A DESK REFERENCE

Planning for Transportation Systems

Management and Operations

WITHIN CORRIDORS
Notice

This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of 

Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government 

assumes no liability for the use of information contained in this document. 

The U.S. Government does not endorse products of manufacturers. Trademarks 

or manufacturers’ names appear in this report only because they are considered 

essential to the objective of the document. 

The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for 

the facts and accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily 

reflect the official policy of the U.S. Department of Transportation.

This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation.

Quality Assurance Statement

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides high quality information 

to serve Government, industry, and the public in a manner that promotes public 

understanding. Standards and policies are used to ensure and maximize the quality, 

objectivity, utility, and integrity of its information. FHWA periodically reviews 

quality issues and adjusts its programs and processes to ensure continuous quality 

improvement.

Cover image: iStock.com/HadelProductions
Technical Report Documentation Page

1. Report No. 

FHWA-HOP-16-037

2. Government Accession 

No.

3. Recipient’s Catalog No.

4. Title and Subtitle 

Planning for Transportation Systems Management and 

Operations within Corridors – A Desk Reference

5. Report Date

September 2016

6. Performing Organizations Code

7. Authors

 Jocelyn Bauer, Deena Platman, Michael Grant, Michael Smith, 

Renee Hurtado, Lindsay Martin, Peng Su, Jiaqi Ma

8. Performing Organization 

Report No.

9. Performing Organization Name and Address

Leidos

11251 Roger Bacon Drive 

Reston, VA 20190

DKS Associates

720 Southwest Washington Street, Suite 500

Portland, OR 97205

ICF International

1725 I (Eye) Street, Northwest, 10th Floor

Washington, D.C. 2006

10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)

11. Contract or Grant No.

 Contract No. 

DTFH61-12-D-00050

12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address

U.S. Department of Transportation

Federal Highway Administration

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Washington, DC 20590

13. Type of Report and Period 

Covered

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

HOP

15. Supplementary Notes

Mr. Wayne Berman, Federal Highway Administration Government Task Manager

16. Abstract

This Desk Reference is designed to equip State, regional, and local transportation operations and 

planning professionals with the knowledge and tools necessary to effectively plan for and implement 

transportation systems management and operations (TSMO) within a corridor. Its purpose is to 

support transportation planners and operations staff to plan for and apply TSMO activities within 

corridors to achieve a more reliable, efficient, and livable outcome from their existing and planned 

transportation infrastructure. This document highlights a planning for operations approach at 

a corridor level to focus on issues, such as mobility, reliability, and safety, from a multimodal 

perspective and provides a variety of tools to advance TSMO within corridors.

17. Key Words

Transportation systems management and operations, corridors, 

planning, reliability, analysis tools

18. Distribution Statement 

 No restrictions. 

19. Security Classif. (of this report) 

Unclassified

20. Security Classif. (of this 

page) Unclassified

21. No of Pages

 140

22. Price 

 N/A

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

FACTORS APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS TO SI UNITS

SYMBOL WHEN YOU KNOW MULTIPLY BY TO FIND SYMBOL

LENGTH

In. inches 25.4 millimeters mm

ft feet 0.305 meters m

yd yards 0.914 meters m

mi miles 1.61 kilometers km

AREA

in.2 square inches 645.2 square millimeters mm2

ft2 square feet 0.093 square meters m2

yd2 square yard 0.836 square meters m2

ac acres 0.405 hectares ha

mi2 square miles 2.59 square kilometers km2

VOLUME

fl oz fluid ounces 29.57 milliliters mL

gal gallons 3.785 liters L

ft3 cubic feet 0.028 cubic meters m3

yd3 cubic yards 0.765 cubic meters m3

NOTE: volumes greater than 1,000 L shall be shown in m3

MASS

oz ounces 28.35 grams g

lb pounds 0.454 kilograms kg

T short tons (2000 lb) 0.907 megagrams (or "metric ton") Mg (or "t")

TEMPERATURE (exact degrees)

°F Fahrenheit 5 (F-32)/9 or 

(F-32)/1.8 

Celsius °C

ILLUMINATION

fc foot-candles 10.76 lux lx

fl foot-Lamberts 3.426 candela/m2 cd/m2

FORCE and PRESSURE or STRESS

lbf poundforce 4.45 newtons N

lbf/in.2 poundforce 

per square inch

6.89 kilopascals kPa

SI* (MODERN METRIC) CONVERSION 
iii

APPROXIMATE CONVERSIONS TO SI UNITS

SYMBOL WHEN YOU KNOW MULTIPLY BY TO FIND SYMBOL

LENGTH

mm millimeters 0.039 inches in.

m meters 3.28 feet ft

m meters 1.09 yards yd

km kilometers 0.621 miles mi

AREA

mm2 square millimeters 0.0016 square inches in.2

m2 square meters 10.764 square feet ft2

m2 square meters 1.195 square yards yd2

ha hectares 2.47 acres ac

km2 square kilometers 0.386 square miles mi2

VOLUME

mL milliliters 0.034 fluid ounces fl oz

L liters 0.264 gallons gal

m3 cubic meters 35.314 cubic feet ft3

m3 cubic meters 1.307 cubic yards yd3

MASS

g grams 0.035 ounces oz

kg kilograms 2.202 pounds lb

Mg (or "t") megagrams (or "metric ton")1.103 short tons (2000 lb) T

TEMPERATURE (exact degrees)

°C Celsius 1.8C+32 Fahrenheit °F

ILLUMINATION

lx lux 0.0929 foot-candles fc

cd/m2 candela/m2 0.2919 foot-lamberts fl

FORCE and PRESSURE or STRESS

N newtons 0.225 poundforce lbf

kPa kilopascals 0.145 poundforce 

per square inch 

lbf/in2

SI* (MODERN METRIC) CONVERSION (Continued)

v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Overview of Desk Reference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Who Should Use this Desk Reference? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Transportation Systems Management and Operations within Corridors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Chapter 2. Planning for Transportation Systems Management and Operations 

within Corridors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Why is Planning for Transportation Systems Management and Operations within Corridors 

Needed?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Planning Contexts for Transportation Systems Management and Operations within Corridors . . . . . . . 17

Examples of Current Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Chapter 3. Approach to Planning for Transportation Systems Management 

and Operations within Corridors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Getting Started – Scoping the Effort and Building a Team . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Gathering Information on Current and Future Context and Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Developing an Outcome-Oriented Operational Concept . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Identifying Operations Performance Needs, Gaps, and Opportunities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

Developing an Integrated Transportation Systems Management and Operations Approach . . . . . . . . . 51

Putting It All Together . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

Chapter 4. Moving to Implementation: Transportation Systems Management and Operations 

Within Corridors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85

Programming for Transportation Systems Management and Operations within Corridors . . . . . . . . . . . 85

Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91

Chapter 5. Toolbox for Effective Transportation Systems Management and Operations 

Planning. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99

Scenario Planning for Transportation Systems Management and Operations within Corridors . . . . . . . 99

Use of Archived Operations Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102

Analysis Tools Available for Transportation Systems Management and Operations Planning within 

Corridors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103

Chapter 6. Taking Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
vi

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Photo. Corridor in urban area which may handle a dynamic mix of vehicle traffic, 

transit services, bicyclists, and pedestrians. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Figure 2. Photo. The Dulles Corridor in Northern Virginia is an example of a corridor 

defined around a major highway and passenger rail spine with adjoining roadways, 

park-and-ride facilities, and surrounding business and residential land uses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Figure 3. Map. Dulles Corridor includes multiple parallel roads, bus lines, rail, and 

a multi-use trail. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Figure 4. Photo. TSMO strategies within rural corridors may include multistate traveler information 

for long-haul truck drivers related to weather, incidents, and road closures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Figure 5. Diagram. Transportation systems management and operations planning within 

a corridor occurs in a wide range of planning contexts from multistate to strategyfocused planning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Figure 6. Graphic. Context for transportation systems management and operations 

planning within corridors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Figure 7. Map. The Interstate 80 Integrated Corridor Mobility Project area map in California. . . . 23

Figure 8. Diagram. Approach to planning for transportation systems management 

and operations within corridors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Figure 9. Diagram. The “Getting Started – Scoping the Effort and Building a Team” 

activity of the approach for planning for transportation systems management and 

operations within corridors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Figure 10. Diagram. The framework for collaboration and coordination within a corridor. . . . . . . 32

Figure 11. Diagram. The activity, “Gathering Information on Current and Future Contexts 

and Conditions,” of the approach for planning for transportation systems management and 

operations within corridors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Figure 12. Diagram. The activity, “Developing an Outcome-Oriented Operational Concept,” 

of the approach for planning for transportation systems management and operations 

within corridors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Figure 13. Image. Cover of Federal Highway Administration’s Advancing Metropolitan 

Planning for Operations Desk Reference. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

Figure 14. Diagram. Illustrative objectives tree for corridor-based transportation systems 

management and operations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

Figure 15. Diagram. The activity, “Identifying Operations Performance Needs, Gaps, and 

Opportunities,” of the approach for planning for transportation systems management and 

operations within corridors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
vii

Figure 16. Diagram. The activity, “Developing an Integrated Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations Approach,” of the approach for planning for transportation 

systems management and operations within corridors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

Figure 17. Flowchart. Wisconsin Department of Transportation Traffic Operations 

Infrastructure Plan methodology for identifying priority corridors and related transportation 

systems management and operations strategies for achieving the corridor management vision. . . .54

Figure 18. Map. Milwaukee-Green Bay corridor transportation systems management 

and operations deployment density. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

Figure 19. Diagram. The activity, “Programming for Transportation Systems Management 

and Operations within Corridors,” of the approach for planning for transportation 

systems management and operations within corridors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85

Figure 20. Chart. Genesee Transportation Council’s mode-specific project evaluation 

criteria for transportation systems management and operations projects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88

Figure 21. Diagram. The activity, “Implementing,” of the approach for planning for 

transportation systems management and operations within corridors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91

Figure 22. Graph. Corridor planning within the systems engineering “V” model. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93

Figure 23. Diagram. Regional intelligent transportation systems architecture use in 

corridor planning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94

Figure 24. Diagram. The activity, “Monitoring and Maintaining Level of Operations over 

Time,” of the approach for planning for transportation systems management and operations 

within corridors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97

Figure 25. Diagram. Example process for automated corridor performance measurement. . . . . . . 98

Figure 26. Diagram. Phases of scenario planning for transportation systems management 

and operations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100

Figure 27. Screenshot. Traffic Incident Management Benefit-Cost Tool navigation page 

with panels linking to all eight sub-tools. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114

Figure 28. Screenshot. Key user interface for the Safety Service Patrol Benefit-Cost sub-tool. . . 115

Figure 29. Graphic. Origin-destination-level travel time in different weather scenarios. . . . . . . . . . 118

Figure 30. Graphic. Network-level travel time in different incident scenarios. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119

LIST OF FIGURES (CONTINUED)
viii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Sample of transportation systems management and operations strategies 

relevant to corridors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Table 2. Developing a thorough understanding of the corridor users will help determine possible 

transportation systems management and operations strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

Table 3. Illustrative performance measures to guide corridor transportation systems 

management and operations planning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47

Table 4. Example transportation systems management and operations strategy identification for a 

desired outcome of reducing recurring congestion on arterials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

Table 5. Strategies included in the Tool for Operations Benefit-Cost Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111

Table 6. Evaluation results of three traffic incident management strategies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116
ix

LIST OF ACRONYMS

ATDM active transportation and demand management

ATM active traffic management

DOT department of transportation

DTA dynamic traffic assignment

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

ICM integrated corridor management

ITS intelligent transportation systems

LOS level of service

MPO metropolitan planning organization

PennDOT Pennsylvania Department of Transportation

RCTO regional concept for transportation operations

SHRP2 Strategic Highway Research Program 2

SMART specific, measurable, agreed-upon, realistic, and time-bound

SSP safety service patrol 

TDM transportation demand management

TIM traffic incident management

TIM-BC Traffic Incident Management-Benefit-Cost Analysis

TIP transportation improvement program

TMC transportation management center

TSMO transportation systems management and operations

TSP transit signal priority

TOPS-BC Tool for Operations Benefit CostAnalysis

1

1

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 

INTRODUCTION

OVERVIEW OF DESK REFERENCE

Over the past decade, transportation agencies have increasingly integrated transportation systems 

management and operations (TSMO) in planning at the statewide and metropolitan levels. Using 

an objectives-driven, performance-based approach, State departments of transportation (DOTs) 

and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) around the country are working with local 

jurisdictions, transit agencies, law enforcement, toll authorities, and other partners to manage traffic 

congestion, improve system reliability, increase safety, and enhance multimodal options using 

operations solutions. Rather than relying solely on new highway and transit capacity, this approach 

recognizes that TSMO strategies (e.g., enhanced incident management, traffic signal coordination, 

transit signal priority (TSP), and traveler information) can often be low in cost, highly effective, 

and implemented in concert with infrastructure to enhance transportation system performance. 

Planning for operations involves identifying operations objectives and performance measures, 

which guide the identification, prioritization, and selection of investments, programs, and 

strategies. The result is implementation of programs, projects, and collaborative efforts to better 

manage and operate transportation systems and services to preserve capacity and improve 

security, safety, and reliability of the transportation system. Today, many State DOTs and MPOs 

have policies to improve transportation operations by first managing travel demand and applying 

management techniques prior to considering additional capacity for a roadway. 

While many statewide and regional policies and programs are advancing implementation of 

effective TSMO strategies, more benefits will occur when TSMO is considered and applied 

strategically at a smaller scale where many critical implementation decisions are made. 

Transportation within corridors presents opportunities for agencies to plan for operations at a 

more-refined geographic scale and at a level where specific and actionable plans can be developed. 

Increasingly, transportation agencies are recognizing the value of a corridor approach instead of 

looking at individual transportation projects on a piecemeal or single facility basis. A corridor 

approach takes a broad view of the interconnected factors that influence travel and enables more 

creative and collaborative approaches for addressing transportation problems. While, traditionally, 

corridor planning has often focused on improving the performance of an individual highway 

facility, increasingly, transportation planners and operators view corridors as an interconnected 

network of facilities and services. Managing mobility on a corridor by leveraging all modal 

choices and assets is called integrated corridor management (ICM), an approach to managing 

corridors that is being used on several major corridors across the United States.1 This Desk 

Reference describes an approach for planning for TSMO within corridors that incorporates the 

ICM concept of looking beyond a single highway facility to parallel routes and transit services 

and focuses on the performance of the corridor travel-shed from the customer’s perspective. 

1 U.S. Department of Transportation, Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) Knowledge and Technology Transfer Factsheet, FHWAJPO-14-151 (Washington, DC: 2014). Available at: http://www.its.dot.gov/factsheets/pdf/ICM_KTT_V5.pdf.
2

1INTRODUCTION

Transportation agencies and stakeholders, 

however, often have started corridor studies from 

a perspective that focuses on investment needs 

to address traffic level of service (LOS) or other 

issues that result in proposals for expensive 

capital investments that may be outside the 

available resources. Moreover, while TSMO 

may be identified as a priority from a statewide 

or regional perspective, strategies are often 

applied at a broad scale (e.g., through a statewide 

incident management program, a regional 

ridesharing program, or traveler information 

systems) without further connecting these 

programs to corridor operations or designing 

TSMO strategies and investments that are 

targeted to address unique corridor challenges 

and conditions.

This Desk Reference is designed to equip State, 

regional, and local transportation operations 

and planning professionals with the knowledge 

and tools necessary to effectively plan for and 

implement TSMO within a corridor context. Its 

purpose is to support transportation planners and 

operations staff in planning for and applying 

TSMO activities within corridors to achieve a 

more reliable, efficient, and livable outcome 

from their existing and planned transportation 

infrastructure. Utilizing a planning for operations 

approach at a corridor level can help to focus on 

issues (e.g., mobility, reliability, and safety) from 

a multimodal perspective and bring to light costeffective demand management and operations 

solutions that may not otherwise have been fully 

considered. 

The document describes planning for TSMO 

at the corridor level so that readers can tailor 

and apply this approach in a variety of corridor 

contexts. This Desk Reference is founded upon 

three themes for success that cut across all 

TSMO planning efforts: 

• Use of an objectives-driven, performancebased approach. 

Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations is...?

“...[a set of] integrated strategies to 

optimize the performance of existing 

infrastructure through the 

implementation of multimodal and 

intermodal, cross-jurisdictional 

systems, services, and projects designed 

to preserve capacity and improve 

security, safety, and reliability of the 

transportation system.”

It “includes - (i) actions, such as traffic 

detection and surveillance, corridor 

management, freeway management, 

arterial management, active 

transportation and demand management, 

work zone management, emergency 

management, traveler information 

services, congestion pricing, parking 

management, automated enforcement, 

traffic control, commercial vehicle 

operations, freight management, and 

coordination of highway, rail, transit, 

bicycle, and pedestrian operations; and 

(ii) coordination of the implementation of 

regional transportation system 

management and operations investments 

(e.g., traffic incident management, 

traveler information services, emergency 

management, roadway weather 

management, intelligent transportation 

systems, communication networks, and 

information sharing systems) requiring 

agreements, integration, and 

interoperability to achieve targeted 

system performance, reliability, safety, 

and customer service levels.”

Source: 23 United States Code Section 101(a)(30).
3

1INTRODUCTION

• Collaboration across agencies, jurisdictions, and modes.

• Linking to overarching planning processes at the metropolitan or statewide level.

The Desk Reference connects readers to other tools and resources developed by the Federal 

Highway Administration (FHWA) and partners to support a more in-depth understanding of 

several topics introduced in this document. It draws upon concepts, such as ICM and active 

transportation demand management (ATDM), that are increasingly focusing attention on 

collaboration across multimodal system operators and planners to address corridor conditions. 

Quick reference sheets provide examples of corridor operations objectives, performance measures, 

and the management and operations strategies that can be applied as readers move forward in 

applying the components of planning for and implementing TSMO within corridors.

This Desk Reference is a companion to the FHWA Planning for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations within Subareas: A Desk Reference, a resource that addresses the 

specific needs of organizations planning for TSMO at the local or subarea level.2

WHO SHOULD USE THIS DESK REFERENCE? 

This Desk Reference is intended for the transportation planning or operations professional who 

is looking to address specific questions on planning for TSMO within corridors, as well as the 

professional who wants to gain a comprehensive understanding of how to successfully improve 

travel and goods movement on a corridor. This document brings together planning and operations 

approaches, practices, and lessons that have been developed over the past 10 years and provides 

consolidated assistance on planning for TSMO at the corridor level. Several sections serve as 

launching points to related FHWA documents that provide more in-depth information and tools. 

Readers will find links and references to technical assistance materials alongside related content 

introduced in this Desk Reference. 

ORGANIZATION

The desk reference is organized into six sections:

Chapter 1: Introduction

Provides a brief introduction to TSMO within corridors and planning for TSMO in a variety of 

corridor contexts. Helps readers identify the need for TSMO planning at the corridor level.

Related technical assistance materials: Advancing Metropolitan Planning for Operations: An 

Objectives-Driven, Performance-Based Approach – A Guidebook.

3

2 Federal Highway Administration, Planning for Transportation Systems Management and Operations within Subareas: A Desk Reference. 

Available Spring 2016 at http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/plan4ops/index.htm.

3 Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration, Advancing Metropolitan Planning for Operations: An ObjectivesDriven, Performance-Based Approach – A Guidebook, FHWA-HOP-10-026 (Washington, DC: 2010). Available at: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.

gov/publications/fhwahop10026/.


4

1INTRODUCTION

Chapter 2: Planning for Transportation Systems Management and Operations within 

Corridors

Makes the case for TSMO planning to achieve coordinated and strategic implementation and 

ongoing use of TSMO strategies. Provides an overview of the planning context for TSMO on a 

corridor, and describes examples of current practice. 

Related technical assistance materials:

• Advancing Metropolitan Planning for Operations: The Building Blocks of a Model 

Transportation Plan Incorporating Operations - A Desk Reference.

4

• Performance Based Planning and Programming Guidebook.

5

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

Reference Manual.6

• The Collaborative Advantage: Realizing the Tangible Benefits of Regional Transportation 

Operations Collaboration.

7

• Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination: A Primer for 

Working Together to Improve Transportation Safety, Reliability, and Security.8

Chapter 3: Approach to Corridor Planning for Transportation Systems Management 

and Operations

Lays out a common-sense approach to planning for TSMO on a corridor for a variety of corridor 

contexts. Takes the reader from building a team for the effort to selecting TSMO strategies that 

will best achieve the corridor operations objectives. Provides easy-to-use reference guides for a 

range of operational objectives relevant to multimodal corridors, including corridor travel time, 

traffic signal management, transit priority, and bicycle and pedestrian accessibility and efficiency. 

Related technical assistance materials:

In addition to the resources listed for Chapters 1 and 2, this chapter draws from:

• Operations Benefit/Cost Analysis Desk Reference.

9

• The Role of Transportation Systems Management & Operations in Supporting Livability 

and Sustainability: A Primer.

10

4 Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration, Advancing Metropolitan Planning for Operations: The Building Blocks 

of a Model Transportation Plan Incorporating Operations - A Desk Reference, FHWA-HOP-10-027 (Washington, DC: 2010). Available at: 

http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop10027/.

5 Federal Highway Administration, Performance Based Planning and Programming Guidebook, FHWA-HEP-13-041 (Washington, DC: 

September 2013). Available at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/performance_based_planning/pbpp_guidebook/.

6 Federal Highway Administration, Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety and Multimodal Planning: A Reference 

Manual, FHWA-HOP-10-028 (Washington, DC: June 2010). Available at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/processes/statewide/practices/

manual/index.cfm.

7 Federal Highway Administration, The Collaborative Advantage: Realizing the Tangible Benefits of Regional Transportation Operations 

Collaboration, FHWA-HOP-08-001 (Washington, DC: August 2007). Available at: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/benefits_

guide/index.htm.

8 Federal Highway Administration, Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination: A Primer for Working Together 

to Improve Transportation Safety, Reliability, and Security, FHWA-OP-03-008 (Washington, DC: 2003). Available at: http://ntl.bts.gov/lib/

jpodocs/repts_te/13686.html.

9 Federal Highway Administration, Operations Benefit/Cost Analysis Desk Reference, FHWA-HOP-12-028 (Washington, DC: May 2012). 

Available at: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop12028/index.htm. 

10 Federal Highway Administration, The Role of Transportation Systems Management and Operations in Supporting Livability and 

Sustainability: A Primer, FHWA-HOP-12-004 (Washington, DC: January 2012). Available at: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/

fhwahop12004/.




5

1INTRODUCTION

• Guide for Highway Capacity and Operations Analysis of Active Transportation and 

Demand Management Strategies.

11

• Integrated Corridor Management: Implementation Guide and Lessons Learned.

12

• PlanWorks: Linking Planning and Operations.

13

Chapter 4: Moving to Implementation: Transportation Systems Management and 

Operations within Corridors 

Offers information on how to go from plans for TSMO to implementation, monitoring, and 

maintenance of TSMO strategies. This includes obtaining funding for TSMO, agreeing upon 

organizational roles and responsibilities, applying systems engineering, and regularly evaluating 

the effectiveness of the implemented strategies in relation to the corridor objectives. 

Related technical assistance materials:

• Applying a Regional ITS Architecture to Support Planning for Operations: A Primer.

14

• Programming for Operations: MPO Examples of Prioritizing and Funding Transportation 

Systems Management and Operations Strategies.

15

• Designing for Transportation Management and Operations: A Primer.

16

Chapter 5: Toolbox for Effective Transportation Systems Management and 

Operations Planning

Introduces several tools to help ensure effective planning for TSMO at the corridor level, 

including scenario planning, analysis tools, and benefit-cost analysis.

Related technical assistance materials:

• The Regional Concept for Transportation Operations: A Practitioner’s Guide.

17

Chapter 6: Taking Action 

Describes key actions that readers can take to jump start their efforts to advance TSMO on 

a corridor.

11 Federal Highway Administration, Guide for Highway Capacity and Operations Analysis of Active Transportation and Demand Management 

Strategies, FHWA-HOP-13-042 (Washington, DC: June 2013). Available at: http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop13042/

fhwahop13042.pdf.

12 U.S. Department of Transportation, Integrated Corridor Management: Implementation Guide and Lessons Learned, FHWA-JPO-12-075 

(Washington, DC: February 2010). Available at: http://ntl.bts.gov/lib/47000/47600/47670/FHWA-JPO-12-075_FinalPKG_508.pdf.

13 Federal Highway Administration, PlanWorks: Linking Planning and Operations, Web site. Available at: https://fhwaapps.fhwa.dot.gov/

planworks/Application/Show/7.

14 Federal Highway Administration, Applying a Regional ITS Architecture to Support Planning for Operations: A Primer, FHWA-HOP-12-001 

(Washington, DC: February 2012). Available at: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop12001/index.htm.

15 Federal Highway Administration, Programming for Operations: MPO Examples of Prioritizing and Funding Transportation Systems 

Management and& Operations Strategies, FHWA-HOP-13-050 (Washington, DC: September 2013). Available at: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.

gov/publications/fhwahop13050/index.htm.

16 Federal Highway Administration, Designing for Transportation Management and Operations: A Primer, FHWA-HOP-13-013 (Washington, 

DC: February 2013). Available at: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop13013/index.htm.

17 Federal Highway Administration, The Regional Concept for Transportation Operations: A Practitioner’s Guide, FHWA-HOP-11-032 

(Washington, DC: July 2011). Available at: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop11032/index.htm.






6

1INTRODUCTION

TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS 

WITHIN CORRIDORS

What is Transportation Systems Management and Operations?

TSMO encompasses a broad set of strategies that aim to optimize the safe, efficient, and reliable 

use of existing and planned transportation infrastructure for all modes. TSMO is undertaken from 

a systems perspective, which means that these strategies are coordinated with related strategies 

and across multiple jurisdictions, agencies, and modes. TSMO strategies range from regional 

traffic signal systems management to shared-use mobility initiatives (see Table 1 for an expanded 

list of strategies). TSMO includes efforts to operate the multimodal transportation system and 

activities to manage travel demand. 

TSMO proactively addresses a variety of transportation system user needs by:18

• Influencing travel demand in terms of location, time, and intensity of demand.

• Effectively managing the traffic or transit crowding that results.

• Anticipating and responding to planned and unplanned events (e.g., traffic incidents, work 

zones, inclement weather, and special events).

• Providing travelers with high-quality traffic and weather information.

• Ensuring that the unique needs of the freight community are considered and included in all 

of the above.

TSMO strategies are supported by both institutional and technology-based activities. For example, 

TSMO is enabled by memoranda of agreement between agencies, operational policies and 

procedures, and shared resources (e.g., interoperable communications systems, centralized traffic 

signal operations, and closed circuit television video sharing).

What are the Benefits of Transportation Systems Management and 

Operations?19

TSMO strategies have allowed transportation agencies to address transportation issues in the nearterm, with lower-cost solutions. TSMO strategies deliver a variety of benefits. These include:

• Safer travel: For example, freeway ramp metering has been demonstrated to reduce 

crashes by 15 to 50 percent.

• More free time: Among other time-saving TSMO strategies, traffic signal retiming 

decreases delay on roads by 13 to 94 percent, and TSP reduces transit delay by 30 to 

40 percent.

• Improved reliability: Strategies that reduce unexpected delays (e.g., incident management, 

road weather management, and work zone management) enable the public and freight 

shippers to reduce unexpected delays. TSP improves transit on-time performance.

18 Federal Highway Administration, Office of Operations, “The Operations Story,” Presentation, 2012, Jeffrey A. Lindley.

19 U.S. Department of Transportation, Intelligent Transportation Systems Joint Program Office, Investment Opportunities for Managing 

Transportation Performance through Technology, January 2009. Available at: http://www.its.dot.gov/press/pdf/transportation_tech.pdf.




7

1INTRODUCTION

• Less wasted fuel: Traffic incident management (TIM) programs help to clear incidents 

safely and quickly. They reduce time lost and fuel wasted in traffic backups. For example, 

Georgia’s TIM program (NaviGAtor) reduced annual fuel consumption by 6.83 million 

gallons per year. National studies have shown that integrating traveler information with 

traffic and incident management systems could improve fuel economy by about 1.5 percent.

• Cleaner air: TSMO strategies result in cleaner air by encouraging alternative modes of 

transportation (e.g., transit, ridesharing, biking, walking, and telecommuting) and reducing 

excess idling due to congested bottlenecks. Electronic toll collection reduced harmful 

emissions at Baltimore, Maryland, toll plazas by 16 to 63 percent. 

Sample of Transportation Systems Management and Operations Strategies 

Relevant to Corridors

Many TSMO strategies are applicable and effective at the corridor level. Table 1 lists TSMO 

strategies that agencies can consider when looking to improve the operation of their corridors.

Table 1. Sample of transportation systems management and 

operations strategies relevant to corridors.

TSMO Strategies Supporting Activities

Traffic Management 

and Operations

• Active traffic management:

◦ Variable speed limits.

◦ Changeable lane assignment.

• Freeway/arterial integrated corridor management.

• Managed lanes (high-occupancy vehicle/toll lanes).

• Ramp metering.

• Traffic surveillance.

• Traffic signal control:

◦ Enhanced multimodal traffic signal operations.

◦ Emergency vehicle preemption.

◦ Transit signal priority.

◦ Truck signal priority.

• Warning systems (queue, curve, intersection, size, and speed).

• Roadside truck electronic screening/clearance programs.

• Bicycle and pedestrian crossing enhancements.

• Use of connected vehicles for management.


8

1INTRODUCTION

TSMO Strategies Supporting Activities

Traveler Information

• Local/regional multimodal traveler information.

• Roadside traveler information dissemination.

• Predictive traveler information.

• Real-time transit arrival information.

• Trip planning and routing systems.

Road Weather 

Operations

• Road weather information systems.

• Winter roadway operations.

Maintenance and 

Construction 

Management

• Maintenance and construction activity coordination.

• Work zone management.

Incident and 

Emergency 

Management

• Traffic incident management. 

• Emergency management.

• Computer-aided dispatch integration.

• Emergency vehicle routing.

Public Transportation 

Management

• Advanced transit operations management.

• Electronic fare collection and integration.

• Transit surveillance and security.

• Multimodal travel connections.

Transportation 

Demand Management

• Traveler information marketing campaigns.

• Route planning tools.

• Employer programs and commuter incentives.

• Rideshare support. 

• Telecommuting.

• Congestion pricing.

• Corridor investments to support mode transfers or trip ends.

Complementary 

Strategies that Support 

TSMO

• Bottleneck removal.

• Access management.

• High performance transit.

TSMO = transportation systems management and operations.

Table 1. Sample of transportation systems management and operations strategies 

relevant to corridors. (Continued)
9

1INTRODUCTION

Transportation Systems Management and Operations within Corridors: 

Understanding the Corridor Contexts20

When developing strategies for TSMO within corridors, it is critical to understand the context for 

the corridor, including surrounding land uses and development patterns, available travel options 

(e.g., highway, road network, transit, and non-motorized options), and the types of system users 

(e.g., freight, commuters, and interstate travelers) and their needs and priorities. A corridor generally 

includes multiple freeways, arterial roadways, transit services, bicycle and pedestrian connections, 

park-and-ride lots, and rideshare services serving people traveling in similar directions. 

Different types of corridors are found in urban, suburban, and rural contexts. Many corridors 

traverse multiple contexts. To optimize performance of the transportation system and meet user 

needs, TSMO within a corridor should reflect the unique form, use, and needs of the corridor. 

Some typical types of contexts 

include:

A Complex Corridor in an 

Urbanized Area, with a 

Major Arterial and/or 

Transit Line “Spine”

Urban centers are dense areas 

with high levels of activity and 

where complex, multimodal 

transportation systems offer 

options for taking transit, walking, 

and biking. Corridor planning in 

urban centers may be focused on 

a major arterial roadway, a rail 

line or major bus corridor, or a 

combination. TSMO strategies 

for urban corridors may focus on 

multimodal system performance 

and managing travel demand 

and may include a wide array 

of strategies, including parking 

management, TSP, dynamic 

ridesharing, bikesharing, 

pedestrian count-down signals, 

real-time, multimodal traveler 

information, and traffic signal 

coordination. 

20 California Department of Transportation, 

Smart Mobility, 2010. A Call to Action for the 

New Decade (California: 2010). Available at: 

http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/ocp/smf_

files/SmMblty_v6-3.22.10_150DPI.pdf.



Figure 1. Photo. Corridor in urban area which may handle 

a dynamic mix of vehicle traffic, transit services, 

bicyclists, and pedestrians. 

Source: IStock/PVuckovic.
10

1INTRODUCTION

A Complex Corridor in a Suburban or 

Urbanized Area, with a Major Freeway 

as a “Spine” and Associated Alternatives

Suburban communities are less dense than 

a downtown core, and corridors are often 

defined based on major highways or arterials 

that may serve a combination of commuters, 

other travelers, and freight. For these corridors, 

TSMO strategies may focus on managing 

traffic and incidents to provide predictable 

travel times, shifting demand to transit and 

ridesharing, and balancing travel loads across 

the network. Examples of TSMO investments 

may include adaptive ramp metering, dynamic 

high-occupancy vehicle or managed lanes, and 

dynamic merge or junction control. 

Corridors in Rural Areas 

In rural areas, development is limited and dispersed, and travel options are often limited. While 

congestion is generally a minor concern, traffic safety and weather conditions (e.g., snow, ice, 

rain, and fog) are often significant concerns. Some rural areas also may experience seasonal, 

off-peak congestion due to tourism or events (e.g., festivals, etc.). In addition, in some small 

towns, stretches of State highways serve as main streets and may attract pedestrian and bicycle 

use. Given the infrequent congestion on rural roads, the more-aggressive TSMO strategies used 

in urban and suburban areas may not warrant deployment. TSMO strategies for corridors in rural 

areas require a flexible approach tailored to specific characteristics of the corridor and may include 

strategies such as road weather management and dynamic routing. 





Figure 2. Photo. The Dulles Corridor in 

Northern Virginia is an example of a corridor 

defined around a major highway and 

passenger rail spine with adjoining roadways, 

park-and-ride facilities, and surrounding 

business and residential land uses. 

Figure 3. Map. Dulles Corridor includes multiple parallel roads, 

bus lines, rail, and a multi-use trail. 

Source: Michael Grant.

Source: OpenStreetMap.
11

1INTRODUCTION

These are just three examples of ways in which corridor contexts can differ. Many States and 

communities define corridor contexts in their own unique ways. For instance, in its Smart 

Mobility Framework, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) has defined seven 

“place types,” which are used to create distinct contexts for transportation investments and 

operational performance: 

• Urban centers.

• Close-in compact communities.

• Compact communities.

• Suburban communities.

• Rural and agricultural lands.

• Protected lands.

• Special use areas.21

These different contexts are used to define appropriate sets of strategies, encompassing both 

infrastructure investments and operational strategies. For instance, Caltrans notes that reliability 

is a key objective guiding investment and operations in urban centers, providing people with the 

ability to conveniently use walk, bike, and high-capacity transit modes, as well as supporting 

street and intersection operations that focus on providing predictable travel times with traffic 

and incident management. Conversely, rural and agricultural lands have fewer modal options 

due to their more limited activity areas. It also is important to consider that the context may 

change throughout the length of a corridor, and the different segments may warrant different 

TSMO strategies. 

21 California Department of Transportation, Smart Mobility, 2010. A Call to Action for the New Decade (California: 2010). 

Available at: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/ocp/smf_files/SmMblty_v6-3.22.10_150DPI.pdf.

Figure 4. Photo. TSMO strategies within rural corridors may include multistate traveler 

information for long-haul truck drivers related to weather, incidents, and road closures. Source: Thinksock.
12

1INTRODUCTION

Typically, a corridor will span multiple jurisdictions and agencies responsible for different 

components of system operations, including traffic signals, traveler information systems, 

and maintenance functions. Consequently, involving a wide range of agencies with corridor 

responsibilities is critical to taking a successful corridor approach to TSMO.

Who Performs Transportation Systems Management and Operations 

within Corridors?

While the lead agencies in managing and operating the transportation system are typically the 

owners of the facilities (i.e., State and local DOTs, roadway authorities, and transit agencies), 

many other partners are involved in how corridors are managed, and these relationships are critical 

for corridor operations. For example, effective TIM involves coordination among several different 

groups, including responders from a variety of disciplines (e.g., law enforcement, fire and rescue, 

and towing and recovery), as well as the DOT or transportation management center (TMC) staff. 

Implementation of TSP requires coordination between transit agencies that operate services and 

DOTs that are responsible for arterial roadway operations. Work zone management involves 

coordinating alternate routes between agencies and their contractors involved in construction and 

infrastructure renewal, other transportation agencies and services that use the facility or connect 

to the facility, as well as TMC and public relations staff who provide information to the public. 

Transportation demand management (TDM) programs often work directly with employers to 

promote travel options to their employees and may include efforts to support customized travel 

planning in communities, support for school-based programs to support bicycling and walking, 

and other options. 

At a regional level, MPOs play a critical role in TSMO, both by convening collaborative 

relationships among diverse agencies and organizations that play a role in transportation system 

operations, as well as through implementation of TSMO programs. For example, the Metropolitan 

Transportation Commission in the Bay Area of California operates the Bay Area 511 system. The 

Denver Regional Council of Governments provides engineering support to cities and counties 

in the region for signal retiming. The National Capital Region’s Transportation Planning Board 

manages the region’s Commuter Connections program, which supports ridesharing, transit, 

walking, biking, and other options.22

Over the past decade, TSMO has benefited from rapidly advancing technology and an increased 

emphasis on cost-effective transportation solutions. TSMO now appears to be headed into 

an era where State DOTs are elevating TSMO as a top priority and systematically increasing 

their operational capabilities. MPOs are consistently planning and programming for TSMO 

and spearheading regional collaboration for TSMO. Local governments, with responsibility 

for operating traffic signals, transit services, road maintenance and snow removal, local police 

forces, and other services, play an increasingly important role as TSMO strategies become part 

of corridor, local, and subarea plans. Advances in vehicle and infrastructure technology and 

communication systems promise to shift the paradigm of how infrastructure, people, vehicles, and 

operators interact to change the way safe, efficient, and reliable transportation is provided.

22 National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board, Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Commuter Connections, Web 

site. Available at: http://www.commuterconnections.org/.


13

1INTRODUCTION

A wide range of transportation-related agencies 

often plays a role in how transportation 

systems are managed and operated, such as: 

• Local transportation agencies, which are 

responsible for arterial traffic signals, 

pedestrian signals, and crosswalks, as 

well as snow removal and winter weather 

operations. 

• Transit agencies – regional and/or local 

– operate public transportation services 

along the corridor, which may include 

bus services, commuter rail, or other rail 

transit services.

• State DOTs typically operate freeway 

management systems, 511 traveler 

information, and park-and-ride lots, and 

often are responsible for snow removal 

on major freeways or other roadways 

within the corridor.

• MPOs may operate regional rideshare 

or TDM programs and may initiate 

targeted efforts to communities and 

businesses in the corridor.

• Local transportation management 

associations or organizations serve 

businesses or communities within 

the corridor. 

• Toll authorities. 

Even in cases where a TSMO strategy is 

being implemented or operated by a single 

entity or agency (e.g., a freeway management 

system that is managed by a State DOT), 

there are typically many different partners that 

should help to inform or play a role in those 

operations, such as:

• Law enforcement (responsible for 

incident management and parking 

enforcement).

• Fire and rescue.

Broad Range of Stakeholders 

Involved in I-95/I-395 Integrated 

Corridor Management (ICM) 

System Concept of Operations

The Virginia Department of 

Transportation worked with a broad range 

of stakeholders to develop an ICM 

Concept of Operations, for the I-95/I-395 

corridor between Fredericksburg and the 

District of Columbia line. This effort 

engaged the Virginia Department of Rail 

and Public Transportation, three 

metropolitan planning organizations 

(Metropolitan Washington Council of 

Governments, Potomac and 

Rappahannock Transportation Regional 

Commission, and George Washington 

Regional Commission), city and county 

governments, the Northern Virginia 

Regional Commission, the Northern 

Virginia Transportation Commission, the 

U.S. Department of Defense, and other 

stakeholders. The corridor contains 

numerous options for transit (rail and bus), 

along with rideshare and carpool 

activities, and contains substantial 

employment centers associated with the 

Federal government, including Fort 

Belvoir, Quantico, the Mark Center, and 

the Pentagon. Strategies were developed to 

balance travel between private vehicles 

and public transit, encourage the use of 

carpool and rideshare options, and 

advance traffic management strategies.

Source: Virginia Department of Transportation, I-95/I-395 Integrated Corridor Management Initiative - See more at: http://www.itsa.wikispaces.

net/file/view/ITSA_ICM+Workshop_Hari+Sripathi_VDOT.

pdf/340972496/ITSA_ICM%20Workshop_Hari%20Sripathi_

VDOT.pdf. 
14

1INTRODUCTION

• Local governments (responsible for street and off-street parking policies, zoning, and access 

management).

• Local businesses and venues along a corridor that serve as activity centers.

• Ports, freight distribution centers, and other facilities.

• Neighborhood associations and other community groups.

TSMO strategies, whether or not they are implemented and operated by a single entity or 

agency, involve building consensus around needs, priorities, performance measures, resources, 

and responsibilities. As a result, the corridor planning or study process should recognize the 

importance of key stakeholders in the corridor who will be affected by—and whose support 

is needed to identify and advance—appropriate TSMO strategies in the corridor, including 

non-traditional stakeholders. Local businesses, neighborhood associations, bicycle/pedestrian 

advocates, and others will likely be engaged in the decision-making process and will need to be 

informed of alternatives, benefits, and potential or perceived negative effects of TSMO strategies 

under consideration. Rather than optimizing individual services or facilities, effective corridor 

operations involve optimizing from an overall system perspective.
15

PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

2

CHAPTER 2. PLANNING FOR TRANSPORTATION 

SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS 

WITHIN CORRIDORS

WHY IS PLANNING FOR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS 

MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS WITHIN CORRIDORS 

NEEDED? 

The benefits of transportation systems management and operations (TSMO) within corridors are 

achieved through coordinated, strategic implementation and ongoing support through day-today operations and maintenance, and this requires planning. All TSMO strategies require some 

investment of resources, which could be in the form of funding, data, equipment, technology, or 

staff time. To obtain these resources and then make the best use of them, planning is needed. If 

TSMO is to be implemented effectively within corridors, there are a number of planning activities 

that need occur prior to implementation:

• Properly scoping the TSMO effort by obtaining input from all stakeholders in the corridor.

• Collaboration between all agencies or parties involved in the TSMO effort.

• Identification and agreement on the need for action and desired corridor objectives 

(or outcomes).

• Consideration of alternative solutions.

• Estimation of impacts (good and bad) on the corridor.

• Identification of resource needs and sources.

• Approval from relevant decisionmakers.

• Plan for ongoing corridor operations and maintenance.

Traditionally, transportation planning and TSMO have been largely independent activities. 

Planners typically focus on long-range transportation plans and projects programming. Operators 

are primarily concerned with addressing immediate system needs, such as incident response, 

traffic control, and work zone management. Planning for TSMO connects these two vital 

components of transportation, bringing operations needs and solutions to the corridor planning 

processes and likewise bringing longer-term, strategic planning to operations managers.

The following examples demonstrate the need for planning for TSMO within corridors. 

The examples are a small set of commonly missed opportunities for improving the operational 

performance of corridors through TSMO planning.
16

PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

2

2

Incorporating TSMO as a Consideration into Corridor Planning Processes Led by 

Planning Groups

When planning groups conduct corridor-level plans, the TSMO perspective is often absent. This 

may occur because planners lack familiarity and experience with operations strategies. TSMO 

activities generally occur outside of the plan, design, and build functions for capital infrastructure 

investment. Often, TSMO is afforded a place alongside system maintenance activities in agency 

organizational charts, relegating TSMO activities to what happens after the planning, design, and 

build out is complete. In this way, agencies miss the opportunity to integrate TSMO with the tools 

that can help address community needs and achieve community goals. By incorporating TSMO 

planning practices and strategies into the stages of goal setting, existing conditions assessment, 

alternatives development and analysis, and project selection, the results include a balanced plan 

that has both operational and infrastructure investments that make it more financially feasible and 

achievable in the near term.

Linking Corridor Optimization Efforts Led by Operations Groups with the Overarching 

Policy Framework and Plans of Their Agency

Coordination activities and integration with long-range planning efforts are often overlooked 

when advancing transportation operations projects. For example, a regional traffic operations 

group initiates a process to provide real-time traveler information along a major corridor, 

including freeway and arterial travel times. Their vision is to install several variable message signs 

along the corridor facilities and support it with travel time data from a third-party data provider. 

By coordinating with the overarching planning process, the traffic operations group can align the 

operational benefits with the broader goals identified in long-range transportation plans to draw 

champions at the local and regional levels, who may, in turn, open doors to funding and other 

resources, including integration with other projects. 

Using the Systems Engineering Process to Plan for ITS or TSMO

The use of the systems engineering process to support the implementation of intelligent 

transportation system (ITS) or TSMO deployments along a corridor is sometimes overlooked. 

As an illustrative example, agency planners forecast 50 percent traffic volume growth on a key 

corridor within 10 years. In response, the traffic operations group decides to install adaptive 

signal control technology. The agency procures equipment and software without completing a 

systems engineering process. Implementation falters with the discovery that the selected solution 

fails to meet key needs. Benjamin Franklin wrote, “If you fail to plan, you are planning to fail!” 

This holds particularly true for complex technology solutions like ITS. When agencies use good 

planning practices, like systems engineering, to clarify needs, goals, and requirements, they 

minimize the risk of failure. Failed projects, especially when highlighted by the media, make it 

harder to secure funding and to achieve buy-in from the public and key decisionmakers for 

future projects.
17

PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

2

PLANNING CONTEXTS FOR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS 

MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS WITHIN CORRIDORS

Planning for TSMO occurs at the multistate, statewide, regional, subarea, local, corridor, and 

project levels. It may be a stand-alone effort at any of those levels, or it may be integrated 

into a more comprehensive planning process, such as the development of a State long-range 

transportation plan or metropolitan transportation plan. Operations may be incorporated in a 

regional or statewide safety plan, freight mobility plan, transit plan, or sustainability plan. 

TSMO planning efforts can range from informal to formal and cover a spectrum of temporal 

scales, from next week to the next 30 to 50 years. In addition, the functional scope of TSMO 

planning on a corridor may be a single TSMO strategy or program (e.g., regional signal 

coordination, transportation management centers (TMCs), and traffic incident management 

(TIM)) or a comprehensive set of TSMO strategies, and every combination in between. 

Likewise, planning for TSMO at the corridor level is performed at a variety of scales and scopes 

and in several institutional contexts. For example, some State departments of transportation 

(DOTs) (e.g., Pennsylvania DOT) and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) (e.g., Puget 

Sound Regional Council) use corridors as the geographic basis for their TSMO planning or 

congestion management process. In other cases, agencies focus on operations improvements 

for a single corridor.

This section explores the range of planning contexts for TSMO within corridors (Figure 5). These 

contexts include multistate, statewide, regional, and local planning. That includes planning that 

is focused on one or more TSMO strategies such as traffic incident management or road weather 

management. Below is a description of the common contexts for TSMO planning and how 

planning for TSMO within corridors 

has been involved. Following these 

descriptions is a more in-depth look at 

the corridor planning contexts in terms 

of four dimensions: the motivation 

or impetus for the corridor TSMO 

planning effort (“why”), the lead 

organization (“who”), the timeframe for 

the plan (“when”), and the geographic 

extent of the corridor (“where”). 

Advancing Transportation 

Systems Management and 

Operations within Corridors in 

Several Planning Contexts

At the statewide level, planning for 

TSMO takes many forms. Planning 

for how TSMO will be conducted may 

be incorporated broadly in the State’s 

long-range transportation plan, which 



Traffic Incident Management

Road Weather Management

Traffic Signal Systems

Work Zone Management

Congestion Pricing

Others

Regional Planning

Local Planning

Statewide Planning

Multistate Planning

TSMO=Transportation Systems Management and Operations.

Planning for 

TSMO within 

Corridors 

Occurs in all 

of these 

Contexts

TSMO Strategy-Focused Planning

Figure 5. Diagram. Transportation systems management 

and operations planning within corridors occurs in a 

range of planning contexts and includes planning for a 

specific TSMO strategy.
18

PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

2

2

is developed by the State DOT in collaboration with the State’s MPOs and other transportation 

stakeholders. The State’s long-range transportation plan may contain TSMO elements that are 

part of a larger multistate initiative that individual States agree to support (e.g., a multistate 

road-weather information system or traveler information system). TSMO planning also may be 

performed at the district level, across a state, where each State DOT district develops its own 

strategic operations plan in coordination with the MPOs and local agencies in the DOT district. 

Alternatively, TSMO planning may occur at the corridor level, across the state, especially where 

a State has identified priority corridors where there are specific needs (e.g., improved goods 

movement from a seaport; more efficient commuter options to and from major employment 

areas; or better access to major entertainment, recreational, or sports venues). The 2012 Surface 

Transportation Authorization Act, Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century, requires that 

“[t]he statewide transportation plan and the transportation improvement program developed 

for each State shall provide for the development and integrated management and operation 

of transportation systems and facilities...”23 States are encouraged to include TSMO in their 

long-range transportation plans developed through performance-based planning.24 For more 

information on planning for TSMO at the Statewide level, readers should consult the Federal 

Highway Administration’s (FHWA’s) Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety 

and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual.

25

At the metropolitan level, planning for TSMO often is led or facilitated by the MPO, which 

convenes a group of TSMO stakeholders, typically including State DOT district or regional 

offices, to advance TSMO in the region. Metropolitan planning for operations is frequently 

conducted in coordination with the development of the metropolitan transportation plan as a 

means of including TSMO priorities and strategies into the overall metropolitan transportation 

plan and including TSMO program and projects in the transportation improvement program (TIP). 

The FHWA recommends that planning for TSMO at the metropolitan (as well as statewide) level 

be driven by outcomes-oriented objectives and performance measures. Rather than focusing on 

projects and investment plans, the planning for operations approach emphasizes, first, developing 

objectives for transportation system performance, and then using performance measures and 

targets as a basis for identifying solutions and developing investment strategies. This is called 

the “objectives-driven, performance-based approach.” The FHWA provides more information on 

using this approach to integrate TSMO into the metropolitan transportation planning process in a 

key document: Advancing Metropolitan Planning for Operations: The Building Blocks of a Model 

Transportation Plan Incorporating Operations - A Desk Reference.

26 Planning for TSMO within 

corridors occurs at the metropolitan level when MPOs use corridors as the geographic unit for 

conducting the congestion management process or other operations related planning.

23 Title 23 United States Code Section 135(a).

24 Federal Highway Administration, Model Long-Range Transportation Plans: A Guide for Incorporating Performance-Based Planning,

FHWA-HEP-14-046 (Washington, DC: August 2014). Available at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/performance_based_planning/mlrtp_

guidebook/.

25 Federal Highway Administration, Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety and Multimodal Planning: A Reference 

Manual, FHWA-HOP-10-028 (Washington, DC: June 2010).Available at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/processes/statewide/practices/

manual/index.cfm.

26 Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration, Advancing Metropolitan Planning for Operations: The Building Blocks 

of a Model Transportation Plan Incorporating Operations - A Desk Reference, FHWA-HOP-10-027 (Washington, DC: 2010). Available at: 

http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop10027/.
19

PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

2

Local or subarea planning refers to planning which addresses

“A defined portion of a region (such as a county) in more detail than area-wide 

or regional plans. Subarea studies are similar to corridor studies, with the 

distinction that a subarea study generally addresses more of the total planning 

context and the broader transportation network for the area.”27

Because subarea planning addresses a fairly broad planning context, this often involves a larger 

number of potentially affected stakeholders and comprehensive visioning for the area. Local 

studies may address a municipality (city or county) or other area, and may include a wide array of 

different issues, including transportation, land use, and urban design. Corridor planning for TSMO 

also occurs at the local level (e.g., when one or more local agencies want to address mobility 

issues on an individual corridor). 

Corridor planning focuses on planning for a linear system of multimodal facilities in which an 

existing roadway or transit facility will typically serve as the “backbone” of the corridor. The 

travel-shed helps determine the length and breadth of a corridor area, which usually connects 

major activity centers or logical destinations. Corridors can range in length from a few miles in an 

urban location to hundreds of miles for State or multistate corridors. In addition to different spatial 

scales, corridors also may have different modal foci (e.g., freight rail corridor, high capacity 

passenger rail corridor, limited-access highway corridor, or bus rapid transit corridor). Usually, 

corridor planning focuses on a combination of modes and a network of facilities.

Statewide and metropolitan long-range transportation plans establish the policy framework for 

corridor, local, and subarea planning and provide guidance in terms of regional and statewide 

priorities related to goals, objectives, strategies, and transportation investments. MPOs, counties, 

and cities commonly lead local and subarea planning efforts. Corridor studies and planning 

activities are often performed by State DOTs and MPOs.

Corridor improvements to achieve goals and objectives may include major capital investments in 

new capacity or infrastructure, which are typically incorporated into the State or MPO long range 

transportation plan. They also may take the form of improvements in the way the existing capacity 

in the corridor is managed, including investments in TSMO strategies that also may require capital 

investment and should be included in State and MPO long-range plans and TIPs as part of the 

planning for operations approach.

Statewide and regional TSMO or ITS plans and associated architectures are a resource that can 

inform corridor, local, and subarea planning activities. These plans typically include existing and 

planned TSMO strategies that have been identified for statewide or metropolitan area use. Some 

include suggested TSMO strategies or implementation projects for specific subareas or an entire 

toolbox of potential strategies to consider.

27 Federal Highway Administration, Guidance on Using Corridor and Subarea Planning to Inform NEPA (Washington, DC: April 2011). 

Available at: http://environment.fhwa.dot.gov/integ/corridor_nepa_guidance.asp#toc212.
20

PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

2

2

The Who, Why, When, and Where of Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations Planning within Corridors

The contexts for corridor TSMO planning 

can be understood in the simple terms of 

who, why, when, and where (Figure 6).

Why?

The why provides the primary motivation 

for considering TSMO strategies within 

the corridor. The motivation can be the 

result of the regional planning process 

where a specific corridor is identified as an 

area requiring significant improvements or 

corrections (as in Example Context 1), or it 

could come through a multistate coalition 

that identifies a particular corridor as 

critical to mobility and economic activity 

throughout the corridor. For example, 

prior to the 2002 Winter Games in Salt 

Lake City, Utah, major improvements 

were made in corridors likely to carry heavy traffic during the Games, and these improvements 

included upgrades to traveler information and other TSMO-related enhancements. The need for 

corridor improvements also could come from within operating agencies that see opportunities for 

providing a higher level of service (LOS) to travelers in the corridor (e.g., through more accurate 

and timely traveler information, better synchronized signals, or improved incident management 

in the corridor). Investments required to implement these improvements may be integrated into 

regional transportation plans and may provide the motivation for implementing TSMO strategies 

and tactics in a corridor. 



Example Context 1: Strong regional planning for operations supports corridor planning.

• Why – The need for a specific corridor planning study has been identified as part of a regional 

or agency transportation systems management and operations (TSMO) planning effort based 

on operational deficiencies within the corridor.

• Who – The key stakeholders who operate transportation systems or emergency management 

within the corridor have probably been identified as part of the intelligent transportation 

system architecture and should be used as a starting point. A regional TSMO committee also 

may provide a sounding board for input throughout the study.

• Where – The corridor limits help identify expanded stakeholders (e.g., businesses, 

neighborhoods, freight, etc.) within the corridor that are impacted.

• When – The planning includes TSMO from start to finish.

Figure 6. Graphic. Context for transportation systems 

management and operations planning within corridors.

WHY

Motivation 

for Corridor 

TSMO 

Planning

WHERE

Geographic 

Area for TSMO 

Corridor 

Improvements

WHO

Responsibility and 

Capability for 

TSMO Corridor 

Improvements

Timeframe for 

TSMO 

Corridor 

Improvements

WHEN

TSMO=transportation systems management and operations.


21

PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

2

The why also might be the result of growing concerns about congestion, safety, air quality, 

reliability, or other recurring problems within a corridor, which may or may not be addressed in 

regional transportation plans. The motivation also might come as a result of a major incident that 

resulted in significant delays or that highlighted deficiencies in the existing corridor capacity 

(see Example Context 2). Interest in TSMO strategies in a corridor also might arise in conjunction 

with new capacity expansion projects when integrating TSMO strategies and tactics can be most 

cost effective (see Example Context 3). 

Example Context 2: Transportation systems management and operations applications are 

largely outside the regional planning process, such as traffic incident management (TIM).

• Why – Data indicate a high number of incidents are causing lane closures on a State urban 

arterial.

• Who – Existing freeway TIM teams led by the State agency are used as a starting point to 

identify the potential arterial TIM team. Other potential stakeholders include local agency 

traffic operations staff, if they operate any part of the arterial, and local police, fire, and 

medical responders. See Example Context 1 for expanded stakeholders.

• Where – The corridor limits (in this case, defined by past high-incident locations) help identify 

the specific stakeholders that may be required, such as city police instead of State police.

• When – Initiate the planning process as soon as performance metrics first indicate an issue on 

the arterial.

Example Context 3: Corridor or facility study does not include transportation systems 

management and operations (TSMO) as initial focus, such as a rural corridor safety audit.

• Why – A corridor study is initiated to examine high-crash locations along a corridor and 

identify geometric or capacity improvements.

• Who – The initial team may only include transportation planners. A regional or statewide 

TSMO champion could reach out to the study team and offer education and assistance with an 

evaluation of TSMO strategies that may help address the problem. See Example Context 1 for 

expanded stakeholders.

• Where – The project limits inform operational responsibilities. For example, a county without 

an electrical crew may need help from their State department of transportation to operate and 

maintain a TSMO strategy, such as a curve warning system.

• When – As soon as a TSMO champion is aware of the corridor study, they should approach the 

project team about incorporating TSMO into the study. If a champion is in place at the 

executive level, they may be able to add TSMO to the study during the scoping process.
22

PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

2

2

Who?

The who for TSMO planning for corridors establishes responsibility for planning and 

implementing TSMO strategies within a corridor that, in many cases, spans multiple 

jurisdictions and requires interagency and multijurisdictional agreements regarding responsibilities 

for planning, designing, implementing, operating, monitoring, and maintaining TSMO strategies 

and tactics. This could be an authority acting on behalf of multiple entities (e.g., a toll authority 

or regional transit authority) or a single entity designated as the lead agency on behalf of other 

jurisdictions or agencies. Alternatively, if the corridor of interest is within a single jurisdiction, 

responsibility may lie with a single agency within the jurisdiction, but, even in this case, there are 

likely to be other agencies and jurisdictions that are affected by decisions made with respect to the 

corridor of interest, thus communication and coordination with these agencies and jurisdictions is 

important to the success of the TSMO improvements in the corridor.

The who in TSMO planning for corridors reflects the capacity and experience of the responsible 

agency or agencies. Agencies with considerable experience in TSMO planning will have tools 

needed to evaluate various TSMO strategies and will understand the data available to evaluate 

these strategies. Agencies with less institutional knowledge and experience with TSMO strategies 

and tactics can draw on external expertise to assist in integrating TSMO into corridor planning. 

Moreover, those with less experience may find institutional resistance to considering and 

committing resources to TSMO improvements and may need to enlist the support of champions 

who can help make the case for TSMO as a means for improving transportation system 

performance within the corridor. 

In many, perhaps most, cases, a regional entity, such as an MPO or the major jurisdiction (e.g., 

city, county, or parish), will serve as the lead or facilitating entity for convening multiple agencies 

and jurisdictions to develop operations objectives for the corridor under consideration. State DOT 

district or regional offices also are likely to be involved because, in many states, the State DOT 

is responsible for maintenance and operations on major arterials. Other local and State agencies, 

such as law enforcement, also may be engaged, because they are often the entities most visible to 

the traveling public and will have significant responsibility for implementing and enforcing new 

operations strategies. 

Where?

The where of TSMO planning for corridors is critical both to identifying key entities responsible 

for planning and implementing TSMO strategies and tactics and to determining who will benefit 

or be otherwise affected by TSMO strategies and tactics considered for the corridor. For example, 

the I-95 Corridor Coalition, a multistate coalition on the east coast, was originally formed as 

a way to coordinate major construction projects and inform motor carriers so that they could 

anticipate delays and plan their routes and schedules accordingly. However, the coalition has 

expanded to provide extensive traveler information to all travelers in the corridor; to coordinate 

formation of a seamless multistate electronic toll collection system (EZPass); and to collect and 

disseminate information regarding emergencies and incidents up and down the corridor, including 

advisories regarding delays and alternative routes. Other multistate corridor coalitions have been 

formed to provide traveler information to motor carriers and other travelers, especially in areas 

subject to frequent and severe weather events. 




23

PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

2

More often, however, corridors of interest are within or between major population centers and are 

critical to moving goods and people that are essential to economic activity along the corridor and 

in the broader region. For example, the I-80 Integrated Corridor Mobility Project in California 

addressed a highly congested, 20-mile stretch of I-80 on the eastern side of the San Francisco Bay 

Area, extending from Carquinez Bridge to Bay Bridge (see Figure 7).28 In this case, geographical 

features and developed areas prevented further expansion of the facility; therefore, a multimodal, 

systems management approach was necessary. The corridor management project, planned 

and implemented through a partnership including Caltrans, the Alameda County Congestion 

Management Agency, and the Contra Costa County Transportation Authority sought to:

• Create a well-balanced system.

• Maintain optimal operational viability.

• Avoid flow breakdown by using proactive measures.

• Detect and respond to congestion 

events faster. 

• Improve safety and security. 

• Manage congested flow when it 

does occur.

• Promote transit ridership and 

mode shifts.

• Protect local arterials from 

unnecessary diversion.

• Minimize adverse social and 

environmental impacts.

Because of the geographic location 

of the portion of the I-80 corridor 

included in the project, 17 jurisdictions, 

agencies (Federal, State, and local), and 

regional authorities were involved in the 

corridor project as primary stakeholders. 

Consequently, the level of coordination 

required among the primary stakeholders 

and other interests (e.g., neighborhoods, 

commercial spaces, shippers, and carriers) 

was directly affected by the geographic 

location of the corridor.

28 California Department of Transportation, I-80 

Smart Corridor Project, Web site. Available at: 

http://80smartcorridor.org/. 

Figure 7. Map. The Interstate 80 Integrated Corridor 

Mobility Project area map in California.

Source: Caltrans.

EL

CERRITO

Carquinez

Bridge

Bay Bridge

EMERYVILLE

ALBANY

VALLEJO

RICHMOND

BERKELEY

PINOLE

HERCULES

ORINDA

OAKLAND

SAN

PABLO

San Pablo Ave

13

24

4

780

580

80

80

80

LEGEND

 Project Corridor

PROJECT AREA MAP
24

PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

2

2

When?

The when of TSMO corridor planning considers both the point at which TSMO planning takes 

place and the timeframe for TSMO strategies and tactics. TSMO corridor planning is most 

effective when integrated into the planning process for a new facility or when an existing facility 

is expanded or undergoing major renovation. At that time, plans for TSMO projects that require 

the installation of technology (e.g., cameras, fiber optics, and dynamic message signs) or roadway 

features (e.g., turn lanes and full-depth shoulders) can be included in the design most effectively. 

However, in many cases, TSMO strategies are considered only when available capacity no longer 

accommodates current or projected demand, and TSMO strategies and tactics are viewed as the 

most appropriate way to improve transportation system performance, as in the I-80 example above.

In addition to when the TSMO corridor plans are developed and implemented in a corridor, the 

TSMO corridor planning process considers the timeframe for implementation and operation of the 

TSMO investments. TSMO investments typically have short returns-on-investment (ROI) relative 

to other investments in transportation infrastructure and so can be justified based on much shorter 

life cycles than can major capacity expansion projects. On the other hand, such investments 

tend to be technology intensive and, with relatively rapidly changing technology, investments in 

these strategies must be made with an eye toward next-generation technologies and capabilities. 

As more advanced technologies emerge in sensors, vehicles, communications, visualization, 

and others, TSMO corridor planning should consider how current TSMO investments will 

accommodate future upgrades and new capabilities that may make past investments less attractive.

EXAMPLES OF CURRENT PRACTICES

Below are brief examples of current practices for TSMO planning at the corridor level. These 

help to illustrate the wide breadth of activities that are considered to be planning for TSMO 

within corridors:

• Dynamic Corridor Congestion Management (California DOT [Caltrans], District 7) –

Caltrans, District 7 includes both Los Angeles and Ventura counties in Southern California. 

The Dynamic Corridor Congestion Management project focused on planning and 

implementing an integrated corridor management (ICM) approach to operations strategies 

to integrate freeway ramp operations with local street intersections and arterials to achieve 

corridor congestion relief for the region. To select a pilot project, Caltrans evaluated six 

corridors based on system demand, existing physical and ITS infrastructure, the possibility 

for institutional coordination, and ICM readiness. A single corridor, I-110, emerged as the 

top-rated corridor for a pilot project, and a Concept of Operations was prepared.29

As part of TSMO policy for all of Caltrans, it has established the Connected Corridors 

Program and is reorganizing based on corridor management statewide. This is part of the path 

that Caltrans is pursuing to implement corridor management and operations strategies that 

optimize system capacity and meet the demands of all users in a real-time, multi-modal 

29 California Department of Transportation, South Bay Corridor Study and Evaluation for Dynamic Corridor Congestion Management 

(DCCM), Presentation to Metro Streets and Freeways Subcommittee Meeting, October 17, 2013. Available at: http://media.metro.net/about_

us/committees/sfs/images/sfs_item10_10_2013.pdf. 


25

PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

2

environment. As such, Caltrans is also emphasizing planning for operations, which requires 

strong partnerships among the traffic operations, planning, maintenance, and capital programs 

within Caltrans and its external partners at local and regional levels.

• Harmony Road Enhanced Travel Corridor Master Plan (City of Fort Collins, 

Colorado) – The city used a four-tier evaluation and screening process to analyze 

multimodal improvement alternatives, many of which included TSMO strategies, to 

reach a locally preferred alternative for the Harmony Road arterial corridor.30

• Road Safety and Operations Audit (Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission, 

Pennsylvania) – This audit identified immediate safety and operational issues along a 

corridor and provided improvement recommendations. Although many improvements were 

related to safety and maintenance, TSMO strategies also were included.31

• Statewide Active Arterial Management Needs Plan (Florida DOT) – This plan 

identified the causes of congestion on arterials across the state and recommended arterial 

management strategies. It presented a two-pronged approach for implementing TSMO 

improvements based on the extent of the congestion problems. An enhanced maintenance 

plan was recommended for less-congested corridors, and a full active arterial management 

plan was recommended for congested corridors.32

• I-805 South Active Transportation and Demand Management (ATDM) Strategy Plan 

(San Diego Association of Governments, California) – Planning is currently underway to find 

solutions to congestion on the I-805 corridor by considering transportation system management 

and demand management strategies. The outcome of the study will be a prioritized set of 

ATDM strategies that includes the completion of a corridor program level concept of operations 

report. The concept of operations report presents a multimodal and multi-agency corridor vision 

and goals and provides an initial prioritized set of ATDM strategies. 

• I-580 Inter-Regional, Multimodal Corridor Study (San Joaquin Council of 

Governments, California) – This study focused on identifying three types of multimodal 

strategies for the corridor: enhanced transportation demand management (TDM) programs, 

inter-regional goods movement strategies, and inter-regional transit services.33

• United States 20/Oregon Road 34 Optimization Study (Oregon DOT, Corvallis) – 

The primary goal of the study was to identify low-cost operational improvements to address 

safety and mobility within an arterial corridor that is a critical highway segment for 

commuter, freight, and recreational traffic. Potential TSMO strategies were screened 

against high-level criteria, and the top five were evaluated in detail based on benefits, cost, 

and how well they support the project goals and objectives. The top three strategies are 

currently moving forward for implementation.34

30 City of Fort Collins, Harmony Road ETC Master Plan, June 2013. Available at: http://www.fcgov.com/transportationplanning/pdf/harmonydraft-report.pdf.

31 Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission, I-95 Road Safety and Operations Audit (RSOA) – Delaware County, December 2011. 

Available at: http://www.dvrpc.org/reports/10011.pdf.

32 Florida Department of Transportation, “Statewide Active Arterial Management Needs Plan,” (July 2013). Unpublished.

33 San Joaquin Council of Governments, Final Report for: I-580 Interregional Multimodal Corridor Study, Aug 2011. Available at: 

http://www.sjcog.org/DocumentCenter/View/44.

34 DKS Associates, US 20/OR 34 Optimization Study Final Report, February 2015. Prepared for Oregon Department of Transportation Region 2.

APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

27

3

CHAPTER 3. APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR 

TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT 

AND OPERATIONS WITHIN CORRIDORS

This chapter provides information on several fundamental activities that will typically need 

to occur when planning for transportation systems management and operations (TSMO) on a 

corridor regardless of the type of corridor and 

the planning context. Chapter 4 describes the 

activities that are needed to make the plans 

for TSMO a reality through key activities, 

such as programming, design, and systems 

engineering. All of these activities form 

the basis for an approach to planning and 

preparing for the implementation of TSMO 

strategies in corridors. This approach is 

outlined in Figure 8. This figure will be 

used throughout the next two chapters to 

highlight the major activities. The approach 

is based on the planning for operations 

approach developed for advancing TSMO at 

the metropolitan planning level. Adaptations 

were made to account for the broad range of 

contexts in which TSMO may be planned 

for within corridors (e.g., planning for road 

weather management on a multistate corridor 

conducted outside of a formal regional or 

statewide planning process). 

This section covers:

• Getting started – scoping the effort and 

building a team.

• Gathering information on current and 

future context and conditions.

• Developing an outcome-oriented 

operational concept, including 

operations objectives.

• Identifying operations performance 

needs, gaps, and opportunities.

Figure 8. Diagram. Approach to planning 

for transportation systems management and 

operations within corridors.

TSMO=Transportation Systems Management and Operations.
28

APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

3

• Developing an integrated TSMO approach:

◦ Identifying TSMO strategies based on operations objectives and performance needs.

◦ Evaluating TSMO strategies.

◦ Selecting TSMO strategies. 

GETTING STARTED – SCOPING THE EFFORT AND BUILDING A TEAM

Developing an effective corridor plan 

or system management plan requires 

scoping the effort and building a team 

of partners and stakeholders to work 

together on its development (Figure 9).

Key questions to consider in scoping 

the effort include:

• What do we want to accomplish/

address?

• What is the geographic area of 

the corridor? Does it include 

parallel roadways or transit 

lines? Are there any connectors 

along the corridor that also 

should be included?

• What are the pressing issues or 

desired areas of change?

• Who should be involved in this 

process? Why and how?

• How will the planning effort be 

conducted? What Federal, State, 

regional, or local procedures or 

guidelines are best suited to the 

effort regarding items such as outcome-oriented objectives, performance measurement, 

conditions analysis, strategy identification and evaluation, and public involvement?

Tools that can be leveraged to scope the effort and build a team include:35

• Statewide or regional intelligent transportation system (ITS) architecture – Most 

states and large metropolitan areas already have an ITS architecture in place. This 

framework for planning, defining, and integrating ITS can provide insights into the 

management and operations services, stakeholders, and performance data that may play 

a role in a corridor study.

35 For more information, see: Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration, Advancing Metropolitan Planning for 

Operations: An Objectives-Driven, Performance-Based Approach – A Guidebook, FHWA-HOP-10-026 (Washington, DC: 2010). 

Available at: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop10026/.

Figure 9. Diagram. The “Getting Started – Scoping 

the Effort and Building a Team” activity of the 

approach for planning for transportation systems 

management and operations within corridors.

Getting Started: Scoping the Effort 

and Building a Team

Gathering Information on Current and 

Future Context and Conditions

Identifying Operations Performance 

Needs, Gaps, and Opportunities

Programming for TSMO on Subareas

Implementing

Developing an Integrated 

TSMO Approach

• Identifying TSMO Strategies Based 

on Operations Objectives and 

Performance Needs

• Evaluating TSMO Strategies

• Selecting TSMO Strategies

Developing an Outcome-Oriented 

Operational Concept

• Subarea Goals

• Subarea Operations Objectives

• Performance Measures

Monitoring and Maintaining Level of Operations Over Time

TSMO=transportation systems management and operations.

Getting Started: Scoping the Effort 

and Building a Team
APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

29

3

• Regional concept for transportation 

operations (RCTO) – An RCTO is an 

objectives-driven, performance-based 

approach to planning for one or more 

specific operations areas, such as traveler 

information or traffic incident management 

(TIM). The RCTO, which typically 

includes roles, responsibilities, and 

resources needed to achieve specific 

operations objectives, can be used as a 

tool to develop and implement TSMO 

strategies at the corridor level.

• Statewide or regional corridor planning 

guide – Some agencies, such as the 

Delaware Valley Regional Planning 

Commission, have developed guides for 

corridor planning that include planning 

process recommendations and a toolbox 

of available strategies that may be 

considered. Ideally, the toolbox should 

include TSMO strategies in addition to 

more traditional transportation strategies, 

such as complete streets.36

The team involved in a corridor planning study 

provides a forum for idea sharing, decisionmaking, and a commitment to improving 

operations. Chapter 1 includes a preliminary 

list of transportation-related stakeholders that 

should be considered. Effectively engaging the team involves developing a shared understanding 

of the roles, responsibilities, and needs of key constituencies (e.g., partnering agencies, authorities, 

network owners and operators, stakeholders, and the users of the corridor). The team will 

then work together to define needs in the corridor, agree upon goals and objectives, develop 

preliminary consensus on pragmatic concepts for strategies or combinations of strategies that 

realistically address specified goals and objectives, and develop viable operating scenarios under 

which the concepts and strategies can be analyzed.

36 For more information, see: Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission, Corridor Planning Guide: Towards a More Meaningful 

Integration of Transportation and Land Use, September 2007. Available at: http://www.dvrpc.org/asp/pubs/publicationabstract.asp?pub_

id=07028.

Partner Agencies Working 

Together on the I-495 Corridor 

Concept of Operations in New 

York/New Jersey

A wide array of partnering agencies in 

the New York/Northern New Jersey 

metropolitan region initiated a Concept 

of Operations study for the I-495 

corridor, spanning from Northern New 

Jersey through the Lincoln Tunnel, 

Midtown Manhattan, the QueensMidtown Tunnel, and I-495 through 

Queens. This complex corridor 

encompasses highways, principal and 

secondary arterial networks, bridges, 

tunnels, local street grids, and multiple 

transit services, and has engaged an 

extensive set of operating agencies 

and partners. In addition to primary 

partners, the agencies recognize the 

important role of emergency responders, 

private bus companies, event promoters, 

and the freight industry, among other 

stakeholders.
30

APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

3

Although there is no one-size-fits-all approach to team building, these approaches have worked for 

some regions:37

• Build on an existing collaborative group – Use an existing operations group or a 

committee that has already been used to develop a regional ITS architecture or RCTO as a 

starting point for identifying stakeholders. An existing operations group may be able to 

incorporate the corridor project into its meeting agendas.

• Ensure at least one committed champion – Ideally, the champion has a clear vision of the 

desired outcome, brings the stakeholders together, ensures they are engaged, and works to 

get the support needed to achieve the desired outcomes.

• Gather support from elected or appointed officials and agency leadership – Identify an 

advocate for the effort at the executive leadership level to help influence the success of the 

team.

• Engage participants – It is important to identify and engage the array of operating 

agencies and stakeholders that will play a role in, and ultimately be critical to, operations 

within the corridor. Typically, this will include local transportation agencies, a State 

department of transportation (DOT), transit agencies, and representatives of local 

governments and community groups. Law enforcement, emergency responders, and major 

employers in a corridor also may be important participants. If some participants, such as 

emergency management agencies, are unable to attend project committee meetings, better 

success may be realized by taking the project to other established forums held by those 

stakeholders.38

• Form a tiered collaborative structure with a strong mandate – The use of a steering 

committee with agency leaders can provide project guidance and make high level decisions 

while a working group comprised of technical staff can help shape the technical approaches 

needed to deliver on the leaders’ vision. 

Benefits of Collaboration 

Enhancing collaboration and coordination among agencies involved in systems management 

and operations within corridors is a key component of integrated corridor management (ICM) 

and is vital to developing solutions for optimizing corridor performance; this is particularly true 

in complex urban corridors with many different operators and choices of modes and routes. 

Collaboration produces tangible benefits both to participating agencies and jurisdictions, as well 

as to system users and other stakeholders who depend on effective corridor operations in moving 

people and goods. These benefits fall into three general groups: (1) access to and use of existing 

resources, (2) improvements in current operations, and (3) better outcomes for system users and 

other stakeholders.39

37 For more information, see: Federal Highway Administration, The Regional Concept for Transportation Operations: A Practitioner’s Guide. 

Available at: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop11032/.

38 For suggested stakeholders based on operational objectives, see: Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration, 

Advancing Metropolitan Planning for Operations: An Objectives-Driven, Performance-Based Approach – A Guidebook, FHWAHOP-10-026 (Washington, DC: 2010). Available at: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop10026/.

39 For more information, see: Federal Highway Administration, The Collaborative Advantage: Realizing the Tangible Benefits of Regional 

Transportation Operations Collaboration, FHWA-HOP-08-001 (Washington, DC: August 2007). Available at: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/

publications/benefits_guide/index.htm.


APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

31

3

Expanded Access to Resources and More Efficient Use of Existing Resources 

The visible and immediate benefits of collaboration among agencies and jurisdictions in a corridor 

may be realized through strategies, such as:

• Pooling funds to avoid duplicate investments or purchases.

• Participating in joint training activities.

• Taking advantage of special expertise or experience that may reside in some but 

not all agencies or jurisdictions. 

• Negotiating group purchasing agreements with vendors and suppliers. 

• Adopting common standards for technology that can simplify interagency and 

multijurisdictional interactions and mutual support.

• Acquiring and maintaining more current and more effective hardware and 

software systems.

Each of these approaches, or several in combination, can improve the use of available resources.

Improved Agency Operations 

Beyond more efficient access to and use of resources, collaboration enables cooperating entities to 

perform their missions more effectively. These improvements can result in:

• Sharing information among system operators and owners so that they have greater 

awareness of current and anticipated events in adjacent jurisdictions or in other agencies.

• Developing standard protocols and procedures among agencies and jurisdictions that 

operate within the corridor.

• Improving responsiveness to events and incidents by sharing information, assets, and 

responsibilities.

• Working cooperatively to leverage all available assets, skills, and personnel to 

improve efficiency.

Each of these, and other strategies, can enhance working relationships during routine operations 

and offer the added benefit of providing the foundation for preparing for and responding to 

emergency situations, crashes, intentional attacks on transportation assets or other infrastructure, 

planned special events (e.g., sporting events, conventions, and festivals), or major natural events 

(e.g., hurricanes, snowstorms, tornados, earthquakes, mudslides, wildfires, etc.). 

Better Outcomes or Results for Travelers, Suppliers or Shippers, and Other Stakeholders

Ultimately, system users and communities benefit through effects, such as: 

• Safer corridor facilities (e.g., transit stations and bicycle/pedestrian paths and lanes).

• Lower fuel consumption through both more efficient operation of the corridor and more 

and better alternatives to private vehicle use.

• Shorter travel times achieved through congestion mitigation strategies and more effective 

corridor management and operation.






32

APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

3

• More accurate, timely, and relevant information about past, current, and anticipated travel 

conditions, modes, schedules, travel times, and travel options so that travelers, shippers, and 

others can make more informed travel decisions.

These benefits will, over time, prove to be the most important, because they are the outcomes 

important to travelers, shippers, environmental agencies, neighborhood associations, bicycle/

pedestrian advocates, and others who interact with the corridor.

A Framework for Collaboration and Coordination in a Corridor

Five key, or foundational, elements 

characterize the collaboration and 

coordination necessary for effective TSMO 

within corridors. As shown in Figure 10, 

these five elements are connected, interactive, 

iterative, and build upon foundational 

elements that can be applied at multiple 

scales.

The starting point for collaboration and 

coordination is the structure, or the means 

through which individuals, agencies, and 

jurisdictions come together to identify needs, 

establish priorities, make commitments, 

allocate resources, and evaluate performance. 

In a corridor, a structure might be formalized 

in an ongoing corridor coalition or working 

group, or it may be addressed as part of 

broader regional or State efforts that include 

a focus on key corridors. 

The process is the course of action taken 

through which options are created and 

decisions are made; the process could involve 

formal activities like a structured set of meetings as part of a corridor planning process or informal 

activities.

The products are the agreements, arrangements, and commitments to move forward with agreed 

upon strategies. The product may include a corridor plan, a concept of operations, operating plans 

and procedures, or other documents. 

Resources reflect the commitments made in terms of funding, people, equipment, facilities, 

support, and other assets needed to implement the strategies identified for the corridor.

Finally, performance measurement provides the feedback to determine how well the agreed 

upon strategies have been implemented and executed, and the effect these strategies have had on 

outcomes of interest in the corridor relative to the agreed-upon goals and objectives.



Figure 10. Diagram. The framework for 

collaboration and coordination within a corridor.

Performance

Resources Products

Process

Structure

Source: Federal Highway Administration. Regional Transportation Operations 

Collaboration and Coordination: A Primer for Working Together to Improve 

Transportation Safety, Reliability, and Security, FHWA-OP-03-008.
APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

33

3

Connections to Broader Planning and Operations Efforts

Transportation planning in a corridor should build off of broader planning efforts for TSMO, as 

well as existing operations programs and strategies at a regional and State level. Regardless of 

the size of the corridor, planning for corridor operations should recognize and build upon existing 

programs that can benefit the corridor, including: 

• Existing ITS infrastructure, such as fiber networks, variable message signs, and 

traffic cameras.

• State and/or regional traveler information systems, which can be utilized to help provide 

real-time information on incidents, speeds, and other aspects of operating conditions for 

highways, arterials, and transit in the corridor. 

• Regional incident management and response programs, which can be expanded or 

targeted to address corridor-specific issues.

• Work zone management strategies used in transportation management plans for 

significant projects. 

• Regional transportation demand management (TDM) programs, which often include 

ridematching services, employer outreach, and public outreach and incentives to encourage 

use of alternatives to driving alone.

In particular, transportation management centers (TMCs) use real-time information to support 

quicker incident management and communicate this information to the public through 511 

systems, the Internet, and media to help travelers avoid delays. Employing active traffic 

management (ATM) and active transportation and demand management (ATDM) strategies in 

a corridor builds upon the foundation of monitoring, assessment, and response that takes place 

within TMCs. This may involve applying a wide range of strategies, such as opening shoulder 

lanes to transit vehicles or general-use traffic during congested periods, adjusting speed limits 

based on traffic levels, and dynamic ramp metering to control the flow of traffic at merging points.

TDM program services and incentives also could be targeted to specific corridors, particularly 

those with major construction activity. For instance, in the Washington, DC, metro area, the 

Virginia DOT and Maryland State Highway Administration partnered in developing the Bridge 

Bucks pilot program, which provided a 50-dollars-a-month incentive to commuters who switched 

out of their cars and into buses, trains, or vanpools during reconstruction of the Woodrow Wilson 

Bridge. The regional Commuter Connections program, operated by the Metropolitan Washington 

Council of Governments, was a resource that helped provide ridematching and a guaranteed ride 

home to participants.40

In developing corridor goals, operations objectives, and performance measures, and identifying 

and selecting appropriate strategies for application, the approach for planning for TSMO on a 

corridor should build upon existing planning efforts that relate to system operations, including:

40 Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments, Committee Document, “A Transit/Ridesharing Initiative to Ease Commuting During 

Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Construction,” January 2004. Available at: http://www.mwcog.org/uploads/committee-documents/

zFpaVg20040127141601.pdf.


34

APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

3

• Priorities identified in State and regional transportation plans – Statewide and 

metropolitan transportation plans identify policies and priorities that can be used to inform 

identification of potential strategies for a corridor. For instance, some plans emphasize 

demand management or include a policy to prioritize strategies that increase transit, 

ridesharing, and non-motorized travel over single-occupancy vehicle travel.

• State or metropolitan area TSMO plans – Some State DOTs have developed TSMO 

plans, which identify priority corridors and sets of strategies that may be applicable for 

different types of corridors. For instance, Minnesota DOT’s Highway System Operations 

Plan and Wisconsin DOT’s Traffic Operations Infrastructure Plan generally outline 

Statewide operations infrastructure needs and opportunities.41, 42 A number of metropolitan 

planning organizations (MPOs) also have developed regional TSMO plans. For instance, 

the Baltimore Metropolitan Council developed the Baltimore Regional Management and 

Operations Strategic Deployment Plan, which includes goals, objectives, and strategies, as 

well as screening factors, to suggest an implementation order for projects.43 Metro, the 

MPO for Portland, Oregon, developed a Regional Transportation System Management and 

Operations Plan, which lays out a framework that includes a regional vision, planning goals 

and objectives, and guiding principles, and an action plan for regional and corridor 

investments.44 Similarly, the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission 

completed its Regional Transportation Operations Plan: 2012-2016 in 2012, which 

identifies short-range actions recommended for implementation over a 5 year period.45

While these plans are often high level, where available, they will serve as a very strong 

basis for more-detailed, corridor-focused efforts. 

• Regional ITS architectures – A regional ITS architecture provides a common framework 

for planning, defining, and integrating ITS across a state or region. A regional ITS 

architecture can be used by State and local planning agencies and organizations to identify 

integration opportunities and to support incorporation of operational needs in 

transportation planning. For instance, the North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority, 

in coordination with New Jersey DOT, is updating the regional ITS architectures for the 

region and state. A key component of this effort is development of an ITS strategic 

deployment plan, known as The Connected Corridor, that will serve as a shared vision by 

transportation agencies to more effectively plan, program, and operate the region’s 

transportation system with operational strategies.46 Consequently, these documents will 

help to inform ICM planning efforts. 

41 Minnesota Department of Transportation, Highway Systems Operations Plan 2012-2015, September 2012. Available at: http://www.dot.state.

mn.us/maintenance/hsop/.

42 Wisconsin Department of Transportation, WisDOT Traffic Operations Infrastructure Plan, May 2008. Available at: http://worldcat.org/

oclc/926983390/viewonline and http://www.topslab.wisc.edu/workgroups/toip.php.

43 Baltimore Metropolitan Council, Baltimore Regional Management and Operations Strategic Deployment Plan, March 2007. Available at: 

http://www.baltometro.org/phocadownload/Publications/Transportation/Plans/MandO_StrategicDeploymentPlan_2007.pdf.

44 Metro, Regional Transportation System Management and Operations Plan, June 30, 2010. Available at: http://www.oregonmetro.gov/

regional-transportation-system-management-and-operations-plan.

45 Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, Regional Transportation Operations Plan: 2012-2016, May 2012. Available at: 

http://www.sewrpc.org/SEWRPC/Transportation/Regional-Transportation-Operations-Plan-2012-2016.htm.

46 North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority, The Connected Corridor Final Report, December 2014. Available at: http://www.njtpa.org/

planning/regional-studies/intelligent-transportation/theconnectedcorridor.aspx. 
APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

35

3

• Regional TDM plans – Some metropolitan areas also have developed TDM plans, which 

can provide a basis for developing corridor-specific demand management efforts. For 

instance, the Atlanta Regional Commission developed the Atlanta Regional Transportation 

Demand Management Plan that defined a framework for developing and integrating TDM 

strategies into planning, project development, and system operations investment decisionmaking.47 The plan identifies key goals and strategies, which are intended to be addressed 

with partners from Georgia DOT, the Georgia Regional Transportation Authority, local 

governments, and others.

Effectively planning for TSMO within corridors will build upon existing plans and programs and 

ensure that corridor plans are compatible with, and take advantage of, these broader efforts. It is 

important to recognize that a corridor is part of a larger transportation network, and the policies 

and strategies being identified at the regional and state levels should help to inform the more 

geographically focused effort. At the same time, the plans, strategies, and operational relationships 

that will be effective within a corridor will reflect the specific travel needs, constraints, and 

opportunities of the corridor. 

GATHERING INFORMATION ON CURRENT AND FUTURE 

CONTEXT AND CONDITIONS 

Gathering information about the 

corridor – the current conditions 

and the future context – is a key 

early step in the development 

of any corridor plan or strategy 

(Figure 11). Data, both qualitative 

and quantitative, play a vital role 

in a performance-based approach 

to planning for TSMO in a 

corridor.

Baseline information helps 

define the existing conditions 

in the corridor, including 

identification of challenges 

and problem areas. Data on 

expected changes in population, 

land use, and travel conditions 

also will help to inform 

understanding of potential 

future corridor challenges that 

should be addressed during 

a corridor planning process. 

47 Atlanta Regional Commission, Atlanta Regional Transportation Demand Management Plan, 2013. Available at: http://www.atlantaregional.

com/transportation/commute-options/regional-tdm-plan.

Figure 11. Diagram. The activity, “Gathering Information on 

Current and Future Contexts and Conditions,” of the approach 

for planning for transportation systems management and 

operations within corridors.

Getting Started: Scoping the Effort 

and Building a Team

Gathering Information on Current and 

Future Context and Conditions

Identifying Operations Performance 

Needs, Gaps, and Opportunities

Programming for TSMO on Subareas

Implementing

Developing an Integrated 

TSMO Approach

• Identifying TSMO Strategies Based 

on Operations Objectives and 

Performance Needs

• Evaluating TSMO Strategies

• Selecting TSMO Strategies

Developing an Outcome-Oriented 

Operational Concept

• Subarea Goals

• Subarea Operations Objectives

• Performance Measures

Monitoring and Maintaining Level of Operations Over Time TSMO=transportation systems management and operations.

Gathering Information on Current and 

Future Context and Conditions
36

APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

3

Data gathered during this phase also are a starting point for identifying opportunities for potential 

operations strategies that may be applied within the corridor and are used in analysis tools and 

evaluation to assess the effectiveness of these strategies. Given the critical role of data in a 

performance-based approach, gathering quality data and accurate information is imperative. 

Often, a technical advisory committee or some other type of stakeholder partner group will play 

a key role in defining corridor objectives and in providing guidance on data and information 

gathering. Members with operations data expertise will play an important role in bringing forth 

operations data to inform the corridor planning process, as well as to explain data limitations.

Common sources of information include previous plans and studies; data sets on current and past 

system performance, including archived operations data; and forecasts of future conditions.

Previous Studies, Reports, and Plans 

A review of existing studies, reports, and plans provides information about the broader planning 

context and may include recent multimodal transportation plans, pedestrian and bicycle plans, 

land use and development plans, and infrastructure condition reports. These documents offer 

insight into the long-term, big-picture vision for the corridor and surrounding study area. They 

also can provide data on anticipated future conditions in a corridor, such as population, jobs, 

housing units, and vehicle or passenger trips. 

A range of information may be available on the current transportation system components and 

features within the corridor study. For instance, topographical maps provide information about the 

corridor surface and geographical features. Documentation of the overall transportation network 

also is useful, including information about the existing multimodal transportation network, such 

as highways, transit services, and side and perpendicular streets (intersection types and traffic 

control measures used). Moreover, beyond the infrastructure, baseline information also should 

document existing operational assets, partnerships, relationships, and programs that affect system 

operations. Examples include ITS components, ramp metering, traveler information systems, 

incident management programs, and transit signal priority (TSP), among others. Documenting the 

current application of these system components or strategies will be important as a baseline for 

understanding the existing context in the corridor.

Understanding Users of the Corridor 

Understanding travel markets and users of the corridor is important in defining both needs and 

possible strategies that will be effective. Some corridors carry significant freight truck activity, 

while others do not. Some also handle significant interstate through traffic, while others carry 

largely localized trips.

While some freeway management and incident management strategies (e.g., variable speed limits 

and queue warning) will benefit all travelers and help system operators to have better information 

to adjust system operations, it is important to consider the needs of different types of travelers. 

Understanding the unique characteristics of travelers in the corridor and their key concerns also 

will be useful in assessing potential strategies that may be targeted to specific types of travelers. 




APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

37

3

Recognizing how they access information and make travel decisions, some will aid in tailoring 

TSMO strategies. Possible traveler groups may include daily commuters traveling regularly 

to and from work or school, leisure travelers going to local destinations (e.g., running errands, 

entertainment, etc.), long-distance commuters or tourist travelers passing through, and freight 

or commerce vehicles transporting goods. Table 2 provides a sample of potential corridor users, 

their concerns, and TSMO strategies that planners and operators may consider to address those 

concerns.

Table 2. Developing a thorough understanding of the corridor users will help determine possible 

transportation systems management and operations strategies.

Local Commuter

Leisure 

Traveler

Long Distance/ 

Interstate 

Traveler Freight/Commerce

Description Reside locally, 

travel regularly 

between work/

school.

Reside locally, 

traveling 

to local 

destinations 

(e.g., running 

errands, 

entertainment, 

recreation, etc.).

Non-local 

travelers traveling 

to or through 

the corridor, less 

familiar with 

local conditions or 

alternative routes.

Transportation of 

goods to local stores 

and businesses or to 

regional distribution 

centers.

Key 

Concerns

Reliability of route 

and avoidance 

of traffic delays, 

information about 

transportation 

options.

Avoiding traffic 

congestion, 

parking 

availability, 

information 

about 

transportation 

options.

Notification of 

travel delays due 

to construction 

or incidents, 

access to stopover 

points (e.g., rest 

stop, gas stations, 

restaurants, etc.).

Reliability of travel 

time for on-time 

delivery, availability 

of preferred routes 

(particularly 

those that can 

accommodate 

freight vehicles).

Possible 

Strategies

Dynamic 

ridesharing, 

predictive traveler 

information, 

real-time transit 

and parking 

information, 

dynamic shoulder 

lane use.

Dynamic 

parking 

reservation, 

real-time travel 

information, 

off-peak 

parking 

discounts. 

Real-time travel 

information, 

advance 

information to 

take alternative 

route well in 

advance to avoid 

congested area.

Variable speed 

limits, queue 

warning, adaptive 

signal control.
38

APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

3

Information on Current System Performance 

In addition to information about the physical assets, corridor conditions, and traveler 

characteristics, data on current corridor performance are needed. Data on traffic volumes, peak 

hour volume, and travel patterns convey important information on corridor performance, and data 

may include average daily travel, peak-hour volume, and mode-split. Level of service (LOS), 

which is a function of traffic volumes, traffic composition, roadway geometry, and the traffic 

control at the intersection, is widely used in traffic studies and reports. However, LOS does not 

capture the source or extent of congestion, especially non-recurring congestion (due to traffic 

incidents, work zone, bad weather, special events, etc.). Better data on actual travel speeds and 

delay in a corridor can be critical to understanding existing conditions. To incorporate operations 

strategies into the corridor plan, a more detailed account of the causes and impacts of congestion 

along the corridor is needed. 

Archived operations data, from ITS programs, also can be used to assess important operational 

conditions, including system reliability; on-time transit performance; and the role of factors, 

such as weather conditions, on traffic congestion. Archived travel time data form the basis for 

understanding a wide variety of performance metrics, such as congestion, reliability, and freight 

mobility. Chapter 5, Toolbox for Effective Transportation Systems Management and Operations 

Planning, contains additional information on archived operations data. 

Safety data are very useful for identifying challenges and problem areas along the corridor 

that may be addressed by operations strategies. Types of safety data include incident data (e.g., 

fatalities, injuries, and property damage); crash data by type (e.g., rear-end, left-turn, etc.), weather 

conditions, and light condition (e.g., daylight, dusk, etc.); and the spatial distribution of crashes.

Information about Future Conditions and Contexts 

Information about anticipated conditions and contexts is important as well. This includes 

forecasted data about socio-economic factors (e.g., population, density, employment, etc.), as well 

as information from transportation modeling in regard to future anticipated travel demand. It also 

is important to document improvements slated for implementation in the near future. Information 

on future projects may come from consulting the metropolitan transportation improvement 

program (TIP), the statewide TIPs, or local plans.

Stakeholder and Public Engagement 

In addition to previous studies and information on current and future conditions, input from 

stakeholders and the public is critical; specifically, their opinions about the corridor and 

preferences for the future of the corridor. The public and stakeholders should play a key role in 

defining goals and objectives for the corridor, as well as the performance measures that will be 

used to assess system performance. In urban corridors, there often are tradeoffs to be made in 

terms of performance of the system in relation to passenger vehicles, public transit, bicycling, and 

walking, and the public and stakeholders should play a key role in defining the specific objectives 

for the corridor. The public, for instance, may be willing to accept lower average motor vehicle 

speeds to improve the safety and accessibility of pedestrian and bicycle activity. While optimizing 

system performance along urban and suburban highway corridors might involve diverting heavily 






APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

39

3

congested freeway traffic to parallel arterials, 

there may be community concerns about the 

impacts on accessibility in neighborhoods, 

which need to be considered. Consequently, 

it is important to engage the public and 

stakeholders in clearly defining corridor 

goals and operations objectives and in 

articulating priorities and values.

Methods for gathering information from 

stakeholders and the public include 

conducting qualitative research (e.g., 

interviews, focus groups, and workshops) or 

quantitative research (e.g., polls, surveys), as 

well as hosting citizens’ panels and town hall 

meetings. A comprehensive approach should 

be used for stakeholder public engagement 

to capture input from all affected parties 

along the corridor, including those 

traditionally underserved by the existing 

transportation system (e.g., low-income 

communities, persons with disabilities, 

minorities). Engaging with stakeholders and 

the public early in the process is important 

and also presents an opportunity to raise 

awareness about operations and the role 

that operational strategies can play along 

the corridor. Educating stakeholders and the 

public about operational strategies will make them better-informed participants throughout the 

remainder of the corridor planning process. 

Once the information-gathering process is complete, there is solid understanding of the needs, 

deficiencies, and opportunities to address in the next step: developing an operational concept.

DEVELOPING AN OUTCOME-ORIENTED OPERATIONAL 

CONCEPT 

An effectively managed corridor involves not only the provision of highway and transit 

infrastructure for movement of people and freight, but also efficient ways of operating these 

systems to support mobility, reliability, and safety. Consequently, while corridor planning may 

involve consideration of, or focus on, certain types of infrastructure improvements (e.g., 

streetscaping, bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure), the planning process should focus on 

desired outcomes for travelers and communities, including outcomes related to how the 

corridor is managed and operated.

Questions to Gather Stakeholder 

Input

Below are sample questions to facilitate a 

dialogue with stakeholders and the public to 

capture input about incorporating operations 

into corridor planning:

• How do you travel in the corridor? Where 

do you go? What problems do you 

encounter?

• What is important to you, to your 

neighborhood, to the local area, and to the 

region (e.g., transportation, community, 

environment) in the corridor?

• Do you have any comment on the problems 

and opportunities that have already been 

identified for the corridor?

• How would improving the corridor through 

working with a private developer and 

considering options, such as tolling, impact 

your support of the solutions?

Source: Linking Planning and Operations 

Application, PlanWorks, Federal Highway 

Administration. Available at: https://fhwaapps.fhwa.

dot.gov/planworks/.
40

APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

3

An outcome-oriented operational 

concept provides the framework for 

developing and evaluating options 

for the corridor that reflect local and 

regional values, which may include 

mobility, air quality, sustainability, 

livability, safety, security, economic 

activity, and accessibility, among 

other considerations (Figure 12). 

The relative priority of these 

considerations may vary depending 

on the context, needs of system 

users and other stakeholders, and 

stakeholder groups that are affected 

by transportation in the corridor.

Examples of outcomes commonly 

used in corridor studies include safety 

and mobility, often defined in terms 

of levels of traffic congestion or 

hours of delay. Other outcomes may 

include economic vitality, community 

livability, environmental quality, and 

other community goals. 

Planning for TSMO involves considering a broad range of issues and outcomes associated with 

how transportation systems are managed and operated. For instance, a corridor plan with a greater 

focus on TSMO may include specific discussion of reliability as an outcome. In addition to 

general travel time, travelers and freight shippers often are very concerned about the variability 

in travel time from day-to-day or hour-to-hour. If it typically takes 20 minutes to travel a corridor 

off-peak and 30 minutes during peak congestion, travelers can plan for the extra travel time. 

However, if travel times are highly unpredictable, sometimes 30 minutes during rush hour but 

other times 60 minutes or more, this creates significant problems for making tightly scheduled 

appointments or delivery times. Studies show that travelers and freight shippers strongly value 

reliability in travel time; therefore, this is an important issue. High variability in travel times often 

is caused by traffic incidents, poor weather conditions, special events, and construction work 

zones, which can be considered in the context of corridors.

Substantial experience in TSMO planning at the regional level shows that rather than just defining 

goals and strategies, a key foundation for advancing TSMO in planning is to define an outcomeoriented operational concept that brings together goals, measurable operations objectives, and 

performance measures that are focused on outcomes important to the transportation system 

users. In a regional context, use of operations objectives and performance measures supports 

consideration and selection of TSMO strategies for the long-range transportation plan and TIP.48

48 For more information, see Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration, Advancing Metropolitan Planning for 

Operations: An Objectives-Driven, Performance-Based Approach – A Guidebook, FHWA-HOP-10-026 (Washington, DC: 2010). Available 

at: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop10026/.

Getting Started: Scoping the Effort 

and Building a Team

Gathering Information on Current and 

Future Context and Conditions

Identifying Operations Performance 

Needs, Gaps, and Opportunities

Programming for TSMO on Subareas

Implementing

Developing an Integrated 

TSMO Approach

• Identifying TSMO Strategies Based 

on Operations Objectives and 

Performance Needs

• Evaluating TSMO Strategies

• Selecting TSMO Strategies

Developing an Outcome-Oriented 

Operational Concept

• Subarea Goals

• Subarea Operations Objectives

• Performance Measures

Monitoring and Maintaining Level of Operations Over Time TSMO=transportation systems management and operations.

Developing an Outcome-Oriented 

Operational Concept

• Subarea Goals

• Subarea Operations Objectives

• Performance Measures

Figure 12. Diagram. The activity, “Developing an 

Outcome-Oriented Operational Concept,” of the 

approach for planning for transportation systems 

management and operations within corridors.
APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

41

3

Similarly, corridor-based operations objectives and performance measures help to focus attention 

on system performance outcomes within a corridor and are a key element to support consideration 

of TSMO strategies. Developing an outcome-oriented operational concept is, by nature, an 

iterative process that involves developing an understanding of regional values that affect or 

influence priorities in the corridor and translating those priorities into observable and measurable 

outcomes that guide development of outcome-oriented objectives.

The outcome-oriented operational concept describes, at a high level, how the corridor would 

operate to realize the desired outcome(s). The operational concept does not specify strategies to be 

implemented in the corridor. It will likely draw upon a collection of individual and complementary 

strategies in response to the operations objectives for the corridor and an assessment of the costs 

and benefits of each. In some corridors, ATDM concepts—active traffic management, active 

demand management, and active parking management—may prove to be attractive strategies; in 

others, other strategies that rely less on real-time data may prove effective (e.g., improvements 

in TIM, seamless integration of public transportation alternatives, and better integration of nonmotorized alternatives).49 These and other concepts can be incorporated into an overall operational 

concept for this corridor.

The operational concept can be formalized within the framework of goals, objectives, and

performance measures. The goals and objectives translate the values and priorities into statements 

that describe what is to be achieved with respect to transportation in the corridor that supports 

higher-level regional goals. The corridor goals should link to these high-level regional goals, 

and then lead to objectives expressed in measurable terms that can be used to help develop and 

evaluate strategies for achieving the objectives.

Note that, in developing an outcome-oriented operational concept, specific solutions (strategies 

and tactics) are not considered, except to the extent that they may inform planners and operators 

about what is possible within available or anticipated technology solutions, legal and institutional 

arrangements, and fiscal constraints. Otherwise, the goals and objectives that characterize the 

operational concept should be open to new ideas about how to achieve the objective until after a 

range of feasible strategies and tactics is identified and evaluated using performance measures that 

relate directly to the objectives for the corridor.

Operations Goals

Operations goals are the high-level statements of what transportation in the corridor would 

look like if it reflects the needs, values, and priorities of the key stakeholders and transportation 

providers that use, depend upon, or operate transportation facilities and services. For example, 

the goals for the Interstate-880 Corridor in the Oakland, California area, as developed by the 

ICM Oakland Pioneer Site Team, are:

• “Improve the efficiency of their individual networks through shared information from, and 

collaborative operations with, the other networks.

• Balance demand across the networks to most efficiently utilize the available capacity. 

• Enable travelers to make informed choices among transportation options, based on reliable 

information about travel conditions. 

49 See: Federal Highway Administration, Active Transportation and Demand Management – FHWA Operations, Web site. Available at: 

http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/atdm/index.htm.


42

APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

3

• Respond quickly and effectively to service disruptions that may be planned or unplanned, 

whether based on human or natural causes.”50

Led by Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART), the multi-agency ICM team for US-75 in Dallas, 

Texas developed a vision statement for the corridor and then four primary goals for the integrated 

management of the corridor. The team defined the vision as: “Operate the US-74 Corridor in a 

true multimodal, integrated, efficient, and safe fashion where the focus is on the transportation 

customer.” This led the team to identify the following goals for the corridor:

• “Increase Corridor Throughput.

• Improve Travel Time Reliability.

• Improve Incident Management.

• Enable Intermodal Travel Decisions.”51

Specific Outcome-based Operations Objectives

The high-level goals are the starting point for developing operations objectives, the basis for 

corridor TSMO planning. Operations objectives define desired outcomes for the corridor in 

relation to how the transportation system will perform. Operations objectives go beyond broad 

statements of goals, which often are loosely defined and difficult to assess. Operations objectives 

are specific, measurable statements developed in collaboration with a broad range of partners who 

have interests or who are affected by corridor transportation systems performance. They may be 

multijurisdictional in nature if the corridor of interest extends beyond or affects more than a single 

jurisdiction. Operations objectives generally lead directly to measures of performance that can be 

used to assess whether or not the objective has subsequently been achieved.

Operations objectives should be specific, measurable, agreed-upon, realistic, and time-bound 

(SMART):

• Specific – The objective provides sufficient specificity to guide formulation of viable 

approaches to achieving the objective without dictating the approach.

• Measurable – The objective facilitates quantitative evaluation, saying how many or how 

much should be accomplished. Tracking progress against the objective enables an 

assessment of effectiveness of actions.

• Agreed – Planners, operators, and relevant planning participants come to a consensus on a 

common objective. This is most effective when the planning process involves a wide range 

of stakeholders to facilitate collaboration and coordination among all parties that use or 

manage the corridor of interest.

• Realistic – The objective can reasonably be accomplished within the limitations of 

resources and other demands. The objective may require substantial coordination, 

collaboration, and investment to achieve. Factors, such as land use, also may have an impact 

50 U.S. Department of Transportation, Concept of Operations for the I-880 Corridor in Oakland, California, FHWA-JPO-08-003 

(Washington, DC: March 2008). Available at: http://ntl.bts.gov/lib/30000/30700/30766/14389.pdf.

51 U.S. Department of Transportation, Concept of Operations for the US-75 Integrated Corridor in Dallas, Texas, FHWA-JPO-08-004 

(Washington, DC: April 2008). Available at: http://ntl.bts.gov/lib/30000/30400/30409/14390.htm.


APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

43

3

on the feasibility of the objective and should be taken into account. Because how realistic 

the objective is cannot be fully evaluated until after strategies and approaches are defined, 

the objective may need to be adjusted to be achievable.

• Time-Bound – The objective identifies a timeframe within which it will be achieved 

(e.g., “by 2017”).

Specifically, an operations objective identifies targets regarding a particular aspect of corridor 

performance, such as traffic congestion, travel time reliability, emergency response time, or 

incident response. By developing SMART operations objectives, system performance can be 

examined and monitored over time. 

Examples of operations objectives that may be applicable or could be adapted to corridor 

management and operations are provided in Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) 

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

Approach – A Desk Reference (Figure 13).52

By including operations objectives that address 

system performance issues, such as recurring and 

non-recurring congestion, emergency response times, 

connectivity among modes, safety, and access to 

traveler information – rather than focusing primarily 

on system capacity – the planning effort for a corridor 

will elevate operations to play a more important role in 

investment planning, addressing both short- and longrange needs.

While outcome-oriented objectives are preferred 

because they are most closely related to the LOS 

provided to systems users, in some cases, outcomes 

are difficult to measure or observe directly. Corridor 

outcome-oriented objectives focused on outcomes 

to the user include corridor travel times, travel time 

reliability, and access to traveler information. The 

public cares about these measures, and in many 

regions, data may be available to develop specific 

outcome-based operations objectives. 

In cases where developing outcome-based objectives is 

difficult, agencies may develop corridor operations objectives that are activity-based and support 

desired system performance outcomes. For example, it may not be possible for a region to develop 

a specific objective related to incident-based delay experienced by travelers in the corridor if 

data are unavailable for this type of delay. However, it may be possible to develop an objective 

that relates to incident response time in the corridor, which may be more easily established and 

measured.

52 Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration, Advancing Metropolitan Planning for Operations: The Building Blocks 

of a Model Transportation Plan Incorporating Operations - A Desk Reference, FHWA-HOP-10-027 (Washington, DC: 2010). Available at: 

http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop10027/.

Figure 13. Image. Cover of 

Federal Highway Administration’s 

Advancing Metropolitan Planning 

for Operations Desk Reference.
44

APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

3

Other examples of activity-based 

objectives include the percentage of 

traffic signals re-timed in the corridor, 

the number of variable message signs 

deployed, and the share of bus stops 

with real-time transit information. 

Although these objectives are not as 

ideal as outcome-based objectives 

because they tend to focus on specific 

strategies or approaches, they may 

serve as interim objectives until more 

outcome-based objectives can be 

established and measured. Working 

together to develop the objectives 

themselves may help to elevate 

management and operations discussions 

among planners and operators and lead 

to initiatives to collect additional data.

One technique for organizing outcomeoriented and activity-based objectives 

is to develop an objectives tree that 

structures objectives in a hierarchical 

manner, with each top-level objective 

supported by lower-level subobjectives. The lower-level objectives, 

taken together, identify what must 

be achieved to realize the high-level 

objectives; the high-level objectives 

give the purpose for achieving the 

lower-level objectives. In many cases, 

the lower-level objectives will be 

activity-based objectives that relate to 

functions that must be performed to 

achieve high-level outcome-oriented 

objectives. Figure 14 illustrates how 

lower-level activity-based objectives 

support higher-level outcome-oriented 

objectives, all acting in support of 

goals for the corridor or region.

Washington State Department of 

Transportation (WSDOT) US 195 

Corridor Study – Spokane to the Idaho 

Border via Pullman – Clear Objectives and 

Data Analysis Lead to Innovative LowerCost Solutions

The WSDOT led the Target Zero US 195 Corridor 

Crash Analysis planning study in the eastern 

part of the state to identify the most common 

circumstances or trends that contribute to serious or 

fatal injury crashes on this rural two-lane highway. 

The WSDOT used robust community engagement 

and a data-driven process to identify the key causes 

of fatal and injury crashes on the corridor. Initial 

stakeholder engagement found that the community 

strongly preferred expansion to a four-lane divided 

roadway. However, a four-lane facility, a very 

costly improvement, would not provide a practical 

solution and would not address the primary crash 

causes like distracted and drowsy driving, speeding, 

driving under the influence, and aggressive 

(inappropriate passing) driving.

The WSDOT used a technical advisory committee 

composed of the regional transportation planning 

organization, cities, counties, universities, and 

law enforcement. The community was involved 

through a survey and various “listening posts,” 

which were informal “meet and greets” at local 

gathering places like grocery stores, coffee shops, 

and post offices. Building on the crash data, the 

corridor study recommendations included a range 

of lower-cost operational and safety improvements, 

including enhanced intentional communication with 

travelers (e.g., variable message signs, brochures, 

public/private kiosks); improved striping; targeted 

maintenance to address real-time travel conditions; 

and enhanced emergency response, signage 

reflectivity, passing lanes, and geometric design to 

reduce the potential of severe and fatal crashes.

For more information, see http://www.wsdot.

wa.gov/Projects/US195/. 
APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

45

3

Performance Measures

One of the key attributes of SMART objectives is that they are measurable. Performance 

measures are associated with operations objectives and provide a measurable basis for:

• Understanding existing performance, including performance gaps.

• Assessing future projected gaps in performance. 

• Supporting assessment of, and comparisons of, potential strategies to meet objectives. 

The idea that “what gets measured gets managed,” recognizes that performance measurement 

focuses the attention of decisionmakers, planners, stakeholders, and the public on important 

characteristics of the transportation system. Developing performance measures involves 

considering:

• How do we want to define and measure progress toward a certain operations objective? 

For instance, is transit ridership a key metric that is important for assessing livability 

and access? Or would bicycle/pedestrian activity be a better measure? Or do both 

provide value?



Corridor Goals

Outcome-Oriented

Operations 

Objectives

Activity-Based

Operations 

Objectives

Management 

and Operations 

Strategies

Improve

Incident

Management

Improve 

Road Weather 

Management

Improve 

Traffic Flow

Increase Access

to Traveler

Information

Increase 

Mobility 

Options

DETAILED, ACTION-ORIENTED BROADER, OUTCOME-BASED

Improve Mobility in 

the Corridor

Reduce Traveler 

Delays

Improve Corridor 

Travel Time Reliability

Reduce

Non-Recurring Delays

Identify and 

Eliminate

Bottlenecks

Optimize Traffic 

Signal Timing

Reduce Demand During 

Peak Travel Periods

(e.g., managed lanes)

Integrate Real-time 

Parking and Transit 

Information

Figure 14. Diagram. Illustrative objectives tree for corridor-based 

transportation systems management and operations.
46

APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

3

• What are the implications of selecting a specific measure? For instance, if travel speeds are 

a key measure of performance in a corridor, this would imply different strategies and 

results than focusing on improving reliability of travel times. Using a measure focused on 

person-travel rather than vehicle-travel might lead toward strategies that give more priority 

to high-occupancy modes like public transit or high-occupancy vehicle lanes than to those 

driving alone.

It is important to recognize that there are often tradeoffs among different goals and objectives 

(e.g., traffic throughput, increasing transit ridership, and enhancing pedestrian and bicycle access); 

therefore, defining an appropriate and balanced set of performance measures for a corridor is 

important.

Performance measures are indicators of how well the corridor transportation system is performing 

and are inextricably tied to operations objectives. A range of performance measures may come 

from developing operations objectives. The performance measures selected should provide 

adequate information to planners, operators, and decisionmakers on progress toward achieving 

their operations objectives.

However, this is an iterative process as operations objectives may be refined once performance 

measures are developed and baseline data have been collected.

Performance measures should be developed based on the individual needs and resources of each 

agency that provides services within the corridor. For example, transit agencies typically use a 

number of measures that are of interest to their customers, such as on-time performance, average 

passenger load, and total ridership. An MPO uses measures of mobility, such as facility LOS, 

travel time, and travel delay. These performance measures help planners focus on the day-today experience for their users. This provides important balance in settings where planners have 

focused exclusively on long-term development of the corridor. With greater focus on the day-today characteristics of the corridor, planners appreciate the issues faced by system operators. The 

result is that mid- and long-term planning now reflect greater consideration of operations and the 

associated investment needs within the corridor.

Some examples of performance areas and performance measures likely to be associated with 

corridor operations objectives are shown in Table 3. These performance measures are primarily 

drawn from the FHWA’s Advancing Metropolitan Planning for Operations: The Building Blocks 

of a Model Transportation Plan Incorporating Operations - A Desk Reference.

53

53 See: Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration, Advancing Metropolitan Planning for Operations: The Building 

Blocks of a Model Transportation Plan Incorporating Operations - A Desk Reference, FHWA-HOP-10-027 (Washington, DC: 2010). 

Available at: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop10026/chap_4.htm#fn15.
APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

47

3

Table 3. Illustrative performance measures to guide corridor transportation systems 

management and operations planning.

Performance Area Illustrative Performance Measures

Travel Time: Travel time measures 

focus on the time needed to travel along 

a selected portion of the corridor, and 

can be applied for specific roadways, 

corridors, transit lines, or at a regional 

level.

• Average travel time, which can be measured based 

on travel time surveys.

• Average travel speeds, which can be calculated 

based on travel time divided by segment length or 

measured based on real-time information 

collection.

• Travel time index: the ratio of peak to non-peak 

travel time, which provides a measure of 

congestion.

Congestion Extent: Congestion 

measures can address both the spatial 

and temporal extent (duration). 

Depending on how these measures are 

defined and data are collected, these 

measures may focus on recurring 

congestion or address both recurring 

and non-recurring congestion.

• Lane miles of congested conditions (defined based 

on volume to capacity (V/C) ratio, level of service 

(LOS) measures, or travel time index).

• Number of intersections experiencing congestion 

(based on LOS).

• Percent of roadways congested by type of roadway 

(e.g., freeway, arterial, collector).

• Average hours of congestion per day.

• Share of peak period transit services experiencing 

overcrowding.

Delay: Delay measures take into 

account the amount of time that it 

takes to travel in excess of travel 

under unconstrained (ideal or freeflow) operating conditions, and the 

number of vehicles affected. These 

measures provide an indication of how 

problematic traffic congestion is, and 

can address both recurring and nonrecurring congestion-related delay.

• Vehicle-hours of recurring delay associated with 

population and employment growth.

• Vehicle-hours of nonrecurring delay associated 

with incidents, work zones, weather conditions, 

special events, etc.

Incident Occurrence/Duration:

Incident duration is a measure of the 

time elapsed from the notification of 

an incident until the incident has been 

removed or response vehicles have left 

the incident scene. This measure can 

be used to assess the performance of 

service patrols and incident management 

systems. Incident occurrence also can 

be used to assess the performance and 

reliability of transit services.

• Median minutes from time of incident until incident 

has been removed from scene.

• Number of transit bus breakdowns.

• Average number of transit rail system delays in 

excess of X minutes.
48

APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

3

Performance Area Illustrative Performance Measures

Travel Time Reliability: Travel time 

reliability measures take into account 

the variation in travel times that occur 

on roadways and across the system.

• Buffer time, which describes the additional time that 

must be added to a trip to ensure that travelers will 

arrive at their destination at, or before, the intended 

time 95 percent of the time.

• Buffer time index, which represents the percent of 

time that should be budgeted on top of average travel 

time to arrive on time 95 percent of the time (e.g., a 

buffer index of 40 percent means that for a trip that 

usually takes 20 minutes, a traveler should budget an 

additional 8 minutes to ensure on-time arrival most 

of the time).

• Percentage of travel when travel time is X percent 

(e.g., 20 percent) greater than average travel time.

• Planning time index, defined as the 95th percentile 

travel time index.

• 90th or 95th percentile travel times for specific travel 

routes or trips, which indicates how bad delay will be 

on the heaviest travel days.

• Percentage of weekdays each month that average 

travel speed of designated facilities fall more than X 

MPH below posted speed limit during peak periods.

Transportation Demand Management 

(TDM): Transportation demand 

management measures examine demand 

in the corridor as well as the impact of 

strategies to manage that demand.

• Awareness – Portion of potential program 

participants aware of a TDM program.

• Utilization – Number or percentage of individuals 

using a TDM service or alternate mode.

• Mode split – Proportion of total person trips that 

uses each mode of transportation.

• Vehicle Trips or Peak Period Vehicle Trips – The 

total number of private vehicles arriving at a 

destination.

Person Throughput: Examines the 

number of people that are moved on a 

roadway or transit system. Efforts to 

improve this measure are reflected in 

efforts to improve the flow of traffic, 

increase high occupancy vehicle 

movement, or increase transit seat 

occupancy on transit.

• Peak hour persons moved per lane.

• Peak hour persons moved on transit services.

Table 3. Illustrative performance measures to guide corridor transportation systems 

management and operations planning. (Continued)
APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

49

3

Performance Area Illustrative Performance Measures

Customer Satisfaction: Examines 

public perceptions about the quality 

of the travel experience, including the 

efficiency of system management and 

operations.

• Percent of the population reporting being satisfied 

or highly satisfied with travel conditions.

• Percent of the population reporting being satisfied 

or highly satisfied with access to traveler 

information.

• Percent of the population reporting being satisfied 

or highly satisfied with the reliability of transit 

services.

Availability of or Awareness of 

Information: These measures focus on 

public knowledge of travel alternatives 

or traveler information.

• Percent of surveyed population aware of travel 

alternatives and related traveler information.

LOS = level of service.

TDM = transportation demand management.

MPH = miles per hour.

In summary, the performance measures (1) tie directly to the operations objectives, (2) provide 

the criteria for evaluating strategies and tactics for improving corridor performance, and (3) 

direct the gathering of data necessary to identify and prioritize needs and gaps.

IDENTIFYING OPERATIONS PERFORMANCE NEEDS, GAPS, 

AND OPPORTUNITIES

Gathering and analyzing data for performance measures is critical to identifying gaps between 

desired outcomes (objectives) and current conditions and in initially identifying potential 

opportunities for improvements (Figure 15). 

Often, a key step following the definition of performance measures is to define scenarios, or to 

conduct a scenario planning exercise as a basis for understanding current performance gaps and 

potential opportunities. Operational scenarios should be defined by stakeholders in the corridor and 

may include (but are not limited to): 

• Normal or daily scenario – to explore recurring congestion and typical challenges faced 

by travelers in the corridor, during peak and/or off-peak periods.

• Incident scenario – to address major or minor incidents along a highway, arterial, or transit 

service, to develop operational plans for how agencies work together and respond to these 

incidents.

• Planned event scenario – to address a major sporting event, festival, or activity that creates 

an atypical level of traffic demand along the corridor.

Table 3. Illustrative performance measures to guide corridor transportation systems 

management and operations planning. (Continued)
50

APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

3

• Weather-related, emergency, or evacuation scenario – to consider unplanned events that 

may require more dynamic decisionmaking and coordination among stakeholders.

• Major work zone scenario

– to address a major corridor 

construction or reconstruction 

project, and how transportation 

services, operations, and 

coordination will be conducted 

to minimize impacts on 

travelers, businesses, and the 

local community. 

By defining scenarios, the 

participants in the corridor 

often can identify existing gaps, 

performance needs, and potential 

opportunities for improvements. 

Moreover, discussions to identify 

gaps aid planners and operators 

in clarifying and documenting 

problems within the corridor 

and highlight opportunities for 

improving corridor performance. In 

many cases, performance data are 

available that clearly demonstrate 

where problems exist and need attention, investment, and priority in the planning process, and 

may be tied to specific types of situations or scenarios where performance improvements would 

be most important.

Planners and operators must be cautious in depending on performance measures alone to 

identify gaps and opportunities, especially activity-based performance measures, because the 

performance measures may be specific to existing systems and may focus attention on improving 

existing operations strategies rather than considering alternatives that take advantage of new 

operational concepts, new technology, new institutional arrangements, and new or emerging 

user expectations. For example, if the performance measures suggest the need to reduce delay 

in the corridor by increasing average speeds, planners and operators may be tempted to focus 

on strategies such as adaptive signal controls and may overlook opportunities for transportation 

demand management approaches that increase use of shared vehicles (e.g., transit, carpools, 

and parking) or shift demand to other times and routes, making more effective use of available 

capacity. This does not mean that adaptive signal controls are inappropriate; only that performance 

measures, if not taken in context, can result in focusing on “efficiency” of current approaches 

rather than in how well outcome-oriented objectives are achieved.

In the end, performance measures point toward deficiencies in achieving goals and objectives for the 

corridor and also can be helpful in identifying opportunities for improving corridor performance.

Getting Started: Scoping the Effort 

and Building a Team

Gathering Information on Current and 

Future Context and Conditions

Identifying Operations Performance 

Needs, Gaps, and Opportunities

Programming for TSMO on Subareas

Implementing

Developing an Integrated 

TSMO Approach

• Identifying TSMO Strategies Based 

on Operations Objectives and 

Performance Needs

• Evaluating TSMO Strategies

• Selecting TSMO Strategies

Developing an Outcome-Oriented 

Operational Concept

• Subarea Goals

• Subarea Operations Objectives

• Performance Measures

Monitoring and Maintaining Level of Operations Over Time TSMO=transportation systems management and operations.

Identifying Operations Performance 

Needs, Gaps, and Opportunities

Figure 15. Diagram. The activity, “Identifying Operations 

Performance Needs, Gaps, and Opportunities,” of 

the approach for planning for transportation systems 

management and operations within corridors.
APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

51

3

DEVELOPING AN INTEGRATED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS 

MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS APPROACH 

Once the corridor TSMO planning team has agreed upon operations objectives for how the corridor should operate and identified the performance gaps, it can begin to identify a system of 

TSMO strategies that will be implemented on the corridor to reach the operations objectives. 

This system of TSMO strategies forms an integrated TSMO approach to improving performance 

on the corridor (Figure 16). It is important to consider TSMO strategies working together in the 

context of the corridor as opposed to selecting and implementing strategies in isolation. Planning 

for an integrated set of strategies allows planners and operators to leverage synergies between 

strategies. For example, the needs of first responders for managing traffic incidents should be 

considered when setting up work zones and, likewise, TIM plans may consider pre-positioning 

vehicles to support quick clearance in areas of reduced capacity due to work zones.

Key Considerations in Developing an Integrated Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations Approach

Ensuring a System Solution Rather than “Stand Alone” Activities

The traditional approach to transportation operations has traditionally involved individual 

agencies (State DOTs, local transportation agencies, toll authorities, transit service providers, etc.) 

managing their own assets and services (e.g., freeways, arterials, toll roads and bridges, and transit 

services). Yet, increasingly, a more effective and efficient approach is being used that involves a 

more holistic approach to managing 

operations on a corridor by viewing 

the corridor as a system, instead 

of a group of stand-alone assets. 

Under this approach, operators 

work together to make investments 

and real-time operations decisions 

to effectively shift travel demand 

across modes and routes to manage 

congestion, improve safety, and 

enhance system reliability. For 

instance, when a highway is 

severely congested due to a traffic 

incident, travelers may be directed 

to alternative routes, including 

parallel arterials, and traffic signal 

patterns may be adjusted to enable 

those arterials to better handle 

additional traffic. 





Getting Started: Scoping the Effort 

and Building a Team

Gathering Information on Current and 

Future Context and Conditions

Identifying Operations Performance 

Needs, Gaps, and Opportunities

Programming for TSMO on Subareas

Implementing

Developing an Integrated 

TSMO Approach

• Identifying TSMO Strategies Based 

on Operations Objectives and 

Performance Needs

• Evaluating TSMO Strategies

• Selecting TSMO Strategies

Developing an Outcome-Oriented 

Operational Concept

• Subarea Goals

• Subarea Operations Objectives

• Performance Measures

Monitoring and Maintaining Level of Operations Over Time TTSMO=transportation systems management and operations.

Developing an Integrated 

TSMO Approach

• Identifying TSMO Strategies Based 

on Operations Objectives and 

Performance Needs

• Evaluating TSMO Strategies

• Selecting TSMO Strategies

Figure 16. Diagram. The activity, “Developing an Integrated 

Transportation Systems Management and Operations 

Approach,” of the approach for planning for transportation 

systems management and operations within corridors.
52

APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

3

Moving Toward Active and Dynamic Transportation Systems Management

The use of operations strategies supports proactive and dynamic management of the transportation 

system, in which system performance is continuously assessed, and the system is managed 

through real-time implementation of adjustments (via traveler information, adjustments to 

signal timing, ramp metering, or other freeway operations) to achieve performance objectives 

(e.g., travel time reliability, corridor throughput, incident management). This approach requires 

collaboration, engaging partners to help influence travel choice and behavior along the corridor. 

Travel choice and behavior are influenced through active demand management (i.e., redistributing 

travel to less-congested routes or times of day and reducing overall trips by promoting mode 

choice); active traffic management (i.e., dynamically managing recurring and non-recurring 

congestion by improving travel throughput); and in urban areas, active parking management (i.e., 

optimizing the performance and utilization of available parking). Technology and innovation are 

critical to active and dynamic transportation systems management, supporting this data-driven 

approach implemented through information technology systems. 

Focusing on the Traveler, Rather than Just Vehicles

A customer-focused perspective is the underpinning of an integrated approach to corridor 

management; rather than looking at enhancing vehicle throughput, a traveler-focused approach 

begins by examining traveler mobility needs and explores the most effective ways to meet those 

needs. This approach sets the context for developing a more efficient system for the end user. 

The TSMO approach is based on a fundamental understanding of how travelers decide which 

mode to use, what time to travel, which route to take, and at what time. Selecting operations 

strategies also requires segmentation of the travel market that differentiates between the various 

types of travelers (including commuters, non-commuter travelers, and freight movement), and 

understanding their travel behaviors, needs, and challenges to inform which operations strategies 

to implement. 

Considering Community Values and Neighborhoods

Transportation within corridors plays a key role in mobility, but is more than just moving 

people and goods. Transportation within corridors is a lifeline for communities, often linking 

neighborhoods, businesses, and jobs. The context of corridors should reflect the character and 

values of the surrounding community. Integrating operational strategies into corridor planning 

is not a uniform approach; the set of strategies selected for an individual corridor should be 

customized and tailored to respond to the unique issues, challenges, and opportunities present. 

Therefore, successful TSMO integration into the planning process requires engaging the partners 

(i.e., the various agencies that operate along the corridor), as well as community stakeholders and 

the general public. 

Recognizing Resource Constraints

Although TSMO strategies are typically low cost, especially in comparison to expansion projects, 

a successful approach to implementing operational strategies is including them as part of an 

integrated approach within a broader project or plan. In many cases, lower-cost solutions can be 

implemented, or TSMO strategies can be implemented over time, in phases, to advance operations 








APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

53

3

improvements in stages over time. When prioritizing TSMO strategies for deployment, benefitcost analysis, stakeholder and public input, and exploring the logical phasing of strategies are all 

useful analysis methods.

Developing an Incremental Approach to Transportation Systems Management and Operations

Transportation agencies engage in TSMO activities at varying degrees of complexity. For some 

agencies, a basic traffic signal system meets the management needs of its transportation network, 

while other agencies rely on a set of advanced and integrated TSMO strategies to meet the 

mobility needs of the community. In either case, planning for TSMO allows agencies to advance 

operational strategies in a measured, organized fashion, whether in a single corridor or across a 

city or region. 

A key distinction in implementing TSMO strategies is that installation is just the starting point. 

Agencies must be prepared to expend the necessary resources to operate and maintain a collection 

of TSMO investments. The most effective TSMO activities are differentiated not by budgets or 

technical skills alone, but by the existence of critical processes and institutional arrangements 

tailored to the unique features of TSMO applications. Applying an incremental approach to 

TSMO strategies in a corridor is a clearer path to successful implementation by allowing time 

to both gain experience with the strategy and institute operational processes. 

The sections below describe the main activities necessary for developing an integrated TSMO 

approach to TSMO on a corridor. One of the current areas of research is in analytical tools that 

support consideration of multiple TSMO strategies and is expected to provide more support in 

the future to developing an integrated TSMO approach. Currently, there are limited options for 

quantitatively examining the impacts of one TSMO strategy on another.

Identifying Transportation Systems Management and Operations 

Strategies Based on Operations Objectives and Performance Needs

There are a variety of ways to identify TSMO strategies that could be implemented to address 

causes of the shortfalls in performance or gaps. This section provides examples of methods or 

tools for identifying TSMO strategies based on operations objectives and performance needs in 

a corridor. While the FHWA has developed some basic mappings between goals or objectives 

and TSMO-related strategies, this also has occurred at the State and regional levels as well, as 

practitioners look to match strategies to needs within a specific context.

The Wisconsin DOT developed a Traffic Operations Infrastructure Plan in 2008 that offers a 

methodology for selecting TSMO strategies that begins with identifying significant corridors 

based on their strategic objectives, and then determines priority management corridors for which 

they develop a corridor management vision.54 This process, illustrated in Figure 17, leads to 

selecting TSMO strategies that achieve the corridor management vision.

54 Wisconsin Department of Transportation, WisDOT Traffic Operations Infrastructure Plan, May 2008. Available at: http://worldcat.org/

oclc/926983390/viewonline and http://www.topslab.wisc.edu/workgroups/toip.php.




54

APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

3

The approach results in a deployment density for TSMO strategies, such as is illustrated for the 

Milwaukee-Green Bay corridor in Figure 18. Note that the higher densities of TSMO deployment 

are concentrated in the most urbanized areas where traffic densities also are the greatest. WisDOT 

used this plan to strategically deploy ITS across the state. As WisDOT's TSMO program has 

evolved, the TOIP has been replaced it with a TMSO-Traffic Infrastructure Process, which is an 

deployment process that considers needs and solutions on an annual basis and uses a needs analysis 

and cost benefit tool.55

55 Wisconsin Department of Transportation, Transportation Systems Management and Operations - Traffic Infrastructure Process, Web site. 

Available at: http://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/about-wisdot/who-we-are/dtsd/bto/stoc/tsmo-tip.aspx.

Outside of CM 

workgroup

RESTART

PROCESS

Identifya

DISTRICT PRIORITY MANAGEMENT CORRIDORS for further 

developing a CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT VISION

Identify

STATEWIDE SIGNIFICANT CORRIDORS

(Connections 2030 SAMP)

Develop a CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT VISION

In creation of a vision, the same “factors” are used, however District information 

will account for more details and regional/local issues. Community involvement 

would be part of the development of a corridor management vision.

Identify and select STRATEGIES and TOOLS to

achieve the CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT VISION

Implement the

CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT VISION

Update and revise the CORRIDOR 

MANAGEMENT VISION and 

IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES

as necessary

Figure 17. Flowchart. Wisconsin Department of Transportation 

Traffic Operations Infrastructure Plan methodology for identifying 

priority corridors and related transportation systems management and 

operations strategies for achieving the corridor management vision. 

Source: Wisconsin Department of Transportation Traffic Operations Infrastructure Plan, May 2008.
APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

55

3

Figure 18. Map. Milwaukee-Green Bay corridor transportation systems 

management and operations deployment density. 

Source: Wisconsin Department of Transportation Traffic Operations Infrastructure Plan, May 2008.
56

APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

3

The FHWA’s 2015 Active Traffic Management Feasibility and Screening Guide provides 

additional guidance in the form of a series of logic flowcharts that assist in determining the 

appropriateness of specific ATM strategies given well-defined mobility issues to be addresses by 

the TSMO strategies.56 This document also describes methods for identifying and determining 

the capital investments required and expected operation and maintenance costs associated with 

various ATM strategies. Benefits are more difficult to predict, but the ATM Feasibility Guide 

suggests estimating benefits based on the experience of other locations where similar strategies 

were implemented in response to similar needs and objectives. In addition, the ATM Feasibility 

Guide suggests using the FHWA’s Tool for Operations Benefit Cost Analysis (TOPS-BC) tool, 

a spreadsheet-based tool designed to assist practitioners in conducting benefit-cost analysis of 

operations strategies by providing four key capabilities, including:57

• The ability for users to investigate the expected range of impacts associated with previous 

deployments and analyses of many TSMO strategies.

• A screening mechanism to help users identify appropriate tools and methodologies for 

conducting a benefit-cost analysis based on their analysis needs.

• Framework and default cost data to estimate the life-cycle costs of various TSMO 

strategies, including capital, replacement, and continuing operations and maintenance costs.

• A framework and suggested impact values for conducting simple benefit-cost analysis for 

selected TSMO strategies.

In 2010, the FHWA took a qualitative approach to matching operations objectives to potential 

TSMO strategies through the development of the Fact Sheets in Advancing Metropolitan Planning 

for Operations: The Building Blocks of a Model Transportation Plan Incorporating Operations - A 

Desk Reference.

58 Samples of these Fact Sheets tailored to corridors are at the end of this chapter. 

The Fact Sheets contain operations objectives that are SMART and can be tailored to an area, time 

period, mode or facility type, or user type. The Fact Sheets also identify TSMO strategies that 

could help realize the operations objectives. This is meant as a tool to assist planners and operators 

in generating ideas for TSMO strategies to support specific objectives. The Fact Sheets were not 

tailored for the specific operations context that each locality may encounter.

The current version of Turbo Architecture software, which is used to document regional ITS 

architectures, includes a “Planning” module that allows users to select operations objectives from 

the Fact Sheets or add custom objectives and link each of those to applicable service packages 

(essentially TSMO strategies) and performance measures.59 The Turbo Architecture “Planning” 

module can be used to help identify TSMO strategies for corridors. 

56 Federal Highway Administration, Active Traffic Management Feasibility and Screening Guide, FHWA-HOP-14-019 (Washington, DC: May 

2015). Available at: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop14019/index.htm. 

57 Federal Highway Administration, Tool for Operations Benefit Cost Analysis (TOPS-BC) Version 1.2, Spreadsheet tool. Available at: 

http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/plan4ops/topsbctool/index.htm.

58 Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration, Advancing Metropolitan Planning for Operations: The Building Blocks 

of a Model Transportation Plan Incorporating Operations - A Desk Reference, FHWA-HOP-10-027 (Washington, DC: 2010). Available at: 

http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop10027/.

59 U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, Intelligent Transportation Systems Joint 

Program Office, National ITS Architecture 7.1, Use In Transportation Planning, Web site. Available at: http://www.iteris.com/itsarch/html/

archuse/planning.htm.
APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

57

3

Regional ITS or TSMO plans commonly include a toolbox of TSMO strategies to support 

the identification of TSMO strategies for use. For example, the regional TSMO plan for the 

Portland, Oregon, region includes a TSMO Toolbox of Strategies organized by operational areas 

(e.g., arterials, freeways, and freight). Each strategy includes a description, example applications, 

potential benefits, estimated costs, and influencing factors (e.g., political, institutional, 

and technical).60

The Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission supports TSMO strategy identification in its 

congestion management process by rating corridors within the region against 25 strategies within 

their congestion management toolbox.61 The strategies seek to improve demand management, 

modal options, transportation operations, and capacity. Each strategy is evaluated based on its 

suitability, reflecting ease of implementation, and applicability to a corridor. Each strategy also 

is given a benefit rating based on how significant its impact may be on reducing congestion. 

The ratings are used to categorize strategies into high, medium, and low priorities.

Several tools for screening TSMO strategies related to ATM are currently under development. 

The FHWA Active Traffic Management Feasibility and Screening Guide uses regional goals and 

associated issues and considerations to rate each potential TSMO strategy as offering a major 

improvement, some improvement, or neutral or not applicable.62 Caltrans, District 7 developed 

an ATM assessment framework that can be applied to any freeway corridor in the state. The 

framework describes potential ATM strategies with associated costs and benefits, which will 

address deficiencies (e.g., safety/crashes, non-recurring congestion, recurring congestion) 

observed in a particular corridor. This tool will support District 7’s implementation of an 

innovative corridor management approach to managing and optimizing performance on the 

freeway system.63

Sample Table for Identifying Transportation Systems Management and Operations 

Strategies for Corridors

Table 4 provides an example of TSMO strategies to consider based on operations objectives 

and performance gaps. This table focuses on objectives and strategies for an urban arterial that 

experiences recurring congestion. The desired outcome for improving corridor operations is the 

reduction of recurring congestion along the corridor. The middle column, “Performance Gap,” 

documents the corridor’s shortfalls in achieving any of the corridor’s operations objectives. The 

last column, “TSMO Strategies to Consider,” identifies potential TSMO strategies to address the 

deficiency or gap. To help ensure that an identified TSMO strategy will address the performance 

gap, the strategy should go through some type of screening and evaluation. The next section 

describes several options for doing this.

60 Metro, Regional Transportation System Management and Operations Plan, Technical Appendix A, June 30, 2010. Available at: http://www.

oregonmetro.gov/regional-transportation-system-management-and-operations-plan.

61 For more information, see: Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission, Congestion Management Process, Web site. Available at: http://www.

spcregion.org/trans_cong.shtml.

62 Federal Highway Administration, Active Traffic Management Feasibility and Screening Guide, FHWA-HOP-14-019 (Washington, DC: 

May 2015). Available at: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop14019/index.htm. 

63 For more information, contact Caltrans, District 7, Division of Operations, at (213) 897-3656.


58

APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

3

 Table 4. Example transportation systems management and operations strategy identification for a 

desired outcome of reducing recurring congestion on arterials.

TSMO Area

Outcome-Oriented 

Operations Objectives Performance Gap

TSMO Strategies to 

Consider

Emergency 

or Incident 

Management

• Improve emergency 

vehicle travel times by 

X percent in Y years.

Delay at traffic signals 

for emergency vehicles 

exceeds Z hours of 

delay per 1,000 vehicle 

miles traveled.

• Emergency vehicle 

preemption.

• Emergency vehicle 

routing.

• Traffic surveillance.

Transit 

Operations and 

Management

• For transit corridors, 

decrease delay by X 

percent per year.

• Improve average 

on-time performance 

for corridor transit 

route by X percent 

within Y years.

Delay at traffic signals 

for transit exceeds Z 

hours of delay per 1,000 

vehicle miles traveled.

• Transit signal 

priority.

• Transit queue jump.

Freight 

Management

• For freight corridors, 

decrease hours of 

delay per 1,000 vehicle 

miles traveled by X 

percent in Y years.

Delay at traffic signals 

for trucks/freight 

exceeds Z hours of 

delay per 1,000 vehicle 

miles traveled.

• Truck signal priority.

Arterial 

Management: 

Delay and Signal 

Systems

• Decrease the seconds 

of control delay on the 

corridor by X percent 

in Y years.

• Increase the number of 

intersections operating 

at level of service Z or 

higher by X percent in 

Y years.

• Evaluate corridor 

signals for retiming 

every X years.

Delay at traffic signals 

for all modes exceeds Z 

seconds of control delay 

per traffic signal on the 

corridor.

• Enhanced traffic 

signal timing 

(e.g., re-timing/

optimization, 

adaptive systems, 

better detection).

• Traffic surveillance.

Access 

Management

• Maintain a distance of 

X feet between 

corridor access points 

for the next Y years.

• Reduce driveway 

access points by X 

percent for all new 

developments for the 

next Y years.

Delay at closely 

spaced intersections or 

driveways exceeds Z 

minutes per vehicle at 

each driveway.

• Access management.
APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

59

3

TSMO Area

Outcome-Oriented 

Operations Objectives Performance Gap

TSMO Strategies to 

Consider

System 

Efficiency: Travel 

Time

• Improve average travel 

time during peak 

periods by X percent 

by year Y.

Delay at geometric 

bottlenecks exceeds 

Z minutes per vehicle 

per location.

• Bottleneck removal 

(e.g., turn lane 

additions).

Directional imbalance 

of volume-to-capacity 

ratio that varies 

throughout day exceeds 

Z percent.

• Changeable lane 

assignment.

System 

Efficiency: 

Duration of 

Congestion

• Reduce the daily hours 

of recurring corridor 

congestion from X to 

Y by 

year Z.

Delay throughout 

corridor exceeds Z 

hours per day.

• High-capacity 

transit.

• Traffic surveillance.

• Traffic management 

center.

• Transportation 

demand 

management.

TSMO = transportation systems management and operations.

Evaluating Transportation Systems Management and Operations Strategies

While many operations strategies (e.g., variable speed limits, queue warning systems, and dynamic 

ramp metering) have benefits, because they differ from conventional capacity investments in 

terms of cost, service life, and requirements, it is not always clear how to assess strategies. After 

identifying potential TSMO strategies for a corridor, there are several methods that are available to 

evaluate the strategies to determine which ones are most suitable to the corridor context and work 

together to provide the most benefit. This often takes place in two phases: screening the strategies 

for feasibility, and then conducting a more detailed evaluation prior to selecting strategies to move 

forward with funding and implementation. The evaluation factors may include technical and 

institutional feasibility, return on investment, or others relevant to the corridor stakeholders. 

Numerous methods and tools are currently available to evaluate TSMO strategies as part of corridor 

planning. They vary in purpose served, complexity, input and output data, and the strategies 

that they analyze. Four main categories of analysis tools could apply to the evaluation of TSMO 

strategies: (1) travel demand models; (2) sketch-planning tools; (3) analytical/deterministic tools; 

and (4) simulation models, as well as many hybrid approaches. Sketch-planning tools allow for 

the basic screening of strategies, while deterministic tools and simulation typically go beyond 

the results of travel demand models to enable more detailed analysis of TSMO strategies. When 

selecting a tool, it is important to not only match the tool’s capabilities to the corridor team’s 



 Table 4. Example transportation systems management and operations strategy identification for a 

desired outcome of reducing recurring congestion on arterials. (Continued)
60

APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

3

objectives, but also to consider other factors (e.g., budget, schedule, and resource requirements). 

The team should avoid trying to apply a tool that is more complex and time-consuming than needed. 

Conversely, the team should not use a tool that lacks the sensitivity or detail to address its need.

Travel demand models are useful in screening and evaluating corridor-wide strategies, such as 

congestion pricing and ridesharing programs, because they support an assessing mode choice 

and travel pattern or volume impacts. Travel demand models supply data to simulation models, 

sketch-planning tools, and post-processors that can analyze TSMO strategies. They are useful for 

generating traffic origin-destination patterns or volumes for input into simulation models. They are 

limited in their ability to analyze TSMO strategies, however, as they miss the impacts of incidents, 

work zones, and special events.

Sketch-planning tools are intended to provide quick analysis using generally available 

information and data. They provide a quick order-of-magnitude estimate with minimal input data 

in support of preliminary screening assessments. Sketch-planning tools are appropriate early on 

when prioritizing large numbers of strategies or investments for more detailed evaluation. They 

are typically spreadsheets or simple databases that are based on built-in assumptions of impacts 

and benefits for various strategies. 

The FHWA developed the TOPS-BC, a benefit-cost analysis sketch-planning tool that is available 

to help corridor teams screen multiple TSMO strategies. It provides order-of-magnitude benefit cost 

estimates using default parameters that can be customized using local data. The TOPS-BC is available 

for download from the FHWA Planning for Operations Website.64 The FHWA is continuing to develop 

products to assist practitioners in applying benefit-cost analysis for TSMO strategies.

Analytical or deterministic tools typically implement the procedures of the Highway Capacity 

Manual.

65 These tools quickly predict capacity, density, speed, delay, and queuing on a variety 

of transportation facilities and are validated with field data, laboratory test beds, or small-scale 

experiments. The primary example of a tool within this category is the Highway Capacity 

Software, which implements the procedures defined in the Highway Capacity Manual for 

analyzing capacity and determining LOS for signalized and unsignalized intersections, urban 

streets, freeways, weaving areas, ramp junctions, multilane highways, two-lane highways, and 

transit. These tools have somewhat-limited application for evaluating TSMO strategies for a 

corridor. They are mainly for individual intersections or small-scale facilities and are widely 

accepted for examining different types of traffic control strategies (e.g., uncontrolled, stop 

controlled, and signalized).

Simulation tools cover a range of software that is available to model transportation system 

operations and can be applied specifically to corridors. Simulation models are typically classified 

according to the level of detail at which they represent the traffic stream. Macroscopic simulation 

models simulate traffic flow, taking into consideration aggregate traffic stream characteristics 

(i.e., speed, flow, and density) and their relationships. Microscopic simulation models simulate 

the characteristics and interactions of individual vehicles. Mesoscopic simulation models simulate 

individual vehicles, but describe their activities and interactions based on aggregate (macroscopic) 

relationships. 

64 Tool for Operations Benefit CostAnalysis can be downloaded from: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/plan4ops/topsbctool/index.htm.

65 Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual 2010 (Washington, DC: 2010). Available from: http://www.trb.org/Main/

Blurbs/164718.aspx.
APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

61

3

Agencies use simulation tools to analyze operations of both traffic and transit to conduct needs 

assessments, alternatives analysis, and environmental impact studies. A key advantage of these 

tools is their ability to simulate conditions, such as incidents, and analyze conditions under 

multiple scenarios. Some specific strategies that can be simulated include ramp metering, express 

lanes, and variable speeds limits. Most simulation models also produce graphical or animated 

displays of the results. These can be invaluable in presenting key findings and results to a broad 

range of audiences beyond transportation professionals. The primary challenges associated with 

simulation tools are related to the resources required to develop and apply such models. These 

include the level of expertise needed, data and computing requirements, and the amount of time 

required to adequately and accurately calibrate models to real-world conditions.

Activity-based models are increasingly being used as a region’s travel demand model and may 

be useful in evaluating TSMO strategies within corridors. They typically function at the level 

of individual traveler and represent how the person travels across the entire day. They provide 

detailed performance metrics but take much longer to run and have greater development and 

maintenance costs. They can evaluate pricing strategies, transportation demand management 

programs, and many other TSMO strategies.

Dynamic traffic assignment (DTA) also is emerging as a practical tool for numerous planning 

and operations applications. DTA is a type of modeling tool that combines network assignment 

models, used primarily in conjunction with travel demand forecasting procedures for planning 

applications, with traffic simulation models, used primarily for traffic operational studies. DTA 

involves the capability to assign or re-assign vehicle trip paths based on prevailing conditions. 

For example, a vehicle may be re-assigned to a different path in the middle of its trip due to the 

congestion on its original path. DTA enables evaluating operational strategies that are likely 

to induce a temporal or spatial pattern shift of traffic. It enables estimating travel behavior 

from various demand and supply changes and interactions. It is suitable for analyses involving 

incidents, construction zones, ATDM strategies, ICM strategies, ITS, managed lanes, congestion 

pricing, and other TSMO strategies. However, the application of DTA does generally require a 

significant investment of resources and expertise in both demand and simulation modeling.

Selecting Strategies to Best Achieve Objectives

Building on the assessment of potential strategies using analysis tools, the corridor plan will 

involve selecting a set of promising strategies to achieve the operations objectives for the corridor. 

Given the wide array of potential strategies to consider, including those that focus on highway/

traffic operations, transit operations, demand management, and capacity, selecting strategies for a 

corridor often will involve both quantitative analysis, as well as qualitative assessments of what 

would work best to fit within the specific context of the corridor. 

It is important to recognize that effective corridor management will typically involve implementation 

of a number of complementary strategies, rather than a single strategy, or even a set of strategies 

applied to different modes. One of the key values of exploring corridor operations is recognizing the 

interconnections between different roadway facilities, transit, and other modal options. Consequently, 

a number of individual strategies may be grouped together and considered as a package of 

improvements. For instance, improving arterial operations may involve a combination of traffic 


62

APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

3

signal coordination, TSP, and parking management strategies. Typically, planners and operators 

will work together to identify and evaluate potential strategies, and then define a package or 

several possible packages of improvements. The alternative corridor strategies can then be 

evaluated in relation to their performance in relation to defined operations objectives, within the 

context of community values, and with recognition of available resources for implementation. 

Some strategies also may not require investments in infrastructure or technology deployment in 

the field, but could be fostered through improved data sharing and communications practices.

Prioritizing strategies or packages of strategies for selection often involves making tradeoffs in 

deciding what approach would be most effective to meet corridor objectives. For instance, use 

of a highway shoulder as a lane for buses could help improve transit reliability, but it needs to be 

considered in the context of road safety and the potential benefit for travelers in relation to the 

costs of upgrading the shoulder and lane markings, in comparison to other potential strategies. 

Similarly, on an urban arterial, traffic signal improvements, including retiming or TSP, need to 

consider an array of issues and potential impacts, including effects on road traffic, transit, and 

bicycles and pedestrians in terms of travel time and safety.

To the extent possible, using common evaluation methods for comparative assessments of strategy 

alternatives is valuable. For instance, if travel time reliability (i.e., consistent or predictable 

travel times and on-time transit performance) is a key objective for the corridor, then integrating 

reliability performance measures into the selection of strategies can help ensure that strategies are 

prioritized that best support the TSMO objectives for the corridor. TSMO strategies that improve 

reliability include a wide range of strategies: information systems, incident management, managed 

lanes, TSP, and transit and freight vehicle tracking. As a result, using reliability performance 

measures does not define a singular strategy but is helpful in comparing the estimating impacts of 

different strategies.

In addition to using the outputs of tools described above, approaches that can be used to compare 

strategies or packages of strategies include: 

• Analyzing cost-effectiveness: Using a cost-effectiveness approach involves calculating the 

overall cost effectiveness (cost per unit of benefit) for each strategy based on defined 

benefits. Tools available to calculate reliability benefits include sketch planning, model 

post-processing, simulation, and multiresolution/multiscenario modeling. Once the cost 

effectiveness of each strategy is determined, strategies can be ranked in order from highest 

to lowest.

• Benefit-cost analysis: Benefit-cost analysis can be a useful tool for comparing different 

options, if sufficient data are available on key metrics, such as travel times and safety, to 

monetize these effects in relation to costs. Valuing travel time and delay is typically 

accomplished using surveys of travelers to determine their perceived benefit of travel time.66

66 Transportation Research Board, Strategic Highway Research Program, Guide to Incorporating Reliability Measures into the Transportation 

Planning and Programming Processes (Washington, DC: 2014). Available at: http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/shrp2/SHRP2_S2-L05-

RR-2.pdf.
APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

63

3

• Multicriteria scoring: Another approach is to use performance measures along with 

scoring criteria to assess how different alternatives support corridor performance 

objectives. For instance, if several key objectives have been defined for a corridor related 

to system operations (e.g., safety, transit on-time performance, highway reliability), 

then strategies are given scores in relation to each objective to prioritize the most 

promising strategies.

Commonly, the process of analyzing and selecting potential strategies or combinations of 

strategies will yield some approaches that are most promising.

PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER

As described above, operations objectives are essential elements of TSMO planning. The 

following section provides a set of easy-to-use reference sheets for operations objectives that are 

relevant to corridors. Each reference sheet provides an overview of the operations objective area, 

a menu of operations objective statements and associated performance measures, a description 

of data needs and potential providers, and possible TSMO strategies to achieve the operations 

objective. They are intended as a resource for corridor TSMO planning teams who are searching 

for ideas for operations objectives and related TSMO strategies. The quick reference sheets draw 

from the FHWA’s Advancing Metropolitan Planning for Operations: The Building Blocks of a 

Model Transportation Plan Incorporating Operations – A Desk Reference, and were adapted for 

application to corridor planning.67

67 Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration, Advancing Metropolitan Planning for Operations: The Building Blocks 

of a Model Transportation Plan Incorporating Operations - A Desk Reference, FHWA-HOP-10-027 (Washington, DC: 2010). Available at: 

http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop10027/.
64

APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

3

System Efficiency: Corridor Travel Time

The objectives focus on reducing the amount of time it takes to travel through a corridor. Travel 

time is a measure of the average time spent in travel, which is a function of both travel speed and 

distance. The objectives can be made multimodal to account for transit, truck, and bicycle travel in 

the corridor, where appropriate. 

Stakeholders • State, county, or city agencies 

responsible for roadways.

• Toll authorities.

• MPOs.

• Rideshare organizations.

• Transportation management 

center(s).

• Transit agencies.

• Corridor businesses, freight 

distribution centers, event centers, 

and neighborhood associations.

• Ports, if applicable.

• Media.

Goals • Reduce corridor travel time experienced by travelers.

Corridor 

Operations 

Objectives

• Improve average travel time during peak periods by X percent by year Y.

• Improve average commute trip travel time by X percent by year Y.

Performance 

Measures

• Average travel time during peak periods (minutes).

• Average commute trip travel time (minutes).

Anticipated 

Data Needs

• Peak period and free flow travel time and speeds.

• Person travel along corridor links (e.g., vehicle volume multiplied by 

vehicle occupancy).

• Trip length.

Data Resources 

and Partners

State DOTs, counties, cities, traffic management centers, and private sector 

sources can provide travel time data including speeds and volumes. Transit 

agencies can provide transit travel time, speed data, and passenger counts.

TSMO 

Strategies to 

Consider

Strategies designed to reduce recurring peak period congestion, such 

as traffic signal coordination, and transportation demand strategies that 

encourage shifts in travel mode, time, or route. If the objective includes 

transit or bicycles, strategies can include transit signal priority or bicycle 

traffic signals.
APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

65

3

System Reliability: Non-Recurring Delay in Corridors

This set of objectives is focused on minimizing non-recurring delay in corridors. This type 

of travel-time delay is caused by transient events as opposed to delay caused by geometric 

limitations or a lack of capacity. These objectives focus on non-recurring delay due to scheduled 

and unscheduled disruptions to travel. 

Stakeholders • State, county, or city agencies 

responsible for roadways, including 

maintenance crews.

• Toll authorities.

• MPOs.

• Transportation management 

center(s).

• Transit agencies.

• Incident responders.

• Contractors.

• Utility agencies/companies.

• Weather forecast services.

• 911 center(s).

• Law enforcement.

• Fire and rescue agencies.

• Emergency medical agencies.

• Tow industry.

• Hazardous materials industry.

• Corridor businesses, freight 

distribution centers, event centers, 

and neighborhood associations.

• Ports, if applicable.

• Media.

Goals • Minimize non-recurring delay (scheduled and non-scheduled disruptions) 

in corridors.

Corridor 

Operations 

Objectives

• Reduce total person hours of delay in corridor by time period (peak, 

off-peak) caused by:

◦ Scheduled events (i.e. work zones, system maintenance, special 

events) by X hours in Y years.

◦ Unscheduled disruptions to travel (i.e. crashes, weather, debris) by 

X hours in Y years.

◦ All transient scheduled and non-scheduled events by X hours in 

Y years.

Performance 

Measures

• Travel time delay during scheduled and/or unscheduled disruptions to 

travel in the corridor.

• Total person hours of delay during scheduled and/or unscheduled 

disruptions to travel in the corridor.

Anticipated 

Data Needs

• Average travel time by person or vehicle during non-recurring events such 

as traffic incidents, special events, and work zones.

• Average travel time by person or vehicle during free flow travel conditions 

in the corridor.
66

APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

3

Data Resources 

and Partners

Travel time data during non-recurring events may be difficult to collect, 

particularly during unscheduled events, such as incidents and severe weather. 

Transportation management centers and/or public safety organizations 

are likely needed to assist in identifying the locations and times of traffic 

incidents. Road and track maintenance staff will be needed to identify 

upcoming work. Data on travel times during unscheduled events may need to 

be extracted after collection from ongoing travel time data based on the time 

and location of events. The National Weather Service also may need to be 

involved in identifying times and locations of severe weather that may have 

impacted travel.

TSMO 

Strategies to 

Consider

Strategies to reduce non-recurring delay include those that focus on reducing 

the delay caused by incidents, work zones, special events, weather, and other 

non-recurring events that affect traffic flow.

System Reliability: Non-Recurring Delay in Corridors (Continued)
APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

67

3

System Options: Bicycle and Pedestrian Accessibility and Efficiency

The objectives focus on improving the accessibility and efficiency of bicycle and pedestrian 

modes to offer travelers feasible and attractive travel options within a corridor.

Stakeholders • State, county, or city agencies 

responsible for roadways.

• Transportation management 

centers.

• Transit agencies.

• University research centers.

• Ports, if applicable.

• Corridor businesses, freight 

distribution centers, event centers, 

and neighborhood associations.

• Pedestrian and bicycle advocacy 

groups.

Goals • Improve bicycle and pedestrian accessibility and efficiency.

• Provide attractive bicycle and pedestrian travel options in a corridor.

Corridor 

Operations 

Objectives

• Decrease average delay for pedestrians and bicyclists on primary 

pedestrian and/or bicycle routes by X percent in Y years.

• Increase system completeness in corridor for pedestrians and/or bicyclists 

by X percent within Y years.

• Increase the number of intersections with pedestrian and/or bicycle safety 

features (e.g., countdown pedestrian signal heads, bicycle signals, painted 

crosswalks/bike boxes) to X percent by year Y.

• Increase average pedestrian (or bicyclist) comfort level by X points in 

Y years.

Performance 

Measures

• Average delay for pedestrians and bicyclists on primary pedestrian and/or 

bicycle routes in the corridor.

• Percent of corridor with pedestrian and/or bicycle facilities.

• The percentage of intersections with pedestrian and/or bicycle safety 

features.

• Average pedestrian and/or bicyclist comfort level as measured by survey.

Anticipated 

Data Needs

• Average wait time for pedestrians and bicyclists at intersections or path 

impediments by time period.

• An inventory of bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure.

• Survey information on pedestrian and/or bicyclist comfort level.

Data Resources 

and Partners

State and local DOTs, MPOs, counties, cities, highway districts, and 

universities are sources for pedestrian and bicycle travel data. Private-sector 

crowd sourcing data also can be utilized to inventory conditions and comfort 

level. Pedestrian and bicycle advocacy groups can be a source of data.

TSMO 

Strategies to 

Consider

Pedestrian countdown signals, bicycle lanes, wayfinding signage, and 

crossing signals where bicycles cross major roadways. 
68

APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

3

Arterial Management: Traffic Signal Management

The objectives focus on improving the management of traffic signal operations in an arterial 

corridor through advanced technology, increased reviews, and planning.

Stakeholders • State, county, or city agencies 

responsible for roadways.

• Transportation management 

center(s).

• Traffic signal technicians.

• Incident responders.

• Contractors.

• Transit agencies.

• Corridor businesses, freight 

distribution centers, event centers, 

and neighborhood associations.

• Ports, if applicable.

Goals • Improve arterial traffic signal operations for day-to-day operations during 

peak and off-peak periods.

• Improve arterial traffic signal operations during scheduled or nonscheduled events.

Corridor 

Operations 

Objectives

• Evaluate signal timing in arterial corridor every Y years.

• Increase the number of arterial corridor intersections running in a 

coordinated, closed-loop, or adaptive system by X percent in Y years.

• Prepare and implement special arterial corridor timing plans for use 

during freeway incidents, roadway construction activities, or other special 

events by year Y.

• Crash data for arterial corridor is reviewed every X years to determine if 

signal adjustments can be made to address a safety issue. 

Performance 

Measures • Number of years between traffic signal timing evaluation in arterial 

corridor.

• Number of intersections running in a coordinated, closed-loop, or 

adaptive system.

• Completion of at least one special timing plan for incidents, construction, 

or events in arterial corridor.

• Number of times per year a special timing plan is used in arterial corridor.

• Number of years between reviews of crash data on all arterials for 

possible signal timing impacts.

Anticipated 

Data Needs

• Reports from operating agencies on frequency of signal retiming 

evaluation, current traffic signal capabilities, special timing plans, and 

crash data reviews.

Data Resources 

and Partners

Partner agencies that operate arterials and agencies that maintain traffic 

crash records. 

TSMO 

Strategies to 

Consider

Regular evaluation of corridor traffic signal timing, enhanced traffic signal 

systems, special corridor timing plans for events, incidents, and work zones, 

and regular review of corridor crash data.
APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

69

3

Freeway Management: Ramp Management

The objectives focus on the application of traffic control devices, such as ramp meters, signing, 

and gates, to regulate the number of vehicles entering or leaving the freeway to achieve operations 

objectives.

Stakeholders • State, county, or city agencies 

responsible for roadways.

• Transportation management 

center(s).

• Transit agencies.

• 911 center(s).

• Law enforcement.

• Fire and rescue agencies.

• Emergency medical agencies.

• Corridor businesses, freight 

distribution centers, event centers, 

and neighborhood associations.

• Ports, if applicable.

• Media.

Goals • Improve overall freeway corridor operations during peak periods and 

during scheduled or unscheduled events.

Corridor 

Operations 

Objectives

• Increase the percent of interchanges in a freeway corridor operating at 

LOS Z or higher during peak periods by X percent by year Y.

• Reduce the number of congestion-inducing incidents occurring at freeway 

ramps by X percent by year Y.

• Increase the number ramps in freeway corridor currently metered by X 

percent by year Y.

Performance 

Measures

• Number and percent of freeway corridor interchanges operating at LOS Z 

or above during peak periods (per year).

• Total number of congestion-inducing incidents at freeway corridor 

interchanges during peak period (per year).

• Number of freeway corridor interchanges with ramp meters (by year of 

installation).

Anticipated 

Data Needs

• Traffic volume and LOS data (e.g., traffic counts) at freeway corridor 

interchanges.

• Total number of congestion-related incidents at freeway corridor 

interchanges.

• Number of freeway corridor ramp meters and year of installation.

Data Resources 

and Partners

Providers of travel data, including traffic volumes and incidents, such as 

State DOTs, cities, counties, and transportation management centers.

TSMO 

Strategies to 

Consider

Ramp management strategies typically encompass ramp metering, ramp 

closure, special use treatments (e.g., High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV), 

special events), and ramp terminal treatments.
70

APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

3

Transit Operations and Management: Transit Signal Priority

The objectives focus on implementing TSP systems to improve transit performance and reliability 

within a corridor.

Stakeholders • State, county, or city agencies 

responsible for roadways.

• Transportation management 

center(s).

• Traffic signal technicians.

• Transit agencies.

• Corridor businesses, freight 

distribution centers, event centers, 

and neighborhood associations.

• Ports, if applicable.

Goals • Improve transit service performance and reliability on corridors with traffic 

signals.

Corridor 

Operations 

Objectives

• Increase implementation of TSP at X number of intersections over the next 

Y years.

• Decrease traffic signal delay on transit routes in corridor by X percent per 

year.

• Decrease transit vehicle delay in corridor by X percent per year by 

increasing the use of queue jumping and automated vehicle location.

Performance 

Measures

• Number of transit routes/intersections equipped with TSP capability in 

corridor.

• System-wide, signalized-stop delay on transit routes.

• Travel time delay on routes with queue jumping and automated vehicle 

location in use.

Anticipated 

Data Needs

• Number of transit routes/intersections with transit signal priority 

capabilities.

• Automated vehicle location data with location and travel time delay.

• Signal operations/green time reports.

Data 

Resources 

and Partners

Transit agencies and traffic signal operating agencies in the region can provide 

information about implementation and performance of TSP. Automated vehicle 

location data can provide transit vehicle travel time.

TSMO 

Strategies to 

Consider

TSMO strategies to increase TSP implementation could involve identification 

and prioritization of transit routes and signalized intersections that are 

candidates for implementing TSP systems or queue jumping. Another strategy 

may include collaboration with the traffic management agency to leverage TSP 

implementation with traffic signal system upgrades.
APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

71

3

Traffic Incident Management

The objectives focus on improving system efficiency, system reliability, traveler information, and 

agency efforts for managing traffic incidents within a corridor.

Stakeholders • State, county, or city agencies 

responsible for roadways.

• MPOs.

• Transportation management 

center(s).

• Transit agencies.

• 911 center(s).

• Law enforcement.

• Fire and rescue agencies.

• Emergency medical agencies.

• Tow industry.

• Hazardous materials industry.

• Corridor businesses, freight 

distribution centers, event centers, 

and neighborhood associations.

• Ports, if applicable.

• Media.

Goals • Reduce traffic incident duration and person hours of delay on a corridor.

• Provide travelers with accurate, timely, and actionable information and 

improve customer satisfaction.

• Increase coordination and communication between agencies.

• Train incident management staff.

Corridor 

Operations 

Objectives

• Reduce corridor mean incident notification time by X percent over Y years.

• Reduce mean time for needed corridor responders to arrive on-scene after 

notification by X percent over Y years.

• Reduce corridor mean incident clearance time and mean roadway clearance 

time per incident by X percent over Y years.

• Reduce mean time of incident duration on transit services and corridor 

facilities by X percent in Y years.

• Reduce the person hours of total delay associated with corridor traffic 

incidents by X percent over Y years.

• Reduce time between incident verification and posting a traveler alert to 

traveler information outlets by X minutes in Y years.

• Reduce the time between recovery from incident and removal of traveler 

alerts for that incident.

• Increase number of repeat visitors to corridor traveler information outlet by 

X percent in Y years.

• Increase customer satisfaction with corridor incident management efforts by 

X percent over Y years.

• Increase the percentage of incident management agencies that participate in 

a coordinated corridor incident response team by X percent in Y years.

• Hold at least X multi-agency after-action review meetings each year with 

attendance from at least Y percent of the agencies involved in the response.

• Conduct X joint training exercises among incident/emergency operators and 

responders for the corridor by year Y.
72

APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

3

Performance 

Measures

• Average incident notification time of necessary response agencies.

• Mean time for needed responders to arrive on-scene after notification.

• Mean incident clearance time and mean roadway clearance time per 

incident.

• Mean time of incident duration.

• Person hours of delay associated with corridor traffic incidents.

• Time to alert travelers of a corridor incident.

• Time between recovery from incident and removal of traveler alerts.

• Number of repeat visitors to traveler information outlet.

• Percentage of customers satisfied with corridor incident management 

practices.

• Number of participating agencies in a corridor coordinated incident response 

team.

• Number of multi-agency after-action reviews per year.

• Percentage of responding agencies participating in after-action review.

• Number of joint training exercises conducted among incident/emergency 

operators and responders.

Anticipated 

Data Needs

• For each incident of interest in the corridor, incident notification time and 

on-scene arrival time; specifically, the time of the awareness of an incident 

and one or more of the following pieces of data: the time the last responder 

left the scene, the time when all lanes were re-opened, and the time when 

traffic returned to full operational status.

• Total travel time in person hours of travel (1) during free flow conditions, 

and (2) impacted by incidents.

• Time of incident verification, time of traveler information outlet activation 

(e.g., dynamic message sign posting, 511 entry, and website log), time of 

corridor system recovery, and time of travel alert removal.

• Customer satisfaction surveys.

• Number of agencies participating in a corridor incident management program.

• Number of after-action reviews held.

• Number of joint training exercises conducted among incident/emergency 

operators and responders.

Data 

Resources and 

Partners

Data would need to be tracked by the incident responders, 9-1-1 dispatchers, 

or operators at a transportation management center or emergency operations 

center with access to video of the scene. The partners needed for these 

measures would be all incident responders willing to support the objectives.

Traffic Incident Management (Continued)
APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

73

3

TSMO 

Strategies to 

Consider

Many of the incident management strategies are complementary and work 

together to achieve the objectives. For example, providing accurate and 

timely traveler information can help reduce travel time delay by encouraging 

travelers to avoid the incident area and also can help improve customer 

satisfaction. Increasing agency participation along the corridor, holding 

after action review meetings, and holding joint training can help improve 

incident detection and verification and help shorten incident clearance 

time. Other strategies to consider include enhancing inter-agency voice 

and data communications systems, using or expanding the use of roving 

corridor patrols, expanding surveillance camera coverage, and training on 

dissemination of corridor traveler information.

Traffic Incident Management (Continued)
74

APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

3

Road Weather Management

The objectives for managing road weather on a corridor focus on improving system efficiency, 

system reliability, traveler information, and traffic signal management within a corridor.

Stakeholders • State, county, or city agencies 

responsible for roadways, including 

maintenance crews.

• Weather forecast services.

• MPOs.

• Transportation management 

center(s).

• Transit agencies.

• 911 center(s).

• Law enforcement.

• Fire and rescue agencies.

• Emergency medical agencies.

• Corridor businesses, freight 

distribution centers, event centers, 

and neighborhood associations.

• Ports, if applicable.

• Media.

Goals • Improve the clearance time of weather-related debris (e.g., fallen limbs and 

trees, snow and ice, and power lines and poles) from the corridor 

transportation facilities.

• Help travelers avoid corridor segments that are dangerous and would cause 

them substantial delay.

• Disseminate relevant information to travelers in a timely manner regarding 

the impact of weather on corridor travel.

• Increase the coverage of the corridor (e.g., roadway, transit, or bicycle 

facilities) with weather sensors and communications.

• Improve traffic signal management during inclement weather conditions.

Corridor 

Operations 

Objectives

• Reduce average time to clear corridor of weather-related debris after 

weather impact by X percent in Y years.

• Increase by X percent the number of significant corridor segments covered 

by weather-related diversion plans by year Y.

• Increase the percent of agencies that have adopted multi-agency, weatherrelated corridor transportation operations plans and are involved in 

operations during weather events to X percent by year Y.

• Reduce time to alert travelers of travel weather impacts using traveler 

information outlets (e.g. dynamic message signs, 511, websites, social 

media) by X (time period or percent) in Y years.

• Increase the percent of the corridor covered by weather sensors or a road 

weather information system by X percent in Y years, as defined by a road 

weather information system station within Z miles.

• Special timing plans are available for use during inclement weather 

conditions for X miles of the corridor by year Y.
APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

75

3

Performance 

Measures

• Average time to clear selected corridor surface transportation facilities of 

weather-related debris after weather impact.

• Percent of significant corridor segments covered by weather-related 

diversion plans.

• Percent of agencies involved in transportation operations during weather 

events that have adopted multi-agency, weather-related corridor 

transportation operations plans.

• Time from beginning of weather event to posting of information to traveler 

information outlets.

• Percent of corridor within Z miles of a road weather information system station.

• Number of miles of corridor that have at least one special signal timing 

plan for inclement weather events.

Anticipated 

Data Needs

• Time in which the corridor surface transportation facilities have been 

impacted by the debris, and the time required to clear the corridor and 

restore it to full operation.

• Number of weather-related diversion plans.

• Total number of agencies involved in transportation operations during 

weather events that have adopted multi-agency, weather-related corridor 

transportation operations plans.

• Time of the start of a weather event and the time in which information is 

given to travelers by traveler information outlets.

• Deployment locations of each road weather information system station 

near the corridor and length of the corridor.

• Reports from operating agencies on corridor signal retiming, signal 

capabilities, and special timing plans.

Data Resources 

and Partners

Field data may come from fixed road or airport weather sensors (road 

weather information systems), observations from meteorologists, National 

Weather Service data, or mobile observations from connected vehicles. 

TSMO 

Strategies to 

Consider

Many TSMO strategies for road weather management are complementary and 

work towards achieving multiple objectives. TSMO strategies that support 

agency operations, and in turn help with system reliability and efficiency, 

include weather sensors/stations at key corridor locations; pre-positioned 

debris removal vehicles; preventative techniques, such as spreading de-icing 

material prior to a storm; collaboration with weather forecasting services; 

and development of alternate route plans in preparation for events through 

collaboration between jurisdictions and modes. System efficiency also can 

be improved by developing and implementing special signal timing plans for 

typical travel demand during weather events. Traveler information strategies 

that help travelers make informed decisions include current corridor weather 

and facility information, weather forecasts, status information on operational 

activities (e.g., map of snow plow activities), and the use of dynamic message 

signs on the corridor or approaches to the corridor.

Road Weather Management (Continued)
76

APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

3

Work Zone Management

The objectives focus on improving system efficiency, system reliability, traveler information, and 

agency coordination efforts for managing work zones within a corridor.

Stakeholders • State, county, or city agencies 

responsible for roadways, including 

maintenance crews.

• Contractors.

• Utility agencies/companies.

• MPOs.

• Transportation management 

center(s).

• Transit agencies.

• 911 center(s).

• Law enforcement.

• Fire and rescue agencies.

• Emergency medical agencies.

• Corridor businesses, freight 

distribution centers, event centers, 

and neighborhood associations.

• Ports, if applicable.

• Media.

Goals • Reduce travel time delay within corridor work zones.

• Reduce the extent of congestion for travelers within work zones.

• Reduce the variability in travel time within work zones.

• Reduce the overlap in corridor construction projects to reduce the burden 

on transportation system users.

• Inform travelers of ongoing corridor work zones to reduce travel time delays.

• Improve customer satisfaction with work zone management.

Corridor 

Operations 

Objectives

• Reduce the person hours of total delay associated with corridor work 

zones by X percent over Y years.

• Increase the rate of on-time completion of corridor construction projects to 

X percent within Y years.

• Increase the percentage of corridor construction projects that employ 

night/off-peak work zones by X percent in Y years.

• Reduce the percentage of vehicles traveling through corridor work zones 

that are queued by X percent in Y year.

• Reduce the average and maximum length of queues, when present by X 

percent over Y years.

• Reduce the average time duration (in minutes) of queue length greater 

than Z miles by X percent in Y years.

• Reduce vehicle hours of total delay in work zones caused by incidents 

(e.g., traffic crashes within or near the work zone).

• Increase the number of capital projects reviewed for corridor construction 

coordination by X percent in Y years.

• Decrease the number of work zones on parallel routes/along the same 

corridor by X percent in Y years.
APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

77

3

Corridor 

Operations 

Objectives 

(continued)

• Establish a work zone management system within X years to facilitate 

coordination of work zones in the corridor.

• Provide work zone information and multimodal alternatives to traveler 

information outlets for at least X percent of corridor work zones over the 

next Y years.

• Increase customer satisfaction with corridor work zone management 

efforts by X percent over Y years.

Performance 

Measures

• Person hours of delay associated with corridor work zones.

• Percent of corridor construction projects completed on-time.

• Percent of corridor construction projects employing night/off-peak work 

zones.

• Percent of vehicles experiencing queuing in corridor work zones.

• Length of average and maximum queues in corridor work zones.

• Average duration in minutes of queue length greater than Z miles.

• Vehicle hours of delay due to incidents related to work zones.

• Percent of corridor capital projects whose project schedules have been 

reviewed.

• Percent of work zones on parallel routes/along the same corridor.

• Presence of an established work zone management system.

• Percent of corridor work zones for which traveler information and 

multimodal alternatives are available through traveler information outlets.

• Percentage of customers satisfied with corridor work zone management 

practices.

Anticipated 

Data Needs

• Total travel time in person hours of travel: (1) during free flow conditions, 

and (2) impacted by work zones.

• Work zone information for work and non-work time periods (e.g., traffic 

volumes, travel time, and work zone length [average and maximum]).

• Number of construction projects completed on time.

• Number of construction projects employing night/off-peak work zones.

• Number of vehicles traveling through work zones.

• Number of vehicles traveling through work zones experiencing queuing.

• Duration of queue length greater than Z miles.

• Hours of incident-related delay in work zones.

• Corridor capital projects submitted for review.

• Corridor capital project anticipated and actual schedules.

• Map of work zones along area maps.

• Availability of traveler information and multimodal alternatives for work 

zones.

• Customer satisfaction surveys.

Work Zone Management (Continued)
78

APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

3

Data Resources 

and Partners

Data would need to be collected by agencies responsible for maintenance 

and operation of the transportation facilities. Partners needed may include 

DOTs, public safety agencies, contractors, and utility companies.

TSMO 

Strategies to 

Consider

Many of the TSMO strategies for work zone management work together in 

a complementary fashion to achieve the objectives. For example, providing 

ahead-of-time and real-time multimodal traveler information can help 

reduce travel time delay and extent of congestion by providing travelers 

with tools to help them avoid or minimize their exposure to the work zone. 

This strategy, along with shortening lane closure times particularly during 

high travel demand periods, also helps improve customer satisfaction. 

Multi-agency coordination, such as scheduling different work zones for 

different construction seasons, can help minimize the overall corridor travel 

impacts. Other strategies to consider include using temporary traffic control 

devices and practices that minimize the opportunity for crashes, which in 

turn shortens the incident-related delay in work zones, and using dynamic 

message signs or portable variable message signs to disseminate traveler 

information along the corridor or on approaches to the corridor.

Work Zone Management (Continued)
APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

79

3

Active Transportation and Demand Management

This objective set focuses on actively influencing traveler choices to better manage travel supply 

and demand. Active management includes proactive, predictive, and reactive elements.

Stakeholders • State, county, or city agencies 

responsible for roadways.

• Toll authorities.

• Parking providers.

• MPOs.

• Rideshare organizations.

• Transportation management 

center(s).

• Transit agencies.

• Law enforcement.

• Corridor businesses, freight 

distribution centers, event centers, 

and neighborhood associations.

• Ports, if applicable.

• Media.

• Travelers.

Goals • Actively manage travel supply and demand, traffic operations, and parking 

by influencing traveler choices related to destination, time of day, mode, 

route, and facility/lane to improve system efficiency and reliability.

Corridor 

Operations 

Objectives

• Increase the number of corridor travelers receiving information on ATDM 

strategies by X percent within Y years. 

• Increase customer satisfaction with ATDM efforts by X percent over Y years.

• Improve average corridor travel time during peak periods by X percent by 

year Y.

• Reduce corridor trips per year by X percent through dynamic ridesharing 

and active transit management within Y years.

• Increase the percentage of corridor travelers with electronic toll collection 

transponders by X percent by year Y.

• Increase the share of corridor segments or lanes that are using dynamic 

pricing to X percent by year Y.

• Reduce the number of congestion-inducing crashes occurring on the 

corridor and at corridor freeway ramps by X percent by year Y.

• Implement active parking management for X percent of the corridor within 

Y years.
80

APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

3

Performance 

Measures • Total number and percent of corridor travelers receiving information 

on ATDM strategies. 

• Percent of customers satisfied with corridor ATDM practices.

• Average corridor travel time during peak periods (minutes).

• Share of household trips by each mode of travel before and after 

availability of dynamic ridesharing and active transit management.

• Percent of corridor travelers with electronic toll collection 

transponders.

• Share of corridor segments or lane miles using dynamic pricing.

• Total number of congestion-inducing crashes on corridor and at 

freeway ramps (per year).

• Percent of corridor parking stalls with active parking management.

Anticipated Data 

Needs

• Survey/count of travelers exposed to ATDM information.

• Customer satisfaction surveys.

• Corridor peak period and free flow travel times and speeds.

• Person travel time along corridor links (e.g., vehicle volume 

multiplied by vehicle occupancy) during free flow conditions and 

congested conditions.

• Trip length.

• Mode share and total trips for corridor.

• Total number of corridor users (annually) with electronic toll 

collection transponders.

• System information (e.g., miles of dynamically priced lanes or 

facilities).

• Total number of congested-related crashes by location on corridor.

• Count of total and actively managed parking stalls.

Data Resources and 

Partners

• Data may need to be gathered from transportation management 

centers, State DOTs, cities, counties, toll authorities, transit 

agencies, and parking providers.

Active Transportation and Demand Management (Continued)
APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

81

3

TSMO Strategies to 

Consider

• There are numerous TSMO strategies to consider to achieve ATDM 

objectives. The strategies are typically categorized as they relate to 

demand, traffic, or parking:

• Active Demand Management:

◦ Corridor monitoring.

◦ Corridor specific traveler information (including predictive 

information).

◦ Dynamic ridesharing.

◦ Active transit management: dynamic fare reduction, dynamic 

transit capacity assignment, on-demand transit, transfer 

connection protection.

◦ Dynamic/congestion pricing (also electronic toll collection).

• Active Traffic Management:

◦ Dynamic/variable speed control.

◦ Dynamic lane use control and reversal.

◦ Adaptive ramp metering.

◦ Dynamic merge control.

◦ Dynamic queue warning.

◦ Hard shoulder running.

◦ Dynamic re-routing.

◦ Dynamic truck restrictions.

• Active Parking Management:

◦ Dynamic overflow transit parking.

◦ Dynamic parking reservation.

◦ Dynamic wayfinding.

◦ Dynamically priced parking.

• Automated enforcement may also be considered to complement 

some of the strategies such as dynamic pricing and dynamic speed 

control.

Active Transportation and Demand Management (Continued)
82

APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

3

Integrated Corridor Management

This objective set focuses on balancing travel demand across corridor networks and providing 

multi-agency management of events within a corridor.

Stakeholders • State, county, or city agencies 

responsible for roadways, including 

maintenance crews.

• MPOs.

• Transportation management 

center(s).

• Transit agencies.

• Incident responders.

• Contractors.

• 911 center(s).

• Law enforcement.

• Fire and rescue agencies.

• Emergency medical agencies.

• Corridor businesses, freight 

distribution centers, event centers, 

and neighborhood associations.

• Ports, if applicable.

• Media.

Goals • Balance travel demand across networks (freeway, arterial, transit, parking).

• Provide multi-agency management of events such as incidents, special 

events, inclement weather, and work zones.

Corridor 

Operations 

Objectives

• Increase the number of corridor travelers receiving information on ICM 

strategies by X percent within Y years.

• Increase customer satisfaction with ICM efforts by X percent over Y years.

• Balance corridor trips so that each route and mode within the corridor 

operate at X percent capacity within Y years.

• Improve average corridor travel time during peak periods by X percent by 

year Y.

• Reduce the person hours of total delay associated with non-recurrent 

events by X percent over Y years.

• Increase the percentage of agencies that participate in an ICM team by 

X percent in Y years.

• Hold at least X multi-agency, after-action review meetings following a 

corridor event each year, with attendance from at least Y percent of the 

agencies involved in the response.

• Conduct X joint-ICM training exercises for the corridor by year Y.
APPROACH TO PLANNING FOR TSMO WITHIN CORRIDORS

83

3

Performance 

Measures

• Total number of corridor travelers and percent receiving information on 

ICM strategies. 

• Percent of customers satisfied with ICM practices.

• Volume-to-capacity ratios for corridor routes and modes.

• Average corridor travel time during peak periods (minutes).

• Person hours of delay for the corridor.

• Number of agencies participating in an ICM team.

• Number of multi-agency after-action reviews per year.

• Percent of responding agencies participating in after-action review.

• Number of joint ICM training exercises conducted.

Anticipated 

Data Needs

• Survey/count of travelers exposed to ICM information. 

• Corridor peak period and free flow volumes (i.e., vehicles and occupancy), 

travel times, and speeds by route and mode.

• Person travel time along corridor links (e.g., vehicle volume multiplied by 

vehicle occupancy) during free flow conditions and congested conditions.

• Trip length.

• Mode share and total trips for corridor.

• Number of agencies participating in an ICM team.

• Number of after-action reviews held.

• Number of joint-ICM training exercises conducted.

Data Resources 

and Partners

Data may need to be gathered from transportation management centers, 

State DOTs, cities, counties, toll authorities, transit agencies, public safety 

agencies, the National Weather Service, and other ICM partners.

TSMO 

Strategies to 

Consider

A wide variety of TSMO strategies may be considered to support ICM 

objectives. Refer to the other reference sheets on TIM, ATDM, road weather 

management, work zone management, freeway ramp management, traffic 

signal management, and TSP for a detailed list of potential TSMO strategies 

in those areas. Providing ahead-of-time, real-time, and predictive multimodal 

traveler information tailored to the corridor is key to supporting balanced 

network demand in addition to route/mode diversion to parallel facilities, 

short-term ATDM strategies, and longer-term transportation demand 

management strategies (e.g., rideshare, employer programs, and commuter 

incentives). Additional TSMO strategies to consider for improving multiagency coordination include information clearinghouses, common event 

reporting systems, event pre-planning efforts, system coordination between 

ramp meters and traffic signals, and responsibility sharing for traffic 

operations functions (e.g., shared control of traffic signal timing plans).

Integrated Corridor Management (Continued)

M O V I N G T O I M P L E M E N T AT I O N : T S M O W I T H I N C O R R D I R O S

4

85

CHAPTER 4. MOVING TO IMPLEMENTATION: 

TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT AND 

OPERATIONS WITHIN CORRIDORS

This chapter presents several components that are critical to successfully implementing the plans 

for transportation systems management and operations (TSMO) on a corridor and maintaining 

those strategies over time. This includes identifying funding for the selected TSMO strategies and 

using the overarching systems engineering process and regional intelligent transportation systems 

(ITS) architecture to further define the TSMO strategies into specific, implementable systems that 

work with each other and connect to relevant operations systems already in place. This chapter 

also highlights the need to consider designing transportation infrastructure and ITS installations to 

enable and support planned TSMO strategies. 

PROGRAMMING FOR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS 

MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS WITHIN CORRIDORS

Programming funds for TSMO 

strategies is a necessary step 

in making TSMO strategies a 

reality on corridors (Figure 19). 

TSMO investments and strategies within a corridor can be 

funded by a combination of 

Federal, State, and local funding sources. Monies may come 

from general funds, local sales 

taxes dedicated to transportation, 

toll revenues, vehicle registration fees, or specialized taxes on 

local businesses or residents in a 

defined geographic area to fund 

local improvements, including 

corridor improvements. 

There are a few potential 

approaches for programming 

TSMO projects, including 

the following:68

68 Federal Highway Administration, Programming for Operations: Metropolitan Planning Organization Examples of Prioritizing and 

Funding Transportation Systems Management and Operations Strategies, FHWA-HOP-13-050, 2013. Available at: http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/

publications/fhwahop13050/index.htm.

Getting Started: Scoping the Effort 

and Building a Team

Gathering Information on Current and 

Future Context and Conditions

Identifying Operations Performance 

Needs, Gaps, and Opportunities

Programming for TSMO on Subareas

Implementing

Developing an Integrated 

TSMO Approach

• Identifying TSMO Strategies Based 

on Operations Objectives and 

Performance Needs

• Evaluating TSMO Strategies

• Selecting TSMO Strategies

Developing an Outcome-Oriented 

Operational Concept

• Subarea Goals

• Subarea Operations Objectives

• Performance Measures

Monitoring and Maintaining Level of Operations Over Time TSMO=transportation systems management and operations.

Programming for TSMO on Subareas

Figure 19. Diagram. The activity, “Programming for 

Transportation Systems Management and Operations within 

Corridors,” of the approach for planning for transportation 

systems management and operations within corridors.
86

M O V I N G T O I M P L E M E N T AT I O N : T S M O W I T H I N C O R R D I R O S

4

• TSMO funding set-aside – Some agencies set aside funding for TSMO projects such that a 

portion of the available funding is restricted and spent only on TSMO projects. With this 

approach, amounts may be set aside for specific projects (e.g., highway emergency local 

patrol, ITS) or individual TSMO projects. Strategies are selected for funding based on preestablished selection criteria. Some regions have specific operations-focused plans that inform 

the development of the selection criteria, such as a regional operations strategy, a regional 

concept for transportation operations, or an ITS strategic plan.

• Open competition – Many TSMO projects might compete with other types of projects for 

funding. In this approach, the merits of each project are evaluated using criteria that address 

broad transportation needs. The long-range transportation plan should guide the selection of 

projects that are funded in the transportation improvement program (TIP). In this way, when 

all projects compete for general funds, project selection criteria should prioritize projects 

according to a performance-based approach that aligns with the regional long-range 

transportation plan. One evaluation approach is to rank all projects using a set of common 

criteria, as well as mode-specific criteria (TSMO can be a category with mode-specific 

criteria). For example, out of a scale of 100, 70 points may be attributed to common criteria 

and 30 from mode-specific criteria. 

• A combination or hybrid approach – Some areas use a combination of set-aside funding for 

some types of projects, but also with the ability for TSMO projects to compete for general funds.

In addition, it is important to consider prioritization processes used for State and local funding 

sources, which may serve as a match for Federal funding or may be used entirely to fund 

operational improvements. For instance, the Northern Virginia Transportation Authority is 

responsible for prioritizing regional revenues for regional transportation improvement projects 

in the congested Northern Virginia region. Northern Virginia Transportation Authority uses a 

systematic project selection procedure, which includes preliminary screening (to ensure projects 

meet basic criteria for funding), development of a quantitative score for each project using 

weighted selection criteria, calculation of a Congestion Reduction Relative to Cost (CRRC) 

ratio, and consideration of qualitative factors. The quantitative scoring is conducted in relation to 

defined goals using a rating scale and the assignment of points to each project. The scoring assigns 

points based on an evaluation of how each project rates in terms of factors, such as improving the 

management and operation of existing facilities through technology applications, reducing vehicle 

miles traveled, and improving the safety of the transportation system.69 While the Northern Virginia 

Transportation Authority cannot directly fund operations, it can fund infrastructure related to 

operations, such as transit signal priority technology.

As another example, the San Diego Association of Governments administers funds from TransNet, 

a county-wide half-cent sales tax generated for local transportation projects, with a focus on 

addressing traffic congestion and improving mobility. The program provides funding for specific 

projects pulled from the Regional Transportation Plan; these were selected as high priority through 

public surveys and focus groups and were named in the program ballot measures approved by 

voters. In addition to these specific projects, some TransNet funds are allocated to the San Diego 

Association of Governments’ member jurisdictions for local street and road projects and awarded 

69 Northern Virginia Transportation Authority, Project Implementation Working Group Memorandum, NVTA FY2017 Program Project 

Selection Criteria, November 9, 2015. Available at: http://www.thenovaauthority.org/wp-content/uploads/XVI-Approval-of-FY2017-

Program-Project-Selection-Criteria1.pdf.
M O V I N G T O I M P L E M E N T AT I O N : T S M O W I T H I N C O R R D I R O S

4

87

to other projects through a competitive process. 

An Independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee 

is charged with ensuring that expenditures from 

the TransNet fund support the implementation 

of the program’s intent to reduce congestion and 

improve regional mobility.70

Prioritizing Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations 

Strategies for Funding

The goals and objectives of the long-range 

transportation plan should guide funding 

decisions and the selection of projects at the 

State and regional levels. Regions that place 

importance on system operations in the longrange transportation plan have a strong basis for 

allocating funding for TSMO strategies. 

Regional goals, objectives, and performance 

measures relevant to system operations and 

management provide a foundation for setting 

aside funding for TSMO strategies, developing a 

project prioritization process that enables TSMO 

strategies to be competitive for general funds, or 

a combination of both. In addition to the longrange transportation plan, some metropolitan 

planning organizations (MPOs) develop 

regional operations or ITS plans. These specific 

operations-focused plans can further advance 

the implementation of TSMO strategies. For 

example, the Puget Sound Regional Council,71

the MPO for the Seattle, Washington, area, has 

developed a regional ITS implementation plan 

that identifies 25 key arterial multijurisdictional 

corridors and the recommended ITS physical 

improvements for each corridor (e.g., signal 

improvements). The 25 corridors were selected 

using criteria, such as roadway characteristics 

(e.g., vehicle miles traveled and congestion 

70 San Diego Association of Governments, TransNet Extension 

Ordinance and Expenditure Plan. Available at: http://www.

sandag.org/uploads/projectid/projectid_341_8806.pdf. Additional 

information on TransNet at: http://www.sandag.org/?projectid=341

&fuseaction=projects.detail.

71 Puget Sound Regional Council, Regional ITS Implementation Plan, 

August 2009. Available at: http://www.psrc.org/transportation/its/

ritsip-docs/. 



Virginia Department of 

Transportation (VDOT) I-66 and I-95 

Corridor Projects: Phase-in Approach 

to Deploying Operational Strategies

The purpose of the I-66 active traffic 

management (ATM) initiative is to relieve 

congestion and improve safety on a 34-mile 

stretch of interstate in Northern Virginia. 

The project was prioritized by political 

leadership and awarded 30 million dollars to 

expedite implementation, through operational 

and technological strategies (roadway 

improvements and widening are not included 

in the initiative). Key transportation systems 

management and operations strategies selected 

include use of existing shoulders, dynamic 

messaging signs, improved monitoring of 

incidents and bottlenecks, adaptive ramp 

metering, and speed harmonization. The 

implementation schedule is determined by the 

funding available, which varies by fiscal year. 

As a result, the project planners developed 

a phased-in approach for implementing the 

project incrementally. 

VDOT’s strategy initially focused on facilities 

it has control over, rather than beginning with a 

large program that may never be implemented. 

For instance, the I-66 project is focusing on 

ATM, and then will explore broader efforts, 

such as converting the existing high-occupancy 

vehicle lanes to high-occupancy toll lanes. 

VDOT also is initially looking at active parking 

management on the I-95 corridor, focusing 

on its own commuter lots. Implementing the 

full corridor vision will require additional 

partnerships (e.g., working to install sensors 

at Virginia Railway Express parking lots to 

provide real-time parking information will 

involve additional coordination by multiple 

agencies, as well as funding agreements). 

For more information: http://www.virginiadot.

org/projects/northernvirginia/i-66_atms.asp.
88

M O V I N G T O I M P L E M E N T AT I O N : T S M O W I T H I N C O R R D I R O S

4

level), regional significance, and stakeholder significance (e.g., identified by transit agencies as an 

existing or planned route for bus rapid transit service or transit signal priority (TSP)). 

Aligning the corridor plan with the goals and objectives outlined in the long-range transportation 

plan and developing regional operations or ITS plans will improve the likelihood that the 

strategies identified in a corridor study receive funding for implementation. 

Prioritization of Transportation Systems Management and Operations Projects among 

All Project Types

The potential for TSMO projects to be selected in an open competition process is highly 

dependent on the selection criteria used for evaluation. Criteria that address mobility, reliability, 

and cost-effectiveness help TSMO initiatives compete effectively for funding. 

Project Prioritization Method at Genesee Transportation Council

As an example, the Genesee Transportation Council, the Metropolitan Planning 

Organization for the Rochester, New York area, ranks project using a set of common 

criteria (up to 100 points) and mode-specific criteria (up to 30 points). The set of common 

project selection criteria relate to the broader transportation goals and objectives identified 

in the Long Range Transportation Plan for the Genesee Finger-Lakes Region 2040, which 

include promoting efficient system management and operations, safety for motorized and 

non-motorized users, and accessibility and mobility options, among others. There also 

is a set of mode-specific criteria for transportation systems management and operations 

(TSMO) that focuses on outcomes (see Figure 20). The other mode specific categories are 

highway and bridge, public transportation, bicycle and pedestrian, and goods movement.72

Given the overall ranking of common and mode-specific criteria, TSMO projects 

are typically competitive with public transportation and highway projects. Genesee 

Transportation Council’s project evaluation criteria allow for smaller TSMO projects to be 

competitive for funding. 

System Management and Operations

1. Reduce travel times on major roadways 0 2 4 6 8 10

2. Reduce incident clearance times 0 2 4 6 8 10

3. Increase the productivity of regional transportation agencies/

providers (e.g., cost savings, times savings, etc.) 0 1 2 3 4 5

4. Support or advance existing and/or proposed ITS elements 0 1 2 3 4 5

72 Genesee Transportation Council, Long Range Transportation Plan for the Genesee-Finger Lakes Region 2040 (New York: June 2016). 

Available at: http://www.gtcmpo.org/LRTP. 



Source: Genesee Transportation Council’s Transportation Improvement Program Guidebook.

Figure 20. Chart. Genesee Transportation Council’s mode-specific project 

evaluation criteria for transportation systems management and operations projects. 

ITS = intelligent transportation systems
M O V I N G T O I M P L E M E N T AT I O N : T S M O W I T H I N C O R R D I R O S

4

89

Prioritization of Projects with Funding Dedicated to Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations Projects

When a region decides to set aside or dedicate funding for TSMO initiatives, criteria that link to 

key regional objectives are often used for prioritizing that funding. In addition, a TSMO plan can 

be used to prioritize funding. For instance, Metro, the Portland, Oregon, metropolitan area MPO 

developed a 10-year regional TSMO plan to guide operations investments in the region.73 The 

TSMO plan identifies two categories of actions: (1) those for regional programs and projects that 

require interagency cooperation, and (2) those for individual travel corridors and single-agency 

services. After the allocation of funding for the TSMO program in the metropolitan TIP, Metro 

then works with its regional operations collaborative group, called TransPort, to evaluate and select 

projects to receive TSMO program funds. Of these funds, one-third goes to region-wide projects and 

two-thirds go to corridor-specific projects. Corridor projects are organized under mobility corridor 

concepts, in which 24 unique, multimodal corridors in the Portland region connect major activity 

centers. Each corridor includes a combination of freeways and highways, parallel networks of arterial 

streets, regional multi-use paths, high-capacity transit, and frequent bus services that connect major 

activity centers, as defined by the regional growth concept.

Incrementally Funding Transportation Systems Management and 

Operations Strategies within a Corridor

Investments to support TSMO do not have to be implemented at one time as part of a large 

corridor capacity project. Recognizing the scarcity of funding and the value that different TSMO 

strategies can have, agencies can develop a multiphased approach to implement strategies 

incrementally. Phasing can have the benefit of not only allowing small investments to proceed 

more quickly, but also can recognize that some potentially effective strategies may require more 

partner cooperation and more complex institutional arrangements (see the Virginia Department 

of Transportation I-66 and I-95 Corridor Projects: Phase-In Approach to Deploying Operational 

Strategies for an example of this approach on page 2). 

Life-Cycle Costing for Transportation Systems Management and 

Operations Projects 

When evaluating TSMO strategies for a corridor, it is important to consider not just the initial 

investment required to deploy a strategy, but the costs incurred throughout the life of the strategy. 

Life-cycle costing is an approach for determining the true cost of a project – the total cost for 

acquiring, installing, configuring, operating, maintaining, and disposing of a system throughout 

the entity of its intended use. For TSMO strategies, costs associated with maintenance and dayto-day utilization (e.g., staff time, software) are particularly critical, because the ongoing costs of 

operations are typically critical to the effectiveness of the strategy.

Agencies typically do a good job estimating the cost of physical items associated with a strategy 

and the resources necessary to install them; however, over the life of a program, the costs to operate 

and maintain a system usually exceed the original investment. This can create challenges for 

agencies that did not prepare for the increased costs required to utilize such systems or it can lead to 

an unused investment. A system includes the people who are required to operate and manage it.

73 Metro, Regional Transportation System Management and Operations Plan, June 30, 2010. Available at: http://www.oregonmetro.gov/

regional-transportation-system-management-and-operations-plan.






90

M O V I N G T O I M P L E M E N T AT I O N : T S M O W I T H I N C O R R D I R O S

4

Depending on the agency and TSMO strategy, there are numerous facets of cost that can be 

included. In some agencies, years of research and development may be conducted before the 

initial roll-out of a system. The typical phases to be considered for life-cycle costing consist of:

• Installation: All costs associated with getting the system in place and ready for use, 

including purchasing, construction, configuration, process development, staffing, and other 

activities conducted prior to “Day One.” 

• Operations: Utilization of the system on a day-to-day basis. 

• Maintenance: Preventive and corrective maintenance necessary to keep the system 

working in accordance with performance measures.

• Technology Refresh: Replacement of individual components of the system as they wear 

out or become obsolete.

• Decommissioning: Any costs associated with end of life.

The methodologies agencies use for estimating lifecycle costs for TSMO strategies vary greatly 

in detail and scope. Some agencies maintain detailed spreadsheets tracking cost components such 

as operations, maintenance and repair, and upgrades over the useful life of a specific strategy or 

device, factoring in whether and for how long any of these components are covered by the product 

warranty (e.g., whether repairs are covered by a product manufacturer for the first several years of 

deployment). Other agencies use more general cost estimates, such as the overall staffing costs for 

operating all ITS devices managed by the agency (e.g., transportation management center staffing 

costs). Still others only factor capital infrastructure costs into their lifecycle estimates.

Key considerations when estimating lifecycle costs for TSMO include: 

• Factor in All Costs – When calculating lifecycle costs, it is important to factor in all of the 

costs required to operate and maintain a system. This includes labor and materials for 

day-to-day operations and repairs, as well as “hidden” costs, such as electricity and general 

facility costs for a TMC.

• Split Preventive and Emergency Maintenance – By tracking these two costs separately, 

agencies have found that preventive maintenance is more cost-effective and have been able 

to better incorporate it into their budgets rather than rely on costlier reactive repairs. This 

can also help an agency make a case for funding for upgrades before a system’s end of life.

• Conduct Benefit-Cost Analysis – When it comes to operating and maintaining their 

systems, agencies often focus on “keeping things working” without considering what 

benefits their system is actually providing to the customer. By regularly conducting a 

benefit-cost analysis of the system, agencies will be able to adjust their budget to cover the 

lifecycle costs for those components of the system that provide the biggest “bang for the 

buck.” This analysis can also be used to make a case to senior management and legislators 

for increased funding for TSMO.
M O V I N G T O I M P L E M E N T AT I O N : T S M O W I T H I N C O R R D I R O S

4

91

• Use Alternate Data Sources – Even if an agency has not been internally tracking 

operations and maintenance costs long enough to use as historical data to generate lifecycle 

costs, they can rely on examples from peers or Federal resources to generate preliminary 

lifecycle estimates. They could also gather several representative cases (e.g., camera, sign, 

or traffic signal installation), and develop scenarios to estimate lifecycle costs based on 

internal knowledge.

IMPLEMENTATION 

There are several frameworks and methods to consider when preparing for the implementation of 

an integrated TSMO approach within a corridor (Figure 21). This section provides an overview 

of those frameworks and methods that can be critically important for successful implementation of 

TSMO within corridors. 

Interagency Agreements

TSMO within corridors frequently requires close coordination to be successfully implemented 

among transportation and non-transportation agencies. Interagency agreements are used to 

facilitate needed collaboration 

across agencies for corridor 

operations activities such as 

traffic incident management, 

fiber sharing, special event 

management, traffic signal 

optimization, and joint purchasing. 

Interagency agreements have 

become increasingly important 

as a collaborative transportation 

operating environment has 

emerged in the past decade. 

Individual agencies are 

increasingly collaborating with 

other agencies for a variety of 

reasons: transportation needs 

exceed resource levels, customer 

expectations for seamless travel 

across jurisdictions and modes, 

and advances in technology that 

have opened up opportunities 

and needs for the integration of 

systems that facilitate operations 

activities. 



Figure 21. Diagram. The activity, “Implementing,” of 

the approach for planning for transportation systems 

management and operations within corridors.

Getting Started: Scoping the Effort 

and Building a Team

Gathering Information on Current and 

Future Context and Conditions

Identifying Operations Performance 

Needs, Gaps, and Opportunities

Programming for TSMO on Subareas

Implementing

Developing an Integrated 

TSMO Approach

• Identifying TSMO Strategies Based 

on Operations Objectives and 

Performance Needs

• Evaluating TSMO Strategies

• Selecting TSMO Strategies

Developing an Outcome-Oriented 

Operational Concept

• Subarea Goals

• Subarea Operations Objectives

• Performance Measures

Monitoring and Maintaining Level of Operations Over Time

TSMO=transportation systems management and operations. Implementing

TSMO = transportation systems management and operations. 
92

M O V I N G T O I M P L E M E N T AT I O N : T S M O W I T H I N C O R R D I R O S

4

Within a single agency, there is an institutional structure for performing operations and allocating 

resources on an ongoing basis, but as agencies within a region increasingly seek ways to improve 

their effectiveness and efficiency through working together, they need a mechanism to formalize 

and codify those relationships to preserve and encourage the collaboration. Agreements provide 

a framework to facilitate and guide the collaboration. They are critical to enabling many of the 

partnerships that are now in existence and avoid fragmented operations. As resources become 

involved in the collaboration, agreements can be used to provide a legal means to protect the 

participating agencies and preserve the intent of the agreement. Interagency agreements are an 

important mechanism for allowing government agencies to combine services and resources, or 

just follow the same policy direction without giving up their autonomy. Interagency agreements 

serve a valuable purpose in that they formalize the complex coordination that needs to take place 

to develop and implement multi-agency projects that have different stakeholders and priorities. 

There is not a standard naming convention or classification scheme for interagency agreements. 

Interagency agreements can be associated with three large groupings and refer to all types of 

agreements between government agencies. The first type of agreement is one that actually is not 

documented. The handshake agreement is a paperless agreement based on good faith. This may be 

appropriate for more informal collaborative efforts that do not require resource commitments from 

parties. The next two types of agreements are memoranda of understanding and intergovernmental 

agreements. The memorandum of understanding is generally less detailed and not legally binding, 

while the intergovernmental agreement is specific and binding for the signing parties.

As mentioned, general types of interagency agreements include:

• Handshake agreement.

◦ Paperless agreement based on good faith.

• Memorandum of understanding.

◦ Formal expression of intent by parties to engage in a specific course of action.

◦ Defines roles and responsibilities.

◦ Establishes common direction for achieving shared policy goals.

◦ Documents area of mutual understanding.

◦ Generally non-binding.

• Interagency or intergovernmental agreements.

◦ Legal pact between two or more units of government.

◦ Defines responsibility, function, and liability of each party.

◦ Includes any financial or other resource obligations. 

◦ More detailed procedures for agreed upon activities.

The interagency agreement should serve as the vehicle for establishing an agreed upon course of 

action relating to TSMO. The agreement can be used to:

• Define the program or project objectives.
M O V I N G T O I M P L E M E N T AT I O N : T S M O W I T H I N C O R R D I R O S

4

93

Figure 22. Graph. Corridor planning within the systems engineering “V” model.

Regional 

Architecture

Operations 

and 

Maintenance

Needs

Assessment

Concept 

Selection

Project 

Planning

Concept of 

Operations

System 

Requirements System 

High-Level Verication

Design & Integration

& Integration

Testing

Procurements & 

Installation

Life Cycle Time Line

Document Approval

Subsystem 

Verication

System 

Validation

Detailed 

Design

Subsystem 

Requirements

Initial 

Deployment

Systems 

Engineering 

Management 

Planning

Interfacing with 

Planning and the 

Regional 

Architecture

Phase -1

Concept 

Exploration and 

Benets Analysis

Phase 0

Project Planning 

and Concept of 

Operations 

Development

Phase1

System Denition 

and Design

Phase 2

System 

Development 

and 

Implementation

Phase 3

System 

Retirement/

Replacement

Phase 5

Validation, 

Operations and 

Maintenance, 

Changes & Upgrades

Phase 4

Retirement/

Replacement

Changes 

and 

Upgrades

Subarea planning for transportation 

systems management and operations 

interfaces with the systems 

engineering process in the left “wing”

• Identify stakeholders.

• Address roles and responsibilities for each stakeholder.

• Establish guidelines for how agencies will work together.

• Identify timelines. 

• Facilitate communication.

• Offer an opportunity to resolve any issues encountered during the life of the agreement.

Systems Engineering Process

Systems engineering is an organized approach intended to improve the success rate of system 

projects by reducing schedule and cost risks and ensuring that user needs and requirements are 

met. The approach can be applied to any of the TSMO strategies described in this Desk Reference. 

Systems engineering analysis is required for all ITS projects using Federal funds, per Title 23 

Code of Federal Regulations 940.11. Although there are many ways to represent the systems 

engineering process, the winged “V” (or “Vee”) model diagram shown in Figure 22 has been 

broadly adopted in the transportation industry.74

74 For more information, see: Federal Highway Administration, Systems Engineering for ITS: An Introduction for Transportation Professionals, 

FHWA-HOP-07-069, 2007. Available at: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/seitsguide/index.htm or Federal Highway Administration 

and California Department of Transportation, Systems Engineering Guidebook for ITS 3.0, 2009. Available at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/

cadiv/segb/. 



Source: Federal Highway Administration and California Department of Transportation
94

M O V I N G T O I M P L E M E N T AT I O N : T S M O W I T H I N C O R R D I R O S

4

The left wing of the “V” process shows the regional ITS architecture, needs assessment, and 

concept exploration that support initial identification and planning for a project. Corridor planning 

interfaces and feeds into the systems engineering process primarily in the left wing. The regional 

ITS architecture can be used to inform corridor planning and a concept of operations, both of 

which are described below. The operations objectives and performance measures identified during 

the planning phases should be applied throughout the systems engineering process and validated 

once the project reaches the operations and maintenance phase in the right wing of the “V” 

diagram. This approach provides a systematic method to plan and design systems to achieve the 

desired operations objectives.

Regional Intelligent Transportation Systems Architecture

A regional ITS architecture is a 

framework for institutional and 

technical integration in a particular 

region. Over 300 regional ITS 

architectures have been developed; 

therefore, it is likely that one is 

available in any region or at the 

Statewide level as a tool to support the 

corridor planning process. 

Figure 23 shows how the regional 

ITS architecture can provide support 

in an objectives-driven, performancebased approach to planning for 

operations on a corridor.

The regional ITS architecture helps 

answer important questions, such as:75

• What existing or planned 

management and operations 

strategies may be available to 

help achieve the corridor 

operations objectives?

• What stakeholders and 

collaborative relationships can 

be leveraged as part of the 

corridor planning process?

• What data is available to monitor 

transportation system 

performance and track 

progress toward corridor 

operations objectives?

75 For more information, see: Federal Highway Administration, Applying a Regional ITS Architecture to Support Planning for Operations: 

A Primer, FHWA-HOP-12-001 (Washington, DC: February 2012). Available at: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop12001/

index.htm.



Figure 23. Diagram. Regional intelligent transportation 

systems architecture use in corridor planning.
M O V I N G T O I M P L E M E N T AT I O N : T S M O W I T H I N C O R R D I R O S

4

95

• What parts of the ITS architecture’s operational concepts, functional requirements, or other 

contents can be used to support project development? 

Concept of Operations

Another crucial step in the systems engineering process is the completion of a concept of 

operations. Once TSMO strategies have been recommended as part of the needs assessment and 

concept-selection phase of a corridor planning process, the recommended strategies should be 

carried forward into a concept of operations, which provides a stakeholder view of the system 

being developed in a non-technical manner with a focus on user needs, activity-based operations 

objectives, performance measures, roles and responsibilities, and institutional agreements. The 

concept of operations provides the basis for developing the systems requirements, which is the 

next step in the “V” diagram.

A successful concept of operations includes these key activities:76

• Identify stakeholders – This includes anyone involved in or impacted by the project, such 

as owners, operators, maintainers, users, etc. Stakeholder identification is described in 

Chapter 3 of this Desk Reference and often uses the regional ITS architecture as a 

starting point.

• Develop a consensus on roles and responsibilities – This is typically done by working 

through operational scenarios for the corridor, such as normal system operation (e.g., traffic 

signal operations) and various fault-and-failure scenarios (e.g., major incident and 

communications failure). This process also helps identify institutional agreements that may be 

needed to design and operate the project (e.g., agreement for one agency to implement signal 

timing adjustments to another agency’s traffic signals on a multijurisdictional corridor).

• Define stakeholder needs – This captures a clear definition of stakeholder needs and 

differentiates between what is essential for system operations and wish-list items for 

“wants” and “nice-to-haves.” 

• Define performance measures – These measures should assess the effectiveness of the 

system in comparison to the operations objectives of the corridor. The performance 

measures provide the foundation for the system validation plan used in the systems 

engineering process.

The size of the concept of operations should be commensurate with the size and complexity of 

the TSMO strategies selected for the project corridor. A corridor with one or two simple TSMO 

strategies, particularly ones that expand on existing systems, may only require a document that is 

several pages. For example, the addition of TSP on an arterial corridor where TSP is already used 

by the transit agency within corridors in neighboring jurisdictions may require only a reference 

to other concepts of operations, but the concept of operations document will focus on the roles 

and responsibilities for the subject corridor. A larger, more complex corridor project, such as 

instituting integrated corridor management (ICM) on a freeway corridor, will require a much more 

extensive concept of operations document to capture numerous systems and stakeholders.

76 For more information, see: Federal Highway Administration, Systems Engineering for ITS: An Introduction for Transportation Professionals, 

FHWA-HOP-07-069 (Washington, DC: January 2007). Available at: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/seitsguide/index.htm.


96

M O V I N G T O I M P L E M E N T AT I O N : T S M O W I T H I N C O R R D I R O S

4

Designing for Operations 

The success of the corridor TSMO strategies to be implemented depends in large part on the 

design of the roadway or transit infrastructure. Examples of roadway design treatments that are 

important for improving the management and operation of the facility include:

• Median crossovers, which allow for incident responders to quickly access the opposite side 

of the road.

• Crash investigation sites, which reduce impacts associated with collecting incident 

information.

• Snow fences, which reduce blowing snow and drifts on the road.

• Emergency access between interchanges, which decreases response time to incidents.

• Bus turnouts, which ease arterial congestion.

Ideally, planning for TSMO within a corridor would occur in conjunction with the initial 

construction of the corridor’s roads or rails so that TSMO strategies could be factored into the 

infrastructure design. For example, truck-only toll lanes or median breaks and crash investigation 

sites can be included as part of the road from the beginning. Even after the road or rail is initially 

built, TSMO planners and operators can take advantage of opportunities to influence design 

during reconstruction or maintenance projects. For example, laying fiber optic cable could be 

considered during reconstruction. 

The effectiveness of TSMO strategies also relies on what type, how, and where the ITS and other 

equipment is deployed to support operations. These physical components that enable TSMO 

strategies include speed harmonization gantries, variable message signs, or traffic surveillance 

equipment. The current and future operational use of ITS equipment should help drive the design 

decisions. For example, the installation of variable message signs in locations prior to significant 

route or modal decision points for travelers or common incident areas supports relevant, 

actionable traveler information to the public.

The FHWA document, Designing for Transportation Management and Operations: A Primer, 

introduces the concept of designing for operations, describes tools and institutional approaches to 

assist transportation agencies in considering operations in their design procedures, and points out 

some specific design considerations for various operations strategies.77 The tools and approaches 

to aid in designing for operations may include checklists for designers to reference operational 

considerations, formation of a technical advisement committee with operations expertise, or 

agency policies that instruct designers on how to incorporate operational elements within the 

project development process. These will benefit multiple practitioner groups, including planners, 

project designers, scoping engineers, maintenance and traffic managers, and contract development 

personnel. This primer can be consulted by corridor TSMO teams to learn more about how to 

integrate design elements that facilitate TSMO strategies within corridors into roadway design.

77 Federal Highway Administration, Designing for Transportation Management and Operations: A Primer, FHWA-HOP-13-013 (Washington, 

DC: February 2013). Available at: http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop13013/index.htm.


M O V I N G T O I M P L E M E N T AT I O N : T S M O W I T H I N C O R R D I R O S

4

97

Life-Cycle Planning – Monitoring and Maintaining Level of Operations 

Over Time

To fully realize the value of an objectives-driven, 

performance-based approach, it is necessary to assess 

how well the corridor strategies meet the objectives 

immediately after implementation and over the time 

the strategy is in use. The monitoring and evaluation 

feedback loop involves several elements (Figure 24):78

• Evaluate the effectiveness of implemented 

strategies – Develop a corridor evaluation plan 

during the planning or design process, and put 

the plan into action following implementation. 

Figure 25 provides an example evaluation plan 

with key steps during design, data collection and 

validation, data archiving and transformation, 

data analysis, and performance measure 

reporting. Some regions already have established 

performance measures and evaluation plans in 

place through the regional or metropolitan 

transportation plan, ITS or TSMO plan, 

congestion management process, or corridor 

planning process. These may be tailored to the 

corridor level. 

• Report corridor performance – Inform 

decisionmakers and stakeholders about trends in 

corridor system performance. Highlight project 

benefits for any objectives that have been met or 

exceeded. For under-performing objectives, 

proceed to the next step.

• Assess and refine operations objectives – If 

measured corridor performance falls short of 

meeting a desired objective, consider refining the 

objective or contemplate alternate strategies that 

may meet the objective.

This process should be repeated on a regular cycle, 

perhaps in conjunction with other regional planning 

cycles, to identify any issues and address them to stop the 

degradation of corridor performance.

78 Federal Highway Administration, Advancing Metropolitan Planning for Operations: An Objectives-Driven, Performance-Based 

Approach- A Guidebook, FHWA-HOP-10-026 (Washington, DC: February 2010). Available at: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/

fhwahop10026/.



Getting Started: Scoping the Effort 

and Building a Team

Gathering Information on Current and 

Future Context and Conditions

Identifying Operations Performance 

Needs, Gaps, and Opportunities

Programming for TSMO on Subareas

Implementing

Developing an Integrated 

TSMO Approach

• Identifying TSMO Strategies Based 

on Operations Objectives and 

Performance Needs

• Evaluating TSMO Strategies

• Selecting TSMO Strategies

Developing an Outcome-Oriented 

Operational Concept

• Subarea Goals

• Subarea Operations Objectives

• Performance Measures

Monitoring and Maintaining Level of Operations Over Time TSMO=transportation systems management and operations.

Monitoring and Maintaining Level of Operations Over Time

Figure 24. Diagram. The activity, 

“Monitoring and Maintaining 

Level of Operations over Time,” 

of the approach for planning for 

transportation systems management 

and operations within corridors.

TSMO = transportation systems management and operations.
98

M O V I N G T O I M P L E M E N T AT I O N : T S M O W I T H I N C O R R D I R O S

4

79

79 Adapted from Oregon Department of Transportation and Metro, Portland Multimodal Arterial Performance Management Implementation 

Guidance Document, February 2013. Available at: http://www.oregonmetro.gov/sites/default/files/Arterial_Measures_Guide.pdf.

• Identify corridor performance measures (based on corridor objectives developed during 

the planning process) and associated data needs (often determined during the systems 

engineering process).

• Determine the most appropriate technology to collect the required data.

• Procure data sources and install field devices and communications as necessary.

• Verify the accuracy of the data collected.

• Correct mechanical data errors (e.g., failed detection).

• Smooth the data to adjust for gaps in data.

• Create methods to automatically flag data anomalies and failed detectors.

• Collect data for corridor (to a central location if possible).

• If needed, connect devices to central system.

• If needed, upgrade central system data acquisition and storage capabilities.

• Validate.

• Transform the data into a usable database.

• Archive the data at the highest precision available.

• Geocode the data so that it can be mapped easily.

• Upload and save the databases to a local or regional data warehouse.

• Create standardized reports and visuals for performance measures.

• Allow users to pull raw data where applicable.

• Allow users to query the data by location, time period, and data resolution.

• Allow data to be cross-referenced (e.g., linking speeds, weather conditions, collisions, or 

other factors to traffic conditions).

Design

Collect 

Data

Validate

Archive 

and 

Transform

Analyze 

and 

Report

Figure 25. Diagram. Example process for automated 

corridor performance measurement.80
99

TOOLBOX FOR EFFECTIVE TSMO PLANNING

5

CHAPTER 5. TOOLBOX FOR EFFECTIVE 

TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT AND 

OPERATIONS PLANNING 

There are a variety of tools that can support transportation systems management and operations 

(TSMO) planning on a corridor, and many of them have already been discussed prior to this chapter, 

including analytical tools and simulation models, the regional intelligent transportation system (ITS) 

architecture, and archived operations data. (Note: The word “tools” is used in this chapter in the 

broadest sense – anything that can be used to support and enhance TSMO planning on a corridor.) 

This chapter offers readers a “toolbox” of analysis tools and planning techniques that can be applied 

when planning for TSMO within corridors. For several of the tools described, there is at least one 

additional Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) guide that can give readers a much greater 

understanding of how the tool may be applied. This chapter begins with two planning techniques and 

then moves into short reference sheet-style descriptions of common types of analysis tools. Following 

the reference sheets are overviews of several specific applications that planners and operators can use 

to directly address analysis needs while planning for TSMO within corridors. 

SCENARIO PLANNING FOR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS 

MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS WITHIN CORRIDORS

Scenario planning is an important enhancement to planning for TSMO within a corridor. 

It can be used to incorporate the consideration of factors that are difficult to predict, such 

as evolving technology, climate change, shifting traveler behavior, financial uncertainty, 

failing infrastructure, natural and man-made events, and other unknowns into planning and 

programming decisions. Scenario planning supports the exploration and consideration of 

different future conditions along a corridor.

Scenario planning is an approach to strategic planning that uses alternate narratives of plausible 

futures (or future states) to play out decisions in an effort to make more informed choices and 

create plans for the future. It engages participants in considering the “what ifs” of tomorrow, 

whether those are desirable or undesirable outcomes. The simple task of imagining a different 

future can help to challenge the status quo and encourage creative thinking, which ultimately can 

lead to the development of more thoughtful and resilient plans. Scenarios are developed to enable 

participants to test out possible decisions, analyze their impacts given the conditions in each 

scenario, and come to agreement on a preferred course of action. 

Scenario planning follows many of the same planning activities as described in Chapter 3, 

beginning with scoping the effort, examining current conditions and trends, and then identifying 

goals and objectives. In scenario planning, the leaders and stakeholders would then develop 

multiple scenarios or descriptions of possible futures, identify the strategies needed to realize each 

of the scenarios, and then analyze the impacts of each scenario against reaching their objectives. 

The scenario planning approach to TSMO is shown in Figure 26. 
100

TOOLBOX FOR EFFECTIVE TSMO PLANNING

5

Figure 26. Diagram. Phases of scenario planning for transportation systems 

management and operations. 

Identify, Prepare, and Refine Analysis Tools

Stakeholder Involvement

How should we get started?

Convene a broad set of relevant stakeholders and scope the effort:

 What do we want to accomplish/address? 

 What is the geographic area and timeframe?

 What are the pressing issues or desired areas of change in operations?

 Who should be involved in these discussions?

 Focal issue and major driving forces influencing the focal issue should 

arise during this step.

Output: Work plan, 

operations stakeholder 

group, focal issue, 

driving forces.

1

Output: Baseline 

information on trends, 

current performance, 

institutional context.

Where are we now?

 Establish the baseline information and data needed to identify trends, issues, 

and opportunities for relevant time horizons (usually 10-30 yrs).

 Data should include travel time reliability, delay, and incident or event 

management statistics as well as factors influencing travel demand. 

 Current operating policy, transportation systems management and 

operations (TSMO)-related institutional collaboration and organizational 

capabilities for the area. 

2

Output: Draft 

operations goals, 

objectives, 

performance measures 

and targets, key local 

factors.

Where do we want to go?

 Establish desired operations goals, objectives, and performance targets in 

light of transportation goals from local, metropolitan planning organization 

(MPO), department of transportation (DOT) plans and policies. 

 Identify performance measures.

 Identify key local factors that could negatively impact reaching those 

desired conditions. 

3

What could the future look like?

 Develop scenario logic (based on driving forces) and create alternative 

scenarios to envision, examine, or explore how the transportation system 

should or could operate under different conditions. 

 Identify TSMO strategies or policies to best achieve future description in 

each scenario.

4

Output: Scenarios 

and TSMO 

strategies or 

policies.

What impacts will scenarios have?

 Alternative scenarios are evaluated according to the operations 

objectives and performance targets identified in step 3, using analytic 

tools, models, and stakeholder input. 

 Iterative consideration of potential outcomes helps stakeholders to refine 

operations objectives and performance targets.

5

Output: Estimated 

impacts of TSMO 

strategies or policies 

for each scenario. 

How will we reach our desired future?

 Stakeholders apply insights from scenario analysis to create a preferred 

scenario or strategic direction to guide operations planning and 

programming.

 Stakeholders develop an action plan to implement the preferred scenario 

or strategic direction, linking to operations objectives. 

6

Output: Action plan, 

TSMO projects, 

programs.

Data Collection

Source: Federal Highway Administration, Advancing Transportation Systems Management and Operations Through Scenario Planning, 

FHWA-16-016 (Washington, DC: 2016). Available at: http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop16016/index.htm.
101

TOOLBOX FOR EFFECTIVE TSMO PLANNING

5

As an example of scenario planning for TSMO within a corridor, the planning team could be 

looking to achieve the following goal and objectives for a 40-mile corridor from a rural area to a 

very large metropolitan area: 

• Goal: Provide efficient and reliable travel along the I-21 corridor.

• Operations Objectives:

◦ Efficiency: Reduce the per-capita hours of delay along the I-21 corridor by X percent by 

2024.

◦ Reliability: Reduce the average planning time index for the I-21 corridor by X points by 

2024.

The I-21 corridor stakeholders must then create scenarios based on prioritizing modal options or 

prioritizing route and time of day travel options. The first scenario would be created in response 

to the question: “What does efficient and reliable travel along the I-21 corridor look like if 

one emphasizes and encourages the use of multiple modes?” The second scenario would be a 

response to the question: “What does efficient and reliable travel along the I-21 corridor look like 

if one emphasizes and prioritizes the use of route and time-of-day travel options?” Assuming the 

scenarios are written from the perspective of two commuters, the TSMO strategies that would 

achieve each of the futures provided in the scenarios would be identified and evaluated to see 

what impact they would have on the operations objectives. During the final step of the scenario 

planning process, the results of the evaluation would be presented to the stakeholders, who would 

provide extensive feedback on both the scenarios as well as the predicted impacts on the measures 

and goals of interest. Stakeholders would then select or combine elements of each scenario 

together to create a preferred scenario that encompasses a comprehensive vision for the future 

operations of the corridor.

This is only one example of the many ways scenario planning can be applied to planning for 

TSMO within corridors. Generally, there are three types of scenario planning that reflect the 

different conditions and purposes for which scenario planning may be used. For example, scenario 

planning for TSMO within a corridor may be used to identify the most effective package of 

TSMO strategies given an expected change in conditions on the corridor (trend-based type). 

Alternatively, scenario planning may be used to build consensus on operations objectives by 

examining multiple desired future conditions and the strategies needed to support those conditions 

(normative type). Finally, scenario planning can be used to examine different scenarios in response 

to uncontrollable or unknown future conditions (e.g., to better understand the impacts of global 

trade changes, extreme weather, etc.). The purpose of this is to guide stakeholders in identifying 

policies, plans, and strategies that can work best under all extreme conditions (exploratory type).

Additional information on how to use scenario planning to advance TSMO can be found in the 

FHWA’s Advancing Transportation Systems Management and Operations Through Scenario 

Planning.

80

80 Federal Highway Administration, Advancing Transportation Systems Management and Operations Through Scenario Planning, 

FHWA-16-016 (Washington, DC: 2016). Available at: http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop16016/index.htm.
102

TOOLBOX FOR EFFECTIVE TSMO PLANNING

5

USE OF ARCHIVED OPERATIONS DATA 

Archived operations data is a critical tool in an objectives-driven, performance-based planning 

approach to TSMO within corridors. Archived operations data is information that is collected and 

stored in support of day-to-day efforts to monitor and manage the transportation system. Archived 

operations data can include traffic, transit, bike, pedestrian, construction, and weather information 

that is usually collected in real time by ITS infrastructure, such as in-pavement inductive loop 

detectors, radar detectors, remote traffic microwave sensors, Bluetooth, and EZPass or other 

unique identification tag readers. It also includes incident or event information entered into 

electronic logs by transportation or public safety personnel. Transportation planners at the State, 

metropolitan, and local level are finding that, with archived operations data, they are able to do 

more, be more accurate, and solve more problems than ever before—relying less on assumptions 

and modeled data, and making more effective, less costly decisions.

There are several advantages to having archived operations data available:

• Provides a more accurate picture of system performance.

• Opens up new types of analyses to support the planning process.

• Enables more advanced modeling.

The following are examples of significant uses for archived operations data in planning for 

TSMO within corridors:

• Monitoring and evaluating system performance in support of identifying 

performance issues/needs, project prioritization, and reporting. Archived travel time 

data forms the basis for computing a wide variety of congestion, reliability, and freight 

performance measures.

• Setting performance targets. Archived data provides information on past trends that are 

useful in establishing targets.

• Evaluation of completed projects. A key component of performance-based planning is the 

ability to conduct evaluations of completed projects and to use the results to make more 

informed investment decisions in the future.

• Trip-based mobility monitoring and accessibility. Although archived origin-destination 

travel time data is just becoming available, it is expected to become more prevalent as 

technology evolves. Origin-destination data makes it possible to monitor the performance 

of trips taken by travelers.

The FHWA has produced a desk reference (Use of Archived Operations Data in Planning) on 

applying archived operations data to planning aimed toward TSMO planners and their planning 

partners. This desk reference raises planners’ awareness of the opportunities afforded through 

archived operations data and provides guidance on how to take advantage of that data to expand 

and improve planning practices.81 It also identifies new and innovative applications for this data 

in planning. The desk reference is intended to help planners and their operations data partners 

overcome the barriers to obtaining and using data. 

81 Federal Highway Administration, Use of Archived Operations Data in Planning, FHWA-HOP-16-017 (Washington, DC: 2016). Available 

Summer 2016 at: http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop16016/index.htm.
103

TOOLBOX FOR EFFECTIVE TSMO PLANNING

5

ANALYSIS TOOLS AVAILABLE FOR TRANSPORTATION 

SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS PLANNING 

WITHIN CORRIDORS

Following are the reference sheets for several types of analysis tools that can be applied for TSMO 

planning within corridors. The types of analysis tools covered are travel demand models, sketch 

planning tools, analytic/deterministic tools, simulation tools, and dynamic traffic assignment 

(DTA) methods.
104

TOOLBOX FOR EFFECTIVE TSMO PLANNING

5

Travel Demand Models

Description Travel demand models are widely used to compare or screen alternatives by 

using origin-destination patterns, demand-to-capacity ratios, differences in 

percent volumes, and rough estimates of travel times. These models consider 

land use, demographics, mode choice, and the transportation system (roadway 

and transit).

Examples • Types of models:

◦ Three-step models (no mode choice).

◦ Four-step models.

◦ Activity-based models.

◦ Mesoscale models

Software: Cube, Emme, and TransCAD.

Planning for 

Operations 

Uses for 

Corridors

• Supply data (e.g., travel forecast inputs) to sketch-planning tools, simulation 

models, and post-processors that can analyze corridor operations strategies.

• Use traffic origin-destination patterns or volumes for input into corridor 

simulation models.

• Provide changes in peak-hour turning volumes at major corridor 

intersections and freeway ramp volumes through refined (subarea) travel 

demand models.

• Extract tables with origin-destination for trips in a focus area as required 

input for microscopic corridor simulation models.

• Screen and evaluate corridor strategies.

• Assess mode choice and travel pattern/volume impacts.

• Capture linked trips (e.g., home-to-work-to-shopping-to-home), smart 

growth, walk/bike trips for parcel-level models, and more accurate origindestination estimates for use as inputs to simulation models.

Advantages • Validates models available for most metropolitan areas.

• Evaluates corridor impacts.

• Is consistent with current planning practices.

• Is capable of estimating mode choice and travel pattern change reductions. 

due to transit and smart growth.

Challenges • Limited ability to analyze operational strategies.

• High initial costs.

• Typical travel day does not capture incident, weather, work zones, and 

special event conditions.
105

TOOLBOX FOR EFFECTIVE TSMO PLANNING

5

Sketch Planning Tools

Description Sketch-planning tools provide quick order-of-magnitude estimates with 

minimal input data (e.g., traffic volumes and speeds) in support of preliminary 

screening assessments. These tools are appropriate early in the planning 

process when prioritizing large numbers of projects or strategies for more 

detailed evaluation. Tools are often spreadsheets or simple databases that are 

based on built-in assumptions of impacts and benefits for various strategies. 

Data from sketch-planning tools, such as Florida ITS Evaluation Tool 

(FITSEVAL), can be integrated with travel demand model data to provide 

analysis of operational strategies.

Examples • Tool for Operations Benefit CostAnalysis (TOPS-BC).

• ITS Benefit/Cost Database.

• California Life-Cycle Benefit/Cost Analysis Model (Cal-B/C).

• Florida ITS Evaluation Tool (FITSEVAL).

• QuickZone (work zone analysis tool).

• Results from other corridor before-and-after studies.

Planning for 

Operations 

Uses for 

Corridors

• Evaluate policy-based and corridor TSMO strategies.

• Screen a large number of potential TSMO strategies and obtain a general 

idea of whether a strategy is worth investigating further.

• Generate expected impacts of TSMO projects that can be compared with 

other potential investments, such as traditional roadway capacity 

improvements.

Advantages • Low cost.

• Fast analysis times.

• Uses readily accessible data.

• View of the “big picture.”

• Some tools expressly for evaluating policy-based or corridor strategies.

• May be integrated with travel demand model.

Challenges • Limited in scope, robustness, and presentation capabilities.

• Results constrained by quality of input data and built-in assumptions of 

impacts.

• Not always transferable between agencies.
106

TOOLBOX FOR EFFECTIVE TSMO PLANNING

5

Analytical/Deterministic Tools

Description Most analytical/deterministic tools implement the procedures of the Highway 

Capacity Manual. The following summarize the Highway Capacity Manual 

procedures:

• Closed-form: A practitioner inputs data and parameters and, after a sequence 

of analytical steps, the Highway Capacity Manual procedures produce a 

single answer.

• Macroscopic: Input and output deal with average performance during a 

15-minute or a 1-hour analytical period.

• Deterministic: Any given set of inputs will always yield the same answer

• Static: Predict average operating conditions over a fixed time period and do 

not deal with transitions in operations from one system state to another.

Analytical/deterministic tools quickly predict capacity, density, speed, delay, 

and queuing on a variety of transportation facilities.

Examples • Highway Capacity Software (HCS).

• Traffix. 

Planning for 

Operations 

Uses for 

Corridors

• Analyze the performance of isolated or small-scale transportation facilities.

• Examine impacts under different demand conditions.

• Assess a range of traffic control strategies (e.g., uncontrolled, stop-controlled, 

signalized).

Advantages • Predicts impacts for isolated or small-scale transportation facilities.

• Is widely accepted.

• Provides repeatable results.

Challenges • Limited ability to assess many TSMO strategies.

• Limited ability to analyze broader corridor network or system effects.

• Limited output of performance measures.
107

TOOLBOX FOR EFFECTIVE TSMO PLANNING

5

Simulation Tools

Description Simulation tools use a variety of formulas and algorithms to simulate 

travel behavior to analyze operations of traffic and transit to conduct 

needs assessments, alternatives analysis, environmental impact studies, 

and operations planning. These tools may be deterministic or incorporate 

stochastic sampling or perturbation. Simulation tools can be classified as:

• Macroscopic: Simulates average flow, speed, and density on a segment-bysegment basis.

• Mesoscopic: Simulates individual vehicles based on average segment speed 

and density.

• Microscopic: Simulates detailed movement of individual vehicles 

throughout the network.

Examples • Macroscopic: PASSER, TSIS-CORSIM (includes TRANSYT-7F), and 

VISTA.

• Mesoscopic: DYNASMART-P, DynusT, DynaMIT, TransModeler, 

TRANSIMS, Aimsun, and Dynameq.

• Microscopic: TSIS-CORSIM, Paramics, VISSIM, TransModeler, and 

Aimsun.

Planning for 

Operations 

Uses for 

Corridors

• Evaluate a range of improvements and strategies at corridor levels.

• Conduct sensitivity testing to reflect variability in traffic demands or 

incident severity.

• Refine project scope and design.

• Support environmental assessment.

Advantages • Simulates operations strategies to varying degrees.

• Offers extensive and comprehensive model outputs.

• Incorporates traffic variations as observed in the field.

• Provides dynamic analysis of incidents and real-time diversion patterns 

when coupled with dynamic traffic assignment (DTA).

• Analyzes complex conditions and multimodal interaction.

• Offers visual presentation opportunities.

Challenges • Expertise needed to develop and apply models.

• Demanding data and computing requirements.

• Resource requirements may limit network size and number of analysis 

scenarios.

• Calibration may be time consuming.

• Extensive outputs may require development of separate post processing tools.

• Static network assignment.
108

TOOLBOX FOR EFFECTIVE TSMO PLANNING

5

Dynamic Traffic Assignment

Description DTA is a simulation tool that assigns vehicles to paths based on traffic 

conditions instead of pre-defined routes using origin-destination data and 

link path travel time equilibrium. Simulated vehicles can adapt to prevailing 

conditions, change start times, choose alternative routes, or change modes. 

DTA often involves a combination of model types representing multiresolution modeling. The following are requirements for DTA:

• Travel demand model (highly recommended).

• Data for development and calibration.

• Origin-destination estimation technique.

• Transportation modeling software with DTA capabilities.

• Appropriate transportation modeling skill.

Examples • DYNASMART-P.

• DynusT.

• DynaMIT.

• Dynameq.

Planning for 

Operations 

Uses for 

Corridors

• Simulate the impact of incidents/events.

• Evaluate operational strategies that are likely to induce a temporal or spatial 

pattern shift of traffic.

• Estimate travel behavior from various demand/supply changes and 

interactions.

• Conduct analyses involving incidents, construction work zones, active 

transportation and demand management (ATDM) strategies, integrated 

corridor management (ICM) strategies, managed lanes, congestion pricing, etc.

Advantages • More realism in estimating traveler response and therefore operations.

• Wider range of strategies can be more accurately tested.

Challenges • Is resource intensive.

• Requires skill sets of both travel demand modeling and simulation modeling.
109

TOOLBOX FOR EFFECTIVE TSMO PLANNING

5

Work Zone Traffic Analysis Tools 

Work zone management is essential element to a comprehensive approach to managing travel 

within corridors because of the frequent maintenance and major rehabilitation projects that 

are required as the infrastructure continues to age. Work zone traffic analysis enables agencies 

to evaluate the mobility and safety impacts of a transportation construction, maintenance, or 

rehabilitation project and make more informed decisions regarding when and how the projects 

should take place. There are a variety of work zone modeling and simulation tools to support work 

zone traffic analyses ranging from the simple to complex.

Work zone traffic analysis can assist in three primary types of decisions:82

• Scheduling decisions ‒ When the work zone activity should occur in terms of time of day, 

days of the week, or time of year and when the project phases should occur.

• Application decisions ‒ How the construction or maintenance should be done, such as 

what technique can be used to minimize mobility and safety impacts.

• Transportation management plan decisions ‒ How traffic will be managed during a work 

zone including traveler information, temporary traffic control devices, and other strategies.

The traffic analysis tools to support work zones include tools in several of the analysis tool 

categories previously mentioned including sketch-planning tools, travel demand models, and 

microscopic simulation models. Many tools that were not specifically designed to support work 

zone traffic analysis can be used in that capacity, but there also are many tools that have been built 

to address the specific needs of work zone related analysis. The FHWA Office of Operations Work 

Zone Management Program maintains a list of many of the available tools on its website.83

Two of the more common tools for work zone traffic analysis are QuickZone and the Construction 

Analysis for Pavement Rehabilitation Strategies (CA4PRS). 

QuickZone is a tool that compares the traffic impacts for work zone mitigation strategies and 

estimates the costs, traffic delays, and potential backups associated with these impacts. QuickZone 

assists State and local traffic, construction, operations, and planning staff, and construction 

contractors to accomplish the following:

• Quantify delay along corridors due to capacity reductions in work zones.

• Examine the impacts of alternative project phasing plans on delay. 

• Support tradeoff analyses between construction costs and delay costs.

• Identify the impacts of construction staging by location, time of day, and time of year.

• Evaluate travel demand management strategies.

• Help build incentives for completing work. 

• Support impact analysis efforts encouraged by the Work Zone Safety and Mobility Rule.84

82 Federal Highway Administration, Traffic Analysis Toolbox Volume XII: Work Zone Traffic Analysis – Applications and Decision 

Framework, FHWA-HOP-12-009 (Washington, DC: 2012). Available at: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop12009/index.htm.

83 Federal Highway Administration, Work Zone and Traffic Analysis Tools Web page. Available at: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/Wz/traffic_

analysis/tools.htm.

84 Federal Highway Administration, QuickZone Web page. Available at: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/wz/traffic_analysis/quickzone/index.htm.


110

TOOLBOX FOR EFFECTIVE TSMO PLANNING

5

The Construction Analysis for Pavement Rehabilitation Strategies (CA4PRS) is a tool that 

allows users to conduct an integrated analysis of project alternatives including pavement design, 

construction logistics, and traffic operations options. It helps State departments of transportation 

(DOTs) and contractors make effective scheduling decisions that minimize traffic delay, extend 

the service life of pavement, and reduce agency costs.85

Application to Planning for Transportation Systems Management and Operations 

within Corridors

Work zone traffic analysis tools help planners and operators reduce the impacts of transportation 

infrastructure projects within a corridor. Specifically, these tools help transportation agencies in: 

• Allocating resources more effectively before and during a road or bridge construction, 

maintenance, or rehabilitation project.

• Improving the management and schedule coordination of multiple projects within a corridor 

or on parallel corridors so as to minimize overall impacts.

• Developing methods to monitor and mitigate work zone impacts during construction.

• Conducting performance assessment pre- and post-construction that leads to improved 

work zone policies, procedures, and practices in the future. 

Tool for Operations Benefit CostAnalysis 

The Tool for Operations Benefit CostAnalysis (TOPS-BC) offers a means to determine whether 

investment in a given TSMO strategy is justifiable in comparison to investment in a traditional 

capital infrastructure project. The tool was created by the FHWA as a sketch-planning benefit-cost 

analysis tool to support preliminary screening and initial prioritization of TSMO strategies. The 

TOPS-BC tool has four key functions: 

• Allows users to look up the expected range of TSMO strategy impacts based on a database 

of observed impacts in other areas. 

• Offers guidance and a selection tool for users to identify appropriate benefit-cost methods 

and tools based on the input needs of their analysis. 

• Supports the ability to estimate life-cycle costs of a wide range of TSMO strategies. 

• Enables users to estimate benefits using a spreadsheet-based sketch-planning approach and 

the comparison with estimated strategy costs. 

As a sketch-planning tool, TOPS-BC allows users to quickly understand typical benefits for 

a range of TSMO strategies and then estimate the benefit-cost ratios for each of those TSMO 

strategies. The tool also provides a suggested list of analysis tools whose use depends on user 

selected criteria, such as the level of confidence required, which TSMO strategies are being 

investigated, key measures of effectiveness, and a few other filters. 

The TOPS B-C tool is built on a Microsoft Excel platform and can be downloaded from the FHWA’s 

Planning for Operations website at: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/plan4ops/topsbctool/index.htm.

TOPS-BC is a companion resource to the FHWA’s Operations Benefit/Cost Desk Reference.

85 Federal Highway Administration, Work Zone and Traffic Analysis Tools Web page. Available at: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/Wz/traffic_

analysis/tools.htm.




111

TOOLBOX FOR EFFECTIVE TSMO PLANNING

5

Application to Planning for Transportation Systems Management and Operations 

within Corridors

TOPS B-C is a useful tool for analyzing TSMO strategies identified in corridor planning. The 

strategies included in TOPS B-C are commonly applied in corridors. Table 5 lists those TSMO 

strategies included in the TOPS-BC tool and indicates whether typical impacts or benefits are 

provided for the strategy, as well as the availability of more detailed calculation tools for costs 

and benefits. 

Table 5. Strategies included in the Tool for Operations Benefit-Cost Analysis.

TSMO 

Category TSMO Strategy

Typical 

Impacts Cost Benefit

Traveler 

Information

Dynamic message signs.

Highway advisory radio.

Pre-trip traveler information.

Other traveler information strategies.

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes 

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Traffic 

Signal 

Coordination 

Systems

Preset timing.

Traffic actuated.

Central control.

Transit signal priority.

Emergency signal priority.

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

Ramp 

Metering 

Systems

Central control.

Traffic actuated.

Preset timing.

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Other 

Freeway 

Systems

Traffic incident management. Yes Yes Yes

Advanced 

Traffic 

Demand 

Management

Speed harmonization.

Employer-based traveler demand 

management.

Hard shoulder running.

High-occupancy toll lanes.

Road weather management.

Work zone.

Advanced public transit systems.

Congestion pricing.

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

Supporting 

Strategies

Traffic management center.

Loop detection.

Closed circuit television cameras.

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

No

TSMO = transportation systems management and operations.


112

TOOLBOX FOR EFFECTIVE TSMO PLANNING

5

Samples of Use 

As noted above, the tool exists as a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet with several tabs and color coded 

cells that clearly identify where the user needs to provide information but also allows the user to 

modify the spreadsheet as needed. 

TOPS-BC calculates an annualized cost for each strategy that incorporates the useful life of the 

equipment, the replacement cost, and the annual operations and maintenance cost. The net present 

value of implementing the strategy also is provided, and while default values for the discount rate 

and time horizon are provided, the user can change those values.

The cost components for each TSMO strategy are broken down into two categories: the one-time 

costs to create the backbone structure for the strategy, such as software and system integration; 

and the incremental cost of each additional installation, such as additional loops, weather stations, 

and dynamic message signs. Default costs are included in the spreadsheet for all of the cost 

components. The user simply needs to enter the number of infrastructure deployments and the 

number of incremental deployments. 

The annual benefits calculated by TOPS-BC focus on travel time savings for both recurring and 

non-recurring congestion, energy/fuel savings, and savings due to reduced crashes. A tab marked 

“Parameters” includes all of the assumptions used to calculate the benefits, such as:

• Cost of fuel.

• Fuel economy of autos and trucks.

• Cost of hourly travel for autos and trucks. 

• Typical percent of trucks on the facility.

• Cost of crashes by severity.

• Typical emissions.

• Typical crash rates by facilities.

• Speed-flow relationships. 

• Typical incident delay factors.

If local information is known, in particular the percentage of trucks on the facility and crash 

rates on the facility by severity, those can be modified to provide a more accurate assessment of 

benefits. However, if local factors are not known, the default values make the tool ready to use for 

an approximation of the benefit for the desired TSMO countermeasure.

As with the cost component, each strategy has its own tab to calculate benefits. Again, color-coded 

cells are used to help the user identify where input is required. A basic benefit analysis requires 

minimal input from the users. For example, to calculate the benefits for dynamic message signs, 

the user is required to provide three pieces of information: 

• Length of the analysis period.

• Type of traveler information (three options are provided on a pull-down menu).

• Traffic volume passing the sign location(s) during the period of analysis.


113

TOOLBOX FOR EFFECTIVE TSMO PLANNING

5

There are additional categories where default values are provided, or the user can override those 

values when location-specific information is known. For example, the ramp meter benefits 

assessment assumes a freeway free flow speed of 55 miles per hour and a ramp free flow speed of 

35 miles per hour. Both of those values can be overridden if local data is known.

In addition to the benefit tabs for each strategy, the tool contains a generic link-based analysis 

tab that can be used to enter benefits related to a TSMO strategy not specifically identified. The 

TOPS-BC tool also includes a summary tab that allows the user to select some or all of the 

strategies for a total benefit-cost summary.

Advantages

The following are advantages of the TOPS B-C tool:

• The tool provides information that can be used in conjunction with benefit-cost analyses for 

capital infrastructure, which can be useful when comparing TSMO and capital 

infrastructure projects.

• It is customizable; therefore, if better data is available, the user can easily modify the 

spreadsheet with project-specific costs or add components. 

Challenge from Training

• The right-of-way acquisition is an important component that is not captured in the costestimating tool.86

• The strategies are treated independently. Synergies or countervailing effects among 

strategies are not captured

• Due to limited performance results for some strategies, the user often needs to come into 

the tools with expected impacts from more sophisticated models or real-world data

• Analyses are facility based. Network or system effects are not directly accounted for.

The Traffic Incident Management Benefit-Cost Tool 

Traffic incident management (TIM) strategies are critical components of TSMO. These strategies 

deal with safety and mobility issues resulting from traffic incidents on the roadways and support 

quick incident response, thereby shortening incident duration and controlling traffic delays around 

the occurrence scene. Because resources and funding are oftentimes limited for State DOTs and 

local transportation agencies, it is essential to investigate benefits and costs for potential and 

existing TIM strategies to avoid potentially expensive or ineffective approaches. 

Various types of TIM strategies have been implemented world-wide. Some of the most cost 

effective and commonly used TIM strategies include:

• Safety service patrols.

• Driver removal laws.

• Authority removal laws.

86 For more information and access to the TOPS BC tool, refer to the FHWA’s TOPS- BC web page at: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/plan4ops/

topsbctool/index.htm.






114

TOOLBOX FOR EFFECTIVE TSMO PLANNING

5

• Shared quick-clearance goals.

• Pre-established towing service agreements.

• Dispatch collocation.

• TIM task forces.

• Strategic Highway Research Program 2 (SHRP2) training.

The Traffic Incident Management Benefit-Cost Analysis (TIM-BC) Tool is a web-based tool with 

a standardized methodology that can be universally employed in benefit-cost ratio estimations for 

different TIM programs.87 Standardization benefits the evaluations by creating consistency and, 

therefore, greater confidence in the validity of the results. With access to the approach in the form 

of a user-friendly, less data-intensive tool, TIM programs and taxpayers alike can benefit from 

cost-effective evaluations.

TIM-BC features different sub-tools for the eight different TIM strategies described above, and 

users are able to input their own parameters based on their local experiences and engineering 

judgment. The tool also provides default values for these parameters to facilitate quick TIM-BC 

evaluation, particularly for areas where targeted TIM strategies have not been implemented and no 

relevant data is available. A screenshot of the main navigation page is shown in Figure 27.

87 Federal Highway Administration, Office of Operations Research and Development, Software – Traffic Incident Management Benefit-Cost 

(TIM-BC) Tool. Available at: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/software/research/operations/timbc/.

Figure 27. Screenshot. Traffic Incident Management Benefit-Cost Tool navigation page 

with panels linking to all eight sub-tools.

Source: Federal Highway Administration, Traffic Incident Management Benefit-Cost (TIM-BC) Tool. 

Figure 1. Screenshot. TIM-BC Tool Homescreen.

• Home Screen. Users can begin a new project or load an existing project file from this 

screen. Users can also click the “Learn More” link for resources about the tool, as well as 

click the button to see more information about the tool, such as whom to contact 

with questions or if issues are found.

• Project Name. This screen allows users to enter or modify the name of the current 

project.

• Project Details. On this screen, users enter project-level information, including the State 

in which the program is locatedthe number of segments in the programthe duration 
115

TOOLBOX FOR EFFECTIVE TSMO PLANNING

5

Application to Planning for Transportation Systems Management and Operations 

within Corridors

The TIM-BC tool includes the capability to estimate travel delay, fuel consumption, emissions, and 

secondary incidents. The data and equations encompassed in the database are derived directly from 

well-designed simulation experiments, which consider different incident information (i.e., number 

of lanes, lane blockage, duration, and location) under different traffic conditions. The computations 

employ a hybrid statistical-simulation methodology in which parameters from regression analysis 

are combined with results from simulation runs to improve the fit of the regression model.

A key user interface of one sub-tool, the Safety Service Patrol (SSP) benefit-cost tab (for 

evaluating a safety service patrol) is shown in Figure 28. Other than basic SSP program 

information, such as location, number of vehicles, and staff for back-end program cost calculation, 

the user has the flexibility to input information on roadway geometry, the SSP program, traffic, 

weather, and incidents. The tool also can automatically generate an evaluation report that is 

professionally designed for effective presentation of evaluation results.

Samples of Use 

A recent case study on the I-95 Corridor Coalition in New York was conducted to explain 

the TIM-BC tool application. This study was performed on the I-287 segment that was 

approximately 10 miles long, beginning at the junction with I-95 and continuing west to the 

Tappan Zee Bridge in New York.88 This stretch of roadway has four lanes in each direction and 

14 ramps, with level terrain and straight horizontal curvature. The speed limit is 65 miles per 

hour, and the traffic volumes are 1,800 and 1,200 vehicles per hour with a truck percentage of 

7.8 percent. During the 6-month evaluation period, there were 659 incidents on the segment.

88 Miller-Hooks, E., TariVerdi, M. and Zhang, X. 2012. Standardizing and Simplifying Safety Service Patrol Benefit-Cost Ratio Estimation, 

Report to the I-95 Corridor Coalition.





Figure 28. Screenshot. Key user interface for the Safety Service Patrol Benefit-Cost sub-tool.

Source:Federal Highway Administration, Traffic Incident Management BenefitCost (TIM-BC) Tool. 
116

TOOLBOX FOR EFFECTIVE TSMO PLANNING

5

In addition to SSP program evaluation, two other potential TIM programs, driver removal laws and 

dispatch collocation, also are evaluated and compared with SSP. The annual program cost of SSP is 

calculated by the tool based on user input information on number of patrol vehicles, driver’s hourly 

wage, working hours, fuel price, and other costs. Users are required to give an overall estimate 

of the annual costs of the other two programs, and a conservative value of 5,000 dollars for this 

segment is assumed for both programs.

As shown in Table 6, SSP is the most cost-effective strategy, with a benefit-cost ratio of 18.43, 

while the other two strategies have relatively lower, but still significant ratios of more than 3.0. 

The results indicate that all three investments are cost effective and should be considered for the 

segment. Further, with adequate funding for TIM programs, it is recommended that SSP should 

be considered initially. The program costs for the driver removal laws and dispatch collocation are 

assumed to be conservative. If their costs, particularly the institutional components, are reduced by 

five times, these two strategies will be comparable with the SSP.

Table 6. Evaluation results of three traffic incident management strategies.

Benefit Type Performance 

Measure

Safety Service 

Patrol

Driver Removal 

Law

Dispatch 

Collocation

Total 

Program 

Savings

Travel Delay of 

Passenger Vehicles 

52,343.64 vehicle 

hours

302.09 vehicle 

hours

256.07 vehicle 

hours

Travel Delay of 

Trucks 

1,326.12 vehicle 

hours 5.88 vehicle hours 7.21 vehicle hours

Fuel Consumption of 

Passenger Vehicles -36.96 gallons 62.45 gallons 143.46 gallons

Secondary Incidents 5.09 0.03 0.03

Annual Costs $161,280 $5,000 $5,000

Emissions 

Reductions

Hydrocarbon (HC) -0.0023 metric 

tons 0.0039 metric tons 0.0089 metric tons

Carbon Monoxide 

(CO) 

-0.0171 metric 

tons 0.0288 metric tons 0.0663 metric tons

Nitrogen Oxide 

(NOx) 

-0.0011 metric 

tons 0.0019 metric tons 0.0044 metric tons

Carbon Dioxide 

(CO2) 

-0.3683 metric 

tons 0.6224 metric tons 1.4299 metric tons

Sulfur Oxide (SOx) -0.0059 grams 0.01 grams 0.023 grams

Benefit-Cost 

Ratio N/A 18.43 3.50 3.10

Note that there are negative benefits of fuel consumption and emissions for the SSP in the case 

study, and this result is expected through the development process. From various test cases, it 

was observed that the fuel savings output in relatively high-volume, high-speed scenarios was 

negative. That is, for these scenarios, a decrease in incident duration resulted in an increase in 

fuel consumption over the base case. These results are reasonable given that some incidents may 
117

TOOLBOX FOR EFFECTIVE TSMO PLANNING

5

have the effect of slowing down fast-moving traffic to more fuel-efficient speeds. The choice to 

consider these negative values as costs represents a conservative approach and further reflects the 

fact that some congestion lowers fuel consumption despite increases in travel delays. 

Advantages

The following are a few key advantages of the developed TIM-BC tool:

•	 The tool uses a standardized methodology that can be universally and equitably employed 

in benefit-cost ratio estimation for different TIM programs, which is essential to creating 

consistency and, therefore, greater confidence in the validity of the results.

•	 The tool assesses a range of eight different TIM strategies, offering practitioners greater 

flexibility in deploying and evaluating TIM strategies.

•	 The methodology also is incorporated into a user-friendly and less data-intensive webbased TIM tool to facilitate the cost-effective TIM evaluation by State DOTs. 

Challenges

While the new TIM-BC tool offers the possibility of evaluating a wider range of TIM programs, 

there are still areas for future studies. For example, it should be noted that the results for different 

TIM strategies are not additive. This is because the benefits of different TIM strategies may not 

be independent of each other. Future studies should consider the potential interactions between 

these strategies, and corresponding modules should be incorporated for better evaluation. Also, 

the evaluation of more strategies can be potentially added as next steps, and this is particularly 

important when more effective TIM strategies are developed in the future. Further, under 

the environment of TSMO, the tool is limited to evaluating TIM strategies only, and its level 

consistency with evaluation results from other TSMO tools is yet to be investigated. Future studies 

should consider how to integrate the TIM-BC tool with other general TSMO evaluation tools to 

better support TSMO programs.

The Strategic Highway Research Program 2 Tools – Incorporating Travel 

Time Reliability in Operations and Planning Models 

The approach for modeling and estimating travel time reliability employed by researchers through 

the SHRP2 supplements existing simulation models with two components: a scenario manager, 

and a vehicle trajectory processor.89 The simulation models that are compatible with the two 

tools have to be particle-based, including microscopic (AimSun, VISSIM, and Paramics) and 

mesoscopic models (DynaSmart, DynasT, and MATSim), but not macroscopic models 

(TransCAD and Cube), because macroscopic models cannot generate vehicle trajectories. 

The Scenario Manager is a preprocessor to prepare input scenarios for the traffic simulation 

models. It captures exogenous sources of travel time variation, such as external events, traffic 

control and management strategies, and travel demand-side factors. Recognizing the importance 

of the scenario definition and the complexity of identifying relevant exogenous sources, the 

Scenario Manager provides the ability to construct scenarios that entail any mutually consistent 

89 Transportation Research Board, Strategic Highway Research Program, Report S2-L04-RW-2: Incorporating Reliability Performance 

Measures into Operations and Planning Modeling Tools: Application Guidelines (Washington, DC: 2014). Available at: http://onlinepubs.trb.

org/onlinepubs/shrp2/SHRP2_S2-L04-RW-2.pdf.






118

TOOLBOX FOR EFFECTIVE TSMO PLANNING

5

combinations of external events. It captures parameters that define external sources of unreliability 

(e.g., special events, inclement weather, and work zones) and enables users either to specify 

scenarios with particular historical significance or policy interest, or to generate them randomly 

given the underlying stochastic processes of the associated events.

The scenario input files generated by the Scenario Manager are then fed to the traffic simulation 

model. The model generates vehicle trajectory files for each of the scenarios.

The Vehicle Trajectory Processor then extracts reliability-related measures from the vehicle 

trajectory outputs. It produces and helps visualize reliability performance measures (e.g., travel 

time distributions and indicators) from observed or simulated trajectories. Observed trajectories 

may be obtained directly through measurement (e.g., Global Positioning System-equipped probe 

vehicles), thus enabling validation of travel time reliability metrics generated on the basis of output.

The two tools are not stand-alone applications; instead, they work as a preprocessor and a 

postprocessor of mesoscopic and microscopic simulation models for travel time reliability analysis 

on the network level, origin-destination level, path level, and segment/link level. The tools are 

available from the Transportation Research Board SHRP2 project website: http://www.trb.org/

Main/Blurbs/170717.aspx.

Application to Planning 

for Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations 

withinCorridors

The proposed tools can be used 

to evaluate TSMO benefits within 

corridors as long as the simulation 

models have been established with 

the corresponding TSMO strategy. 

Depending on the TSMO strategy, 

an appropriate simulation model 

needs to be selected. Factors 

to consider include the scale of 

analysis (e.g., regional, corridor, 

or intersection/segment level), and 

whether travel demand in terms of 

intensity, departure time, or mode 

choice needs to be considered.

Samples of Use

Two case studies have been 

conducted to demonstrate how 

the tool set can be applied: one in 

mesoscopic (DYNASMART-P), 

and one in microscopic (AimSun). 





Figure 29. Graphic. Origin-destination-level travel time 

in different weather scenarios.

Source: SHRP 2 Report S2-LO4-RR-1: Incorporating Reliability Performance Measures into Operations and Planning Modeling Tools,Figure 8.7 and Figure 8.8, p. 103. Copyright, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C., 2014. Reproduced with permission of the Transportation Research Board.
119

TOOLBOX FOR EFFECTIVE TSMO PLANNING

5

Mesoscopic Case Study

This case study examines the effect of inclement weather on travel time reliability for weekday 

and weekend traffic. Specifically, reliability performance measures for the following four 

scenario cases were obtained: Weekdays under Rain (WD-RA), Weekends under Rain (WE-RA), 

Weekdays under No Rain (WD-NR), and Weekends under No Rain (WE-NR). The rain scenarios 

are based on historical observations. Weather data collected on May 3, 2010, at the Automated 

Surface Observing System weather station located at the LaGuardia Airport are used. Incident 

properties are characterized using parametric models. For frequency, a Poisson distribution is used 

to model the number of incidents for a given time period. To capture the dependency between 

weather and incident frequency, weather conditional incident rates are used. 

Figure 29 illustrates an example of the results using the New York City DYNASMART-P network. 

TSMO concepts, such as managed lanes, road weather management, traveler information system, 

traffic signal coordination, and transit signal priority (TSP), can be applied on this network, and travel 

time can be evaluated for both the before and after cases. 

Microscopic Case Study

The objective of the 

microsimulation tests was 

to determine a range of 

reliability measures that 

is characteristic of the 

study area for weekday 

and weekend traffic. The 

weekday and weekend 

scenarios were subjected 

to incident and demand 

variation events that are 

typical of the study area 

(East Manhattan). The 

micro-model covers an 

area that includes 178 

lane kilometers and 217 

signalized intersections. 

A total of 147 centroids 

were connected to the 

network to generate 

origin–destination trips, 

including 44 gate and 103 

internal centroids.

Figure 30. Graphic. Network-level travel time in 

different incident scenarios.

Source: SHRP 2 Report S2-LO4-RR-1: Incorporating Reliability Performance Measures into Operations and Planning Modeling Tools, Figure 9.1 and Figure 9.2, p. 115 and Figure 9.3, p. 116. Copyright, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, D.C., 2014. Reproduced with permission of the Transportation Research Board.
120

TOOLBOX FOR EFFECTIVE TSMO PLANNING

5

The same methodology that was used to generate scenarios for the mesoscopic model using 

the Scenario Manager was applied for the microscopic model. The scenarios relevant for the 

microsimulation study area were then selected based on incidents that were located within the 

boundaries. Fifteen of the generated weekday scenarios and four of the weekend scenarios 

contained incidents within the microsimulation study area. Two base models were constructed 

representing peak a.m. weekday and weekend conditions. The weekday a.m. peak period model 

consisted of a total demand of around 155,000 vehicles over a 5-hour period from 6 a.m. to 11 a.m. 

The weekend peak period model consisted of a total demand of around 80,000 vehicles over a 

period of 3 hours from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m. The results are in formats very similar to those of the 

mesoscopic model (i.e., average, standard deviation, 80th percentile, Buffer Index, and Skew 

Index of the travel time of the regional, origin-destination, path, and link levels).

This example can be used to evaluate TSMO concepts, such as incident management, special 

event management, ridesharing and demand management, and traveler information systems. 

Advantages

• The tools promote greater appreciation and recognition of the entire distribution of travel 

time rather than simply mean values.

• The tools overcome the limitations of a conventional single-run framework to incorporate 

important reliability-related phenomena, such as non-recurrent congestion due to a traffic 

incident, special event, or extreme weather condition. 

• The tools are robust in that they can be integrated with different simulation models instead 

of requiring extensive software development to include the travel time reliability 

measurement function. 

• Adopting scenario-based approaches to project evaluations is the primary, default approach 

for conducting such evaluations.

Challenges

• Mainstream traffic simulation tools focus on the supply side. It is still a challenge to 

incorporate travel-time reliability into the demand side (e.g., activity scheduling and 

departure time). Agent-based models are becoming more and more important as they 

ensure a full consistency of daily activity patterns at the individual level. 

• The post-processing nature of the tool set makes it difficult to incorporate reliability 

measures in such a way that they could be effectively generated within the network 

simulation procedure and, thus, affect the route choice embedded in it. 




121

TAKING ACTION

6

CHAPTER 6. TAKING ACTION

While transportation systems management and operations (TSMO) at the corridor level can 

be advanced in many ways, and can involve coordination among operating agencies to major 

planning studies, it does not have to be daunting to proceed. The scope of the effort can be 

scaled to the needs and challenges of the corridor and can be integrated into ongoing operational 

coordination efforts and planning studies.

The checklist below summarizes the key points presented in this Desk Reference and can be used 

to guide the process for developing a TSMO plan for a corridor. 

 Scoping the Effort and Building a Team. 

The team working on a corridor planning study or operations plan should encompass many 

different agencies and partners who, together, operate services and influence operations in 

the corridor. The team may include multiple jurisdictions (State, county, city, other 

municipality), as well as a range of different agencies and service providers, which may 

include regional transit providers, local bus services, State departments of transportation 

(DOTs), toll authorities, port authorities, vanpool operators, transportation management 

associations, or others. In addition, it is valuable to involve planners, traffic engineers, 

transit operators, law enforcement, and other organizations that play a key role in the 

corridor. Getting the agencies together is often a critical component of success in gaining 

an early understanding of who operates in the corridor, what their opportunities are for 

enhancing operations, and ways to work together to optimize system performance.

Transportation planning in a corridor should build off of broader planning efforts for 

TSMO, as well as operations programs and strategies at a regional and State-level. 

Regardless of the size of the corridor, planning for corridor operations should recognize 

and build upon existing programs that can benefit the corridor.

Develop a clear definition of the corridor where TSMO strategies are to be introduced. 

While an effort to advance TSMO can focus on one facility, a corridor should be looked 

upon as more than an individual facility and should consider the interconnected nature of 

travel across facilities in a travel-shed to maximize the effectiveness of the selected TSMO 

strategies. Components of a corridor may include a freeway; major arterials; local road 

networks; transit rail and bus services; and transportation services, including rideshare 

programs and parking facilities.

Think carefully about the boundaries and definition of a corridor to assess and develop 

solutions comprehensively. Defining a corridor often begins with a review of data on travel 

patterns (including origin-destination data) and connecting networks and choices available 

to travelers, which are informed by public perceptions.
122

TAKING ACTION

6

 Gathering Information on Current and Future Contexts and 

Conditions.

Compile information on the transportation assets, capabilities, and resources that exist 

within the corridor. Document existing intelligent transportation system (ITS) equipment, 

real-time traffic and bus monitoring, park and ride facilities, traffic signal timing plans, and 

other technologies and facilities relating to corridor operations, because operational 

improvements can build upon these assets. In addition, identify regional resources (e.g., 

highway and transit traveler information systems, ridesharing programs, and regional 

incident management programs).

 Developing an Outcome-Oriented Operational Concept – Goals, 

Objectives, and Performance Measures.

This may be the most important step in the process because it establishes how the corridor is 

expected to perform once TSMO strategies are implemented and operated on a day-to-day 

basis. Operations objectives are developed through interactions with partners and 

stakeholders who help define the intended objectives and performance outcomes for the 

corridor. These objectives can be further refined through a study process, but the initial 

identification of objectives is critical for setting the context for developing and evaluating 

corridor TSMO strategies. Objectives can be expressed in the form of an objectives tree that 

shows how higher-level objectives are reached by first achieving lower level objectives that 

support them.

 Identifying Operations Performance Needs, Gaps, and Opportunities.

Gather and analyze data for performance measures to identify existing gaps between desired 

outcomes (objectives) and current conditions, as well as potential opportunities for 

improvement. Define scenarios or conduct a scenario planning exercise as a basis for 

understanding current performance gaps and potential opportunities. By defining scenarios, 

participants in the corridor can identify existing gaps, performance needs, and opportunities 

for improvements. In many cases, performance data is available that clearly demonstrate 

where problems exist and need attention, which leads to understanding where investments 

are needed and what efforts should be prioritized in the planning process. 
123

TAKING ACTION

6

 Developing an Integrated TSMO Approach.

Consider TSMO strategies working together in the context of the corridor as opposed to 

selecting and implementing strategies in isolation. Planning for an integrated set of strategies 

allows planners and operators to leverage synergies between strategies. Build on the 

assessment of potential strategies using available analysis tools so that the corridor plan 

involves a set of promising strategies that achieve the operations objectives for the corridor. 

Given the wide array of potential strategies to consider, include those that focus on highway/

traffic operations, transit operations, demand management, and capacity. Selecting strategies 

for a corridor involves both quantitative and qualitative assessments of what would work best 

to fit within the specific context of the corridor.

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) document Advancing Metropolitan Planning 

for Operations: The Building Blocks of a Model Transportation Plan Incorporating 

Operations provides a guide for assembling a range of complementary TMSO strategies 

that, together, provide wide-ranging benefits to corridor management and operations. This 

document, along with other FHWA references and guides, addresses the range of needs for 

improving corridor performance.

 Putting it All Together: Efficiency, Reliability, Travel Options, 

Non-Recurring Delay, Arterial Management, Freeway Management, 

and Transit Operations and Management. 

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) document Advancing Metropolitan Planning 

for Operations: The Building Blocks of a Model Transportation Plan Incorporating 

Operations provides a guide for assembling a range of complementary TMSO strategies 

that, together, provide wide-ranging benefits to corridor management and operations. This 

document, along with other FHWA references and guides, addresses the range of needs for 

improving corridor performance.

 Programming for TSMO. 

Identify and understand the various sources of funding for TSMO strategies in the corridor, 

and prioritize TSMO projects based on funding availability and potential benefits. Use an 

incremental investment approach that gains benefits from early implementation while 

maintaining a strategic view of fully implemented solutions in the corridor.
124

TAKING ACTION

6

 Implementing, Monitoring, and Maintaining Level of Operations 

over Time.

Apply well-tested systems engineering processes to ensure that system requirements are 

properly specified and achieved in systems design and deployment and that the corridor plan 

includes consideration for life-cycle management and operation.



U.S. Department of Transportation 

Federal Highway Administration 

Office of Operations 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov

Toll-Free “Help Line” 866-367-7487

September 2016

FHWA-HOP-16-037