and safety staff involved in the 

development of the SLRTP? 

 3.1 

Does the SLRTP include a vision and goal(s) that 

address operational and safety considerations? 

 3.1 

Is there recognition of the importance of linkages 

between operations and safety considerations in 

the SLRTP? 

 

3.1 
Appendix B: Agency Self-Assessment Checklist

 86 Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

Checklist: Statewide Level Opportunities 

Question Yes No If no, what can be added or improved? 

Relevant 

Subsection 

Are there specific objectives in the SLRTP that 

relate to system operation and safety? 

 3.1 

Have system-wide performance measures been 

developed in the SLRTP, including those focused 

on operations and safety? 

 

3.2 

Are performance measures for livability, multimodal 

choice, and other planning considerations utilized in 

operations and safety programs? 

 

3.2 

Are performance measures being tracked? 3.2 

Are safety and/or operations data being utilized to 

monitor system performance? 

 3.3 

Are operations and safety strategies, policies, and 

programs highlighted in the SLRTP? 

 3.4 

Are the SHSP’s goals, objectives, and priorities 

reflected in the SLRTP? 

 3.5 

Has an effort been undertaken to develop statewide 

operations goals and priorities, such as development 

of a statewide operations or ITS plan? 

 

3.6 

Do other plans outside of the SLRTP (e.g., modal 

plans, freight plans, etc.) relate back to the overarching 

goals and objectives in the SLRTP? Do these plans 

include operations and safety considerations? 

 

3.7 

Are goals and objectives helping to inform projects 

that are programmed in the STIP? 

 3.8 

Are fiscal constraints being considered in the 

development of the SLRTP and other plans? 

 3.8 

Regional Level Opportunities

Checklist: Regional Level Opportunities 

Question Yes No If no, what can be added or improved? 

Relevant 

Subsection

Are operations, safety, and planning staff working 

together to address regional challenges, such as 

incident management, work zone management, or 

emergency management? 

 

4.1 

Has a regional concept for transportation 

operations (RCTO) been developed? 

 4.1 

Are operations and/or safety data being shared with 

MPOs, transit agencies, and other agencies 

responsible for regional planning? 

 

4.2 

Are State DOT planners, operations, and safety staff 

participating in the congestion management process? 

 4.2 
Appendix B: Agency Self-Assessment Checklist 

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety, and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual 87

Checklist: Regional Level Opportunities 

Question Yes No If no, what can be added or improved? 

Relevant 

Subsection

Are congestion and safety challenges in rural areas, 

tribal lands, and national parks being addressed 

through a cooperative approach involving State 

DOT operations and safety staff? 

 

4.3 

Is coordination with tribal governments, federal 

lands, transit agencies, and other agencies on 

planning and investment studies incorporating 

operations and safety considerations? 

 

4.3 

Corridor and Sub-Area Level Opportunities 

Checklist: Corridor and Sub-Area Level Opportunities 

Question Yes No If no, what can be added or improved? 

Relevant 

Subsection

Are operations and/or safety data being used in 

assessing corridor system performance? 

 5.1 

Are reliability and other operations considerations 

(e.g., incident management, traveler information) as 

well as safety being considered within corridor studies?

 

5.2 

Is analysis being conducted to assess the benefits of 

operations and safety strategies? 

 5.2 

Are analysis tools being applied, such as simulation, to 

assess reliability and other operations considerations? 

 5.2 

Are operations and safety strategies and multimodal 

options being included in corridor plans? 

 5.2 

Do corridor system management and operations 

activities link back to planning efforts? 

 5.3 

Project Level Opportunities 

Checklist: Project Level Opportunities 

Question Yes No If no, what can be added or improved? 

Relevant 

Subsection

Are operations and safety components being 

incorporated into project planning and design? 

 6.1 

Are transit operations and service considerations, and 

other multimodal aspects (e.g., bicycles, pedestrians), 

considered in project planning and design? 

 

6.1 

Are operations and safety components being 

incorporated into project construction mitigation? 

 6.2 

Are project-level operations activities (e.g., demand 

management during construction) being considered 

as opportunities for broader planning initiatives to 

address operations and safety within corridors? 

 

6.2