intelligent transportation systems 

Benefits, Costs, Deployment,

and Lessons Learned

U.S. Department of Transportation

Research and Innovative Technology Administration

2008 Update
Notice

The U.S. Department of Transportation 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. 

U.S. DOT periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its programs and processes to ensure 

continuous quality improvement.

The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trademarks or manufacturers’ names appear herein only because they are considered essential to the objective of 

this document.
Intelligent Transportation Systems

Benefits, Costs, Deployment, and

Lessons Learned | 2008 Update

September 2008

1. Report No.

FHWA-JPO-08-032

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

4. Title and Subtitle

Intelligent Transportation Systems Benefits, Costs, Deployment, and 

Lessons Learned: 2008 Update

5. Report Date

September 2008

6. Performing Organization Code

7. Author(s)

Robert P. Maccubbin, Barbara L. Staples, Firoz Kabir, Cheryl F. Lowrance, 

Michael R. Mercer, Brian H. Philips, Stephen R. Gordon (Oak Ridge 

National Laboratories)

8. Performing Organization Report No.

9. Performing Organization Name and Address

Noblis

600 Maryland Ave., SW, Suite 755

Washington, DC 20024

10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)

11. Contract or Grant No.

DTFH61-05-D-00002

12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address

Department of Transportation

Research and Innovative Technology Administration

Intelligent Transportation Systems Joint Program Office

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Washington, D.C. 20003

13. Type of Report and Period Covered

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

15. Supplementary Notes

Jane Lappin—Task Manager

16. Abstract

Intelligent transportation systems (ITS) provide a proven set of strategies for addressing the challenges of assuring safety and reducing 

congestion, while accommodating the growth in transit ridership and freight movement. This report presents information on the performance of deployed ITS under each of these goal areas, as well as information on the costs, deployment levels, and lessons learned 

regarding ITS deployment and operations. The report, and the collection of four Web-based resources upon which it is based, have 

been developed by the U.S. DOT’s ITS Joint Program Office (JPO) to support informed decision making regarding ITS deployment. This 

report discusses 17 different areas of ITS application. These chapters are divided into two sections discussing technologies deployed 

on the transportation infrastructure and those deployed within vehicles. The 14 different infrastructure applications discussed can be 

grouped into ITS strategies applied to roadways, transit, management and operations of transportation systems, and freight movement. 

Lessons learned during ITS planning implementation and deployment, are highlighted throughout the report and in a chapter following 

the review of ITS applications.

17. Key Word

Intelligent Transportation Systems, ITS, Benefits,

Costs, Deployment Statistics, Lessons Learned

18. Distribution Statement

No Restrictions

This document is available to the public

19. Security Classif. (of this report)

Unclassified

20. Security Classif. (of this page)

Unclassified

21. No. of Pages 22. Price

N/A

executive summary xv

Executive Summary

Intelligent transportation systems (ITS) provide a proven set of strategies for addressing the challenges of assuring safety and reducing congestion, while accommodating the 

growth in transit ridership and freight movement. ITS improve transportation safety and 

mobility, and enhance productivity through the use of advanced communications, sensors, 

and information processing technologies encompassing a broad range of wireless and 

wireline communications-based information and electronics. When integrated into the 

transportation system’s infrastructure, and into vehicles themselves, these technologies 

relieve congestion, improve safety, and enhance American productivity.

This report presents information on the performance of deployed ITS, as well as information on the costs, deployment levels, and lessons learned regarding ITS deployment and 

operations. The report, and the collection of four Web-based resources upon which it is 

based, have been developed by the U.S. DOT’s ITS Joint Program Office (JPO) to support 

informed decision making regarding ITS deployment.

To support the deployment of ITS and to address the challenges facing the U.S. transportation system, the JPO has developed a suite of knowledge resources. This collection 

of Web-based resources provides ready access to information supporting informed 

decision making regarding deployment and operation of ITS to improve transportation 

system performance. Information presented in these online knowledge resources is 

the basis for this document. The four knowledge resources are the ITS Benefits Database (www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov), ITS Costs Database (www.itscosts.its.dot.gov), ITS Deployment 

Statistics Database (www.itsdeployment.its.dot.gov), and the ITS Lessons Learned Knowledge 

Resource (www.itslessons.its.dot.gov).

This report discusses 17 different areas of ITS application. These chapters are divided into 

two sections discussing technologies deployed on the transportation infrastructure and 

those deployed within vehicles. The 14 different infrastructure applications discussed can 

be grouped into ITS strategies applied to roadways, transit, management and operations 

of transportation systems, and freight movement. Lessons learned during ITS planning, 

implementation, and deployment, highlighted throughout the report, are discussed in a 

chapter following the review of ITS applications and summarized at the conclusion of this 

executive summary.
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

xvi Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Intelligent Infrastructure

Roadways

Roadway applications of ITS include strategies applied to arterial roadways, freeways, 

crash prevention and safety, road weather management, and roadway operations and 

maintenance.

Arterial Management

Studies demonstrate the ability of traffic control ITS applications to enhance mobility, 

increase efficiency of the transportation systems, and reduce the impact of automobile 

travel on energy consumption and air quality. The ability of both adaptive signal control 

and coordinated signal timing to smooth traffic can lead to corresponding safety improvements through reduced rear-end crashes. Optimizing signal timing is considered a lowcost approach to reducing congestion. Based on data from six separate studies, the costs 

range from $2,500 to $3,100 per signal per update.1

 Based on a series of surveys of arterial 

management agencies in 78 of the largest U.S. metropolitan areas, half of traffic signals in 

these metropolitan areas were under centralized control through closed-loop or computer 

control in 2006. 

Freeway Management

There are numerous ITS strategies to improve freeway operations. Metropolitan areas that 

deploy ITS infrastructure including dynamic message signs (DMS) to manage freeway and 

arterial traffic, and integrate traveler information with incident management systems can 

increase peak period freeway speeds by 8 to 13 percent,2

 improve travel time, and according to simulation studies, reduce crash rates and improve trip time reliability with delay 

reductions ranging from 1 to 22 percent.3

 In Minneapolis-St. Paul, the benefit-to-cost ratio 

for a ramp metering system was estimated at 15:1.4

The Florida DOT (FDOT) deployed 31 DMS in Broward County including associated structures, foundations, controllers, cabinets, and installation, plus approximately 37 miles of 

in-ground fiber optic communications at a cost of $11 million. Annual operating costs were 

estimated at $22,320 and annual maintenance costs were estimated at $620,000. FDOT 

coordinates with other agencies to verify incident and congestion locations and then posts 

traveler information on the DMS along effected routes.5

Ramp meters now manage access to 13 percent of freeway miles in the country’s 78 largest metropolitan areas, up from 9 percent in 2000. As of 2006, surveillance—consisting of 

loop detectors, radar detectors and acoustic detectors—is used to collect data on traffic 

conditions on 45 percent of freeway miles in the country’s 78 largest metropolitan areas, 

up from 22 percent in 2000. 

Crash Prevention and Safety

Road geometry warning systems can improve safety on highway ramps or curves that experience a high incidence of truck rollovers. Downhill speed warning systems have decreased 

truck crashes by up to 13 percent at problem sites in Oregon and Colorado.6

 As part of an 

evaluation of automated truck rollover warning systems, the Pennsylvania DOT researched 

systems in other states. The cost of these systems varied significantly, ranging from $50,000 

to $500,000, as did their configurations: invasive and non-invasive detection, weight-based 

versus simplified speed class algorithms, and system calibrations for warnings.7

 The three 

most widely adopted systems are curve and ramp speed, rail crossing warning systems, 
executive summary xvii

and pedestrian safety systems. Next in popularity, and adopted by about half as many 

states, are downhill warning systems, intersection collision avoidance systems, and animal 

warning systems. 

Road Weather Management

High-quality road weather information can benefit travelers, commercial vehicle operators, 

emergency responders, and agencies who construct, operate, and maintain roadways. 

Evaluation data show that 80 to 94 percent of motorists who use traveler information Web 

sites think road weather information enhances their safety and prepares them for adverse 

road weather.8

 Studies have found that anti-icing programs can lower snow and ice control 

costs by 10 to 50 percent and reduce crash rates by 7 to 83 percent.9

 Nine respondents to a 

fixed automated spray technology (FAST) survey indicated that cost of installations varied 

greatly, $22,000 to $4 million, depending on coverage area, site location, accessibility of 

existing utilities, system functionality and features, and market factors. Operations and 

maintenance (O&M) costs of FAST systems are relatively low compared to the installation 

costs.10 State DOTs disseminate weather warnings to public traveler information agencies 

in 26 states, traffic management agencies in 22 states, and incident management agencies 

in 21 states.

Roadway Operations and Maintenance

ITS technologies deployed for roadway operations and maintenance activities can have 

system-wide impacts. Network simulation models estimate that smart work zones can 

reduce total delay by 41 to 75 percent.11 In addition to improving mobility, work zone ITS can 

improve safety. Evaluation data show that areas equipped with speed monitoring displays 

can decrease vehicle speeds by 4 to 6 mi/h,12 and reduce the number of speeding vehicles 

by 25 to 78 percent.13 Work zone ITS deployment costs ranged from $100,000 to $2.5 million 

with the majority of systems ranging from $150,000 to $500,000.14

Transit

Several applications of ITS for transit management have been deployed.

Transit Management

Fleet management applications, including automatic vehicle location (AVL) and computeraided dispatch (CAD) systems, can improve both the experience of transit riders and 

the efficiency of transit operations by enabling more efficient planning, scheduling, and 

management of transit assets and resources. Transit agencies have reported reductions 

in fleet requirements ranging from two to five percent as a result of improved fleet utilization.15 Data from transit systems in Portland, Oregon; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; and Baltimore, Maryland show that AVL/CAD systems have improved schedule adherence by 9 to 

23 percent.16

Mobile data terminals (MDTs) are an important component of transit fleet management 

systems. MDTs are multifunctional on-board devices that support two-way communication between the vehicle and the control center. Capital costs for MDTs typically range 

between $1,000 and $4,000 per unit with installation costs frequently between $500 and 

$1,000.17

The use of AVL on fixed-route buses has expanded rapidly during this period, growing from 

32 percent in 2000 to almost 60 percent in 2006.
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

xviii Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Management and Operations 

ITS strategies for improving transportation system management and operations include: 

transportation management centers, traffic incident management, emergency management, 

electronic payment and pricing, traveler information, and information management.

Transportation Management Centers

A transportation management center (TMC) integrates a variety of ITS applications to 

facilitate the coordination of information and services within the transportation system. 

Integrated transportation management systems supported by TMCs have the potential 

to improve traffic management, traveler information, and maintenance operations, and 

enable more effective use of agency personnel and resources.18

The cost of TMCs can vary greatly. Primary cost drivers include the size of the facility, the 

number of agencies present, and the number of functions performed by the facility.19 The 

capital cost of physical components can range from $1.8 million to $11.0 million per facility,20 and have O&M costs that range from $50,000 to $1.8 million per year.21

In a survey of 102 freeway management agencies and 170 arterial management agencies 

conducted in 2006, capabilities reported by a high percentage of both types of TMC include 

incident management, network surveillance and data collection, dissemination of data to travelers and other agencies, as well as traffic management for special events and evacuations. 

Traffic Incident Management

Traffic incident management programs have demonstrated success under each of the goals 

of ITS: mobility, safety, efficiency, productivity, energy and environment, and customer 

satisfaction. This success builds from the ability of the programs to significantly reduce 

the duration of traffic incidents, from 15 to 65 percent, with the bulk of studies finding 

savings of 30 to 40 percent.22

One component of successful traffic incident management programs are service patrols for 

which State DOTs can spend from $5.6 million to $13.6 million per year.23 Service patrols 

have also been the subject of numerous benefit-to-cost analyses over the course of their 

deployment, with 26 studies of the programs completed in 23 U.S. cities between 1994 and 

2005. These studies document benefit-to-cost ratios ranging from 2:1 to 36:1.24

Sharing data on the type, severity, and location of traffic incidents is a common practice of 

traffic incident management agencies. Sixty-eight (68) traffic incident management agencies in the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas share traffic incident data with public 

safety agencies, which tend to reciprocate the sharing of these data. 

Emergency Management

ITS applications for emergency management can improve the efficiency of transportation 

capacity during emergencies, increase productivity for hazardous material (HAZMAT) shipping operations, and improve overall traveler safety and security. Evaluation data collected 

from a number of studies suggest that customer satisfaction with emergency management 

is largely positive. Stakeholders perceive positive impacts and indicate that these technologies are widely accepted. Contraflow freeway operations in South Carolina enabled a 

76 percent increase in traffic volumes.25 The HAZMAT Transportation Safety and Security 

Field Operational Test found that the technologies that enhance the safety and security of 

HAZMAT transportation operations range in cost from $250 to $3,500 per vehicle.26 As of 

2006, 80 percent of emergency management vehicles in the 108 largest metropolitan areas 

operate under computer-aided dispatch, an increase from 67 percent in 2000. 
executive summary xix

Electronic Payment and Pricing

Electronic toll collection (ETC) is one of the most successful ITS applications with numerous benefits including delay reductions, improved throughput, and fuel economy. On freeways, variable pricing strategies are effective at influencing traveler behavior. Although 

initial public support for such tolls may be low, research indicates that road users value 

time savings and are willing to pay a price to avoid congestion and delay.27 In California, 

for example, public support for variable tolling on State Route 91 was initially low; but after 

18 months of operations, nearly 75 percent of the commuting public expressed approval 

of virtually all aspects of the express lanes program.28

Electronic fare payment can yield customer satisfaction, productivity, and efficiency benefits for transit agencies. In a study of a hypothetical full deployment of ITS in three U.S. 

cities, the annualized life cycle costs for electronic transit fare payment systems were 

estimated at $5.9 million for Seattle, Washington; $2.4 million for Cincinnati, Ohio; and 

$1.1 million for Tucson, Arizona.29

Deployment of electronic toll collection is nearly universal, with more than 90 percent of toll 

plazas and more than 80 percent of toll lanes in the 78 metropolitan areas equipped with 

ETC. Many transit agencies are also offering customers the option of electronic payment. 

Customers can pay with magnetic card readers on more than 60 percent of transit buses 

in these 78 metropolitan areas and pay with “smart cards” on nearly one-third of transit 

buses in these 78 metropolitan areas.

Traveler Information

Evaluation of traveler information services has shown benefits in improved on-time reliability, better trip planning, and reduced early and late arrivals. Studies show that drivers who use route-specific travel time information instead of area-wide traffic advisories 

can improve on-time performance by 5 to 13 percent.30 Recent evaluation data show that 

customer satisfaction with regional 511 deployments range from 68 to 92 percent.31 The 511 

Deployment Coalition conducted an in-depth cost analysis based on the experience from 

nine 511 deployers. On average, the statewide systems cost approximately $2.5 million to 

design, implement, and operate during the first year. Metropolitan systems cost an average of $1.8 million to design, implement, and operate during the first year.32 The two most 

popular media for distributing traveler information in the 78 largest U.S. metropolitan areas 

are Web sites and e-mail, followed by automatic telephone and pagers. Thirty (30) of the 78 

metropolitan areas use dedicated TV to distribute traveler information and 18 use kiosks, 

a medium which has seen no growth in recent years. 

Information Management

Data archiving enhances ITS integration and allows for coordinated regional decision 

making. Traffic surveillance system data as well as data collected from commercial vehicle 

operations, transit systems, electronic payment systems, and road weather information 

systems have been the primary sources of archived data available to researchers and planners. Studies have demonstrated the cost savings that can be achieved by agencies making 

use of archived ITS data.33 A study reviewing over 60 data archiving programs documented 

substantial returns on the investments made in the programs. 34 Stakeholders making use 

of archived data also had positive experiences to report. 35

The costs to develop archived data management systems (ADMS) vary based on the size 

of the system and features provided. Based on limited data available from a study of six 

transportation agencies that have established ADMS, costs for one system was $85,000 

and $8 million for another.36
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

xx Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Survey data from 546 arterial agencies, 147 freeway agencies, and 219 transit agencies found 

the most common uses for archived data by arterial management agencies were traffic 

analysis, traffic management, operations planning and analysis, and capital planning. Most 

common uses for archived data reported by freeway agencies were traffic analysis, operations planning and analysis, dissemination to the public, and performance measurement. 

Transit agencies most frequently reported using archived data for operations planning, 

performance measurement, safety analysis, and dissemination to the public.

Freight

ITS deployed to improve freight transportation include those addressing commercial vehicle 

operations and intermodal freight.

Commercial Vehicle Operations

Evaluations of ITS applied to commercial vehicle operations have shown substantial 

improvements under the safety, mobility, and productivity goal areas. For example, electronic credentialing reduced paperwork and saved carriers participating in the Commercial 

Vehicle Information System and Networks (CVISN) Model Deployment 60 to 75 percent 

on credentialing costs.37 Both motorcoach and truck drivers held favorable opinions of 

commercial vehicle electronic clearance, while a survey of Maryland motor carriers found 

that carriers with large fleets (25 or more vehicles) conducting business with State agencies 

value electronic data interchange and Internet technologies more than small fleets.38

To help States track their own progress in deploying CVISN technologies, a self-evaluation 

requirement was included in the partnership agreements between the U.S. DOT and individual States. States now in the planning, decision-making, or early deployment stages can 

learn from the experiences of others; and States further along in the deployment process 

can learn new ideas that might help them improve their existing systems and networks.39

To this end, a process for reporting CVISN costs data was established, and the results of 

the costs data collection and analysis were published and the costs data were imported 

to the ITS Costs Database. The reader is encouraged to access the ITS Costs Database for 

complete details of CVISN unit costs.

Benefit-to-cost ratios range from 2:1 to 12:1 for electronic screening,40 0.7:1 to 40:1 for electronic credentialing,41 and 1.3:1 to 6.1:1 for roadside safety inspection systems.42

As of August 2007, 18 states had completed core deployment of CVISN and were working 

on expanding the core capability. Twenty-seven (27) states and the District of Columbia are 

in the process of deploying the core capability. Five states are in the process of planning 

and design of their core CVISN capability.

Intermodal Freight

Electronic supply chain manifest systems that automate the transfer of intelligent freight 

data between supply chain partners and government agencies have enabled freight operators to reduce administrative burdens, shorten processing times, and lower the cost of 

cargo movement. Initial field operational tests indicate that these automated tools, when 

applied to a domestic supply chain, can reduce the time it takes to accept and process 

cargo transfer documents by more than 50 percent.43

Asset tracking technologies can monitor the location and identity of containers in real 

time. A study found that basic in-vehicle tracking equipment ranged from $429 to $995 

per vehicle. Advanced in-vehicle tracking equipment (multiple sensors) ranged from $1,290 
executive summary xxi

to $2,275 per vehicle. Basic costs for asset tracking—tracking of trailers whether tethered 

or untethered—ranged from $139 to $500 per unit. Mid-range costs ranged from $375 to 

$450 per unit.44

Intelligent Vehicles

Vehicles

In-vehicle ITS include collision avoidance, driver assistance, and collision notification 

technologies.

Collision Avoidance

For passenger vehicles, collision warning systems can have a significant impact on vehicle 

safety. In an estimate developed jointly with industry, the U.S. DOT estimates that widespread deployment of integrated countermeasure systems could prevent over 48 percent of 

rear-end, run-off-road, and lane change crashes, representing 1.8 million target crashes. 45

Collision warning systems are still somewhat in the experimental stage and have had only 

limited application to date.46 Rollover warning or roll stability control systems have limited 

commercial availability. Rear-impact warning or rear-end impact prevention systems are 

still in the research and development phase.47 Some of the collision avoidance systems 

are available as factory-installed options, as standard items included in the base cost of 

a vehicle, or as a component of an upgrade package.

Driver Assistance

Evaluations have documented the performance of in-vehicle navigation systems, driver 

communication systems, adaptive cruise control (ACC), and roll stability control. In-vehicle 

navigation and route guidance systems have gained mainstream acceptance and are widely 

available in private vehicles. When linked to sources of current traffic congestion information to provide dynamic routing, one study found that the devices could reduce traffic 

congestion and thereby provide additional network capacity.48

Several studies have been completed assessing the potential of ACC, which is now available in some private vehicles. The most recent studies have found that the systems are 

most effective at improving safety when bundled with collision warning systems. 49 With 

widespread deployment, ACC has the ability to reduce vehicle emissions and increase the 

capacity of roadways. 50

While both cars and sport utility vehicles (SUVs) benefit from electronic stability control 

systems, the reduction in the risk of single-vehicle crashes was significantly greater for 

SUVs (49 to 67 percent) than for cars (33 to 44 percent).51With respect to fatal single-vehicle 

crashes, however, the impacts were similar (59 percent reduction for SUVs and 53 percent 

reduction for cars).52

On-board safety systems are offered as an option on some vehicles; but more often than 

not these systems are being packaged with comfort, convenience, and entertainment 

services. A consumer willing to pay for ACC, for example, may forgo the purchase if required 

to buy a more expensive package that includes unrelated and unwanted features such as 

climate-controlled front seats and a rear-view monitor. As a result, this bundling approach 

is deterring consumers from purchasing safety systems. Another side effect of bundling is 

the difficulty in determining the cost of each individual ITS technology.53
xxii Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

Collision Notification

Evaluations to date have documented strong customer satisfaction with automated collision notification (ACN) systems. These benefits include a heightened sense of safety, as 

reported by travelers testing an early deployment of the systems in Washington State.54 An 

evaluation of advanced ACN documented improved notification times for crashes reported 

by the ACN system, demonstrating a significant safety benefit that can be achieved using 

either type of ACN system.55

In a recent study of private-sector deployment of ITS, the costs of telecommunicationsand location-based services designed to assist motorists were estimated at $350 per unit. 

The first year’s subscription was included in the retail price of the vehicle with subsequent 

subscriptions sold on an annual basis. One basic safety and security subscription package 

cost $199 per year with other packages costing $399 and $799 per year. The basic safety and 

security package included advanced safety features such as advanced ACN. It appears that 

the trend of telematics services is on the decline as several automakers have discontinued 

these services due to lack of consumer interest.56

Lessons Learned

The lessons learned discussed in this report provide a synthesis of stakeholders’ experience in the planning, deployment, operations, maintenance, and evaluation of ITS. Such 

learning is intended to foster informed decision making by the readers in their own ITS 

initiatives. For example, a planner may learn that including ITS projects in the State’s long 

range transportation plan is a sensible way to take advantage of multiple project synergies 

and stable funding, and a traveler information Web site designer may learn that embedding a function for receiving customer feedback is essential to improving the usability of 

the site.

The lesson learned topics discussed in this report are: management and operations, policy 

and planning, design and deployment, leadership and partnerships, funding, technical 

integration, procurement, legal issues, and human resources. 

Management and Operations

The lessons learned on management and operations (M&O) discuss decision-making 

approaches to implement, operate, and maintain transportation facilities with the intent 

of optimizing system performance and improving safety, mobility, efficiency, and reliability 

of the Nation’s transportation infrastructure. M&O approaches may include operations 

structure and strategy, M&O plans and programs, systems data and storage, performance 

measurement and evaluation, and M&O tools and models. Key lessons learned are summarized below:

•	 Coordinate across jurisdictions, share resources, and create procedures that do not

threaten individual agencies’ roles.

•	 Continually seek ways to make operations more effective when deploying ITS.

•	 Evaluate and upgrade maintenance programs on an ongoing basis. 

•	 Strengthen interest in data archiving systems among traffic managers.

•	 Provide an avenue for operators and customers to get involved in the planning process,

incorporate operational performance measures in strategic and long-range plans.

•	 Design Web sites with usability in mind and obtain feedback from customers.
executive summary xxiii

Policy and Planning

The lessons learned on policy and planning discuss policies and approaches used to 

incorporate the consideration of ITS products and services in the transportation planning 

process. Such policies and approaches may include the development of policies used to 

elicit buy-in from regional stakeholders, as well as preparation of planning documents such 

as a regional ITS architecture, an ITS strategic plan, a concept of operations, a long-range 

transportation improvement plan, or use of traffic analysis tools to assist in evaluating 

alternatives. Key lessons learned are summarized below:

•	 Develop ITS stakeholder policies to ensure efficiency, consistency, and interoperability

in deploying integrated systems. 

•	 Develop a formal ITS data sharing policy.

•	 Learn the successful approaches to ITS planning.

•	 Anticipate challenges in planning and deploying ITS in a rural environment.

•	 Use the National ITS Architecture and other tools for effective ITS planning.

•	 Include ITS in the State’s long-range transportation plan to take advantage of project

synergies and stable funding.

Design and Deployment

The lessons learned on design and deployment discuss approaches used in the design 

and completion of an ITS project including the choice of appropriate ITS technologies, use 

of ITS standards and systems engineering, ITS software development, and construction 

and implementation techniques. Design and deployment lessons include experiences in 

project management, requirements and design, standards and interoperability, implementation, quality assurance and testing, and design tools and models. Key lessons learned 

are summarized below:

•	 Make use of flexible methods and accepted techniques for successful project management.

•	 Design and tailor system technology to deliver an ITS project that meets the needs of

the users and the customers.

•	 Recognize interoperability as an important issue in achieving the vision of a nationwide 511 system.

•	 Cultivate commitment by the Federal Highway Administration and/or other appropriate agencies at the Federal level.

•	 Consider that advanced traveler information system deployment in rural and/or remote areas presents special challenges.

•	 Implement a limited-deployment fare pass system before implementing a region-wide

fare card system.

•	 Conduct rigorous testing prior to deployment of an ITS project.

•	 Conduct a requirements analysis to determine the most appropriate ITS telecommunications solution.

Leadership and Partnerships 

The lessons learned on leadership and partnerships discuss the role of an ITS champion, 

partnerships that promote collaboration and cooperation among multiple agencies in 

deploying ITS, outreach and awareness efforts that make stakeholders knowledgeable 
xxiv Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

and accepting of ITS, and organizational structures that facilitate efficient planning and 

implementation of ITS. Key lessons learned are summarized below:

•	 For regional ITS deployments involving multiple agencies, find an influential project

champion for successful execution of the project.

•	 Forge regional partnership agreements capable of addressing the specific characteristics of individual partner agencies and their customers.

•	 Consider public-private, partnership-based unique financing methods as ways to cover costs for transportation projects.

•	 Consider several forms of customer outreach services, with a focus on customer convenience.

•	 Conduct systematic surveys of and interviews with customers periodically to reliably

assess customer satisfaction and to design strategies to improve satisfaction.

•	 Consider a consensus organizational model to help assure support and participation

of partners in a regional ITS deployment, but beware of potential delays in implementation. 

•	 Clearly define the organizational structure and establish an ITS Program Coordinator

to ensure an effective ITS program.

Funding

The lessons learned on funding discuss approaches to sourcing of funds, including Federal, 

State, regional and local, private, funding source combinations, and innovative financing. For the five-year period from 2005 to 2009, Federal funding for highways and transit 

is established by the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A 

Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). State and local agencies play a large role in financing, 

owning, and operating highway, and ITS systems and networks. Private financing refers 

to ways that State and local agencies can collaborate with the private sector to develop 

unique opportunities for funding ITS projects. Innovative financing for transportation is a 

broadly-defined term that encompasses a combination of specially designed techniques 

that supplement traditional highway financing methods. Key lessons learned are summarized below:

•	 Clarify Federal funding regulations for projects that are service-oriented and do not

deliver tangible products.

•	 Distribute financial resources equitably according to agency capital cost shares.

•	 Leverage State assistance in the procurement and funding of ITS technologies for rural transit.

•	 Consider partnering with neighboring agencies and non-traditional stakeholders.

•	 Consider public-private partnerships and unique financing methods as ways to cover

costs for ITS projects.

•	 Examine multiple funding sources and anticipate unforeseen costs associated with

deploying ITS. 

•	 Consider development impact fees, special assessments, and other innovative mechanisms to help finance ITS projects, and management and operations strategies. 

Technical Integration

The lessons learned on technical integration discuss approaches that facilitate the technical connection of dispersed ITS elements for efficient information sharing and control in 
executive summary xxv

transportation management and operations. Such integration may occur among multiple 

systems, agencies, and regions. Technical integration is a multi-faceted concept that may 

include functional integration, jurisdictional considerations, and the integration of legacy 

systems. Key lessons learned are summarized below: 

•	 Assess user needs and follow accepted usability engineering practices when developing interactive systems to develop usable systems.

•	 Use ITS standards when developing systems to maximize vendor flexibility and data

exchange compatibility, and ensure comprehension by agencies.

•	 Create systems and plans that allow information sharing and coordination among regional agencies and states.

•	 Consider developing an emergency response plan that coordinates command, control,

and communications among regional agencies. 

•	 Comply with standards and select proven commercial off-the-shelf technology (hardware and software), when possible, to save money and facilitate integration with existing legacy systems.

•	 To identify and resolve system integration issues with existing legacy equipment, plan

on adequate development time and thorough system testing to ensure systems are 

working properly after system integration.

Procurement 

The lessons learned in procurement address critical steps in the acquisition of ITS projects 

and captures stakeholders’ experiences in work allocation, method of award, contract form, 

contract type, and terms and conditions. Key lessons learned are summarized below:

•	 Determine agency capability level when selecting the most appropriate ITS procurement package.

•	 Maintain owner control and consistent oversight to keep a project on time and on

budget.

•	 Utilize flexible procurement methods that allow for thorough and detailed negotiations.

•	 Consider dividing a large ITS project into manageable task orders.

•	 Consider performance-based contracts, including incentives and penalties, during the

procurement process.

•	 Create policies to specifically address software and technologies including intellectual 

property rights that are brought into, enhanced, and developed during a project.

Legal Issues

The lessons learned in legal issues provide insights on intellectual property, liability, 

privacy, and rules and regulations. Many of these areas, such as liability and intellectual 

property, are not unique to ITS and apply to many other domains, whereas others, such 

as privacy, have particular relevance and application to ITS, as new ITS technologies can 

often raise concerns about privacy. Key lessons are summarized below:

•	 Address intellectual property rights (IPR) early to develop a clear policy and increase

efficiency.

•	 Understand the IPR issues concerning software development and technology and develop a clear policy to address these issues.

•	 Develop written policies to address liability issues early.
xxvi Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

•	 Carefully consider data sharing issues to effectively balance information sharing needs

with data security measures for ITS applications.

•	 Plan and create policies and rules that address electronic toll collection, enforcement,

and data sharing issues. 

•	 Develop a regional information sharing policy to help define information access and

compensation arrangements.

•	 Consider legislative authority and institutional arrangements to help affect policy

changes.

Human Resources

The lessons learned on human resources provide insights on managing staffing needs 

for ITS projects including personnel management, recruiting, retention and turnover, and 

training. ITS projects involve application of engineering, electronics, and computer information technology principles. Therefore, the human resource needs for ITS projects vary 

significantly from the traditional transportation engineering projects of facility construction 

and operations. Key lessons are summarized below:

•	 Develop a staffing plan flexible enough to accommodate both routine and emergency

conditions. 

•	 Consider different staffing arrangements to meet various scheduling demands at a

transportation management center.

•	 Evaluate technical and support staffing needs to close gaps in ITS operational support.

•	 Involve staff in the ITS planning and deployment process.

•	 Create meaningful career paths and adopt optimal workload conditions for successful

operations staff hiring and retention.

•	 Train staff throughout the deployment of a project to ensure successful implementation and use of ITS resources.

•	 Provide training to maintenance crews before introducing a maintenance decision

support system.

•	 Implement cross-training mechanisms to allow task-transfer to handle variable staffing needs. 

Detailed narratives for the key lessons noted above are presented in the Lessons Learned 

chapter of this report. For additional guidance, the U.S. DOT’s ITS Lessons Learned Web 

site (www.itslessons.its.dot.gov), which served as the basis for this synthesis, contains a significant body of knowledge on all topic areas discussed in this report. 

This report presents many benefits based on evaluations of deployed ITS, deployment and 

operations costs, as well as lessons learned during ITS planning and operation. The level of 

ITS deployment in the United States and worldwide continues to increase. As experience 

with ITS deployment and operations continues to accrue, the Web-based ITS Knowledge 

Resources developed by the ITS JPO will be updated to provide convenient access to this 

information, enabling informed ITS decision making.
endnotes 303

Endnotes

1 The estimate of $2,500 to $3,100 is based on information from the following sources:

Conversation with Mr. Jerry Luor. Traffic Engineering Supervisor, Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG). October 2006. 

Costs ID: 2007-00117

Fee Estimate—Millennia Mall Retiming and Scope and Schedule—Millennia Mall Retiming, Bid submitted by TEI Engineering to the City of 

Orlando, FL. October 2005. Costs ID: 2007-00113

Heminger, S. “Regional Signal Timing Program—2005 Cycle Program Performance,” Memorandum to the California Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s Operations Committee. Oakland, CA. October 2006. Costs ID: 2007-00112

Harris, J. “Benefits of Retiming Traffic Signals: A Reference for Practitioners and Decision Makers About the Benefits of Traffic Signal 

Retiming,” Presented at the ITE 2005 Annual Meeting and Exhibit. Melbourne, Australia. 7–10 August 2005. Costs ID: 2007-00115

Sunkari, Srinivasa. “The Benefits of Retiming Traffic Signals,” ITE Journal. April 2004. Costs ID: 2007-00116

The National Traffic Signal Report Card: Technical Report, National Transportation Operations Coalition. Washington, DC. 2005. Costs ID: 

2007-00114

2 Sources that support these findings:

Birst, Shawn and Ayman Smadi. “An Evaluation of ITS for Incident Management in Second-Tier Cities: A Fargo, ND Case Study,” Paper 

Presented at ITE 2000 Annual Meeting. Nashville, Tennessee. 6–10 August 2000. Benefits ID: 2007-00335

Smith, S. and C. Perez. “Evaluation of INFORM—Lessons Learned and Applications to Other Systems,” Paper Presented at the 71st 

Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 12–16 January 1992. Benefits ID: 2000-00098

3 Sources that support these findings:

Birst, Shawn and Ayman Smadi. “An Evaluation of ITS for Incident Management in Second-Tier Cities: A Fargo, ND Case Study,” Paper 

Presented at ITE 2000 Annual Meeting. Nashville, TN. 6–10 August 2000. Benefits ID: 2007-00335

Detroit Freeway Corridor ITS Evaluation, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, EDL No. 13586. July 2001. Benefits ID: 2007-00472

Innovative Traffic Control Technology and Practice in Europe, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Office of International Programs, 

Report No. FHWA-PL-99-021. August 1999. Benefits ID: 2007-00355

ITS Impacts Assessment for Seattle MMDI Evaluation: Modeling Methodology and Results, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration. EDL No. 

11323. September 1999. Benefits ID: 2007-00359

Jeannotte, Krista. “Evaluation of the Advanced Regional Traffic Interactive Management and Information System (ARTIMIS),” Paper 

Presented at the 11th Annual ITS America Meeting. Miami, FL. June 2001. Benefits ID: 2007-00347

Metropolitan Model Deployment Initiative: San Antonio Evaluation Report (Final Draft), U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-OP-00-017, EDL No. 12883. May 2000. Benefits ID: 2000-00134

Smith, S. and C. Perez. “Evaluation of INFORM—Lessons Learned and Applications to Other Systems,” Paper Presented at the 71st 

Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 12–16 January 1992. Benefits ID: 2000-00098

4 Twin Cities Ramp Meter Evaluation: Final Report. Prepared by Cambridge Systematics for the Minnesota DOT, EDL No. 13425. St. Paul, MN. 

1 February 2001. Benefits ID: 2007-00416

5 2006 Annual Report SMART SunGuide Transportation Management Center (TMC), Florida DOT District IV. January 2007. Correspondence with 

Mr. Steve Corbin, FDOT District IV, ITS Operations Manager. February 2007. Costs ID: 2007-00120

6 Drakopoulos, Alexander. “CVO/Freight and ITS Session,” Presentation at the 12th annual ITS Forum, Wisconsin Chapter of ITS America—Smartways, Marquette University. Milwaukee, WI. 31 October 2006. Benefits ID: 2008-00513

7 Pento, Robert J. “Evaluation of PennDOT ITS Deployments,” PennDOT, Bureau of Highway Safety and Traffic Engineering, Presentation 

to the 2005 Transportation Engineering and Safety Conference. 7 December 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00136
304 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

8 Sources that support these findings:

Evaluation of Rural ITS Information Systems along U.S. 395, Spokane, Washington, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, EDL No. 13955. 8 

January 2004. Benefits ID: 2004-00274

Final Evaluation Report: Evaluation of the Idaho Transportation Department Integrated Road-Weather Information System, U.S. DOT Federal Highway 

Administration, EDL No. 14267. 2 February 2006. Benefits ID: 2008-00522

9 Sources that support these findings:

Breen, Bryon D. Anti-Icing Success Fuels Expansion of the Program in Idaho, Idaho Transportation Department, Snow and Ice Pooled Fund 

Cooperative Program, Web page URL www.sicop.net/US-12%20Anti%20Icing%20Success.pdf. Last Accessed 5 October 2001. Benefits 

ID: 2001-00214

Breen, Bryon D. Anti-Icing Success Fuels Expansion of the Program in Idaho, Idaho Transportation Department, Snow and Ice Pooled Fund 

Cooperative Program, Web page URL www.sicop.net/US-12%20Anti%20Icing%20Success.pdf. Last Accessed 5 October 2001. Benefits 

ID: 2007-00336

Case Study #6: Winter Maintenance Innovations Reduce Accidents and Costs—City of Kamloops, Prepared by the McCormick Rankin Corporation 

and Ecoplans Limited for the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia and Environment. Canada. 2004. Benefits ID: 2008-00526

O’Keefe, Katie and Xianming Shi. Synthesis of Information on Anti-icing and Pre-wetting for Winter Highway Maintenance Practices in North America: 

Final Report, Prepared by the Montana State University for the Pacific Northwest Snowfighters Association and the Washington State 

DOT. 19 August 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00525

10 Shi, Xianming, et al. Vehicle-Based Technologies for Winter Maintenance: The State of the Practice—Final Report, Transportation Research Board, 

NCHRP, Project 20-7/Task 200. Washington, DC. September 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00142

11 Sources that support these findings:

Bushman, R. and C. Berthelot. “Estimating the Benefits of Deploying Intelligent Transportation Systems in Work Zones,” Presentation 

at the 83rd Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 11–15 January 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00326

Chu, L., H. Kim, H. Liu, and W. Recker. „Evaluation of Traffic Delay Reduction from Automatic Workzone Information Systems Using 

Micro-Simulation,“ Paper Presented at the 84th Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 9–13 January 2005. 

Benefits ID: 2007-00400

12 Sources that support these findings:

Fontaine, M.D., P. Carlson, and G. Hawkins, Use of Innovative Traffic Control Devices to Improve Safety at Short-Term Rural Work Zones, Texas 

Transportation Institute, Report No. 1879-S. College Station, TX. 2000. Benefits ID: 2007-00331

Garber, N. and S. Patel. Effectiveness of Changeable Message Signs with Radar in Controlling Vehicle Speeds in Work Zones, Virginia Transportation 

Research Council, Report No. VTRC-95-R4. Charlottesville, VA. 1994. Benefits ID: 2007-00332

Garber, N. and S. Srinivasan, Effectiveness of Changeable Message Signs with Radar in Controlling Vehicle Speeds in Work Zones, Virginia Transportation Research Council, Report No. VTRC-98-R10. Charlottesville, VA. 1998. Benefits ID: 2007-00330

McCoy, P. J., J. Bonneson, and J. Kollbaum. Speed Reduction Effects of Speed Monitoring Displays with Radar in Work Zones on Interstate Highways,

Transportation Research Board, Report No. TRR 1509. Washington, DC. 1995. Benefits ID: 2007-00329

13 Sources that support these findings:

Fontaine, M., P. Carlson, and G. Hawkins. Use of Innovative Traffic Control Devices to Improve Safety at Short-Term Rural Work Zones, Prepared by 

the Texas Transportation Institute for the Texas DOT. 2000. Benefits ID: 2007-00331

Fontaine, Michael D. and Steven D. Schrock. “Feasibility of Real-Time Remote Speed .Enforcement in Work Zones,” Paper Presented at 

the 81st Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 13–17 January 2002. Benefits ID: 2007-00490

Garber, N. and Surbhi T. Patel, Effectiveness of Changeable Message Signs in Controlling Vehicle Speeds in Work Zones: Final Report, Virginia Transportation Research Council, Report No. VTRC 95-R4. Charlottesville, VA. August 1994. Benefits ID: 2007-00332

McCoy, P. J., J. Bonneson, and J. Kollbaum. Speed Reduction Effects of Speed Monitoring Displays with Radar in Work Zones on Interstate Highways,

Transportation Research Board, Report No. TRR 1509. Washington, DC. 1995. Benefits ID: 2007-00329

14 Fontaine, Mike. “Operational and Safety Benefits of Work Zone ITS,” Presentation to “ITS in Work Zones” Workshop/Peer Exchange. 

September 2005. Costs ID: 2006-00109
endnotes 305

15 “Transit Impact Matrix,” U.S. DOT Web site URL itsweb.mitretek.org/its/aptsmatrix.nsf/viewbyEfficiency?OpenView. Last Accessed 12 

December 2007.

16 Sources that support these findings:

APTS Benefits, U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administration. November 1995. Benefits ID: 2000-00028

Strathman, J., et al. “Evaluation of Transit Operations: Data Applications of Tri-Met’s Automated Bus Dispatching System,” 

Transportation, Vol. 29, No. 3. August 2002. Cited in Furth, Peter G., et al. Uses of Archived AVL-APC Data to Improve Transit Performance and 

Management: Review and Potential, Transit Cooperative Research Program Web Document No. 23. June 2003. Benefits ID: 2000-00151

Milwaukee County Transit System, Status Report, Milwaukee County. Milwaukee, WI. July 1995. Benefits ID: 2000-00110

17 Harman, Lawrence J. and Uma Shama. TCRP Synthesis 70: Mobile Data Terminals—A Synthesis of Transit Practice, Transportation 

Research Board, Transit Cooperative Research Program. Washington, DC. 2007. Costs ID: 2008-00147

18 Sources and supporting information:

Integration of Emergency and Weather Elements into Transportation Management Centers, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-HOP-06-090, EDL No. 14247. 28 February 2006. 

Guidelines for Transportation Management Systems Maintenance Concept and Plans, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-OP-04-011, EDL No. 13882. 31 December 2002.

19 Transportation Management Center Concepts of Operation: Implementation Guide, .U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWAOP-99-029, EDL No. 11494. December 1999. 

20 Sources supporting this range include:

2006 Annual Report SMART SunGuide Transportation Management Center (TMC), Florida DOT, District IV. January 2007. Costs ID: 

2007-00120

Burk, Brian D. “Combined Transportation, Emergency and Communications Center: A Partnership of Performance,” Presented at 14th 

ITS America Annual Meeting. San Antonio, TX. May 2004. Costs ID: 2005-00093

Krueger, C., et al. The Chicago Traffic Management Center Preliminary Design Study Planning Effort, Chicago DOT. 2003. Costs ID: 2008-00157

Lake County TMC Study: Implementation Phasing Plan—Version 2.0, Prepared by the National Engineering Technology Corporation. Report 

No. DCN 2020IIPPR2.0. Arlington Heights, IL. September 2003. Costs ID: 2008-00158

Perrin, Joseph, Rodrigo Disegni, and Bhargava Rama. Advanced Transportation Management System Elemental Cost Benefit Assessment, Prepared 

by the University of Utah for the Utah DOT and the U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration. March 2004. Costs ID: 2004-00086

21 Sources supporting this range include:

2005 Annual Report SMART SunGuide Transportation Management Center (TMC), Florida DOT, District IV. January 2006. Correspondence with 

Mr. Steve Corbin, FDOT District IV, ITS Operations Manager. 28 March 2006. Costs ID: 2006-00097

2006 Annual Report SMART SunGuide Transportation Management Center (TMC), Florida DOT, District IV. January 2007. Correspondence with 

Mr. Steve Corbin, FDOT District IV, ITS Operations Manager. February 2007. Costs ID: 2007-00120

MAG Regional Concept of Transportation Operations, Technical Memorandum No. 5/6, Prepared by Kimley-Horn for the Maricopa Associated of 

Governments (MAG). Phoenix, AZ. 7 January 2004. Costs ID: 2008-00159

Transportation Management Center: Business Planning and Plans Handbook, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, TMC Pooled Fund 

Study. December 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00160

Transportation Management Center Staffing and Scheduling for Day-to-Day Operations, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration. January 2006. 

Costs ID: 2008-00161

22 Sources that support these findings:

“1996 ITS Tour Report: Eastern North America,” Institute of Transportation Engineers 1996 ITS World Congress, Vol. 1, Pages 4–5. 1997. 

Benefits ID: 2000-00123

Bertini, R., et al. Evaluation of Region 2 Incident Response Program Using Archived Data, Portland State University Report No. PSU-CE-TRG-01-01. 

Portland, OR. June 2001. Benefits ID: 2007-00483
306 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Performance Evaluation of CHART—Coordinated Highways Action Response Team—Year 2002, University of Maryland, College Park and Maryland State Highway Administration. College Park, MD. November 2003. Benefits ID: 2007-00425

Petrov, A., et al. “Evaluation of the Benefits of a Real-Time Incident Response System,” Paper Presented at the 9th World Congress on 

Intelligent Transport Systems. Chicago, IL. 14–17 October 2002. Benefits ID: 2007-00485

“1996 ITS Tour Report: Eastern North America,” Institute of Transportation Engineers 1996 ITS World Congress, Vol. 1, Pages 4–5. 1997. 

Benefits ID: 2000-00123

23 Sources that support these findings:

“CDOT Launches Courtesy Patrol on I-70 West,” Colorado DOT. Denver, CO. 4 March 2005. Costs ID: 2006-00101

“Freeway Service Patrol: ‘About FSP’’ and ‘Facts at a Glance’ Web Site,” Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority. 22 June 

2006. Web site URL www.metro.net/news_info/facts.htm. Last Accessed 12 December 2007. Costs ID: 2006-00102

Hagen, Larry, Huaguo Zhou, and Harkanwal Singh. Road Ranger Benefit—Cost Analysis, Prepared by the University of South Florida for the 

Florida DOT. November 2005. Correspondence with the report authors (Larry Hagen and Huaguo Zhou). 2006. Costs ID: 2006-00103

HELP Annual Operating Report, July 1, 2004–June 30, 2005, Tennessee DOT. Nashville, TN. October 2005. Costs ID: 2006-00096

MDOT Freeway Courtesy Patrol in Southeast Michigan: 2004 Evaluation Report, Southeast Michigan Council of Governments. Detroit, MI. May 

2005. Costs ID: 2006-00104

24 Sources that support these findings:

Cuciti, P. and B. Janson. “Incident Management via Courtesy Patrol: Evaluation of a Pilot Project in Colorado,” Paper Presented at the 

74th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. January 1995. Benefits ID: 2000-00068

Fenno, D. and M. Ogden. “Freeway Service Patrols: A State of the Practice,” Paper Presented at the 77th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. January 1998. Benefits ID: 2000-00130

Highway Helper Summary Report—Twin Cities Metro Area, Minnesota DOT. St. Paul, MN. July 1994. Benefits ID: 2000-00009

Latoski, S., et al. “Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation of Hoosier Helper Freeway Service Patrol,” Journal of Transportation Engineering, Vol. 125, 

No. 5. September/October 1999. Benefits ID: 2000-00002

25 Managing Demand Through Travel Information Services, Prepared for the U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWAHOP-05-005, EDL No. 14072. 2005. Benefits ID: 2007-00409

26 Hazardous Material Transportation Safety and Security Field Operational Test: Final Report—Deployment Team, U.S. DOT Federal Motor Carrier 

Safety Administration. 31 August 2004. Costs ID: 2006-00100

27 Sources that support these findings:

2005 Regional Value Pricing Corridor Evaluation and Feasibility Study: Dallas/Fort Worth—Value Pricing History and Experience, North Central Texas 

Council of Governments. Arlington, TX. June 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00549

Douma, Frank, Johanna Zmud, and Tyler Patterson. “Pricing Comes to Minnesota: Baseline Attitudinal Evaluation of the I-394 HOT 

Lane Project,” Paper Presented at the 85th Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting. Washington, DC. 22–26 January 2006. 

Benefits ID: 2008-00550

28 2005 Regional Value Pricing Corridor Evaluation and Feasibility Study: Dallas/Fort Worth—Value Pricing History and Experience, North Central Texas 

Council of Governments. Arlington, TX. June 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00549

29 Sources that support these findings:

Benefits and Costs of Full Operations and ITS Deployment: A 2003 Simulation for Cincinnati, Prepared for the U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWAJPO-04-031, EDL No. 13979. May 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00164

Benefits and Costs of Full Operations and ITS Deployment: A 2003 Simulation for Seattle, Prepared for the U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-JPO-04-033, 

EDL No. 13977. May 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00165

Benefits and Costs of Full Operations and ITS Deployment: A 2025 Forecast for Tucson, Prepared for the U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-JPO-04-032, 

EDL No. 13978. May 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00166
endnotes 307

30 Vasudevan, Meenakshy, Karl Wunderlich, James Larkin, and Alan Toppen. “A Comparison of Mobility Impacts on Urban Commuting 

Between Broadcast Advisories and Advanced Traveler Information Services,” Paper Presented at the 84th Annual Transportation 

Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 9–13 January 2005. Benefits ID: 2005-00285

31 America’s Travel Information Number: Implementation and Operational Guidelines for 511 Services Version 3.0, 511 Deployment Coalition. September 

2005. Benefits ID: 2007-00301

32 511 Deployment Costs: A Case Study, 511 Deployment Coalition. November 2006. Costs ID: 2007-00125

33 Stephens, Jerry, et al. An Evaluation of Montana’s State Truck Activities Reporting System, Prepared by the Montana State University for the 

Montana DOT. 11 August 2003. Benefits ID: 2003-00268

34 Liu, Henry X., et al. A Literature and Best Practices Scan: ITS Data Management and Archiving, University of Wisconsin. Madison, WI. May 2002. 

Benefits ID: 2008-00559

35 Sources that support these findings:

National Evaluation of the TMC Applications of Archived Data Operational Test—ADMS Virginia, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, 

Report No. FHWA-JPO-06-014, EDL No. 14250. August 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00560

Smith, Brian L. and Ramkumar Venkatanarayana. “Usage Analysis of a First Generation ITS Data Archive: Lessons Learned in the 

Development of a Novel Information Technology Application,” Paper Presented at the 85th Annual Transportation Research Board 

Meeting. Washington, DC. 22–26 January 2006.

36 Archived Data Management Systems: A Cross-Cutting Study, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-05-044, EDL 

No. 14128. Washington, DC. December 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00173

37 Evaluation of the Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Networks (CVISN) Model Deployment Initiative: Volume I—Final Report, U.S. DOT Federal 

Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-04-082, EDL No. 13677. March 2002. Benefits ID: 2002-00241

38 The national survey regarding electronic clearance is discussed in Driver Acceptance of Commercial Vehicle Operations (CVO) Technology in 

the Motor Carrier Environment, 1997. Benefits ID: 2000-00141. The Maryland survey is detailed in Bapna and Zaveri, 2000. Benefits ID: 

2000-00165

39 Description of Costs Data from State Self-Evaluations of Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Networks (CVISN) Deployments (October 2003 to 

October 2005), U.S. DOT Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, EDL No. 14347. 20 February 2006.

40 Sources that support these findings:

Assessment of Intelligent Transportation Systems/Commercial Vehicle Operations Users Services: ITS/CVO Qualitative Benefits/Cost Analysis—Executive 

Summary, American Trucking Associations Foundation. Alexandria, VA. 1996. Benefits ID: 2007-00456

Maze, T. and C. Monsere. “Analysis of a Multi-State Corridor Deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems for Commercial Vehicle 

Operations,” Paper Presented at the 6th World Congress Conference on ITS. Toronto, Canada. 8–12 November 1999. Benefits ID: 

2007-00447

41 Sources that support these findings:

A Report to the Maryland General Assembly Senate Budget and Taxation Committee and House Appropriations Committee regarding Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Network, Prepared by the Maryland DOT for the Maryland General Assembly. November 1998. Benefits ID: 

2000-00142

Assessment of Intelligent Transportation Systems/Commercial Vehicle Operations Users Services: ITS/CVO Qualitative Benefits/Cost Analysis—Executive 

Summary, American Trucking Associations Foundation. Alexandria, VA. 1996. Benefits ID: 2007-00455

Evaluation of the Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Networks (CVISN) Model Deployment Initiative: Volume I—Final Report, U.S. DOT Federal 

Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-04-082, EDL No. 13677. March 2002. Benefits ID: 2007-00486

Maze, T. and C. Monsere. Analysis of a Multi-State Corridor Deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems for Commercial Vehicle Operations, Paper 

Presented at the 6th World Congress Conference on ITS. Toronto, Canada. 8–12 November 1999. Benefits ID: 2001-00181

42 Sources that support these findings:

A Report to the Maryland General Assembly Senate Budget and Taxation Committee and House Appropriations Committee regarding Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Network, Prepared by the Maryland DOT for the Maryland General Assembly. November 1998. Benefits ID: 

2000-00142
308 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Assessment of Intelligent Transportation Systems/Commercial Vehicle Operations Users Services: ITS/CVO Qualitative Benefits/Cost Analysis—Executive 

Summary, American Trucking Associations Foundation. Alexandria, VA. 1996. Benefits ID: 2007-00457

Automated Enforcement in Transportation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Report No. IR-100. Washington, DC. December 1999. Benefits ID: 2007-00341

43 Electronic Intermodal Supply Chain Manifest Field Operational Test Evaluation Final Report, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, EDL No. 

13769. December 2002. Benefits ID: 2003-00254

44 Hazardous Material Transportation Safety and Security Field Operational Test: Final Report—Deployment Team, U.S. DOT Federal Motor Carrier 

Safety Administration. 31 August 2004. Costs ID: 2006-00100

45 Integrated Vehicle Based Safety Systems: A Major ITS Initiative, U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-JPO-05-019, EDL No. 14084. August 2005. Benefits 

ID: 2008-00572

46 Kittelson and Associates, et al. TCRP Report 118: Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide, Transportation Research Board, Transit Cooperative 

Research Program. Washington, DC. 2007. Costs ID: 2008-00148

47 Private Sector Deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems: Current Status and Trends, U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-JPO-06-028, EDL No. 

14266. February 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00175

48 TravTek Evaluation Modeling Study, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-RD-95-090, EDL No. 4403. January 1996. 

Benefits ID: 2000-00078

49 Evaluation of Intelligent Cruise Control System: Volume I—Study Results, U.S. DOT, Report No. DOT-VNTSC-NHTSA-98-3, EDL No. 11843. October 1999. Benefits ID: 2007-00481

50 Bose, A. and P. Ioannou. “Evaluation of the Environmental Effects of Intelligent Cruise Control (ICC) Vehicles,” Paper Presented at the 

80th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 7–11 January 2001. Benefits ID: 2001-00202

51 Sources that support these findings:

Farmer, C. Effect of Electronic Stability Control on Automobile Crash Risk, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. Arlington, VA. 2004. Benefits 

ID: 2008-00577

Ohono and Shimura. Results From the Survey on Effectiveness of Electronic Stability Control (ESC), National Agency for Automotive Safety and 

Victims’ Aid. 18 February 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00578

Preliminary Results Analyzing the Effectiveness of Electronic Stability Control (ESC) Systems, U.S. DOT National Highway Traffic Safety Agency, 

Report No. DOT HS 809 790. September 2004. Benefits ID: 2008-00579

“Update on Electronic Stability Control,” Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, Status Report, Vol. 41, No. 5. 13 June 2006. Benefits ID: 

2008-00580

52 “Update on Electronic Stability Control,” Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, Status Report, Vol. 41, No. 5. 13 June 2006. Benefits ID: 

2008-00580

53 Private Sector Deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems: Current Status and Trends, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-JPO-06-028, EDL No. 14266. February 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00175

54 Haselkorn, M., et al. Evaluation of PuSHMe Mayday System. Prepared by the Washington State Transportation Center (TRAC) for the Washington State Transportation Commission. September 1997. Benefits ID: 2000-00027

55 Automated Collision Notification (ACN) Field Operational Test (FOT) Evaluation Report, U.S. DOT National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 

Report No. DOT-HS-809-304, EDL No. 13830. February 2001. Benefits ID: 2003-00252

56 Private Sector Deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems: Current Status and Trends, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-JPO-06-028, EDL No. 14266. February 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00175

57 Schrank, David and Tim Lomax. 2007 Urban Mobility Report, Texas A&M University, Texas Transportation Institute. September 2007.

58 “FHWA Safety,” U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Office of Safety, Web site URL safety.fhwa.dot.gov. Last Accessed 17 December 2007.

59 “Public Transportation Ridership Statistics,” American Public Transportation Association, Web site URL

www.apta.com/research/stats/ridership. Last Accessed 17 December 2007.
introduction 1

introduction

Mobility and safety challenges are increasing on the Nation’s transportation system. A 

recent study estimated the cost of traffic congestion in U.S. cities for 2005 at $78 billion, 

with 4.2 billion hours of delay and 2.9 billion gallons of fuel wasted.57 Fatalities on U.S. 

highways rose to 43,443 in 2005.58 Public transportation systems provided 10.1 billion trips 

in 2006, the highest in 49 years, with continuing increases documented through the first 

three quarters of 2007.59 Freight volume on U.S. highways is expected to increase to 22.8 

billion tons in 2035, up from 11.5 billion tons in 2002.60

Intelligent transportation systems (ITS) provide a proven set of strategies for addressing the challenges of assuring safety and reducing congestion, while accommodating the 

growth in transit ridership and freight movement. ITS improve transportation safety and 

mobility, and enhance productivity through the use of advanced communications, sensors, 

and information processing technologies encompassing a broad range of wireless and 

wireline communications-based information and electronics. When integrated into the 

transportation system’s infrastructure, and into vehicles themselves, these technologies 

relieve congestion, improve safety, and enhance U.S. productivity.61 Vehicle infrastructure 

integration has the potential to enable many services presently provided by infrastructureor vehicle-based ITS to benefit from enhanced communication between vehicles and the 

infrastructure. 

ITS deployment can impact transportation system performance in six key goal areas: 

safety, mobility, efficiency, productivity, energy and environment, and customer satisfaction. A wide variety of performance measures are used across the evaluations discussed 

in this report to assess ITS performance under each of these goal areas. Safety is measured 

through changes in crash rates or other surrogate measures such as vehicle speeds, traffic 

conflicts, or traffic law violations. Mobility improvements have been measured in travel time 

or delay savings, as well as travel time budget savings, and on-time performance. Efficiency

findings document the capability of better managed transportation facilities to accommodate additional demand, typically represented through increases in capacity or level 

of service within existing road networks or transit systems. Productivity improvements are 

typically documented in cost savings to transportation providers, travelers, or shippers. 

Benefits in the area of Energy and Environment are typically documented through fuel savings 

and reduced pollutant emissions. Customer Satisfaction findings measure, usually through 

surveys, the perception of deployed ITS by the traveling public. 
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

2 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

This report presents information on the performance of deployed ITS under each of these 

goal areas, as well as information on the costs, deployment levels, and lessons learned 

regarding ITS deployment and operations. The report, and the collection of four Web-based 

resources upon which it is based, have been developed by the U.S. DOT’s ITS Joint Program 

Office (JPO) to support informed decision making regarding ITS deployment.

To support the deployment of ITS to address the challenges facing the U.S. transportation system, the JPO has developed a suite of knowledge resources. This collection of four 

Web-based resources provides ready access to information supporting informed decision 

making regarding deployment and operation of ITS to improve transportation system 

performance. Information presented in these online knowledge resources is the basis for 

this document. The four knowledge resources are the ITS Benefits Database, ITS Costs 

Database, ITS Deployment Statistics Database, and the ITS Lessons Learned Knowledge 

Resource. A fifth Web site, the ITS Applications Overview, provides access to information 

from each of the knowledge resources using an organization scheme similar to that used 

in this report. 

Additional information on each finding cited in this document can be found in the online 

knowledge resources, along with links to the original source documents, when available. 

See the “About This Report” section, below, for more information on accessing specific 

citations in this report online. Each of the knowledge resources is briefly described below. 

Additional information about each resource is available online including details about 

each site’s organization, frequency of updates, and how to contribute information to 

the resources. When visiting the Web sites, follow the link to the “About This Site” and 

“Frequently Ask Questions (FAQ)” pages of each site for this information. 

ITS Benefits Database

The major objectives of the ITS Benefits Database, available online at www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov,

are to:

	Document findings from the evaluation of ITS deployments pertaining to the effects of 

ITS on transportation systems performance.

	Provide transportation professionals with convenient access to the benefits of ITS deployment so that they can make informed planning and investment decisions.

Within the ITS Benefits Database, findings from ITS evaluations are presented in a concise 

summary format. Each benefit summary includes a title in the form of a short statement 

of the evaluation finding, context narrative, and identifying information such as date, location, and source, as well as the evaluation details that describe how the identified ITS 

benefit was determined. The ITS Benefits Database documents all findings of ITS evaluations, regardless of outcome, and includes several findings of neutral impact and a few 

examples of negative impacts under particular goal areas. The Web site includes a useful 

search capability and also presents findings through several organization schemes including the ITS application areas discussed in chapters of this report, the ITS goal areas, and 

by location. 

ITS Costs Database

The ITS Costs Database, available online at www.itscosts.its.dot.gov, was established as a 

national repository of cost estimates for ITS deployments. The purpose of the ITS Costs 

Database is to support informed decision making by transportation leaders.
introduction 3

The ITS Costs Database contains estimates of ITS costs that can be used for developing 

project cost estimates during the planning process or preliminary design phase, and for 

policy studies and benefit-cost analyses. Both non-recurring (capital) and recurring or 

operations and maintenance (O&M) costs are provided where possible.

Two types of cost data are available: unit costs and system cost summaries. The primary 

difference in the two types is the level of aggregation. Unit costs are the costs associated 

with an individual ITS element, such as a video camera for traffic surveillance or a dynamic 

message sign. A range of costs (e.g., $500 to $1,000) is presented for the capital cost and 

annual O&M cost of each element as well as an estimate of the length in years of its usable 

life. Unit costs are available in two formats: unadjusted and adjusted. (Adjusted costs 

are available in Appendix A.) System cost summaries are the costs of an ITS project or 

portion of an ITS project such as the cost of expanding a statewide road weather information system or the detailed costs for a signal interconnect project. Each entry describes 

the background of the project, lists the ITS technologies deployed, and presents the costs 

and what the costs covered. 

ITS Deployment Statistics Database

The ITS Deployment Tracking Project collects and disseminates information on the level of 

deployment and integration of ITS technology nationally. Information is gathered through 

a series of national surveys, covering metropolitan as well as rural deployment. Data have 

been collected in a series of national surveys conducted in 1997, 1999, 2000, 2002, 2004, 

2005, and 2006. In the most recent survey, conducted in 2006, information was gathered 

from 108 of the largest metropolitan areas, shown in figure 1 on page 6. Within each 

metropolitan area, agencies involved with freeway, arterial, and transit management; public 

safety (law enforcement and fire/rescue/emergency medical services); and toll collection 

were surveyed. Statewide and rural deployment information was also gathered in a survey 

of each of the 50 states concerning ITS deployment for crash prevention and safety, road 

weather management, operations and maintenance, and traveler information. More than 

2,100 agencies were covered in the 2006 survey, with a response rate nearly 90 percent. 

The deployment statistics database serves as a source of information on ITS deployment 

for the U.S. DOT, State and local transportation agencies, researchers, vendors, and the 

general public. Results from this survey and all previous national surveys are available 

online at www.itsdeployment.its.dot.gov. The Web site also provides access to survey results in 

the form of downloadable reports and fact sheets. 

ITS Lessons Learned Knowledge Resource

A lesson learned is the knowledge gained through experience or study. It is a reflection 

on what was done right, what one would do differently, and how one could be more 

effective in the future. The ITS Lessons Learned Knowledge Resource, available online 

at www.itslessons.its.dot.gov, provides the ITS professional community with access to those 

lessons learned from others’ experiences. This knowledge resource serves as a clearinghouse to document and share experiences of transportation practitioners in their planning, 

deployment, operations, maintenance, and evaluation of ITS to enable informed decision 

making regarding future ITS projects and programs. ITS lessons are collected primarily from 

case studies, best practice compendiums, planning and design reviews, and evaluation 

studies. The ITS Electronic Document Library, the Transportation Research Board’s Transportation Research Information Services, international transportation literature databases 

(e.g., Transport), and conference proceedings are major sources for the documents that are 

reviewed. Interviews of subject matter experts are also used as sources of new lessons.
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

4 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

The lessons learned in this knowledge resource are based on the experiences of one or more 

ITS stakeholders from numerous ITS projects and programs in the country. Thus, a major 

focus for lessons presented in this document has been to gather typical field evidence—

evidence-based lessons learned—that other stakeholders could benefit from learning.

Narratives of field evidence for selected key lessons are interspersed throughout this report, 

while more extensive details for the same and many other lessons can be found on the ITS 

Lessons Learned Web site (www.itslessons.its.dot.gov). A full chapter of this report is dedicated 

to the presentation of a synthesis of lessons on key areas of interest, such as ITS planning, 

procurement, and legal issues. 

ITS Applications Overview

The ITS Applications Overview, available at www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov, provides access to each 

of the four knowledge resources described above, organized by the ITS application areas 

described in this report. The Web site also provides additional information regarding each 

ITS application including: 

	Evaluation documents available from the ITS JPO 

	Related U.S. DOT initiatives and other program activities

	Other resources available through the JPO’s ITS/Operations Resource Guide

	Points of contact within the U.S. DOT. 

About this Report

Eighth in a series of reports based upon evaluation results collected by the ITS JPO, this 

is the first to include information on ITS deployment statistics. Deployment information is 

drawn from selected findings of the ITS Deployment Tracking surveys conducted by the ITS 

JPO. It is also the first to more fully discuss a variety of important lessons learned through 

ITS deployment and operation, now presented in a series of chapters containing the results 

of a synthesis of ITS lessons learned knowledge. Sample lessons were provided in the 

previous version of this report—Intelligent Transportation Systems Benefits, Costs, and Lessons: 

2005 Update— and in the online knowledge resource launched in September of that year. 

Previous versions of the report included information on ITS costs, beginning with the 2003 

edition, while the original five reports in the series discussed ITS benefits.

Report Organization

Following this introductory chapter, this report begins discussion of 17 different areas 

of ITS applications. These chapters are divided into two groups discussing technologies 

deployed on the transportation infrastructure and those deployed within vehicles. The 

14 infrastructure applications are further divided into groups of ITS strategies applied 

to roadways, transit, management and operations, and freight movement. Each chapter 

broadly describes the various ITS technologies that are typically deployed within a particular application area such as freeway management or commercial vehicle operations. A 

broad discussion of significant findings from the collected studies within the benefits, 

costs, and deployment knowledge resources follows. The chapters conclude with a series of 

specific highlighted findings from the knowledge resources, presented in a tabular format. 

Significant lessons learned are presented as sidebars within each chapter.

Another chapter of this report includes a synthesis of the lessons learned collected in 

the ITS Lessons Learned Knowledge Resource. Nine sections present this information 

THE FOUR WEB-BASED KNOWLEDGE 

RESOURCES PROVIDE TOOLS TO SUPPORT 

INFORMED DECISION MAKING REGARDING THE DEPLOYMENT AND OPERATION 

OF ITS.
introduction 5

according to significant lesson topic areas such as management and operations, and policy 

and planning.

A brief conclusion is followed by two significant appendices. Appendix A presents adjusted 

unit costs (in 2006 dollars) for ITS components, drawn from the ITS Costs Database. Appendix B documents the volume of information available in the ITS Benefits Database, ITS 

Costs Database, and ITS Lessons Learned Knowledge Resource, presenting the number 

of findings available for each of the ITS application areas discussed in this report. The 

concluding references section includes useful information for accessing information on 

each cited reference within the knowledge resources, further described below.

Accessing Source Documents Online

Many of the findings presented in this report include numbered annotations further 

described in the “Endnotes” section near the end of the document. These endnotes provide 

reference information and short identification numbers that can be entered into the Knowledge Resources Web site search feature to quickly access more complete information 

on the cited finding and a link to the cited source document, if it is available online. The 

identification numbers are labeled Benefits ID, Costs ID, and Lessons Learned ID. For 

example, the second endnote includes the following citation:

2 Birst, Shawn and Ayman Smadi. “An Evaluation of ITS for Incident Management in 

Second–Tier Cities: A Fargo, ND Case Study,” Paper Presented at ITE 2000 Annual Meeting. Nashville, Tennessee. 6–10 August 2000. Benefits ID: 2007-00335

Visiting the ITS Benefits Database, at www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov, and entering 2007-00335 in 

the search input box will provide direct access to the online summary of findings from this 

study. To access more detailed costs information, Costs ID numbers should be entered in 

the ITS Costs Database Web site, at www.itscosts.its.dot.gov, and Lessons Learned ID numbers 

will provide access to the relevant entries in the ITS Lessons Learned Knowledge Resource, 

at www.itslessons.its.dot.gov.
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

6 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Figure 1 – Metropolitan Areas Surveyed Through the ITS Deployment Tracking Project

Bellingham

Seattle Spokane

Eugene

Portland

Boise City

Sacramento

San Francisco

Reno

Stockton

Modesto

Salinas

Bakersfield

Fresno

Las Vegas

San Luis Obispo

Santa Barbara

Los Angeles

San Diego

Tucson

Phoenix

Salt Lake City

Provo

Denver

Oklahoma City

El Paso Dallas

Wichita

San Antonio

San Juan

Austin

McAllen

Baton Rouge

Little Rock

Beaumont

Houston

Honolulu

New Orleans

Jackson

Tulsa

Springfield

Kansas City

Des Moines Omaha

Milwaukee

Minneapolis

Pensacola

Sarasota-Bradenton

Jacksonville

West Palm Beach

Orlando

Daytona Beach

Miami

Memphis

Huntsville

Birmingham

Montgomery

Janesville

Grand Rapids

Chicago

St. Louis

Louisville

Indianapolis

Tampa

Fort Myers

Atlanta

SyracuseAlbany

Allentown

Asheville

Baltimore

Boston

Detroit

Charlotte

Charleston

Greenville

Greenville

Greensboro

Hampton Roads

Nashville

Raleigh

Columbia

Knoxville

Buffalo

Rochester

Scranton

Washington D.C.

Harrisburg

Richmond Roanoke

Providence

Lancaster

Youngstown

Philadelphia

Pittsburgh

Fort Wayne

Hartford

Toledo

Cleveland

Columbus

Cincinnati

Chattanooga

Dayton

New York

New Haven New London

Springfield
308 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Assessment of Intelligent Transportation Systems/Commercial Vehicle Operations Users Services: ITS/CVO Qualitative Benefits/Cost Analysis—Executive 

Summary, American Trucking Associations Foundation. Alexandria, VA. 1996. Benefits ID: 2007-00457

Automated Enforcement in Transportation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Report No. IR-100. Washington, DC. December 1999. Benefits ID: 2007-00341

43 Electronic Intermodal Supply Chain Manifest Field Operational Test Evaluation Final Report, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, EDL No. 

13769. December 2002. Benefits ID: 2003-00254

44 Hazardous Material Transportation Safety and Security Field Operational Test: Final Report—Deployment Team, U.S. DOT Federal Motor Carrier 

Safety Administration. 31 August 2004. Costs ID: 2006-00100

45 Integrated Vehicle Based Safety Systems: A Major ITS Initiative, U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-JPO-05-019, EDL No. 14084. August 2005. Benefits 

ID: 2008-00572

46 Kittelson and Associates, et al. TCRP Report 118: Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide, Transportation Research Board, Transit Cooperative 

Research Program. Washington, DC. 2007. Costs ID: 2008-00148

47 Private Sector Deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems: Current Status and Trends, U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-JPO-06-028, EDL No. 

14266. February 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00175

48 TravTek Evaluation Modeling Study, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-RD-95-090, EDL No. 4403. January 1996. 

Benefits ID: 2000-00078

49 Evaluation of Intelligent Cruise Control System: Volume I—Study Results, U.S. DOT, Report No. DOT-VNTSC-NHTSA-98-3, EDL No. 11843. October 1999. Benefits ID: 2007-00481

50 Bose, A. and P. Ioannou. “Evaluation of the Environmental Effects of Intelligent Cruise Control (ICC) Vehicles,” Paper Presented at the 

80th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 7–11 January 2001. Benefits ID: 2001-00202

51 Sources that support these findings:

Farmer, C. Effect of Electronic Stability Control on Automobile Crash Risk, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. Arlington, VA. 2004. Benefits 

ID: 2008-00577

Ohono and Shimura. Results From the Survey on Effectiveness of Electronic Stability Control (ESC), National Agency for Automotive Safety and 

Victims’ Aid. 18 February 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00578

Preliminary Results Analyzing the Effectiveness of Electronic Stability Control (ESC) Systems, U.S. DOT National Highway Traffic Safety Agency, 

Report No. DOT HS 809 790. September 2004. Benefits ID: 2008-00579

“Update on Electronic Stability Control,” Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, Status Report, Vol. 41, No. 5. 13 June 2006. Benefits ID: 

2008-00580

52 “Update on Electronic Stability Control,” Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, Status Report, Vol. 41, No. 5. 13 June 2006. Benefits ID: 

2008-00580

53 Private Sector Deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems: Current Status and Trends, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-JPO-06-028, EDL No. 14266. February 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00175

54 Haselkorn, M., et al. Evaluation of PuSHMe Mayday System. Prepared by the Washington State Transportation Center (TRAC) for the Washington State Transportation Commission. September 1997. Benefits ID: 2000-00027

55 Automated Collision Notification (ACN) Field Operational Test (FOT) Evaluation Report, U.S. DOT National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 

Report No. DOT-HS-809-304, EDL No. 13830. February 2001. Benefits ID: 2003-00252

56 Private Sector Deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems: Current Status and Trends, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-JPO-06-028, EDL No. 14266. February 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00175

57 Schrank, David and Tim Lomax. 2007 Urban Mobility Report, Texas A&M University, Texas Transportation Institute. September 2007.

58 “FHWA Safety,” U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Office of Safety, Web site URL safety.fhwa.dot.gov. Last Accessed 17 December 2007.

59 “Public Transportation Ridership Statistics,” American Public Transportation Association, Web site URL

www.apta.com/research/stats/ridership. Last Accessed 17 December 2007.
endnotes 309

60 “Freight Facts and Figures 2006,” U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Freight Management and Operations, Web site URL 

ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/nat_freight_stats/docs/06factsfigures/index.htm. Last Accessed 17 December 2007.

61 “ITS Overview,” U.S. DOT, ITS Joint Program Office, Web site URL www.its.dot.gov/its_overview.htm. Last Accessed 17 December 

2007.

62 National Strategy to Reduce Congestion on America’s Transportation Network, U.S DOT. May 2006. 

63 “Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) Quarterly Newsletter—Spring 2007,” U.S. DOT ITS Joint Program Office, Web Site URL www.

its.dot.gov/icms/index.htm. Last Accessed 13 November 2007.

64 Sources that support these findings (individual cities implementing coordinated signal timing):

Hetrick, Stephen and Curtis B. McCollough. “How to save $4.2 Million a Year,” ITS International Newsletter. June 1996. Benefits ID: 

2007-00349

Skabardonis, Alexander. “ITS Benefits: The Case of Traffic Signal Control Systems,” Paper Presented at the 80th Annual Transportation 

Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 7–11 January 2001. Benefits ID: 2007-00356

Sunkari, Srinivasa. “The Benefits of Retiming Traffic Signals,” ITE Journal. April 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00393

Syracuse Signal Interconnect Project: Before and After Analysis Final Report, Prepared by DMJM Harris for the New York State DOT. September 

2003. Correspondence with DMJM Harris. Benefits ID: 2007-00398

White, Jeris, et al. Traffic Signal Optimization for Tysons Corner Network Volume I. Evaluation and Summary, Virginia DOT, Report No. TPE.

R7D.03.08.00. March 2000. Benefits ID: 2007-00395

Additional sources that reference findings for two statewide programs (California and Texas):

Skabardonis, Alexander. “ITS Benefits: The Case of Traffic Signal Control Systems,” Paper Presented at the 80th Annual Transportation 

Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 7–11 January 2001. Benefits ID: 2007-00356

Sunkari, Srinivasa. “The Benefits of Retiming Traffic Signals,” ITE Journal. April 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00393

65 Sources that support these findings: 

Hetrick, Stephen, and Curtis B. McCollough. “How to save $4.2 Million a Year,” ITS International Newsletter. June 1996. Benefits ID: 

2000-00065

ITS Impacts Assessment for Seattle MMDI Evaluation: Modeling Methodology and Results, U.S. DOT, EDL No. 11323. September 1999. Benefits ID: 

2007-00358

Phoenix Metropolitan Model Deployment Initiative Evaluation Report (Final Draft), U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-OP-00-015, EDL No. 12743. April 

2000. Benefits ID: 2007-00378

Syracuse Signal Interconnect Project: Before and After Analysis Final Report, Prepared by DMJM Harris for the New York State DOT. Syracuse, NY. 

September 2003. Benefits ID: 2004-00273

White, Jeris, et al. Traffic Signal Optimization for Tysons Corner Network, Volume 1: Evaluation and Summary, Virginia DOT, Report No. TPE.

R7D.03.08.00. March 2000. Benefits ID: 2000-00126

66 Automated Enforcement: A Compendium of Worldwide Evaluations of Results, U.S. DOT National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Report 

No. DOT HS 810 763. July 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00505

67 The estimate of $2,500 to $3,100 is based on information from the following sources:

Conversation with Mr. Jerry Luor. Traffic Engineering Supervisor, Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG). October 2006. 

Costs ID: 2007-00117

Fee Estimate—Millennia Mall Retiming and Scope and Schedule—Millennia Mall Retiming, Bid submitted by TEI Engineering to the City of 

Orlando, FL. October 2005. Costs ID: 2007-00113

Heminger, S. “Regional Signal Timing Program—2005 Cycle Program Performance,” Memorandum to the California Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s Operations Committee. Oakland, CA. October 2006. Costs ID: 2007-00112

Harris, J. “Benefits of Retiming Traffic Signals: A Reference for Practitioners and Decision Makers About the Benefits of Traffic Signal 

Retiming,” Presented at the ITE 2005 Annual Meeting and Exhibit. Melbourne, Australia. 7–10 August 2005. Costs ID: 2007-00115

Sunkari, Srinivasa. “The Benefits of Retiming Traffic Signals,” ITE Journal. April 2004. Costs ID: 2007-00116
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | arterial Management 9

Fifty-Four (54) percent of

signalized intersections

in the country’s MAJOR

metropolitan areas

operate under centralized 

computer control.

Arterial Management Categories 

in the ITS Knowledge Resources

Surveillance

Traffic

Infrastructure

Traffic Control

Adaptive Signal Control

Advanced Signal Systems

Variable Speed Limits

Bicycle and Pedestrian 

Special Events

Lane Management

High-Occupancy Vehicle Facilities

Reversible Flow Lanes

Pricing

Lane Control

Variable Speed Limits

Emergency Evacuation

Parking Management

Data Collection

Information Dissemination

Information Dissemination

Dynamic Message Signs

In-Vehicle Systems

Highway Advisory Radio

Enforcement

Speed Enforcement

Traffic Signal Enforcement

Arterial Management

Roadways

Arterial management systems manage traffic along arterial roadways, employing vehicle 

detectors, traffic signals, and various means of communicating information to travelers. 

These systems make use of information collected by traffic surveillance devices to smooth 

the flow of traffic along travel corridors. They also disseminate important information about 

travel conditions to travelers via technologies such as dynamic message signs (DMS) or 

highway advisory radio (HAR). 

Many of the services possible through arterial management systems are enabled by traffic 

surveillance technologies, such as sensors or cameras monitoring traffic flow. These same 

sensors may also be used to monitor critical transportation infrastructure for security 

purposes.

Traffic signal control systems address a number of objectives, primarily improving traffic flow and safety. Adaptive signal control systems coordinate control of traffic signals 

along arterial corridors, adjusting the lengths of signal phases based on prevailing traffic 

conditions. Advanced signal systems include those that provide the ability for proactive 

management of signal systems by allowing traffic conditions to be actively monitored, 

provide the ability to archive traffic data, and may include some necessary technologies for the later development of adaptive signal control. Coordinated signal operations 

across neighboring jurisdictions may be facilitated by these advanced systems. Pedestrian 

detectors, specialized signal heads, and bicycle-actuated signals can improve the safety 

of all road users at signalized intersections. Arterial management systems can also apply 

unique operating schemes for traffic signals, portable or dedicated DMS, and other ITS 

components to smooth traffic flow during special events.

A variety of techniques are available to manage the travel lanes available on arterial 

roadways and ITS applications can support many of these strategies. Examples include 

dynamic posting of high-occupancy vehicle restrictions and the use of reversible flow 

lanes allowing more lanes in the peak direction of travel during peak periods. Parking 

management systems, most commonly deployed in urban centers or at modal transfer 

points such as airports and outlying transit stations, monitor the availability of parking 

and disseminate the information to drivers, reducing traveler frustration and congestion 

associated with searching for parking spaces. Transportation agencies can share information collected by arterial management systems with road users through technologies 

within the arterial network, such as DMS or HAR. They may also share this information 

with travelers via broader traveler information programs. Arterial management systems 

may also include automated enforcement programs that increase compliance with speed 

limits, traffic signals, or other traffic control devices.

Information sharing between agencies operating arterial roadways and those operating 

other portions of the transportation network can also have a positive impact on the operation of the transportation system. Examples include coordinating operations with a freeway 

management system, or providing arterial information to a traveler information system 

covering multiple roadways and public transit facilities.

Several ITS applications that impact traffic operations on arterial roadways are discussed 

elsewhere in this report. Transit signal priority systems, discussed within the transit 

management chapter, can ease the travel of buses or light rail vehicles on arterial corridors 

and improve on-time performance. Signal preemption for emergency vehicles, discussed 

in the emergency management chapter, reduces the likelihood of crashes during incident 

response while improving response times. The electronic payment and pricing chapter 

discusses pricing strategies that are used on a growing number of arterial streets.
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

10 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Other ITS Knowledge Resource 

Categories Related to Arterial 

Management

Refer to other chapters in this document.

Transit Management

Operations and Fleet

Management: Transit Signal Priority

Emergency Management

Response and Recovery:

Emergency Vehicle Signal

Preemption

Electronic Payment and Pricing

Pricing

Recognizing that congestion has become a national problem, the U.S. DOT launched 

the National Strategy to Reduce Congestion on America’s Transportation Network. One 

element of this strategy is to reduce congestion by promoting operational and technical improvements that have the potential to enable existing roadways to operate more 

efficiently.62

In addition to the individual ITS technologies profiled in this chapter, the Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) initiative—a major ITS initiative currently being conducted by the 

U.S. DOT—has the potential to improve arterial management strategies. The purpose of 

the ICM initiative is to demonstrate that ITS technologies can be used to efficiently and 

proactively manage the movement of people and goods in major transportation corridors 

by facilitating integration of the management of all networks in a corridor. The results of 

the initiative will help to facilitate widespread use of ICM tools and strategies to improve 

mobility through integrated management of transportation assets.63 Additional information 

on this initiative is available at the ITS JPO’s Web site: www.its.dot.gov/icms.

Findings

Benefits

Table 1 summarizes the findings contained in the ITS Benefits Database and highlighted 

later in this chapter. Studies demonstrate the ability of traffic control ITS applications to 

enhance mobility, increase efficiency of the transportation system, and reduce the impact 

of automobile travel on energy consumption and air quality. The ability of both adaptive 

signal control and coordinated signal timing to smooth traffic can lead to corresponding 

safety improvements through reduced rear-end crashes. As shown in figure 2, studies of 

signal coordination in 5 U.S. cities and 1 Canadian city have shown reductions in stops 

from 6 to 77 percent, while 2 statewide studies have shown average improvements from 12 

to 14 percent.64 The figure depicts multiple findings for several studies, reflecting results 

under varying test scenarios, such as peak and off-peak travel periods or different test 

routes driven. The magnitude of the impact varies with the degree of congestion on the 

network, as well as the effectiveness of the traffic signal timing plans in place prior to the 

coordination activities. Reducing the number of vehicle stops can also have significant 

environmental impacts, by reducing the amount of acceleration required of vehicles traveling the corridor. Modeling studies in 5 U.S. cities have shown vehicle emission reductions 

ranging from no significant impact up to 22 percent.65

Studies of parking management systems demonstrate the potential of these systems 

to improve traffic flow in congested urban areas and improve travelers’ experiences at 

major transportation facilities, such as airports and suburban transit and commuter rail 

stations.

A 2007 literature review by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) 

documented studies of speed enforcement camera programs worldwide, which reported 

crash reductions from 9 to 41 percent. The review also discussed rigorous studies of red 

light enforcement camera programs in 18 U.S. cities and 6 Canadian cities. The studies 

typically found a decrease in right-angle crashes and an increase in rear-end crashes, 

with the severity of the right-angle crashes and associated costs outweighing that of the 

rear-end crashes.66 Customer satisfaction surveys have repeatedly shown strong support 

for the programs.
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | arterial Management 11

Table 1—Arterial Management Benefits Summary Safety Mobility Efficiency Productivity 

Energy andEnvironmentCustomerSatisfaction

Surveillance

Traffic Control ✚ ● ● ●

Lane Management

Parking Management ● ✚ ●

Information Dissemination

Enforcement ● ●

● Substantial positive impacts ✚ Positive impacts

❍ Negligible impacts ✱ Mixed results

✖ Negative impacts blank Not enough data

80

60

40

20

0

Figure 2 – Reduction of Number of Stops With Traffic Signal Coordination Reduction in Stops (%)

Burlington, Canada

Gainesville, FL

Richmond, VA

St. Augustine, FL

Syracuse, NY

Tysons Corner, VA

California

Texas

11

77

11

28

39

49

16

6

12.5 14.2

Costs

Optimizing signal timing is considered a low-cost approach to reducing congestion. Based 

on data from six separate studies, the costs range from $2,500 to $3,100 per signal per 

update. While this range is reasonable, costs could be slightly more or less.67 Well-trained 

technicians are needed to maintain traffic signal hardware so that the signal system is 

operating well and according to the timing updates. A current assumption is one traffic 

COORDINATED SIGNAL CONTROL

CAN REDUCE VEHICLE EMISSIONS BY UP

TO 22 PERCENT.
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

12 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

signal technician can maintain 30 to 40 signals. The average costs of a technician is $56,000 

per year which includes salary, benefits (approximately 30 to 35 percent of salary), vehicles, 

parts/supplies, and other required items.68

A cross-cutting study was conducted to evaluate the deployment of advanced parking 

management systems in three new parking facilities. The study found that these systems 

cost between $250 to $800 per space to install depending on the type and level of information provided, level of effort required to install sensors, ease of access to communications 

and power supplies, and the signage required to convey parking information to drivers at 

appropriate decision points. A smart parking field test conducted for the California DOT 

and Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) estimated capital cost at $150 to $250 per space; operations and maintenance (O&M) costs were estimated at $40 to $60 per space.69

Deployment

Figure 3 – Deployment Trends for Arterial ITS, 2000-2006

Closed Loop

Surveillance

HAR

Service Patrols

CCTV

Red Light

Enforcement Cameras

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

‘00 ’02 ‘04 ’05 ‘06

Year

Coverage (%)

Figure 3 shows deployment trends for key ITS technologies supporting arterial management from 2000 to 2006, based on a series of surveys of arterial management agencies in 

78 of the largest U.S. metropolitan areas. Half (50 percent) of traffic signals in these metropolitan areas were under centralized control through closed loop or computer control in 

2006. The trend to bring traffic signals under centralized control has leveled off in recent 

years. In contrast, surveillance at intersections is growing rapidly, nearly doubling since 

2000 to 39 percent of signalized intersections. Fifteen (15) percent of arterial street miles in 

these metropolitan areas were covered by service patrols, a trend which has been growing 

steadily since 2000. Deployment of closed circuit television (CCTV) cameras on arterial 

streets is still at a low level, albeit at a moderate rate of growth. HAR and red light enforcement cameras have yet to be deployed in large numbers.

In 2006, the survey of metropolitan areas was expanded to the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas. This survey is the source of deployment statistics presented later in this 

chapter. 

Optimized signal timing is considered 

a low cost approach to reducing 

congestion. Based on data from six 

separate studies, the costs range from 

2,500 to 3,100 per signal per update. 
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | arterial Management 13

Selected Highlights from the ITS Knowledge

Resources on Arterial Management

Surveillance

Many strategies for arterial management are enabled by traffic surveillance and detection 

technologies, such as sensors or cameras monitoring traffic flow. The surveillance and 

detection technologies used to monitor traffic flow in support of ITS applications can also 

be used to monitor key transportation facilities for security purposes.

Surveillance

Deployment

Thirty-nine (39) percent of signalized intersections in the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas use electronic surveillance to monitor traffic.

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Detection subsystem:

•	 Inductive Loop Surveillance at Intersection: $8.7K-$15.6K

•	 Remote Traffic Microwave Sensor at Intersection: $17K

•	 Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Video Camera: $9K-$19K

Transportation Management Center subsystem:

•	 Hardware, Software for Traffic Surveillance: $131K-$160K

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem:

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

California: The Cities of Concord and Walnut Creek investigated alternatives for 

transmitting real-time traffic video from field devices to each city’s respective traffic 

operations center (TOC). During the design phase of the project, each city conducted 

a budgetary cost comparison to examine the capital costs associated with two alternatives:

•	 Upgrading the existing network of copper wire (twisted pair) traffic signal control 

communications network

•	 Converting to fiber optic communications.

The capital cost for video over existing copper interconnect was $95,910 for a fivemile corridor. The capital cost for video over new fiber optic cable was $160,700 for a 

five-mile corridor.70

Washington: The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) installed 

a system to improve traffic flow and reduce delay at two of the busiest intersections 

in the Puget Sound Region. The system consisted of five traffic cameras mounted on 

existing traffic signal support structures. Traffic engineers at the Washington State 

Traffic Systems Management Center were able to monitor traffic conditions and compensate for unnecessary signal delays by adjusting signal timing at each intersection. 

WSDOT was able to add surveillance to both intersections for $65,000.71
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

14 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Traffic Control: Adaptive Signal Control 

Adaptive signal control systems coordinate control of traffic signals across a signal network, 

adjusting the lengths of signal phases based on prevailing traffic conditions. 

Traffic Control—Adaptive Signal Control

Deployment

Three percent of traffic signals in the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas are 

controlled by adaptive signal control.

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety Summary Finding: Experience with adaptive signal control deployed in 5 cities demonstrated stop reductions from 10 to 41 

percent. Smoothing traffic by reducing the number of required 

stops can improve traffic safety.72

Mobility Summary Finding: Studies from 11 cities in the U.S. and abroad 

found delay reductions from 5 to 42 percent after installation of 

adaptive signal control.73

Efficiency A study of the integrated deployment of freeway ramp metering 

and adaptive signal control on adjacent arterial routes in Glasgow, 

Scotland found a 20 percent increase in vehicle throughput on 

the arterials and a 6 percent increase on freeways. Arterial traffic 

increased 13 percent after implementation of ramp metering and an 

additional 7 percent with the initiation of adaptive signal control.74

Energy and 

Environment

Adaptive signal control in Toronto, Canada has yielded emission 

reductions of three to six percent and fuel savings of four to seven 

percent.75

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Control subsystem:

•	 Signal Controller and Cabinet: $8K-$14K

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem:

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Texas: In November 2007, the City of Tyler deployed the Adaptive Control SystemLite, or ACS-Lite, technology along a 3.17-mile corridor. The deployment included the 

following costs: $150,600 for the software module, $38,400 for traffic communication 

system upgrades, and $357,900 for detection devices.76

lessons learned 

Partner with neighboring agencies, either 

formally or informally, to benefit from 

cross-jurisdictional traffic signal coordination.

Cross-jurisdictional signal coordination is 

an achievable goal for any size community 

regardless of the number of jurisdictions 

involved, the type of signal hardware and 

communication equipment, or even the philosophical differences in timing approaches. 

Partnering with agencies, either formally or 

informally, to manage institutional issues is 

key to implementing a successful cross-jurisdictional traffic signal coordination program. 

•	 Address comfort levels when establishing formal or informal agreements among 

agencies. 

In Philadelphia, the city’s cross-jurisdictional 

signal program involves three agencies sharing information verbally, having established 

informal agreements between jurisdictions. 

As the agencies expanded the system, additional agreements were necessary. The partners found that the smaller municipalities 

prefer formal agreements reviewed by legal 

counsel. The agencies believe that the coordination agreements, whether formal or informal, have resulted in improved operations 

in terms of fewer crashes, more consistent 

speeds, and reduced air pollution.
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | arterial Management 15

Traffic Control—Adaptive Signal Control

Costs

Virginia: In 2001, the Arlington County Department of Public Works, Traffic Engineering Division, funded 65 intersections (expandable to 235) under an adaptive signal 

control system. The project costing $2.43 million included software, hardware, roadside equipment, cabling, mobilization and maintenance of traffic, installation, training, maintenance and test equipment, and system documentation.77

Traffic Control: Advanced Signal Systems 

Advanced signal systems include coordinated signal operations across neighboring jurisdictions, as well as centralized control of traffic signals, which may include some necessary 

technologies for the later development of adaptive signal control.

Traffic Control—Advanced Signal Systems

Deployment

Fifty-four (54) percent of signalized intersections in the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas operate under centralized computer control.

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety Summary Finding: Eight studies in the U.S. have demonstrated the 

ability of traffic signal coordination to smooth traffic flow, with stop 

reductions ranging from 6 to 77 percent. These reductions varied 

with the level of congestion along the corridor and the appropriateness of existing timing plans. 78

Mobility The Texas Traffic Light Synchronization program reduced delays 

by 24.6 percent by updating traffic signal control equipment and 

optimizing signal timing.79 Signal coordination at 145 intersections in Syracuse, New York reduced the total delay experienced 

by vehicles during the AM, mid-day, and PM peak periods by 14 to 

19 percent.80

Efficiency A simulation study of re-timed traffic signals along two major arterials north of Seattle, Washington found a 7.0 percent annualized 

reduction in vehicle delay, accompanied by a 0.2 percent increase 

in vehicles traveling the corridor.81

Energy and 

Environment

Summary Finding: Modeling studies of coordinated signal control 

in 5 U.S. localities found reductions in fuel use ranging from no significant change in Seattle, Washington to a 13 percent decline in 

Syracuse, New York.82

lessons learned 

Cooperate regionally to impact costs and 

performance of a cross-jurisdictional traffic signal system.

The success of a regional signal timing program depends on the willingness of the agencies to work together. Impacts on system 

costs and performance can be significant.

•	 Address comfort levels when establishing formal or informal agreements among 

agencies. 

In Montgomery County, Maryland, a formal 

agreement between the Maryland State 

Highway Administration and the county was 

established for the maintenance of Stateowned traffic signals, but there are no formal agreements to address signal timing. The 

county and the District of Columbia have met 

informally and agreed upon common cycle 

lengths for AM and PM peak periods on corridors that need to be coordinated.

•	 Take advantage of facilitation by regional 

governmental organizations. 

The City of Greenwood Village, Colorado has 

both formal and informal agreements in place 

for coordinating traffic signals across jurisdictions. The Denver Regional Council of Governments is the lead agency and has partnership 

agreements with the City of Greenwood Village, the Colorado DOT, and Arapahoe County 

for the development of timing plans. Each 

jurisdiction maintains its own traffic signals, 

but there is a committee that meets regularly 

to discuss coordination issues.
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

16 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Traffic Control—Advanced Signal Systems

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Control subsystem:

•	 Signal Controller Upgrade for Signal Control: $2.4K-$6.0K

Transportation Management Center subsystem:

•	 Software, Integration for Signal Control: $287K-$383K

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem:

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

United States: Optimizing signal timing is considered a low-cost approach to reducing congestion. Based on data from six separate studies, the costs range from 

$2,500 to $3,100 per signal per update. While this range is reasonable, costs could 

be slightly more or less. 83

United States: Well-trained technicians are needed to maintain traffic signal hardware so that the signal system is operating well and according to the timing updates. 

A current assumption is one traffic signal technician can maintain 30 to 40 signals. 

The average cost of a technician is $56,000 per year which includes salary, benefits (approximately 30 to 35 percent of salary), vehicles, parts/supplies, and other 

required items.84

Benefit-Cost Studies

Texas: The Traffic Light Synchronization program in Texas shows a benefit-to-cost 

ratio of 62:1, with reductions of 24.6 percent in delay, 9.1 percent in fuel consumption, 

and 14.2 percent in stops.85

California: A 2005 Oakland Metropolitan Transportation Commission analysis of its 

traffic signal coordination program yielded a benefit-to-cost ratio of 39:1.86
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | arterial Management 17

Traffic Control: Bicycle and Pedestrian 

Pedestrian detectors, pedestrian-activated crosswalk lighting, specialized pedestrian signals 

(e.g., countdown WALK/DON’T WALK signals), and bicycle-actuated signals can improve the 

safety of all road users at signalized intersections and unsignalized crossings.

Traffic Control—Bicycle and Pedestrian

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety Automatic pedestrian detection systems deployed at 4 intersection 

crosswalks in 3 U.S. cities resulted in a 24 percent increase in the 

number of pedestrians who began crossing during the WALK signal, and an 81 percent decrease in the number of pedestrians who 

began crossing during the steady DON’T WALK signal.87

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Detection subsystem:

•	 Pedestrian Detection—Microwave: $0.6K

•	 Pedestrian Detection—Infrared: $0.3K-$0.5K

Roadside Information subsystem:

•	 Light-Emitting Diode (LED) Countdown Signal: $0.306K-$0.424K

•	 Pedestrian Crossing Illumination System: $26.8K-$41K

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem:

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Colorado: A downtown Boulder intersection has been equipped with a series of four 

flashing in-pavement lights per lane. This high-pedestrian-volume intersection is also 

equipped with two flashing pedestrian signs. The lights and signs are activated manually. The project cost ranging from $8,000 to $16,000 included equipment and installation costs.88
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

18 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

lessons learned 

Hire properly trained staff to deploy and 

maintain traffic signal systems.

Without the proper knowledge of software, 

hardware, maintenance, and communications issues, the result is little improvement 

in operational conditions. A study on the 

nationwide best practices on deploying and 

operating traffic signal systems reveals the 

following experiences.

•	 Obtain access to telecommunication expertise. 

Technical expertise in telecommunications 

is often overlooked by agencies. Many agencies believe hiring technical experts that are 

knowledgeable in telecommunications allows 

flexibility in traffic signal system designs. 

Without this expertise in-house, agencies 

must accept whatever options are presented 

by competing contractors.

•	 Recognize the need for and budget for 

continuing education to ensure success.

(Continued on next page.)

Traffic Control: Special Events 

Arterial management systems can also smooth traffic flow during special events with 

unique operating schemes, incorporating elements such as special traffic signal operating 

plans, temporary lane restrictions, traveler guidance, and other measures.

Traffic Control—Special Events

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Mobility A simulation study found that using a decision support tool to select 

alternative traffic control plans during non-recurring congestion in 

the Disneyland area of Anaheim, California could reduce travel time 

by 2 to 29 percent and decrease stop time by 15 to 56 percent.89

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Control subsystem:

•	 Linked Signal System Local Area Network (LAN): $23K-$55K

Roadside Information subsystem:

•	 Dynamic Message Sign: $48K

•	 Dynamic Message Sign—Portable: $18.6K-$24K

Transportation Management Center subsystem:

•	 Software for Traffic Information Dissemination: $17K-$21K

•	 Labor for Traffic Information Dissemination: $107K-$131K (annually)

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem:

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Utah: The Utah advanced transportation management system (ATMS) includes a 

coordinated signal system. Over 600 of the 900 signals in the Salt Lake Valley are 

connected to the TOC. With the installation of the communication system and central 

traffic control system, monitoring and adjusting the signal system for special events 

is performed at the TOC. The cost of the signal system includes only the communication capability at $2.2 million. The signals were already in place prior to the ATMS 

implementation. Annual maintenance cost is $15,000.

90
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | arterial Management 19

lessons learned 

(Continued from previous page.)

There is a tremendous need to keep employees 

current on the ever-changing technologies that 

influence the design, deployment, and operation 

of traffic signal systems. Agency staff should 

attend technical professional conferences, meetings, and seminars to stay current with technologies and practices as well as to become part of 

peer groups through which new information is 

available.

•	 Consider the agencies’ abilities to implement and maintain a traffic signal system 

before deployment. 

If an agency does not feel it has the technical expertise to design a traffic signal system or 

develop the specifications, it should take a step 

back and seek the training necessary to improve 

the agency skill set before moving forward.

Lane Management

Lane management applications can promote the most effective use of available capacity 

during emergency evacuations, incidents, construction, and a variety of other traffic and/

or weather conditions.

Lane Management

Deployment

Lane management systems have yet to be used widely on arterial streets. Only five of 

the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas have high-occupancy vehicle restrictions 

on at least one of their arterial streets. Only 16 of the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas use reversible flow lanes on at least one of their arterial streets.

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Detection subsystem:

•	 Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Video Camera: $9K-$19K

Transportation Management Center subsystem:

•	 Labor for Lane Control: $107K-$131K (annually)

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem:

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

London: Congestion charging in London improves efficiency, reduces pollution, and 

raises revenue for transit improvements. Championed by the Mayor of London, the 

program requires motorists to pay a fee of £8 per day to drive within the inner city of 

London on workdays between 7:00 AM and 6:30 PM. Enforcement is achieved using 

a network of fixed and mobile video cameras that record images of vehicles in the 

congestion charging zone. Optical character recognition technology and automatic 

number plate recognition computer systems interpret and decipher the license plate 

numbers and map them against a pay list. If the system shows a payment is outstanding, the image is checked manually to confirm the vehicle make and model matches 

the license registration before a penalty is issued. Images of vehicles in good standing are removed from the system. London congestion pricing annual O&M costs are 

estimated at £92 million.

91
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

20 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Parking Management 

Parking management systems with information dissemination capabilities, most commonly 

deployed in urban centers or at modal transfer points such as airports, monitor the availability of parking and disseminate the information to drivers, reducing traveler frustration 

and congestion associated with searching for parking.

Parking Management

Deployment

Fourteen (14) of the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas collect data on parking 

availability and 11 disseminate these data to travelers.

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Mobility Ten (10) parking facilities in downtown St. Paul, Minnesota are connected to an advanced parking management system that provides 

information on facilities with available spaces via 56 on-street signs 

(10 with dynamic displays). A study of downtown traffic found travel 

times were reduced by nine percent and the stopped time delay 

decreased by four percent.92

Efficiency A smart parking system outside San Francisco, California provided 

the ability to reserve parking spaces at a transit station, either pretrip or en route, with space availability displayed on roadside DMS. 

Surveys of participants found sizable increases in transit mode 

share (5.5 more transit commutes per month), a decreased average 

commute time (an average of 5 percent for a 50-minute commute), 

and a reduction in total vehicle miles traveled per participant of 9.7 

miles per month.93

Customer

Satisfaction

Baltimore/Washington International Thurgood Marshall (BWI) airport implemented a parking guidance system which directs travelers to individual available parking spaces. An October 2003 survey 

of BWI travelers found that 81 percent of surveyed travelers indicated that parking was easier at BWI than at the other airports they 

frequented and 68 percent agreed that parking was faster.94
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | arterial Management 21

Parking Management

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Parking Management Center subsystem:

•	 Entrance/Exit Ramp Meters: $2K-$4K

•	 Tag Readers: $2K-$4K

•	 Database and Software for Billing and Pricing: $10K-$15K

•	 Parking Monitoring System: $19K-$41K

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem:

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Maryland, Washington, Illinois: A cross-cutting study was conducted to evaluate 

the deployment of advanced parking management systems in new parking facilities 

constructed in Baltimore, Seattle, and Chicago. The study found that these systems 

cost between $250 to $800 per space to install depending on the type and level 

of information provided, level of effort required to install sensors, ease of access to 

communications and power supplies, and the signage required to convey parking information to drivers at appropriate decision points. The BWI airport installation was 

estimated to cost $450 per space, while the operations cost for the Chicago Metra 

Park-and-Ride facility is estimated at $1,700 annually to power the seven electrical 

signs in the system.95

California: A smart parking field test conducted for the California DOT and BART 

integrated traffic count data from entrance and exit sensors at the Rockridge BART 

station parking lot with an intelligent reservation system to provide accurate, realtime parking availability information. Information was available on two portable DMS 

along Highway 24. Commuters could also check parking availability and make reservations via telephone, mobile phone, Internet, or personal digital assistant. Although 

capital and operating costs of the field test were donated, the capital costs are estimated at $150 to $250 per space and O&M costs are estimated at $40 to $60 per 

space.

96

Washington: In 2004, a study was conducted by the Transpo Group for the City of Bellingham Public Works to review existing parking management practices and policies. 

As a result of the study, a number of strategies and policies were recommended to 

improve and enhance overall parking management in Downtown Bellingham. In 2005, 

the Bellingham City Council adopted the strategy for Bellingham parking. A centralized pay station with automated ingress/egress control cost $100,000. The entrance/

exit access control system cost $30,000 and the parking accounting software package 

cost $18,000 to $25,000.97
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

22 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Information Dissemination 

Advanced communications have improved the dissemination of information to the traveling public. Motorists are now able to receive relevant information on location-specific 

traffic conditions in a number of ways including DMS, HAR, in-vehicle displays, and specialized information transmitted to individual vehicles.

Information Dissemination

Deployment

Permanent DMS, portable DMS, and HAR are used on 2 percent of arterial street 

miles in the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas.

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Information subsystem:

•	 Dynamic Message Sign: $48K

•	 Dynamic Message Sign—Portable: $18.6K-$24K

Transportation Management Center subsystem:

•	 Software for Traffic Information Dissemination: $17K-$21K

•	 Labor for Traffic Information Dissemination: $107K-$131K (annually)

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem:

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Utah: The Utah DOT operates and maintains over 69 permanently mounted DMS on 

freeways and surface streets as part of the Utah ATMS. Portable message signs are 

also used along roadsides where there are no permanent DMS. The capital cost of 

the DMS system is $15.25 million. The annual operating cost of $21,960 is based on 

power consumption.98
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | arterial Management 23

Enforcement

Automated enforcement systems, such as speed enforcement and traffic signal enforcement, improve safety, reduce aggressive driving, and assist in the enforcement of traffic 

signal and speed limit compliance.

Enforcement

Deployment

Automated speed enforcement on arterial streets is in use in 27 of the country’s 108 

largest metropolitan areas; 27 of these 108 metropolitan areas use red light enforcement cameras.

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety Summary Finding: A 2007 literature review by NHTSA documented 

studies of speed camera programs worldwide, which reported crash 

reductions from 9 to 41 percent.99

Safety Analysis of red light enforcement camera programs in Phoenix, Arizona found reductions in right-angle and left-turn crashes of 14 percent and 1 percent, respectively, while rear-end crashes increased 20 

percent. In Scottsdale, right-angle and left-turn crashes decreased 

by 17 percent and 40 percent, respectively, with rear-end crashes 

increasing 45 percent. In both cities, the programs had a positive 

economic impact due to the greater severity of right-angle and leftturn crashes. In Scottsdale, experience showed a larger impact on 

fatal and injury crashes and therefore a larger economic impact than 

in Phoenix.100

Customer 

Satisfaction

Fifteen (15) months after extensive deployment of automated speed 

enforcement cameras in the United Kingdom, a nationwide survey 

found 70 percent of those surveyed thought that well placed cameras were a useful way of reducing crashes and saving lives, while 21 

percent thought that speed cameras were an infringement of civil 

liberties.101

Public opinion surveys indicated 60 to 80 percent support for red 

light enforcement camera programs.102
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

24 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Enforcement

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Detection subsystem:

•	 Portable Speed Monitoring System: $4.8K-$14.4K

•	 Traffic Camera for Red Light Running Enforcement: $69K-$126K

Roadside Information subsystem:

•	 Variable Speed Display Sign: $3.5K-$4.7K

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem:

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

United States: Red light enforcement cameras have been implemented in numerous cities throughout the U.S. The cost of equipping an intersection for red light 

enforcement depends on the geometry of the intersection and the number of lanes 

monitored. Typical implementation costs include camera, poles, loops, wires, and 

installation. Costs per intersection range from $67,000 to $80,000. The cost range 

represents the costs incurred per intersection for the city of Jackson, Michigan (lowend) and the city of San Francisco, California (high-end).103

United Kingdom: In April 2000, speed and red-light cameras were introduced in 

eight pilot areas in England, Wales, and Scotland in the U.K. In Strathclyde, 28 fixed 

camera sites were established primarily in 30 mi/h zones. The costs associated with 

camera enforcement and processing of fixed penalty notices were collected for the 

first two years. Costs increased for year two (from £204,330 to £740,896), which may 

be due in part to the fact that not all of the sites were fully operational during the first 

year. In the second half of year two, the number of fixed penalties paid began to plateau, which may be due to increased compliance. In terms of enforcement history, the 

Strathclyde pilot was one of the more experienced. In Nottingham, two digital camera 

sites were implemented on its ring road. Mobile enforcement also took place at 7 

mobile sites and 19 red-light sites. Most enforcement took place in 30 mi/h zones. The 

costs associated with camera enforcement and processing of fixed penalty notices 

were collected for the first two years. Costs increased for year two (from £622,371 

to £778,536), which may be due in part to the fact that not all of the sites were fully 

operational during the first year. In the second half of year two, the number of fixed 

penalties paid began to plateau, which may be due to increased compliance. The Nottingham pilot had comparatively less experience with camera enforcement.104
endnotes 309

60 “Freight Facts and Figures 2006,” U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Freight Management and Operations, Web site URL 

ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/nat_freight_stats/docs/06factsfigures/index.htm. Last Accessed 17 December 2007.

61 “ITS Overview,” U.S. DOT, ITS Joint Program Office, Web site URL www.its.dot.gov/its_overview.htm. Last Accessed 17 December 

2007.

62 National Strategy to Reduce Congestion on America’s Transportation Network, U.S DOT. May 2006. 

63 “Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) Quarterly Newsletter—Spring 2007,” U.S. DOT ITS Joint Program Office, Web Site URL www.

its.dot.gov/icms/index.htm. Last Accessed 13 November 2007.

64 Sources that support these findings (individual cities implementing coordinated signal timing):

Hetrick, Stephen and Curtis B. McCollough. “How to save $4.2 Million a Year,” ITS International Newsletter. June 1996. Benefits ID: 

2007-00349

Skabardonis, Alexander. “ITS Benefits: The Case of Traffic Signal Control Systems,” Paper Presented at the 80th Annual Transportation 

Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 7–11 January 2001. Benefits ID: 2007-00356

Sunkari, Srinivasa. “The Benefits of Retiming Traffic Signals,” ITE Journal. April 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00393

Syracuse Signal Interconnect Project: Before and After Analysis Final Report, Prepared by DMJM Harris for the New York State DOT. September 

2003. Correspondence with DMJM Harris. Benefits ID: 2007-00398

White, Jeris, et al. Traffic Signal Optimization for Tysons Corner Network Volume I. Evaluation and Summary, Virginia DOT, Report No. TPE.

R7D.03.08.00. March 2000. Benefits ID: 2007-00395

Additional sources that reference findings for two statewide programs (California and Texas):

Skabardonis, Alexander. “ITS Benefits: The Case of Traffic Signal Control Systems,” Paper Presented at the 80th Annual Transportation 

Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 7–11 January 2001. Benefits ID: 2007-00356

Sunkari, Srinivasa. “The Benefits of Retiming Traffic Signals,” ITE Journal. April 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00393

65 Sources that support these findings: 

Hetrick, Stephen, and Curtis B. McCollough. “How to save $4.2 Million a Year,” ITS International Newsletter. June 1996. Benefits ID: 

2000-00065

ITS Impacts Assessment for Seattle MMDI Evaluation: Modeling Methodology and Results, U.S. DOT, EDL No. 11323. September 1999. Benefits ID: 

2007-00358

Phoenix Metropolitan Model Deployment Initiative Evaluation Report (Final Draft), U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-OP-00-015, EDL No. 12743. April 

2000. Benefits ID: 2007-00378

Syracuse Signal Interconnect Project: Before and After Analysis Final Report, Prepared by DMJM Harris for the New York State DOT. Syracuse, NY. 

September 2003. Benefits ID: 2004-00273

White, Jeris, et al. Traffic Signal Optimization for Tysons Corner Network, Volume 1: Evaluation and Summary, Virginia DOT, Report No. TPE.

R7D.03.08.00. March 2000. Benefits ID: 2000-00126

66 Automated Enforcement: A Compendium of Worldwide Evaluations of Results, U.S. DOT National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Report 

No. DOT HS 810 763. July 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00505

67 The estimate of $2,500 to $3,100 is based on information from the following sources:

Conversation with Mr. Jerry Luor. Traffic Engineering Supervisor, Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG). October 2006. 

Costs ID: 2007-00117

Fee Estimate—Millennia Mall Retiming and Scope and Schedule—Millennia Mall Retiming, Bid submitted by TEI Engineering to the City of 

Orlando, FL. October 2005. Costs ID: 2007-00113

Heminger, S. “Regional Signal Timing Program—2005 Cycle Program Performance,” Memorandum to the California Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s Operations Committee. Oakland, CA. October 2006. Costs ID: 2007-00112

Harris, J. “Benefits of Retiming Traffic Signals: A Reference for Practitioners and Decision Makers About the Benefits of Traffic Signal 

Retiming,” Presented at the ITE 2005 Annual Meeting and Exhibit. Melbourne, Australia. 7–10 August 2005. Costs ID: 2007-00115

Sunkari, Srinivasa. “The Benefits of Retiming Traffic Signals,” ITE Journal. April 2004. Costs ID: 2007-00116
310 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

The National Traffic Signal Report Card: Technical Report, National Transportation Operations Coalition. Washington, DC. 2005. Costs ID: 

2007-00114

68 The National Traffic Signal Report Card: Technical Report, National Transportation Operations Coalition. Washington, DC. 2005. Costs ID: 

2007-00114

69 Shaheen, Susan A. and Caroline Rodier. “Research Pays Off—Smart Parking Management to Boost Transit, Ease Congestion: Oakland, 

California, Field Test Shows Promise,” TR News, No. 251, Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. July–August 2007. Costs ID: 

2008-00134

70 Peterman, Josh, Rafat Raie, and Garland Wong. “Real-time Video Over Copper Networks: A Tale of Two Cities,” Paper Presented at the 

14th ITS America Meeting. San Antonio, TX. 26–28 April 2004. Costs ID: 2005-00094

71 “WSDOT Adds Cameras to Fight Congestion on State Route 522 through Lake Forest Park and Kenmore,” Washington State DOT. 4 

December 2002. Costs ID: 2003-00003

72 Sources that support these findings:

Banerjee, Frances T. Preliminary Evaluation Study of Adaptive Traffic Control System (ATCS), City of Los Angeles DOT. July 2001. Benefits ID: 

2007-00316

Peck, C., et al. “Learning from the User: Next Steps for ITACA’s adaptive control,” Traffic Technology International, Annual Review, Pages 

155–158. 1999. Benefits ID: 2007-00363

“SCOOT in Toronto,” Traffic Technology. Spring 1995. Benefits ID: 2007-00385

What Have We Learned About ITS?, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-OP-01-006, EDL No. 13316. December 

2000. Benefits ID: 2007-00431

73 Sources that support these findings: 

Abdel-Rahim, Ahmed, et al. “The Impact of SCATS on Travel Time and Delay,” Paper Presented at the 8th Annual ITS America Meeting. 

Detroit, MI. 4–6 May 1998. Benefits ID: 2000-00138

Adaptive Control Software, Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center, Office of Operations R&D, Report No. HRTS-04-037, 

HRDO-03/12-03(500)E). 2 February 2005. Web page URL ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/adaptivecontrol. Last Accessed 6 December 

2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00509

Diakaki, Christina, et al. “Application and Evaluation of the Integrated Traffic-Responsive Urban Corridor Control Strategy (IN-TUC) in 

Glasgow,” Paper Presented at the 79th Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting. Washington, DC. 9–13 January 2000. Benefits 

ID: 2007-00337

Greenough and Kelman. “ITS Technology Meeting Municipal Needs—The Toronto Experience,” Paper Presented at the 6th World 

Congress Conference on ITS. Toronto, Canada. 8 November 1999. Benefits ID: 2007-00362

Peck, C., et al. “Learning from the User: Next Steps for ITACA’s Adaptive Control,” Traffic Technology International, Annual Review, 

Pages 155–158. 1999. Benefits ID: 2007-00363

Siemens Automotive, USA. “SCOOT in Toronto,” Traffic Technology International. Spring 1995. Benefits ID: 2007-00385

Zhou, Wei-Wu, et al. “Fuzzy Flows,” ITS: Intelligent Transportation Systems. May/June 1997. Benefits ID: 2000-00086

74 Diakaki, Christina, et al. “Application and Evaluation of the Integrated Traffic-Responsive Urban Corridor Control Strategy (IN-TUC) in 

Glasgow,” Paper Presented at the 79th Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting. Washington, DC. 9–13 January 2000. Benefits 

ID: 2002-00243

75 Greenough and Kelman. “ITS Technology Meeting Municipal Needs—The Toronto Experience,” Paper Presented at the 6th World 

Congress Conference on ITS. 8 November 1999. Benefits ID: 2007-00361

76 Correspondence with Mr. Kirk Houser, PE, Traffic Engineer, City of Tyler, Texas. February 2008. Costs ID: 2008-00179

77 Correspondence with Mr. Daniel Worke, Arlington County Department of Public Works, and contractor estimate. February 2001. Costs 

ID: 2003-00002

78 Sources that support these findings:

Hetrick, Stephen and Curtis B. McCollough. “How to save $4.2 Million a Year,” ITS International Newsletter. 1996. Benefits ID: 2007-00349
endnotes 311

Skabardonis, Alexander. “ITS Benefits: The Case of Traffic Signal Control Systems,” Paper Presented at the 80th Annual Transportation 

Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 7–11 January 2001. Benefits ID: 2007-00356

Sunkari, Srinivasa. “The Benefits of Retiming Traffic Signals,” ITE Journal. April 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00393

Syracuse Signal Interconnect Project: Before and After Analysis Final Report, Prepared by DMJM Harris for the New York State DOT. September 

2003. Correspondence with DMJM Harris. Benefits ID: 2007-00398

White, Jeris, et al. Traffic Signal Optimization for Tysons Corner Network Volume I. Evaluation and Summary, Virginia DOT, Report No. TPE.

R7D.03.08.00. March 2000. Benefits ID: 2007-00395

79 Sources that support these findings:

Harris, J. “Benefits of Retiming Traffic Signals: A Reference for Practitioners and Decision Makers About the Benefits of Traffic Signal 

Retiming,” Presented at the ITE 2005 Annual Meeting and Exhibit. Melbourne, Australia. 7–10 August 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00506

Sunkari, Srinivasa. “The Benefits of Retiming Traffic Signals,” ITE Journal. April 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00311

80 Syracuse Signal Interconnect Project: Before and After Analysis Final Report, Prepared by DMJM Harris for the New York State DOT. Syracuse, NY. 

September 2003. Benefits ID: 2007-00398

81 ITS Impacts Assessment for Seattle MMDI Evaluation: Modeling Methodology and Results, U.S DOT, EDL No. 11323. September 1999. Benefits ID: 

2001-00199

82 Sources supporting this range: 

Hetrick, Stephen, and Curtis B. McCollough. “How to save $4.2 Million a Year,” ITS International Newsletter. June 1996. Benefits ID: 

2000-00065

ITS Impacts Assessment for Seattle MMDI Evaluation: Modeling Methodology and Results. U.S DOT, EDL No. 11323. September 1999. Benefits ID: 

2007-00358

Phoenix Metropolitan Model Deployment Initiative Evaluation Report (Final Draft). U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-OP-00-015, EDL No. 12743. April 

2000. Benefits ID: 2007-00378

White, Jeris, et al. Traffic Signal Optimization for Tysons Corner Network, Volume 1: Evaluation and Summary, Virginia DOT, Report No. TPE.

R7D.03.08.00. March 2000. Benefits ID: 2000-00126

Syracuse Signal Interconnect Project: Before and After Analysis Final Report, Prepared by DMJM Harris for the New York State DOT. Syracuse, NY. 

September 2003. Benefits ID: 2004-00273

83 The estimate of $2,500 to $3,100 is based on information from the following resources:

Conversation with Mr. Jerry Luor. Traffic Engineering Supervisor, Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG). October 2006. 

Costs ID: 2007-00117

“Fee Estimate—Millennia Mall Retiming and Scope and Schedule—Millennia Mall Retiming,” Orlando, FL. October 2005. Costs ID: 

2007-00113

Heminger, S. “Regional Signal Timing Program—2005 Cycle Program Performance,” Memorandum to the California Metropolitan 

Transportation Commission’s Operations Committee. Oakland, CA. October 2006. Costs ID: 2007-00112

Harris, J. “Benefits of Retiming Traffic Signals: A Reference for Practitioners and Decision Makers About the Benefits of Traffic Signal 

Retiming,” Presented at the ITE 2005 Annual Meeting and Exhibit. Melbourne, Australia. 7–10 August 2005. Costs ID: 2007-00115

Sunkari, Srinivasa. “The Benefits of Retiming Traffic Signals,” ITE Journal. April 2004. Costs ID: 2007-00116

The National Traffic Signal Report Card: Technical Report, National Transportation Operations Coalition. Washington, DC. 2005. Costs ID: 

2007-00114

84 The National Traffic Signal Report Card: Technical Report, National Transportation Operations Coalition. Washington, DC. 2005. Costs ID: 

2007-00114

85 Sources that support these findings:

Harris, J. “Benefits of Retiming Traffic Signals: A Reference for Practitioners and Decision Makers About the Benefits of Traffic Signal 

Retiming,” Presented at the ITE 2005 Annual Meeting and Exhibit. Melbourne, Australia. 7–10 August 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00507

Sunkari, Srinivasa. “The Benefits of Retiming Traffic Signals,” ITE Journal. April 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00311
312 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

86 Heminger, S. “Regional Signal Timing Program—2005 Cycle Program Performance,” Memorandum to the California Metropolitan 

Transportation Commission’s Operations Committee. Oakland, CA. October 2006. Costs ID: 2007-00112

87 Evaluation of Automated Pedestrian Detection at Signalized Intersections, U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-RD-00-097. August 2001. Benefits ID: 

2004-00276

88 Rural ITS Toolbox, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-OP-01-030, EDL No. 13477. November 2001. Costs ID: 

2003-00006

89 Logi, F. and S. G. Ritchie. “Development and Evaluation of a Knowledge-Based System for Traffic Congestion Management and Control,” 

Transportation Research, Vol. 9C, No. 6, Pages 443–459. December 2001. Benefits ID: 2002-00247

90 Perrin, Joseph, et al. Advanced Transportation Management System Elemental Cost Benefit Assessment, Prepared by the University of Utah for 

Utah DOT. March 2004. Costs ID: 2004-00086

91 Litman, Todd. London Congestion Pricing: Implications for Other Cities, Victoria Transport Policy Institute. January 2006. Costs ID: 

2007-00127

92 Advanced Parking Management Systems: A Cross-Cutting Study—Taking the Stress out of Parking, U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-JPO-07-011, EDL 

No. 14318. January 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00508

93 Rodier, Caroline J. and Susan A. Shaheen. Transit-Based Smart Parking in the U.S.: Behavioral Analysis of San Francisco Bay Area Field Test,

Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Report No. UCD-ITS-RR-06-19. Davis, CA. December 2006. Benefits ID: 

2008-00510

94 Advanced Parking Management Systems: A Cross-Cutting Study—Taking the Stress out of Parking, U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-JPO-07-011, EDL 

No. 14318. January 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00511

95 Advanced Parking Management Systems: A Cross-Cutting Study—Taking the Stress out of Parking, U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-JPO-07-011, EDL 

No. 14318. January 2007. Costs ID: 2008-00131

96 Shaheen, Susan A. and Caroline Rodier. “Research Pays Off—Smart Parking Management to Boost Transit, Ease Congestion: Oakland, 

California, Field Test Shows Promise,” TR News, No. 251, Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. July–August 2007. Costs ID: 

2008-00134

97 Downtown Bellingham Parking Management Strategy, The Transpo Group. September 2004. Correspondence with Mr. Bruce Haldors, The 

Transpo Group, June 2007. Costs ID: 2007-00130

98 Perrin, Joseph, et al. Advanced Transportation Management System Elemental Cost Benefit Assessment, Prepared by the University of Utah for 

Utah DOT. March 2004. Costs ID: 2004-00086

99 Decina, Lawrence E., et al. Automated Enforcement: A Compendium of Worldwide Evaluations of Results, U.S. DOT National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration, Report No. DOT HS 810 763. July 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00505

100 Washington, Simon and Kangwon Shin. The Impact of Red Light Cameras (Automated Enforcement) on Safety in Arizona, Arizona DOT, Report 

No. 550. June 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00512

101 Gaines, Adrian, et al. Department for Transport: A cost recovery system for speed and red-light cameras—two year pilot evaluation, Prepared by the PA 

Consulting Group and University College London for the Department for Transport, Road Safety Division. London, England. 11 February 2003. Benefits ID: 2003-00264

102 Automated Enforcement of Traffic Signals: A Literature Review, U.S. DOT, EDL No. 13603. 13 August 2001. Benefits ID: 2002-00242

103 Sisiopiku, et al. “Assessment of Red Light Running Camera Enforcement Technologies,” Paper Presented at the 81st Annual Meeting 

of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 13–17 January 2002. Costs ID: 2003-00011

104 Gaines, Adrian, et al. Department for Transport: A cost recovery system for speed and red-light cameras—two year pilot evaluation, Prepared by the PA 

Consulting Group and University College London for the Department for Transport, Road Safety Division. London, England. 11 February 2003. Costs ID: 2004-00085

105 “Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) Quarterly Newsletter—Spring 2007,” U.S. DOT ITS Joint Program Office, Web site URL www.

its.dot.gov/icms/index.htm. Last Accessed 13 November 2007.

106 Sources that support these findings: 

Birst, Shawn and Ayman Smadi. “An Evaluation of ITS for Incident Management in Second-Tier Cities: A Fargo, ND Case Study,” Paper 

Presented at ITE 2000 Annual Meeting. Nashville, Tennessee. 6–10 August 2000. Benefits ID: 2007-00335
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | FREEWAY Management 25

Freeway Management Categories 

in the ITS Knowledge Resources

Surveillance

Traffic

Infrastructure

Ramp Control

Ramp Metering

Ramp Closures

Priority Access

Lane Management

High-Occupancy Vehicle Facilities

Reversible Flow Lanes

Pricing

Lane Control

Variable Speed Limits

Emergency Evacuation

Special Event Transportation

 Management

Occasional Events

Frequent Events

Other Events

Temporary Traffic Management Center 

Information Dissemination

Dynamic Message Signs

In-Vehicle Systems

Highway Advisory Radio

Enforcement

Speed Enforcement

High-Occupancy Vehicle Facilities

Ramp Meter Enforcement

TRAFFIC SURVEILLANCE IS

USED TO COLLECT DATA ON

38 PERCENT OF FREEWAY MILES IN 

MAJOR METROPOLITAN AREAS.

Freeway Management

Roadways

There are numerous ITS strategies to improve the operation of the freeway system. Traffic 

surveillance systems use vehicle detectors and cameras to support freeway management 

applications. Traffic control measures on freeway entrance ramps, such as ramp meters, 

can use sensor data to optimize freeway travel speeds and ramp meter wait times. Lane 

management applications can promote the most effective use of available capacity on 

freeways and encourage the use of high-occupancy commute modes. Special event transportation management systems can help control the impact of congestion at stadiums 

or convention centers. In areas with frequent events, large changeable destination signs 

or other lane control equipment can be installed. In areas with occasional or one-time 

events, portable equipment can help smooth traffic flow. Advanced communications have 

improved the dissemination of information to the traveling public. Motorists are now able 

to receive relevant information on location-specific traffic conditions in a number of ways 

including dynamic message signs (DMS), highway advisory radio (HAR), even in-vehicle 

systems. (Other methods of providing traveler information, including those covering multiple modes or travel corridors, are discussed in the traveler information chapter.) Automated 

systems enforcing speed limits and aggressive driving laws can lead to safety benefits. 

Several other chapters of this report discuss ITS applications relevant to freeway management. The traveler information chapter discusses the provision of information on traffic 

conditions to travelers on a regional basis. For example, technologies such as 511 and 

regional traveler information Web sites can provide important information to freeway travelers. Successful implementation of these strategies often requires collaboration with other 

agencies in a region, contrasted with the use of freeway DMS under the direct control of 

the freeway management agency. The crash prevention and safety chapter describes road 

geometry warning systems which have been helpful in addressing safety challenges on 

freeway downgrades and exit ramps. The electronic payment and pricing chapter discusses 

pricing strategies that are used on a growing number of freeways.

In addition to the individual ITS technologies profiled in this chapter, the Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) initiative, a major ITS initiative currently being conducted by the 

U.S. DOT, has the potential to improve freeway management strategies. The purpose of 

the ICM initiative is to demonstrate that ITS technologies can be used to efficiently and 

proactively manage the movement of people and goods in major transportation corridors 

by facilitating integration of the management of all networks in a corridor. The results of 

the initiative will help to facilitate widespread use of ICM tools and strategies to improve 

mobility through integrated management of transportation assets. 105 Additional information on this initiative is available at the ITS JPO’s Web site: www.its.dot.gov/icms. 
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

26 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Other ITS Knowledge Resource 

Categories Related to Freeway 

Management

Refer to other chapters in this document.

Traveler Information

Pre-Trip Information

En Route Information 

Tourism and Events

Crash Prevention and Safety

Road Geometry Warning 

Electronic Payment and Pricing

Pricing

Findings

Benefits

Metropolitan areas that deploy ITS infrastructure, including DMS to manage freeway and 

arterial traffic, and integrate traveler information with incident management systems can 

increase peak period freeway speeds by 8 to 13 percent,106 improve travel time, and according to simulation studies, reduce crash rates and improve trip time reliability with delay 

reductions ranging from 1 to 22 percent.107

Ramp control systems continue to be effective. Available data shows that ramp metering 

can improve mainline traffic speeds by 13 to 26 percent,108 increase throughput by 5 to 30 

percent,109 limit ramp meter delay, and reduce crashes by 15 to 50 percent.110

Surveys conducted in the U.S. and Europe found large numbers of drivers said they had 

changed routes based on the information provided by DMS (85 percent in Houston, Texas; 

and 40 percent in Glasgow, Scotland).111

Table 2—Measured Benefits of Freeway Management

Application Measure Benefits 

Dynamic Message Signs Freeway Travel Speed

(Mobility)

Increase 8% to 13%

Ramp Metering Freeway Speed (Mobility) Increase 13% to 26%

Freeway Throughput

(Efficiency)

Increase 5% to 30%

Crashes (Safety) Decrease 15% to 50%

Automated Speed

Enforcement

Number of Speeding

Vehicles (Safety)

Decrease 27% to 78%

Several studies document safety improvements with the implementation of variable speed 

limits (VSL). These benefits stem from reduced speed variability and slower vehicle speeds 

during periods of hazardous traveling conditions. Another study documents increases in 

roadway capacity through more uniform traffic flow.112

Evaluation studies conducted in Canada, the Netherlands, Australia, and the United Kingdom show that roadways equipped with automated speed enforcement technologies can 

eliminate 27 to 78 percent of speeding vehicles.113 In the United Kingdom, large scale 

deployments have been cost-effective.114

Table 3 presents qualitative ratings of the impact of freeway management ITS applications under each of the six ITS goals. Many of the strategies have been found effective in 

improving safety. Studies of ramp metering and information dissemination have shown 

mobility improvements. Ramp metering has also been found to enable the freeway system 

to accommodate larger traffic volumes. Ramp metering, information dissemination, and 

speed enforcement programs have been found, in surveys, to be well received by the traveling public. More study of the impact of using freeway ITS to manage traffic at special 

events is needed.
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | FREEWAY Management 27

Table 3—Freeway Management Benefits Summary Safety Mobility Efficiency Productivity 

Energy andEnvironmentCustomerSatisfaction

Surveillance Enabling technology

Ramp Control ✚ ● ● ●

Lane Management ✚

Special Event

Transportation Management

Information Dissemination ✚ ✚ ✚

Enforcement ● ●

● Substantial positive impacts ✚ Positive impacts

❍ Negligible impacts ✱ Mixed results

✖ Negative impacts blank Not enough data

Costs

There are numerous ITS strategies to improve freeway operations. The costs of these strategies vary based on many factors including whether or not the deployment is part of a larger 

agency project and maintenance and operations costs, as many States are experiencing. 

The cost of Minnesota DOT (Mn/DOT) ramp metering operations in the Twin Cities metropolitan area in fiscal year 2000 was $210,000 and included staff to monitor and adjust meter 

settings, conduct field reviews, and respond to inquiries from the public and media.115

The Florida DOT (FDOT) deployed 31 DMS in Broward County including associated structures, foundations, controllers, cabinets, and installation, plus approximately 37 miles of 

in-ground fiber optic communications at a cost of $11 million. Annual operating costs were 

estimated at $22,320 and annual maintenance costs were estimated at $620,000. FDOT 

coordinates with other agencies to verify incident and congestion locations and then posts 

traveler information on the DMS along effected routes.116

Washington State DOT (WSDOT) deployed three HAR stations along the Blewett/Stevens 

Pass to provide weather and road condition information to travelers and State maintenance 

crews. One portable and two fixed HAR stations were deployed. Annual operations and 

maintenance (O&M) costs of $1,000 per HAR station were based on prior experience to 

operate and maintain.117

In 2000, the installation and operational costs for 599 speed cameras (mobile and fixed) 

deployed during a two-year pilot study in the United Kingdom were estimated at £21 

million.118

Available data show that ramp

metering can improve mainline

traffic speed by 13 to 26 percent.
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

28 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Benefit-Cost Studies

In Minneapolis-St. Paul, the benefit-to-cost ratio of a ramp metering system was estimated 

at 15:1.119

Deployment

Figure 4 shows deployment trends for four key ITS technologies in terms of coverage of 

metropolitan freeway miles. These data were collected through surveys of the 78 largest 

U.S. metropolitan areas from 2000 to 2006. The data show that significant progress has 

been made in deploying ITS technologies on freeways.

As of 2006, surveillance technologies—consisting of loop detectors, radar detectors, and 

acoustic detectors—are used to collect data on traffic conditions on 45 percent of freeway miles in the country’s 78 largest metropolitan areas, up from 22 percent in 2000. The 

percentage of freeway miles served by HAR nearly doubled in the same period; HAR now 

services nearly one-fourth of all freeway miles. The growth rate of HAR has slowed in recent 

years, however, and may be leveling off. 

Two other freeway management technologies have experienced slower growth. Ramp 

meters now manage access to 13 percent of freeway miles in the country’s 78 largest 

metropolitan areas, up from 9 percent in 2000. Lane control strategies are used to manage 

travel on 9 percent of freeway miles in the country’s 78 largest metropolitan areas, up from 

4 percent in 2000.

In 2006, the survey of metropolitan areas was expanded to the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas. This survey is the source of deployment statistics presented later in this chapter. 

Figure 4 – Freeway Deployment Trends for 78 Major Metropolitan Areas

Surveillance

Ramp Metering

Lane Control

HAR

50

40

30

20

10

0

‘00 ’02 ‘04 ’05 ‘06

Year

Coverage (%)
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | FREEWAY Management 29

Selected Highlights from the ITS Knowledge

Resources on Freeway Management

Surveillance

Traffic surveillance systems use vehicle detectors and video equipment to support the 

most advanced freeway management systems. These sensors can also be used to monitor 

critical transportation infrastructure for security purposes.

Surveillance

Deployment

Surveillance is used to collect information about traffic conditions on 38 percent of 

freeway miles in the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas.

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Detection subsystem:

•	 Inductive Loops on Corridor: $3K-$8K 

•	 Remote Traffic Microwave Sensor on Corridor: $9K-$13K

•	 Closed Circuit Televsion (CCTV) Video Camera: $9K-$19K

Transportation Management Center subsystem:

•	 Hardware, Software for Traffic Surveillance: $131K-$160K

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem:

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Florida: In 2006, FDOT District IV deployed 45 CCTV cameras and 106 vehicle detectors (67 side-fire radar stations). The cost of this Phase I deployment was $2,845,462. 

The cost included installation and associated structures, foundations, cabinets, and 

controllers. The CCTV cameras and detectors make use of existing fiber optics communications. Maintenance costs for Phase I were estimated at $254,000. Maintenance is contracted out and includes trouble-shooting and preventive maintenance. 

In 2007, the number of CCTV cameras increased to a total of 95 and the number of 

vehicle detection stations increased to a total of 170.120

Florida: FDOT examined design factors for CCTV video camera sites and how the 

design and maintenance issues impacted the life cycle costs. Pole height and effect 

on camera system performance, site placement and spacing, coverage area, environmental impacts, and use of camera lowering devices are detailed. The costs of several 

alternatives based on pole height and mounting with and without camera lowering 

devices are compared in the report. Camera site initial costs range from $16,550 to 

$27,550. Camera site life cycle costs range from $403,650 to $835,000.

121
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

30 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Ramp Control

Traffic control measures on freeway entrance ramps, such as ramp meters, can use sensor 

data to optimize freeway travel speeds and ramp meter wait times.

Ramp Control

Deployment

Thirteen (13) percent of freeway access ramps in the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas are controlled by ramp meters. Three of these 108 metropolitan areas have 

the ability to close ramps automatically and give ramp access priority to transit vehicles on at least some of their ramps.

Ramp Control: Ramp Metering

Traffic signals on freeway ramp meters alternate between red and green to control the flow 

of vehicles entering the freeway. Metering rates can be altered based on freeway traffic 

conditions.

Ramp Control—Ramp Metering

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety A study of the six-week shutdown of the ramp meters in Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota found that ramp meters were responsible for 

a 21 percent crash reduction.122

Mobility In Salt Lake Valley, Utah, a ramp metering study showed that 

with a metering cycle 8 seconds long, mainline peak period delay 

decreased by 36 percent or 54 seconds per vehicle.123

Efficiency The Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota shutdown study found that 

freeway volumes were 10 percent higher with ramp meters than they 

were during the shutdown.124 A study in Glasgow, Scotland found 

freeway volumes increased five percent with ramp metering.125

Energy and

Environment

A simulation study of the Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota system found 2 to 55 percent fuel savings at individual ramp metering 

locations along 2 modeled corridors under varying levels of travel 

demand.126

Customer

Satisfaction

Most drivers believed that traffic conditions worsened when the 

Minneapolis-St. Paul ramp metering system was shut down and 80 

percent supported reactivation.127 Fifty-nine (59) percent of survey 

respondents in Glasgow, Scotland found ramp metering to be a 

helpful strategy.128
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | FREEWAY Management 31

Ramp Control—Ramp Metering

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Control subsystem:

•	 Ramp Meter: $24K-$49K

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem:

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Minnesota: The cost of Mn/DOT ramp metering operations in the Twin Cities metropolitan area in fiscal year 2000 was $210,000 and included staff to monitor and adjust 

meter settings, conduct field reviews, and respond to inquiries from the public and 

media. This cost was for annual ramp metering operations on the approximately 230 

miles of fully instrumented highway in the Twin Cities metropolitan area. State funds 

were used for ramp metering O&M.129

Colorado: The Colorado DOT implemented ramp metering to regulate the flow of traffic onto freeways as part of the Transportation Expansion (T-REX) project. Each ramp 

meter site costs approximately $50,000, which includes the cost of the controller and 

approximately 15 percent mark-up for design.130

Benefit-Cost Studies

Minnesota: A 2001 study of the ramp metering system in Minneapolis-St. Paul estimated the benefit-to-cost ratio of the ramp metering system at 15:1.131
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

32 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Lessons Learned

Utilize public education and outreach in 

managed lane projects.

Use of managed lanes is a relatively new and 

complex concept to most travelers. Public 

understanding and acceptance are critical to 

the success of a managed lane project. Public education and outreach can take different 

forms including media coverage, surveys, and 

focus groups. Additionally, political champions who advocate on behalf of a project can 

help build public acceptance and can support any enabling legislation necessary for 

the managed lanes project.

•	 Provide ongoing public education.

Once the project has been implemented, it 

is important to continue providing the public 

with information. The Orange County Transportation Authority maintains a Web site for 

the State Route 91 Express Lanes that allows 

for online account applications and account 

maintenance. There is also a customer service 

center and an 800 number for customers’ convenience. In addition, an advisory committee 

has been formed that includes representatives 

from several different transportation agencies 

and the general public. Based on the objectives of the project set by the community, the 

committee decides on future operational 

strategies and plans, as well as on the use of 

excess revenues.133

Lane Management

Lane management applications can promote the most effective use of available capacity 

on freeways to encourage the use of high-occupancy commute modes.

Lane Management

Deployment

Lane control equipment is used on 5 percent of freeway miles in the country’s 108 

largest metropolitan areas, according to a 2006 survey. According to the same survey, 

15 of these 108 metropolitan areas have high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes and 8 

have reversible flow lanes. Only 5 of these metropolitan areas employ VSL and 11 use 

lane control to support emergency evacuation.

Lane Management: Pricing

Traffic surveillance, electronic payment, video, global positioning systems, and automated 

enforcement technologies can support the implementation of congestion pricing strategies, 

which adjust the cost of transportation facilities based on demand or the time of day.

Lane Management—Pricing

Costs

Unit Costs Data (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Information subsystem: examples include

•	 Dynamic Message Sign: $48K-$119K

Toll Plaza subsystem: examples include

•	 Electronic Toll Reader: $2K-$5K

•	 High-Speed 

•	 Camera: $7K-$10K

Toll Administration subsystem: examples include

•	 Toll Administration Hardware: $5.4K-$8.1K

•	 Toll Administration Software: $39K-$78K

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem: examples include

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

California: Converting under-used HOV lanes to high-occupancy toll (HOT) lanes is 

often financially feasible. The primary capital cost includes plastic pylons, DMS, tolling and video enforcement equipment, and back-office processing systems. Implemented in April 1999, the cost to convert the existing HOV lane on I-15 in San Diego to 

a HOT lane was $1.85 million. The facility is an eight-mile stretch of 2 reversible lanes 

in the median of I-15 about 10 miles north of San Diego.132
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | FREEWAY Management 33

Lane Management: Lane Control 

Lane control signs, supported by surveillance and detection technologies, allow the temporary closure of lanes to avoid incidents on freeways.

Lane Management—Lane Control

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety Traffic surveillance, lane control signs, VSL, and DMS in Amsterdam, the Netherlands have led to a 23 percent decline in the crash 

rate.134

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Control subsystem:

•	 Software for Lane Control: $24K-$49K

•	 Lane Control Gates: $78K-$117K

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem:

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)

Lane Management: Variable Speed Limits

VSL systems use sensors to monitor prevailing traffic and/or road weather conditions, and 

post appropriate enforceable speed limits on DMS.

Lane Management—Variable Speed Limits

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety In Copenhagen, Denmark, a VSL system reduced mean vehicle 

speeds by up to five km/h and contributed to smoother traffic flow.135

In England, VSL supplemented with automated speed enforcement 

have reduced rear-end crashes on approaches to freeway queues by 

25 to 30 percent.136

Efficiency Combined with automated speed limit enforcement, an English 

VSL system has increased freeway capacity by 5 to 10 percent.137

Customer 

Satisfaction

A survey of motorists in Copenhagen, Denmark found that 80 percent of respondents had favorable impressions of VSL and traveler 

information posted on DMS near a work zone.138
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

34 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Lessons Learned 

Provide travel time messages on dynamic 

message signs for normal traffic and recurring congestion conditions. 

Travel time messages on DMS are not appropriate for every location, but they are proven 

successful in regions or corridors that experience periods of recurring congestion—

congestion generally resulting from traffic 

demand exceeding available capacity and 

not caused by any specific event such as a 

traffic incident, road construction, or a lane 

closure. The DMS can provide dynamic travel 

time information instead of generic messages 

such as “congestion ahead” or “stay alert.”

•	 Generate travel times automatically.

Travel times should be generated automatically and not require a human operator to 

manually enter travel time data. All but one 

of the locations surveyed that provide travel 

time messages use automated processes to 

calculate the travel times. The majority of 

agencies surveyed use different technologies 

to measure the traffic flow including loop 

detectors, video detection systems, automatic 

vehicle identification transponders, and toll 

tags. The traffic data are processed to produce travel times over specified links between 

identified destinations. It is important to note 

that effective travel time messages do not 

require the data to be 100 percent accurate. 

Research has indicated that data with error 

rates of 20 percent produce useful traveler 

information. When presenting a range of 

travel times on DMS, the acceptable error 

rate may be even higher.145

Lane Management—Variable Speed Limits

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Detection subsystem:

•	 Remote Traffic Microwave Sensor on Corridor: $9K-$13K per sensor

•	 Environmental Sensor Station (Weather Station): $30K-$49K

Roadside Information subsystem:

•	 Dynamic Message Sign: $48K-$119K

•	 Highway Advisory Radio: $15K-$35K

Transportation Management Center subsystem:

•	 Labor for Traffic Information Dissemination: $107K-$131K (annually)

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem:

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Washington: WSDOT implemented TravelAid, a VSL system that changes as the 

weather does, along the Snoqualmie Pass (I-90) east of Seattle, Washington. Approximately 13 miles are operated with VSL during the winter months. The system consists 

of radar detection, six environmental sensor stations, nine DMS, and radio and microwave communications systems. Design and implementation costs were $5 million

(1997).139
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | FREEWAY Management 35

Lessons Learned 

Display appropriate, concise messages 

on dynamic message signs to communicate effectively with travelers. 

Design DMS messages to be brief, to the 

point, and have impact.

At typical highway speeds, the message posted 

on a DMS must be presented to motorists in 

about eight seconds or less. This translates 

to 8 words at 55 mi/h, 7 words at 65 mi/h, and 

6 words at 70 mi/h. Therefore, the message 

must be concise and the words used must 

have impact.146

•	 Construct travel time messages to benefit not only the local commuters but 

also unfamiliar motorists where there is 

a mixture of traveler types.

Successful practices from the Atlanta, Georgia area demonstrate that a relatively simple 

change to local information can benefit unfamiliar travelers as well. By including the distance to the destination in addition to the 

travel time, even those travelers unfamiliar 

with the area can determine the approximate 

level of congestion ahead.147

Special Event Transportation Management 

Special event transportation management systems can help control the impact of congestion at stadiums or convention centers. In areas with frequent events, large changeable 

destination signs or other lane control equipment can be installed. In areas with occasional 

or one-time events, portable equipment can help smooth traffic flow.

Special Event Transportation Management

Deployment

Fifty-seven (57) of the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas use portable transportation management systems, such as DMS, in various environments such as special event locations. Twenty-four (24) of these 108 metropolitan areas use temporary 

transportation management centers (TMC) or satellite locations for existing TMCs to 

support management of special event traffic.

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Information subsystem:

•	 Dynamic Message Sign: $48K-$119K

•	 Dynamic Message Sign—Portable: $18.6K-$24K

Roadside Detection subsystem:

•	 Portable Traffic Management System: $78K-$97K

Transportation Management Center subsystem:

•	 Software for Traffic Information Dissemination: $17K-$21K

•	 Labor for Traffic Information Dissemination: $107K-$131K (annually)

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem:

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

36 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Information Dissemination

Advanced communications have improved the dissemination of information to the traveling public. Motorists are now able to receive relevant information on location-specific 

traffic conditions in a number of ways including DMS, HAR, in-vehicle displays, or specialized information transmitted to individual vehicles.

Information Dissemination

Deployment

HAR provides information to travelers on 21 percent of freeway miles in the country’s 

108 largest metropolitan areas. Eighty-six (86) of these metropolitan areas use DMS 

to provide information to travelers on freeways.

Information Dissemination: Dynamic Message Signs

DMS are permanent or portable electronic traffic signs that allow operators to give travelers information on traffic conditions, incidents, weather, construction, safety, and special 

events.

Information Dissemination—Dynamic Message Signs

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety A San Antonio, Texas deployment of DMS, combined with an incident management program, resulted in a 2.8 percent decrease in 

crashes.140

Mobility A simulation study of the system deployed on the John C. Lodge 

freeway in Detroit, Michigan estimated that HAR and DMS in combination with ramp metering may reduce vehicle delay by up to 22 

percent.141

Customer 

Satisfaction

Mail-back questionnaires were sent to 428 drivers living near major 

freeways in Wisconsin to assess the impacts of posting travel time 

and traffic information on DMS throughout the state. A total of 221 

questionnaires were returned and analyzed. The results indicated 

that 12 percent of respondents used the information more than 5 

times per month to adjust travel routes during winter months, and 

18 percent of respondents used the information more than 5 times 

per month to adjust travel routes during non-winter months.142
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | FREEWAY Management 37

Information Dissemination—Dynamic Message Signs

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Information subsystem:

•	 Dynamic Message Sign: $48K-$119K

•	 Dynamic Message Sign—Portable: $18.6K-$24K

Transportation Management Center subsystem:

•	 Software for Traffic Information Dissemination: $17K-$21K

•	 Labor for Traffic Information Dissemination: $107K-$131K (annually)

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem:

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Florida: In 2006, FDOT District IV deployed 31 DMS. The cost of deployment was 

$11 million and included the signs, associated structures, foundations, controllers, 

cabinets, and installation, plus approximately 37 miles of in-ground fiber optic communications. The annual operating cost covered electricity and was estimated at 

$22,320. Maintenance costs of approximately $620,000 included spare parts and 

labor for trouble-shooting problems, and preventative maintenance. DMS maintenance was contracted out. FDOT notes that employing an ITS maintenance contractor “... helps to avoid/minimize system downtime, reduces total cost of operation, 

improves effectiveness, and extends the life of ITS assets.” Forty-one (41) additional 

DMS were planned for 2007.143

Utah: The Utah DOT operates and maintains over 69 permanently mounted DMS on 

freeways and surface streets as part of the Utah advanced transportation management system (ATMS) known as CommuterLink. Portable message signs are also used 

along roadsides where there are no permanent DMS. The capital cost of the DMS system was $15.25 million. Annual operating cost of the DMS system, $21,960, is based 

on power consumption. The field devices and control centers are connected via a 

fiber optic network, which was installed as part of the ATMS deployment, at a cost of 

$51.176 million. Annual maintenance cost for the fiber optic communication system 

is $50,000 and the annual operations cost is $150,000.

144
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

38 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Information Dissemination: Highway Advisory Radio 

HAR uses low-power permanent or portable radio stations to broadcast traffic- and travelrelated information to motorists using AM radio. 

Information Dissemination—Highway Advisory Radio

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Customer

Satisfaction

In a mountainous region near Spokane, Washington, about onethird of commercial vehicle drivers interviewed would consider 

changing routes based on the information provided on a road 

weather information Web site and HAR system; however, few could 

identify viable alternate routes.148

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Information subsystem:

•	 Highway Advisory Radio: $15K-$35K

•	 Highway Advisory Radio—Sign: $5K-$9K

Transportation Management Center subsystem:

•	 Software for Traffic Information Dissemination: $17K-$21K

•	 Labor for Traffic Information Dissemination: $107K-$131K (annually)

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem:

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Washington: WSDOT installed a system in the rural and mountainous region of Spokane to collect and communicate weather and road conditions, border crossing status, and other information to commercial drivers, the motoring public, and WSDOT 

maintenance crews. As part of this system, two mobile HAR systems were deployed 

at and near the cities of Republic and at Kettle. Broadcasts warned motorists of road 

construction, incidents, dangerous driving conditions and restrictions, and border crossing conditions and closures. The total cost of the Republic and Kettle HARs 

was approximately $111,073. This cost included $52,000 for two mobile HARs, and 

$59,073 for signs, connectivity, clearing and other associated costs..149

Washington: WSDOT has implemented three HAR stations along the Blewett/Stevens 

Pass to provide weather and road condition information to travelers and maintenance 

crews. One portable and two fixed HAR stations were deployed. Capital cost including 

equipment, cabinets, antennas, and installation was $15,000 for each fixed site, and 

$30,000 for each portable unit. Annual O&M costs of $1,000 were based on prior 

experience to operate and maintain.150
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | FREEWAY Management 39

Enforcement

Automated enforcement systems—such as speed enforcement, HOV lane enforcement, 

and ramp meter enforcement—improve safety and reduce aggressive driving.

Enforcement

Deployment

Few jurisdictions use automated systems to enforce traffic laws on freeways. Seven of 

the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas use automated speed enforcement systems on freeways and 1 uses an automated system to enforce HOV restrictions.

Enforcement: Speed Enforcement 

Automated enforcement technologies can assist with the enforcement of speed limit 

compliance. Still or video cameras, activated by vehicle detectors, can record vehicles 

traveling faster than the speed limit.

Enforcement—Speed Enforcement

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety A study of 2 years of crash data following deployment of speed cameras at study sites throughout the U.K. found a 35 percent reduction 

in the number of people killed or seriously injured at camera locations. There was a 14 percent decline in the number of personal 

injury crashes.151

Customer

Satisfaction

Seventy (70) percent of survey respondents in the U.K. thought that 

automated speed and red-light enforcement cameras were a useful 

way to reduce crashes and save lives.152
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

40 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Enforcement—Speed Enforcement

Speed Enforcement Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Detection subsystem:

•	 Portable Speed Monitoring System: $4.8K-$14.4K

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

England, Wales and Scotland, U.K.: In April 2000, a system for speed and red light 

cameras was introduced in eight pilot areas in England, Wales, and Scotland, U.K. The 

Northamptonshire pilot consisted of 5 fixed camera sites and 45 mobile camera sites. 

Mobile enforcement was typically conducted on long stretches of roads known as red 

routes (corridors greater than 0.6 miles). Enforcement took place at 10 sites where 

the speed limit was 60 to 70 mi/h. The costs associated with camera enforcement 

and processing of fixed penalty notices were collected for the first two years. Costs 

increased for year two, which may be due in part to the fact that not all of the sites 

were fully operational during the first year. In the second half of year two, the number 

of fixed penalties paid began to plateau, which may be due to increased compliance. 

In terms of enforcement history, the Northamptonshire area was comparatively new 

to camera enforcement. First year costs were £1,702,404 and second year costs were 

£2,247,838.153
312 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

86 Heminger, S. “Regional Signal Timing Program—2005 Cycle Program Performance,” Memorandum to the California Metropolitan 

Transportation Commission’s Operations Committee. Oakland, CA. October 2006. Costs ID: 2007-00112

87 Evaluation of Automated Pedestrian Detection at Signalized Intersections, U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-RD-00-097. August 2001. Benefits ID: 

2004-00276

88 Rural ITS Toolbox, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-OP-01-030, EDL No. 13477. November 2001. Costs ID: 

2003-00006

89 Logi, F. and S. G. Ritchie. “Development and Evaluation of a Knowledge-Based System for Traffic Congestion Management and Control,” 

Transportation Research, Vol. 9C, No. 6, Pages 443–459. December 2001. Benefits ID: 2002-00247

90 Perrin, Joseph, et al. Advanced Transportation Management System Elemental Cost Benefit Assessment, Prepared by the University of Utah for 

Utah DOT. March 2004. Costs ID: 2004-00086

91 Litman, Todd. London Congestion Pricing: Implications for Other Cities, Victoria Transport Policy Institute. January 2006. Costs ID: 

2007-00127

92 Advanced Parking Management Systems: A Cross-Cutting Study—Taking the Stress out of Parking, U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-JPO-07-011, EDL 

No. 14318. January 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00508

93 Rodier, Caroline J. and Susan A. Shaheen. Transit-Based Smart Parking in the U.S.: Behavioral Analysis of San Francisco Bay Area Field Test,

Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Report No. UCD-ITS-RR-06-19. Davis, CA. December 2006. Benefits ID: 

2008-00510

94 Advanced Parking Management Systems: A Cross-Cutting Study—Taking the Stress out of Parking, U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-JPO-07-011, EDL 

No. 14318. January 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00511

95 Advanced Parking Management Systems: A Cross-Cutting Study—Taking the Stress out of Parking, U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-JPO-07-011, EDL 

No. 14318. January 2007. Costs ID: 2008-00131

96 Shaheen, Susan A. and Caroline Rodier. “Research Pays Off—Smart Parking Management to Boost Transit, Ease Congestion: Oakland, 

California, Field Test Shows Promise,” TR News, No. 251, Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. July–August 2007. Costs ID: 

2008-00134

97 Downtown Bellingham Parking Management Strategy, The Transpo Group. September 2004. Correspondence with Mr. Bruce Haldors, The 

Transpo Group, June 2007. Costs ID: 2007-00130

98 Perrin, Joseph, et al. Advanced Transportation Management System Elemental Cost Benefit Assessment, Prepared by the University of Utah for 

Utah DOT. March 2004. Costs ID: 2004-00086

99 Decina, Lawrence E., et al. Automated Enforcement: A Compendium of Worldwide Evaluations of Results, U.S. DOT National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration, Report No. DOT HS 810 763. July 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00505

100 Washington, Simon and Kangwon Shin. The Impact of Red Light Cameras (Automated Enforcement) on Safety in Arizona, Arizona DOT, Report 

No. 550. June 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00512

101 Gaines, Adrian, et al. Department for Transport: A cost recovery system for speed and red-light cameras—two year pilot evaluation, Prepared by the PA 

Consulting Group and University College London for the Department for Transport, Road Safety Division. London, England. 11 February 2003. Benefits ID: 2003-00264

102 Automated Enforcement of Traffic Signals: A Literature Review, U.S. DOT, EDL No. 13603. 13 August 2001. Benefits ID: 2002-00242

103 Sisiopiku, et al. “Assessment of Red Light Running Camera Enforcement Technologies,” Paper Presented at the 81st Annual Meeting 

of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 13–17 January 2002. Costs ID: 2003-00011

104 Gaines, Adrian, et al. Department for Transport: A cost recovery system for speed and red-light cameras—two year pilot evaluation, Prepared by the PA 

Consulting Group and University College London for the Department for Transport, Road Safety Division. London, England. 11 February 2003. Costs ID: 2004-00085

105 “Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) Quarterly Newsletter—Spring 2007,” U.S. DOT ITS Joint Program Office, Web site URL www.

its.dot.gov/icms/index.htm. Last Accessed 13 November 2007.

106 Sources that support these findings: 

Birst, Shawn and Ayman Smadi. “An Evaluation of ITS for Incident Management in Second-Tier Cities: A Fargo, ND Case Study,” Paper 

Presented at ITE 2000 Annual Meeting. Nashville, Tennessee. 6–10 August 2000. Benefits ID: 2007-00335
endnotes 313

Smith, S. and C. Perez. “Evaluation of INFORM—Lessons Learned and Applications to Other Systems,” Paper Presented at the 71st 

Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 12–16 January 1992. Benefits ID: 2000-00098

107 Sources that support these findings:

Birst, Shawn and Ayman Smadi. “An Evaluation of ITS for Incident Management in Second-Tier Cities: A Fargo, ND Case Study,” Paper 

Presented at ITE 2000 Annual Meeting. Nashville, TN. 6–10 August 2000. Benefits ID: 2007-00335

Detroit Freeway Corridor ITS Evaluation, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, EDL No. 13586. July 2001. Benefits ID: 2007-00472

Innovative Traffic Control Technology and Practice in Europe, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Office of International Programs, 

Report No. FHWA-PL-99-021. August 1999. Benefits ID: 2007-00355

ITS Impacts Assessment for Seattle MMDI Evaluation: Modeling Methodology and Results, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration. EDL No. 

11323. September 1999. Benefits ID: 2007-00359

Jeannotte, Krista. “Evaluation of the Advanced Regional Traffic Interactive Management and Information System (ARTIMIS),” Paper 

Presented at the 11th Annual ITS America Meeting. Miami, FL. June 2001. Benefits ID: 2007-00347

Metropolitan Model Deployment Initiative: San Antonio Evaluation Report (Final Draft), U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-OP-00-017, EDL No. 12883. May 2000. Benefits ID: 2000-00134

Smith, S. and C. Perez. “Evaluation of INFORM—Lessons Learned and Applications to Other Systems,” Paper Presented at the 71st 

Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 12–16 January 1992. Benefits ID: 2000-00098

108 Sources that support these findings:

Dakaki, Christina, et al. “Application and Evaluation of the Integrated Traffic-Responsive Urban Corridor Control Strategy (IN-TUC) in 

Glasgow,” Paper Presented at the 79th Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting. Washington, DC. 9–13 January 2000. Benefits 

ID: 2007-00337

Hourdakis, John and Panos Michalopoulos. “Evaluation of Ramp Meter Control Effectiveness in Two Twin Cities Freeways,” Paper 

Presented at the 81st Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 13–17 January 2002. Benefits ID: 

2007-00482

Smith, S. and C. Perez. “Evaluation of INFORM—Lessons Learned and Applications to Other Systems,” Paper Presented at the 71st 

Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. January 1992. Benefits ID: 2000-00098

109 Sources that support these findings:

Dakaki, Christina, et al. “Application and Evaluation of the Integrated Traffic-Responsive Urban Corridor Control Strategy (IN-TUC) in 

Glasgow,” Paper Presented at the 79th Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting. Washington, DC. 12–16 January 2000. Benefits 

ID: 2002-00243

Detroit Freeway Corridor ITS Evaluation, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, EDL No. 13586. July 2001. Benefits ID: 2001-00213

“Ramp up the Volume,” ITS International. November 1997. Benefits ID: 2000-00049

“Telematics Applications Programme, 4th Framework Programme,” RTD&D 1994–1998, Web site URL www.cordis.lu/telematics/tap_

transport/research/10.html. Last Accessed 29 October 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00387

Twin Cities Ramp Meter Evaluation: Final Report. Prepared by Cambridge Systematics for the Minnesota DOT, EDL No. 13425. St. Paul, MN. 

1 February 2001. Benefits ID: 2007-00417

110 Sources that support these findings:

Allsopp, Richard, et al. “Safety Evaluation of Ramp Metering in Glasgow Using the Asset Image Processing System,” Paper Presented 

at the 5th World Congress Conference on ITS. Seoul, Korea. 12–16 October 1998. Benefits ID: 2000-00152

Cleavenger, Daniel K. and J. Upchurch. “Effect of Freeway Ramp Metering on Accidents: The Arizona Experience,” ITE Journal, Vol. 69, 

No. 8, Page 12. August 1999. Benefits ID: 2000-00032

Estimation of Benefits of Houston TranStar, Prepared by the Parsons Transportation Group for the Texas Transportation Institute. 7 February 

1997. Benefits ID: 2000-00014

Ramp Metering Status in North America, 1995 Update, U.S. DOT, Report No. DOT-T-95-17. June 1995. Benefits ID: 2000-00077
314 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Twin Cities Ramp Meter Evaluation: Final Report. Prepared by Cambridge Systematics for the Minnesota DOT, EDL No. 13425. St. Paul, MN. 

1 February 2001. Benefits ID: 2007-00420

111 Sources that support these findings:

Diakaki, Christina, et al. “Application and Evaluation of the Integrated Traffic-Responsive Urban Corridor Control Strategy (IN-TUC) in 

Glasgow,” Paper Presented at the 79th Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting. Washington, DC. 12–16 January 2000. Benefits 

ID: 2007-00338

Travel Time Messaging on Dynamic Message Signs—Houston, TX, Texas DOT and the U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration. May 2005. 

Benefits ID: 2007-00304

112 Innovative Traffic Control Technology and Practice in Europe, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Office of International 

Programs, Report No. FHWA-PL-99-021. August 1999. Benefits ID: 2007-00331

113 Sources that support these findings:

Fontaine, Michael D. and Steven D. Schrock. “Feasibility of Real-Time Remote Speed Enforcement in Work Zones,” Paper Presented at 

the 81st Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 13–17 January 2002. Benefits ID: 2007-00490

Gaines, Adrian, et al. Department for Transport: A cost recovery system for speed and red-light cameras—two year pilot evaluation, Prepared by the PA 

Consulting Group and University College London for the Department for Transport, Road Safety Division. London, England. February 

2003. Benefits ID: 2007-00344

114 Gaines, Adrian, et al. Department for Transport: A cost recovery system for speed and red-light cameras—two year pilot evaluation, Prepared by the PA 

Consulting Group and University College London for the Department for Transport, Road Safety Division. London, England. February 

2003. Benefits ID: 2007-00344

115 Working Paper: Estimating the Federal Proportion of Funds Expended on ITS Infrastructure for Fiscal Year 2000, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration. EDL No. 13596. May 2001. Costs ID: 2003-00013

116 2006 Annual Report SMART SunGuide Transportation Management Center (TMC), Florida DOT District IV. January 2007. Correspondence with 

Mr. Steve Corbin, FDOT District IV, ITS Operations Manager. February 2007. Costs ID: 2007-00120

117 “Cost Estimates for Blewett/Stevens Pass Highway Advisory Radios,” U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, ITS Joint Program 

Office. Washington, DC. July 2001. Costs ID: 2003-00016

118 Gaines, Adrian, et al. Department for Transport: A cost recovery system for speed and red-light cameras—two year pilot evaluation, Prepared by the PA 

Consulting Group and University College London for the Department for Transport, Road Safety Division. London, England. February 

2003. Costs ID: 2004-00085

119 Twin Cities Ramp Meter Evaluation: Final Report. Prepared by Cambridge Systematics for the Minnesota DOT, EDL No. 13425. St. Paul, MN. 

1 February 2001. Benefits ID: 2007-00416

120 2006 Annual Report SMART SunGuide Transportation Management Center (TMC), Florida DOT District IV. January 2007. Costs ID: 2007-00120

121 Design Criteria: Pole Heights and Location for Video Surveillance Systems—Version 1, Florida DOT, ITS Office. Tallahassee, FL. 25 November 2003. 

Costs ID: 2004-00077

122 Twin Cities Ramp Meter Evaluation: Final Report. Prepared by Cambridge Systematics for the Minnesota DOT, EDL No. 13425. St. Paul, MN. 

1 February 2001. Benefits ID: 2007-00420

123 Perrin, Joseph, Rodrigo Disegni, and Bhargava Rama. Advanced Transportation Management System Elemental Cost Benefit Assessment, Prepared 

by the University of Utah for the Utah DOT and U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration. March 2004. Benefits ID: 2005-00286

124 Twin Cities Ramp Meter Evaluation: Final Report. Prepared by Cambridge Systematics for the Minnesota DOT, EDL No. 13425. St. Paul, MN. 

1 February 2001. Benefits ID: 2007-00417

125 Diakaki, Christina, et al. “Application and Evaluation of the Integrated Traffic-Responsive Urban Corridor Control Strategy (IN-TUC) in 

Glasgow,” Paper Presented at the 79th Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting. Washington, DC. 9–13 January 2000. Benefits 

ID: 2002-00243

126 Hourdakis, John and Panos Michalopoulos. “Evaluation of Ramp Meter Control Effectiveness in Two Twin Cities Freeways,” Paper 

Presented at the 81st Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 13–17 January 2002. Benefits ID: 

2002-00237
endnotes 315

127 Twin Cities Ramp Meter Evaluation: Final Report, Prepared by Cambridge Systematics for the Minnesota DOT, EDL No. 13425. St. Paul, MN. 

1 February 2001. Benefits ID: 2007-00419

128 Diakaki, Christina, et al. “Application and Evaluation of the Integrated Traffic-Responsive Urban Corridor Control Strategy (IN-TUC) in 

Glasgow,” Paper Presented at the 79th Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting. Washington, DC. 9–13 January 2000. Benefits 

ID: 2007-00339

129 Working Paper: Estimating the Federal Proportion of Funds Expended on ITS Infrastructure for Fiscal Year 2000, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration. EDL No. 13596. May 2001. Costs ID: 2003-00013

130 Cost Estimates for ITS Devices of the T-REX Project, Colorado DOT and Transportation Expansion (T-REX) Project Fact Book. Winter 2002. 

Costs ID: 2003-00014

131 Twin Cities Ramp Meter Evaluation: Final Report. Prepared by Cambridge Systematics for the Minnesota DOT, EDL No. 13425. St. Paul, MN. 

1 February 2001. Benefits ID: 2007-00416

132 Pool, Robert W. Jr. and C. Kenneth Orski. HOT Lanes: A Better Way to Attack Urban Highway Congestion, CATO Institute, Regulation, Vol. 23. 

No. 1. Washington, DC. (2000). Costs ID: 2008-00135

133 Managed Lanes: A Cross-Cutting Study, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Office of Transportation Management, Report No. 

FHWA-HOP-05-037. November 2004. Lesson ID: 2007-00380

134 Innovative Traffic Control Technology and Practice in Europe. U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Office of International Programs, 

Report No. FHWA-PL-99-021. August 1999. Benefits ID: 2007-00355

135 Wendelboe, Jens Toft. Traffic management applications on the Køge Bugt Motorway, Denmark, European Commission Directorate General 

Energy and Transport. April 2003. Benefits ID: 2007-00501

136 Innovative Traffic Control Technology and Practice in Europe. U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Office of International Programs, 

Report No. FHWA-PL-99-021. August 1999. Benefits ID: 2007-00355

137 Innovative Traffic Control Technology and Practice in Europe. U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Office of International Programs, 

Report No. FHWA-PL-99-021. August 1999. Benefits ID: 2007-00353

138 Wendelboe, Jens Toft. Traffic management applications on the Køge Bugt Motorway, Denmark, European Commission Directorate General 

Energy and Transport. April 2003. Benefits ID: 2007-00501

139 Sources that support these findings:

Robinson, Mark. “Examples of Variable Speed Limit Applications,” Presentation given at the Speed Management Workshop held in 

conjunction with the 79th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 9–13 January 2000. 

Rural ITS Toolbox. U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-OP-01-030, EDL No. 13477. November 2001. Costs ID: 2003-00015

“Smart Trek,” Puget Sound Regional Council, Web page URL www.smarttrek.org/html/new2.html. Last Accessed 2 November 2004.

140 Metropolitan Model Deployment Initiative: San Antonio Evaluation Report (Final Draft), U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-OP-00-017, EDL No. 12883. May 2000. Benefits ID: 2007-00375

141 Detroit Freeway Corridor ITS Evaluation, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, EDL No. 13586. July 2001. Benefits ID: 2007-00472

142 Ran, Bin, et al. Evaluation of Variable Message Signs in Wisconsin: Driver Survey, University of Wisconsin. Madison, WI. May 2002. Benefits ID: 

2004-00279

143 2006 Annual Report SMART SunGuide Transportation Management Center (TMC), Florida DOT District IV. January 2007. Correspondence with 

Mr. Steve Corbin, FDOT District IV, ITS Operations Manager. February 2007. Costs ID: 2007-00120

144 Perrin, Joseph, et al. Advanced Transportation Management System Elemental Cost Benefit Assessment. Prepared by the University of Utah for the 

Utah DOT and U.S DOT Federal Highway Administration. Salt Lake City, UT. March 2004. Costs ID: 2004-00086

145 Paniati, Jeffrey and Jeffrey Lindley. Dynamic Message Sign (DMS) Recommended Practice and Guidance, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration. July 2004. Lesson ID: 2007-00337

146 Changeable Message Sign Operation and Messaging Handbook, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-OP-03-070. 

August 2004. Lesson ID: 2007-00336

147 Paniati, Jeffrey and Jeffrey Lindley, Dynamic Message Sign (DMS) Recommended Practice and Guidance, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration. July 2004. Lesson ID: 2007-00337
316 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

148 Evaluation of Rural ITS Information Systems along U.S. 395, Spokane, Washington, U.S. DOT, EDL No. 13955. 8 January 2004. Benefits ID: 

2007-00484

149 Evaluation of Rural ITS Information Systems along U.S. 395, Spokane, Washington, U.S. DOT, EDL No. 13955. 8 January 2004. Costs ID: 

2004-00079

150 “Cost Estimates for Blewett/Stevens Pass Highway Advisory Radios,” U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, ITS Joint Program 

Office. Washington, DC. July 2001. Costs ID: 2003-00016

151 Gaines, Adrian, et al. Department for Transport: A cost recovery system for speed and red-light cameras—two year pilot evaluation, Prepared by the PA 

Consulting Group and University College London for the Department for Transport, Road Safety Division. London, England. 11 February 2003. Benefits ID: 2007-00344

152 Gaines, Adrian, et al. Transport: A cost recovery system for speed and red-light cameras—Two year pilot evaluation, Prepared by the Great PA Consulting Group and University College London for the Department for Transport, Road Safety Division. London, England. 11 February 2003. 

Benefits ID: 2003-00264

153 Gaines, Adrian, et al. Department for Transport: A cost recovery system for speed and red-light cameras—two year pilot evaluation, Prepared by the PA 

Consulting Group and University College London for the Department for Transport, Road Safety Division. London, England. 11 February 2003. Costs ID: 2004-00085

154 Sources that support these findings:

“FHWA Safety,” U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Web site URL safety.fhwa.dot.gov/intersections/index.htm. Last Accessed 

12 December 2007.

Torbic, Darren J., et al. Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan, Volume 7: A Guide for Reducing Collisions on Horizontal Curves, Transportation Research Board, National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), Report No. 500. Washington, 

DC. 2004.

Pedestrian and Bicyclist Intersection Safety Indices: Final Report, U.S. DOT Highway Safety Research Center for the Turner-Fairbank Highway 

Research Center, Report No. FHWA-HRT-06-125. November 2006.

155 Drakopoulos, Alexander. “CVO/Freight and ITS Session,” Presentation at the 12th annual ITS Forum, Wisconsin Chapter of ITS America—Smartways, Marquette University. Milwaukee, WI. 31 October 2006. Benefits ID: 2008-00513

156 Mattingly, Stephen P. “Mitigating Overheight Vehicle Crashes Into Infrastructure: A State of the Practice,” Paper Presented at the 82nd 

Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 12–16 January 2003. Benefits ID: 2008-00514

157 Inman, Vaughan W., et al. “Field and Driving Simulator Validations of System for Warning Potential Victims of Red-Light Violators,” Paper 

Presented at the 85th Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting, Washington, DC. 22–26 January 2006. Benefits ID: 2008-00515

158 Pento, Robert J. “Evaluation of PennDOT ITS Deployments,” PennDOT, Bureau of Highway Safety and Traffic Engineering, Presentation 

to the 2005 Transportation Engineering and Safety Conference. 7 December 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00136

159 Mattingly, Stephen P. “Mitigating Overheight Vehicle Crashes Into Infrastructure: A State of the Practice,” Paper Presented at the 82nd 

Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 12–16 January 2003. Costs ID: 2008-00137

160 Intersection Collision Avoidance Study, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-05-030, EDL No. 14105. September 

2003. Costs ID: 2008-00138

161 Cortelazzi, Lou, et al. Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission’s Advanced Traveler Information System (ATIS) Phase III Project, Prepared by DMJM Harris 

for the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission, EDL No. 14308. Philadelphia, PA. April 2006. Benefits ID: 2008-00516

162 Strickland, Rodney and Hugh McGee. “Evaluation Results of Three Prototype Automatic Truck Rollover Warning Systems,” Paper 

Presented at the 77th Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 11–15 January 1998. Benefits ID: 2000-00131

163 Drakopoulos, Alexander. “CVO/Freight and ITS Session,” Presentation at the 12th Annual ITS Forum, Wisconsin Chapter of ITS America—Smartways, Marquette University. Milwaukee, WI. 31 October 2006. “Design Guidelines for Including ITS in Projects,” Colorado 

DOT CoTrip, Web site URL www.cotrip.org/its/ITS%20Guidelines%20Web%20New%20Format%202-05/Web%20Solutions%20Packages/

Truck%20Overturn%20Speed%20Advisory%20System.xls. Last Accessed 10 February 2008. Costs ID: 2008-00178

164 Sources that support these findings:
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | crash prevention and safety 41

The four most widely

adopted crash prevention

and safety systems are curve

and ramp speed Warning, rail 

crossing warning, and Crash Prevention and Safety pedestrian safety systems.

Roadways

A major goal of the ITS program is to improve safety and reduce risk for road users including pedestrians, cyclists, operators, and occupants of all vehicles who must travel along a 

given roadway. On the Nation’s roadways, vehicle crashes at horizontal curves and intersections account for approximately 25 percent and 21 percent of fatalities, respectively. Nearly 

13 percent of those killed in motor vehicle crashes are pedestrians and bicyclists, and more 

than 1 percent of crashes occur at highway-rail crossings.154 Interstates and other freeway 

ramp curves can be dangerous locations because drivers must perceive the point at which 

to begin braking and slow down sufficiently to safely negotiate the ramp curve. 

Road geometry warning systems warn drivers of potentially dangerous conditions that 

may cause rollover or run-off-the-road crashes on ramps, curves, or downgrades, and 

provide overheight warnings at tunnels and overpasses. Highway-rail crossing warning 

systems can reduce the potential for collisions at railroad crossings including catastrophic 

crashes involving school buses or hazardous materials carriers. Intersection collision warning systems use sensors to monitor traffic approaching dangerous intersections and warn 

vehicles of approaching cross-traffic via roadside or in-vehicle displays. Pedestrian safety 

systems can adjust traffic signal timing to provide an appropriate WALK phase or activate 

in-pavement lighting or roadside warning messages to alert drivers of pedestrians present. 

Bicycle warning systems can detect cyclists on narrow stretches of roadway and provide 

drivers with advanced notice when entering bridges and tunnels. In rural areas, animal 

warning systems can detect large animals near the roadway, alert travelers, and deter 

animals from crossing while traffic is present.

In addition to the ITS technologies profiled in this chapter, the Cooperative Intersection 

Collision Avoidance Systems (CICAS) initiative, a major ITS initiative being conducted by 

the U.S. DOT has the potential to enhance crash prevention and safety. Through CICAS, the 

U.S. DOT is working with automotive manufacturers and State and local DOTs to develop 

and test autonomous-vehicle, autonomous-infrastructure, and cooperative communication 

systems that can help prevent crashes at intersections. For more information, visit the ITS 

JPO’s Web site: www.its.dot.gov/cicas. 

Findings

Benefits

Road geometry warning systems can improve safety on highway ramps or curves that 

experience a high incidence of truck rollovers. Providing truckers with advanced notice 

of excessive approach speeds can reduce truck speeds by up to 8.3 mi/h. Several years of 

safety data collected at multiple sites show these systems can eliminate rollover crashes, 

and the impacts are sustainable. Downhill speed warning systems have also proven effective at mitigating risks to large trucks in areas with steep terrain. These speed advisory 

systems have decreased truck crashes by up to 13 percent at problem sites in Oregon and 

Colorado.155

A nationwide survey evaluating overheight/overwidth warning systems found that eight 

states that deployed active infrared light or laser activated warning systems had fewer 

overheight load strikes on infrastructure components.156 Although active warning systems 

were found to be more effective than passive ridged crossbeam structures or overhead 

suspended chain warning systems, human error was prevalent highlighting the need to 

thoroughly consider driver perception and compliance prior to deployment.

Crash Prevention and Safety 

Categories in the ITS Knowledge 

Resources

Road Geometry Warning 

Ramp Rollover Warning

Curve Speed Warning

Downhill Speed Warning

Overheight/Overwidth Warning

Highway-Rail Crossing Warning Systems

Intersection Collision Warning

Pedestrian Safety

Bicycle Warning

Animal Warning
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

42 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

The need to reduce crashes at intersections has fostered considerable research to develop 

and evaluate cost-effective countermeasures. Initial research suggests that most drivers 

will respond to intersection collision warning systems and slow or stop appropriately.157

These systems are currently being designed to transmit warning messages to in-vehicle 

systems and display warnings on roadside infrastructure. 

Table 4 illustrates that evaluations have shown the safety benefits for deployed crash 

prevention and safety systems. Several evaluations have documented customer satisfaction with road geometry and highway-rail crossing warning systems. A study also indicated 

mobility, fuel consumption, and emissions improvements through a highway-rail crossing 

warning system.

Table 4—Crash Prevention and Safety Benefits Summary Safety Mobility Efficiency Productivity Energy and

EnvironmentCustomerSatisfaction

Road Geometry Warning ● ●

Highway-Rail Crossing Systems ● ✚ ✚ ●

Intersection Collision Warning ✚

Pedestrian Safety ●

Bicycle Warning

Animal Warning ●

● Substantial positive impacts ✚ Positive impacts

❍ Negligible impacts ✱ Mixed results

✖ Negative impacts blank Not enough data

Downhill speed warning systems

have decreased truck crashes up to 

13 percent at problem sites in oregon 

and colorado.
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | crash prevention and safety 43

Costs

The initial costs of crash prevention and safety systems vary depending on the technology deployed, system configuration, and functionality offered. As part of an evaluation of 

automated truck rollover warning systems, the Pennsylvania DOT (PennDOT) researched 

systems in other states. The cost of these systems varied significantly, ranging from $50,000 

to $500,000, as did their configurations: invasive and non-invasive detection, weight-based 

versus simplified speed class algorithms, and system calibrations for warnings.158

Based on responses to a nationwide survey of states operating overheight detection 

systems, the initial costs of active laser or infrared systems vary considerably ranging 

from $7,000 to $70,000. Although costs data are not widely available, the operations and 

maintenance (O&M) costs are considered relatively minimal regardless of the type of 

system deployed ranging from $1,000 to $2,500. The wide variation in capital costs is due 

to the fact that each system vendor packages its system differently. Some vendors perform 

the equipment installation and the labor cost is included in the total deployment costs. 

Also, some vendors select from multiple systems the company offers to meet the needs of 

the customer. Most systems use line power rather than solar power to reduce O&M costs 

and increased reliability.159

For six types of intersection collision warning scenarios, the cost of the design and 

equipment ranges from $47,230 to $73,320 per intersection. Design cost totaled $19,980 and 

included data collection, analysis and system design, human factors testing, and software 

design. The remaining costs were for the equipment (e.g., dynamic message signs (DMS), 

loop detectors, controllers) and communication devices at one-fourth mile spacing.160

Deployment

Crash prevention and safety systems are often deployed in non-urban settings to address 

specific safety issues at spot locations. Figure 5 shows the trends for the number of states 

adopting crash prevention and safety systems in statewide/rural locations from 2002 to 

2006. The four most widely adopted systems are curve speed warning, ramp rollover 

warning, highway-rail crossing warning systems, and pedestrian safety systems. Next in 

popularity, and adopted by about half as many states, are downhill speed warning systems, 

intersection collision warning systems, and animal warning systems. Finally, bicycle warning systems are adopted by about a fourth as many states as the first three systems. The 

trend for adoption of crash prevention and safety systems in general is rapidly expanding, 

with the number of states adopting these systems increasing by a factor of two to three 

over the four-year period. 

For six types of intersection

collision warning scenarios, the

cost of the design and equipment 

ranges from $47,230 to $73,320 per 

intersection.,
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

44 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

The 2006 survey of each of the 50 states about deployment of ITS technologies in rural 

areas and on a statewide basis is the source of deployment statistics presented later in 

this chapter, unless otherwise noted. 

Figure 5 – Trends for Statewide/Rural Deployment of Crash Prevention

and Safety Systems, 2002-2006

Curve and Ramp

Rail Crossing

Pedestrian Safety

Downhill

Intersection Collision

Animal Warning

Bicycle Warning

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

Year

Number of States

‘02 ‘04 ‘06
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | crash prevention and safety 45

Selected Highlights from the ITS Knowledge

Resources on Crash Prevention and Safety

Road Geometry Warning Systems

Road geometry warning systems warn drivers, typically those in commercial trucks 

and other heavy vehicles, of potentially dangerous conditions that may cause rollovers; 

crashes on ramps, curves, or downgrades; and collisions with roadway infrastructure, 

such as overpasses.

Road Geometry Warning Systems

Deployment

Overheight/overwidth warning systems that warn drivers of vehicles that are too tall 

or too wide to pass under bridges or through tunnels are used in 23 states. Systems 

that warn drivers of potentially dangerous speeds in a variety of situations are used 

by several states: approaching freeway ramps (11 states), curved freeways (11 states) 

and downhill grades (8 states).

Road Geometry Warning Systems: Ramp Rollover Warning 

Ramp rollover warning systems use roadside detectors and electronic warning signs to 

warn drivers, typically those in commercial trucks and other heavy vehicles, of potentially 

dangerous approach speeds to freeway ramps.

Road Geometry Warning Systems—Ramp Rollover Warning

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety Summary Finding: Rollover warning systems dramatically reduce 

crashes. A truck rollover warning system installed on the Pennsylvania Turnpike was designed to alert truck drivers of a dangerous 

curve at the Breezewood Interchange. During 21 months of data collection prior to the system deployment, 5 rollover crashes occurred. 

After deployment, only one crash occurred, which was attributed 

to a passenger car that went out of control and forced a nearby 

truck to make a reactive move and roll over.161Similar systems were 

deployed at three sites on the Capital Beltway outside Washington, 

D.C. where no crashes occurred during three years of post-deployment data collection. Trucks also reduced speeds by an average 8.3 

mi/h when warnings were activated.162
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

46 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Road Geometry Warning Systems—Ramp Rollover Warning

 Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Detection subsystem: 

•	 Inductive Loops on Corridor: $3K-$8K

•	 Remote Traffic Microwave Sensor on Corridor: $9K-$13K per sensor

Roadside Information subsystem: 

•	 Dynamic Message Sign: $48K-$119K

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem: 

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Colorado: A Truck Tip-Over Warning System was deployed on I-70 eastbound just 

outside Idaho Springs to help prevent rollover crashes. The system consists of two 

piezo weigh-in-motion devices, vehicle detectors, four fiber optic message signs, computer and associated software, and controller cabinet. The system was deployed at a 

cost of $446,687.

163
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | FREEWAY Management 47

Road Geometry Warning Systems: Curve Speed Warning

Curve speed warning systems use roadside detectors and electronic warning signs to 

warn drivers, typically those in commercial trucks and other heavy vehicles, of potentially 

dangerous speeds on approach to curves on highways.

Road Geometry Warning Systems—Curve Speed Warning

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety Summary Finding: Evaluation data collected in California and 

Oregon indicated that 69 to 76 percent of drivers surveyed 

reduced their speed in response to curve speed warning systems.164

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Detection subsystem: 

•	 Inductive Loops on Corridor: $3K-$8K

•	 Remote Traffic Microwave Sensor on Corridor: $9K-$13K per sensor

Roadside Information subsystem: 

•	 Dynamic Message Sign: $48K-$119K

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem: 

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

California, Colorado, Maryland, and Virginia: As part of an evaluation of automated truck rollover warning systems, PennDOT researched curve speed warning 

systems in other states. The cost of these systems varied significantly, ranging from 

$50,000 to $500,000, as did their configurations: invasive and non-invasive detection, weight-based versus simplified speed class algorithms, and system calibrations 

for warnings.165

lessons learned 

Use speed warning signs on dangerous 

curves to reduce truck speeds.

The Rural ITS Toolbox noted a relatively lowtech approach that was used by Colorado 

DOT to address high speed trucks in mountainous terrain. Colorado DOT has many 

highways that run through the mountains 

and have high truck traffic. The Colorado 

DOT’s experience reveals the following with 

regard to reducing truck speeds on dangerous curves.

•	 Consider using simple radar speed detection devices in combination with dynamic 

message signs (DMS).

To convey to truck drivers their current speed 

and to warn them of impending curves ahead 

that can not be safely negotiated at their current speed, use simple radar speed detection devices in combination with DMS. The 

relatively low-cost system has seen dramatic 

results. Speed studies conducted before and 

after the system was installed revealed a 

reduction in 85th percentile truck speed from 

66 to 48 mi/h.166
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

48 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Road Geometry Warning Systems: Downhill Speed Warning

Downhill speed warning systems use roadside detectors and electronic warning signs to 

warn drivers, typically those in commercial trucks and other heavy vehicles, of potentially 

dangerous speeds in approach to downhill grades.

Road Geometry Warning Systems—Downhill Speed Warning

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety A downhill speed warning system installed on I-70 in Colorado 

decreased truck crashes by 13 percent and reduced the use of run 

away truck ramps by 24 percent.167 Speed studies documented a 

decline in the 85th percentile truck speed from 66 to 48 mi/h.168

Customer

Satisfaction

A small-scale study of truck drivers who experienced the downhill speed warning system in Colorado indicated that most drivers 

thought it was helpful.169

Downhill Speed Warning Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Detection subsystem: 

•	 Inductive Loops on Corridor: $3K-$8K

•	 Remote Traffic Microwave Sensor on Corridor: $9K-$13K per sensor

Roadside Information subsystem: 

•	 Dynamic Message Sign: $48K-$119K

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem: 

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | crash prevention and safety 49

Road Geometry Warning Systems: Overheight/Overwidth Warning 

Overheight/overwidth warning systems use roadside detectors and electronic warning 

signs to warn drivers of vehicles that are too tall or wide to pass under bridges or through 

tunnels.

Road Geometry Warning Systems—Overheight/Overwidth Warning

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety An overheight/overwidth warning system installed at a tunnel 

in Pennsylvania worked well, with a few notable exceptions. One 

driver ignored the warnings given by the system. Another assumed 

that his truck was within the height limit because he did not receive 

a warning from the system when it was inactive due to mechanical problems.170 These experiences demonstrate the value of the 

systems when warnings are heeded, and the importance of maintenance to assure proper performance. 

Costs

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

United States: Overheight detection and warning systems typically use infrared light 

or laser detection systems and warning signs with flashing beacons to warn drivers 

that their truck exceeds the height of an upcoming bridge or tunnel. Each approach 

requires a separate system. Installation costs range from $7,000 to $70,000 per system (including labor) depending on site conditions, customer needs, design costs, 

and availability of power. Reported O&M costs are relatively low, ranging from $1,000 

to $2,500 annually.

171

Michigan: An active overheight detection and warning system installed in advance 

of a sub-standard bridge structure is estimated to cost $110,000 based on data provided by manufacturers and State DOTs responding to a study conducted for the 

Michigan DOT. The system consists of an infrared transmitter, receiver, and a warning 

sign with alternating flashers. The cost estimate is based on the assumption that two 

installations are deployed one on each side of the bridge.172
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

50 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Highway-Rail Crossing Systems 

Highway-rail crossing systems use detectors, electronic warning signs, and automated 

enforcement technologies to warn roadway traffic of approaching trains and discourage 

drivers from violating railroad crossing traffic controls.

Highway-Rail Crossing Systems

Deployment

Sixteen (16) states use systems that detect and warn drivers of approaching trains 

at highway-rail intersections. One state uses an automated enforcement system to 

detect drivers violating railroad crossing traffic controls.

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety Installation of a “Second Train Coming” warning system at a light 

rail transit grade crossing in the suburbs of Baltimore, Maryland, 

led to a reduction of 26 percent of vehicles crossing the tracks 

between the two trains.173 In Los Angeles, California, installation of 

a similar system yielded a 14 percent reduction in risky pedestrian 

behavior.174

Mobility The San Antonio, Texas simulations of increased traffic volumes indicated DMS with railroad crossing delay information may decrease 

system delay by seven percent.175

Energy and 

Environment

Noise levels were measured at a highway-rail intersection before 

and after installation of an automated horn system in Ames, Iowa. 

Analysis indicated that areas impacted by noise levels greater than 

80 decibels decreased by 97 percent.176

Customer

Satisfaction

Ninety-three (93) percent of pedestrians surveyed felt safety was 

improved by the installation of a “Second Train Coming” warning system at a light rail transit grade crossing in Los Angeles, 

California.177
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | crash prevention and safety 51

Highway-Rail Crossing Systems

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Rail Crossing subsystem: 

•	 Rail Crossing Four-Quad Gate, Signals: $90K-$101K

•	 Rail Crossing Train Detector: $12K-$17K

Roadside Detection subsystem: 

•	 Inductive Loops on Corridor: $3K-$8K

•	 Remote Traffic Microwave Sensor on Corridor: $9K-$13K per sensor

Roadside Information subsystem: 

•	 Dynamic Message Sign: $48K-$119K

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem: 

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)

Intersection Collision Warning

Intersection collision warning systems use sensors to monitor traffic approaching dangerous intersections and warn vehicles of approaching cross traffic, via external signage or 

in-vehicle warnings.

Intersection Collision Warning

Deployment

Seven states use intersection collision warning systems that use sensors to monitor 

traffic approaching intersections and warn drivers of approaching cross traffic.

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety Field testing of a warning system at a two-way, stop-controlled 

intersection in rural Virginia reduced vehicle speeds by 2.4 mi/h 

and increased the average projected time to collision from 2.5 to 

3.5 seconds.178

Intersection collision avoidance systems deployed at intersections 

with high crash frequencies or high rates of severe injury are projected to recoup initial costs within one year through a reduction 

in crashes.179
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

52 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Intersection Collision Warning

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Detection subsystem: 

•	 Inductive Loops on Corridor: $3K-$8K

•	 Remote Traffic Microwave Sensor on Corridor: $9K-$13K per sensor

Roadside Control subsystem: 

•	 Signal Controller and Cabinet: $8K-$14K

Roadside Information subsystem: 

•	 Dynamic Message Sign: $48K

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem: 

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Virginia, California, and Minnesota: Infrastructure-only intersection collision 

avoidance systems deployed at high crash intersections in three states ranged in 

costs from $47,995 to $73,230 per intersection. Costs included design and capital 

costs.180
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | crash prevention and safety 53

Pedestrian Safety

Pedestrian safety systems can help protect pedestrians by automatically activating in-pavement lighting to alert drivers as pedestrians enter crosswalks. Other systems include countdown pedestrian traffic signals and pedestrian detectors that extend the WALK phase for 

pedestrians needing more time to cross a street.

Pedestrian Safety

Deployment

Fifteen (15) states use pedestrian safety systems to protect pedestrians by alerting 

drivers when pedestrians enter crosswalks.

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety Automated pedestrian detection at signalized intersections tested 

in 3 U.S. cities reduced vehicle-pedestrian conflicts by 89 percent in 

the first half of the crossing and by 43 percent in the second.181 The 

systems—tested in Los Angeles, California; Rochester, New York; 

and Phoenix, Arizona—also reduced the number of pedestrians 

who began crossing during the steady DON’T WALK signal by 81 

percent.182

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Detection subsystem: 

•	 Pedestrian Detection—Microwave: $0.6K

•	 Pedestrian Detection—Infrared: $0.3K-$0.5K

Roadside Information subsystem: 

•	 Light-Emitting Diode (LED) Countdown Signal: $0.306K-$0.424K

•	 Pedestrian Crossing Illumination System: $26.8K-$41K

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem: 

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

54 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Bicycle Warning 

Bicycle warning systems can use detectors and electronic warning signs to identify bicycle 

traffic and notify drivers when a cyclist is in an upcoming segment of roadway to improve 

safety on narrow bridges and tunnels.

Bicycle Warning

Deployment

Four states use bicycle warning systems that warn drivers of the presence of bicycles 

on narrow bridges and tunnels.

Animal Warning

Animal warning systems typically use infrared or other detection technologies to identify 

large animals approaching the roadway and alert drivers by activating flashers on warning 

signs located upstream of high frequency crossing areas. These systems may also activate 

in-vehicle warning devices.

Animal Warning

Deployment

Six states have deployed animal warning systems that warn drivers of large animals 

approaching the roadway.

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety In Switzerland, an animal warning system installed at 7 sites 

decreased collisions with large animals by 81 percent.183

Costs

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

United States and Europe: The cost of animal detection systems vary depending on 

road length and the cost of research and development. The costs for planning, purchase, installation, and operation and maintenance on a one-mile section of roadway 

have been estimated at $31,300 per year with a 10-year lifespan.184

Lessons learned 

Thoroughly test, evaluate, and maintain 

animal warning systems.

Animal warning systems are relatively new, 

having yet to be deployed on a large scale 

nationally. It is likely that common problems 

will surface, which will need to be remedied. 

In order to mitigate emerging complications, 

deploying agencies need to develop a system 

that provides assurance that animal warning 

systems will be continually evaluated and 

maintained to the highest possible standard.

•	 Extensively test system components and 

specifications in environments similar to 

those experienced at potential animal 

warning system sites.

The specifications of all components of the 

system should be checked and compared to 

specific requirements in the contract including Federal and State regulations, the Federal 

Communications Commission regulations for 

radio signals, maximum heights, and breakaway construction for objects placed in the 

clear zone. All system components should 

be designed to withstand their own weight, 

strong winds, heavy precipitation (including 

snow load and ice build-up), and in some 

cases, high humidity. The site-specific design 

for the location of posts and sensors should 

pay special attention to curves, slopes, rises, 

low areas, and vegetation in the right-of-way 

to avoid “blind spots” where the sensors cannot detect the target species. Final selection 

of equipment placement sites should be verified by an on-site electronic survey using a 

portable beam-break system.185
316 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

148 Evaluation of Rural ITS Information Systems along U.S. 395, Spokane, Washington, U.S. DOT, EDL No. 13955. 8 January 2004. Benefits ID: 

2007-00484

149 Evaluation of Rural ITS Information Systems along U.S. 395, Spokane, Washington, U.S. DOT, EDL No. 13955. 8 January 2004. Costs ID: 

2004-00079

150 “Cost Estimates for Blewett/Stevens Pass Highway Advisory Radios,” U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, ITS Joint Program 

Office. Washington, DC. July 2001. Costs ID: 2003-00016

151 Gaines, Adrian, et al. Department for Transport: A cost recovery system for speed and red-light cameras—two year pilot evaluation, Prepared by the PA 

Consulting Group and University College London for the Department for Transport, Road Safety Division. London, England. 11 February 2003. Benefits ID: 2007-00344

152 Gaines, Adrian, et al. Transport: A cost recovery system for speed and red-light cameras—Two year pilot evaluation, Prepared by the Great PA Consulting Group and University College London for the Department for Transport, Road Safety Division. London, England. 11 February 2003. 

Benefits ID: 2003-00264

153 Gaines, Adrian, et al. Department for Transport: A cost recovery system for speed and red-light cameras—two year pilot evaluation, Prepared by the PA 

Consulting Group and University College London for the Department for Transport, Road Safety Division. London, England. 11 February 2003. Costs ID: 2004-00085

154 Sources that support these findings:

“FHWA Safety,” U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Web site URL safety.fhwa.dot.gov/intersections/index.htm. Last Accessed 

12 December 2007.

Torbic, Darren J., et al. Guidance for Implementation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan, Volume 7: A Guide for Reducing Collisions on Horizontal Curves, Transportation Research Board, National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), Report No. 500. Washington, 

DC. 2004.

Pedestrian and Bicyclist Intersection Safety Indices: Final Report, U.S. DOT Highway Safety Research Center for the Turner-Fairbank Highway 

Research Center, Report No. FHWA-HRT-06-125. November 2006.

155 Drakopoulos, Alexander. “CVO/Freight and ITS Session,” Presentation at the 12th annual ITS Forum, Wisconsin Chapter of ITS America—Smartways, Marquette University. Milwaukee, WI. 31 October 2006. Benefits ID: 2008-00513

156 Mattingly, Stephen P. “Mitigating Overheight Vehicle Crashes Into Infrastructure: A State of the Practice,” Paper Presented at the 82nd 

Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 12–16 January 2003. Benefits ID: 2008-00514

157 Inman, Vaughan W., et al. “Field and Driving Simulator Validations of System for Warning Potential Victims of Red-Light Violators,” Paper 

Presented at the 85th Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting, Washington, DC. 22–26 January 2006. Benefits ID: 2008-00515

158 Pento, Robert J. “Evaluation of PennDOT ITS Deployments,” PennDOT, Bureau of Highway Safety and Traffic Engineering, Presentation 

to the 2005 Transportation Engineering and Safety Conference. 7 December 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00136

159 Mattingly, Stephen P. “Mitigating Overheight Vehicle Crashes Into Infrastructure: A State of the Practice,” Paper Presented at the 82nd 

Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 12–16 January 2003. Costs ID: 2008-00137

160 Intersection Collision Avoidance Study, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-05-030, EDL No. 14105. September 

2003. Costs ID: 2008-00138

161 Cortelazzi, Lou, et al. Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission’s Advanced Traveler Information System (ATIS) Phase III Project, Prepared by DMJM Harris 

for the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission, EDL No. 14308. Philadelphia, PA. April 2006. Benefits ID: 2008-00516

162 Strickland, Rodney and Hugh McGee. “Evaluation Results of Three Prototype Automatic Truck Rollover Warning Systems,” Paper 

Presented at the 77th Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 11–15 January 1998. Benefits ID: 2000-00131

163 Drakopoulos, Alexander. “CVO/Freight and ITS Session,” Presentation at the 12th Annual ITS Forum, Wisconsin Chapter of ITS America—Smartways, Marquette University. Milwaukee, WI. 31 October 2006. “Design Guidelines for Including ITS in Projects,” Colorado 

DOT CoTrip, Web site URL www.cotrip.org/its/ITS%20Guidelines%20Web%20New%20Format%202-05/Web%20Solutions%20Packages/

Truck%20Overturn%20Speed%20Advisory%20System.xls. Last Accessed 10 February 2008. Costs ID: 2008-00178

164 Sources that support these findings:
endnotes 317

Field Evaluation of the Myrtle Creek Advanced Curve Warning System, Oregon DOT and the U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report 

No. FHWA-OR-RD-06-13. June 2006. Benefits ID: 2008-00517

Tribbett, Lani, et al. An Evaluation of Dynamic Curve Warning Systems in the Sacramento River Canyon: Final Report, Western Transportation 

Institute, Montana State University. Bozeman, MT. April 2000. Benefits ID: 2007-00415

165 Pento, Robert J. “Evaluation of PennDOT ITS Deployments,” PennDOT Bureau of Highway Safety and Traffic Engineering, Presentation 

to the 2005 Transportation Engineering and Safety Conference. 7 December 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00136

166 Rural ITS Toolbox, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-OP-01-030, EDL No. 13477. November 2001. Lesson ID: 

2005-00075

167 “IRD Uses WIM Info in Suite of Truck Safety Advisory Systems,” Inside ITS, Pages 8–9. December 1997. Benefits ID: 2000-00055

168 Rural ITS Toolbox, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-OP-01-030, EDL No. 13477. November 2001. Benefits ID: 

2008-00518

169 Janson, Bruce N. Evaluation of Downhill Truck Speed Warning System on I–70 West of Eisenhower Tunnel, Prepared by the University of Colorado 

for the Colorado DOT, EDL No. 11963. Denver, CO. December 1999. Benefits ID: 2001-00212

170 Drakopoulos, Alexander. “CVO/Freight and ITS Session,” Presentation at the 12th Annual ITS Forum, Wisconsin Chapter of ITS America—Smartways, Marquette University. Milwaukee, WI. 31 October 2006. Benefits ID: 2008-00519

171 Mattingly, Stephen P. “Mitigating Overheight Vehicle Crashes Into Infrastructure: A State of the Practice,” Paper Presented at the 82nd 

Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 12–16 January 2003. Costs ID: 2008-00137

172 Cawley, Patrick, M. “Evaluation of Overheight Vehicle Detection/Warning Systems,” Paper Presented at the 2002 ITE Spring Conference 

and Exhibit. Palm Harbor, FL. 24–27 March 2002. Costs ID: 2008-00139

173 “Second Train Coming Warning Sign Demonstration Projects,” Research Results Digest, U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administration, Transit 

Cooperative Research Program, TCRP RRD No. 51. November 2002. Benefits ID: 2005-00282

174 “Second Train Coming Warning Sign Demonstration Projects,” Research Results Digest, U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administration, Transit 

Cooperative Research Program, TCRP RRD No. 51. November 2002. Benefits ID: 2005-00282

175 Metropolitan Model Deployment Initiative: San Antonio Evaluation Report—Final Draft, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-OP-00-017, EDL No. 12883. May 2000. Benefits ID: 2000-00134

176 Gent, Steve, J., et al. Evaluation of an Automated Horn Warning System at Three Highway-Railroad Grade Crossings in Ames, Iowa, Iowa DOT. Ames, 

IA. 1998 (date estimated). Benefits ID: 2007-00477

177 “Second Train Coming Warning Sign Demonstration Projects,” Research Results Digest, U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administration, Transit 

Cooperative Research Program, TCRP RRD No. 51. November 2002. Benefits ID: 2008-00520

178 Hanscom, Fred R. “Rural Stop-Sign Controlled Intersection Accident Countermeasure System Device Vehicle-Behavioral Evaluation,” 

Paper Presented at the 10th ITS America Annual Meeting. Boston, MA. 1–4 May 2000. Benefits ID: 2000-00167

179 Intersection Collision Avoidance Study, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-05-030, EDL No. 14105. September 

2003. Benefits ID: 2008-00573

180 Intersection Collision Avoidance Study, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-05-030, EDL No. 14105. September 

2003. Costs ID: 2008-00138

181 Hughes, Ronald, et al. “ITS and Pedestrian Safety at Signalized Intersections,” ITS Quarterly, Vol. 7, No.2. Spring/Summer 1999. Benefits 

ID: 2000-00018

182 Evaluation of Automated Pedestrian Detection at Signalized Intersections, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-RD-00-097. 

August 2001. Benefits ID: 2004-00276

183 Animal Vehicle Crash Mitigation Using Advanced Technology Phase I: Review, Design and Implementation—Final Report, Prepared by the Montana 

State University for the Oregon DOT, Alaska DOT, and U.S. DOT, Report No. SPR-3(076). Bozeman, MT. August 2006. Benefits ID: 

2008-00521

184 Animal Vehicle Crash Mitigation Using Advanced Technology Phase I: Review, Design and Implementation—Final Report, Prepared by the Montana State 

University for the Oregon DOT, Alaska DOT, and U.S. DOT, Report No. SPR-3(076). Bozeman, MT. August 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00140

185 Animal Vehicle Crash Mitigation Using Advanced Technology Phase I: Review, Design and Implementation—Final Report, Prepared by the Montana State 
318 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

University for the Oregon DOT, Alaska DOT, and U.S. DOT, Report No. SPR-3(076). Bozeman, MT. August 2006. Lesson ID: 2007-00409

186 Where the Weather Meets the Road: A Research Agenda for Improving Road Weather Services, The National Academy of Sciences, National Research 

Council. Washington, DC. April 2004.

187 “Road Weather Management Program,” U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Web site URL www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/Weather/q1_

roadimpact.htm. Last Accessed 20 February 2008.

188 Sources with supporting information:

Pisano, Paul, et al. “U.S. Highway Crashes in Adverse Road Weather Conditions,” Paper Presented at the American Meteorological 

Society Annual Meeting, New Orleans, LA, 20–24 January 2008.

Where the Weather Meets the Road: A Research Agenda for Improving Road Weather Services, The National Academy of Sciences, National 

Research Council. Washington, DC. April 2004.

189 Goodwin, L. Weather Impacts on Arterial Traffic Flow, Mitretek Systems. Falls Church, VA. December 2002.

190 Sources with supporting information: 

“Clarus Initiative,” U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Web site URL www.clarusinitiative.org. Last Accessed 14 December 

2007.

“Road Weather Management Program,” U.S DOT Federal Highway Administration, Web site URL ops.fhwa.dot.gov/weather/mitigating_impacts/programs.htm#3. Last Accessed 14 December 2007.

191 Sources that support these findings:

Evaluation of Rural ITS Information Systems along U.S. 395, Spokane, Washington, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, EDL No. 13955. 

8 January 2004. Benefits ID: 2004-00274

Final Evaluation Report: Evaluation of the Idaho Transportation Department Integrated Road-Weather Information System, U.S. DOT Federal Highway 

Administration, EDL No. 14267. 2 February 2006. Benefits ID: 2008-00522

192 Sources that support these findings:

Cooper, B.R. and Helen E. Sawyer. Assessment Of M25 Automatic Fog-Warning System—Final Report, Safety Resource Centre, Transportation 

Research Laboratory. Crowthorne, Berkshire, United Kingdom. 1993. Benefits ID: 2005-00283

Fog Project on I–75 between Chattanooga and Knoxville, Tennessee ITS State Status Report. October 2000. U.S. DOT Web site URL www.its.

dot.gov/staterpt/tn.htm. Last Accessed 7 November 2001. Benefits ID: 2001-00219

Hogema, Jeroen and Richard van der Horst. Evaluation of A16 Motorway Fog-Signaling System with Respect to Driving Behavior, Transportation 

Research Board, Report No. TRR 1573. Washington, DC. 1995. Benefits ID: 2000-00022

Kumar, Manjunathan and Christopher Strong. Comparative Evaluation of Automated Wind Warning Systems, Prepared by the Montana State 

of University for the California DOT, Oregon DOT, and U.S. DOT. February 2006. Benefits ID: 2008-00523

Perrrin, Joseph and Brad Coleman. Adverse Visibility Information System Evaluation (ADVISE): Interstate 215 Fog Warning System—Final Report,

Prepared by the University of Utah for the Utah DOT, Report No. UT-02.12. Salt Lake City, UT. June 2003. Benefits ID: 2005-00281

Ulfarsson, Gudmundur F., et al. TRAVELAID, Prepared by the University of Washington for the Washington State Transportation 

Commission and the U.S. DOT. December 2001. Benefits ID: 2002-00240

193 Sources that support these findings:

Cooper, B.R. and Helen E. Sawyer. Assessment of M25 Automatic Fog-Warning System: Final Report, Safety Resource Centre, Transportation 

Research Laboratory. Crowthorne, Berkshire, United Kingdom. 1993. Benefits ID: 2005-00283

Fog Project on I–75 between Chattanooga and Knoxville, Tennessee ITS State Status Report. October 2000. U.S. DOT Web site URL www.its.

dot.gov/staterpt/tn.htm. Last Accessed 7 November 2001. Benefits ID: 2001-00219

Hogema, Jeroen and Richard van der Horst. Evaluation of A16 Motorway Fog-Signaling System with Respect to Driving Behavior, Transportation 

Research Board, Report No. TRR 1573. Washington, DC. 1995. Benefits ID: 2000-00022

Kumar, Manjunathan and Christopher Strong. Comparative Evaluation of Automated Wind Warning Systems, Prepared by the Montana State 

of University for the California DOT, Oregon DOT, and U.S. DOT. February 2006. Benefits ID: 2008-00523

Perrrin, Joseph and Brad Coleman. Adverse Visibility Information System Evaluation (ADVISE): Interstate 215 Fog Warning System—Final Report,
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | road weather Management 55

State DOTs Disseminate 

weather warnings to public 

traveler information agencies in 26 states, traffic management agencies in 22 states, 

and incident management 

agencies in 21 states.

Road Weather Management

Roadways

Adverse weather conditions pose a significant threat to the operation of the Nation’s roads. 

According to the National Research Council, motorists endure more than 500 million 

hours of delay each year as a result of fog, snow, and ice.186 Rain—which occurs more 

frequently than snow, ice, and fog—leads to greater delay. Furthermore, an investigation 

of vehicle crashes from 1995 through 2005 show that each year more than 673,000 people 

are injured and nearly 7,400 are killed in weather-related crashes.187 The estimated cost 

of weather-related crashes ranges from $22 billion to $51 billion annually. These costs 

include travel delay, emergency services, property damage, medical and rehabilitation 

costs, productivity losses, insurance administration costs, legal and court costs, and the 

costs to employers.188

Adverse weather not only affects safety but can also degrade traffic flow and increase 

travel times. Under extreme conditions (such as snowstorms), travel times can increase 

by as much as 50 percent.189

The Road Weather Management program, within the Federal Highway Administration 

Office of Operations, is working to mitigate these impacts by developing strategies, tools, 

and technologies that promote safety, increase mobility, improve productivity, and protect 

the environment.

Agencies that operate and maintain roadways use surveillance, monitoring, and prediction to mitigate the impacts of adverse weather. Environmental sensor stations (ESS) and 

road weather information systems (RWIS) are used to provide transportation managers 

and maintenance personnel with actual and forecast weather and pavement condition 

data that can be used to implement advisory strategies, control strategies, and treatment strategies.

Information dissemination capabilities enable advisory strategies to provide information 

on prevailing and predicted conditions to both transportation managers and motorists. 

Posting fog warnings on dynamic message signs (DMS) and listing flooded routes on Web 

sites are examples of these advisory strategies. 

Traffic control technologies enable agencies to enact control strategies that alter the state 

of roadway devices to permit or restrict traffic flow and regulate roadway capacity. Reducing speed limits with variable speed limit (VSL) signs and modifying traffic signal timing 

based on pavement conditions are examples of control strategies.

Response and treatment applications are designed to improve efficiency and the effectiveness of treatment strategies, typically snow and ice control operations involving the 

application of sand, salt, and anti-icing chemicals to pavements to improve traction and 

prevent ice bonding. Winter maintenance vehicles can be equipped with automatic vehicle 

location (AVL) systems and mobile sensors to monitor pavement conditions and optimize 

treatment application rates. In problem areas where the roadway can freeze unexpectedly, 

such as bridges in cold climates, fixed anti-icing/deicing systems can be installed and 

activated automatically based on ESS data.

Several other chapters of this report discuss ITS applications relevant to road weather 

management. The roadway operations and maintenance chapter discusses asset management technologies, such as AVL that can facilitate efficient winter road maintenance. Also, 

the traveler information chapter discusses technologies valuable for disseminating weatherrelated information to travelers.

Road Weather Management 

Categories in the ITS Knowledge 

Resources

Surveillance, Monitoring, and

Prediction

Pavement Conditions 

Atmospheric Conditions 

Water Level 

Information Dissemination—Advisory 

Strategies

Dynamic Message Signs 

Internet/Wireless/Phone 

Highway Advisory Radio 

Traffic Control—Control Strategies 

Variable Speed Limits 

Traffic Signal Control 

Lane Use/Road Closures 

Vehicle Restrictions 

Response and Treatment—Treatment 

Strategies

Fixed Winter Maintenance 

Mobile Winter Maintenance 
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

56 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Other ITS Knowledge Resource 

Categories Related to Road 

Weather Management

Refer to other chapters in this document.

Roadway Operations and Maintenance

Asset Management

Traveler Information

Pre-Trip Information

En Route Information

In addition to the technologies profiled in this chapter, two major road weather programs—

the Clarus initiative and the Maintenance Decision Support System (MDSS)—have the 

potential to encourage the deployment of ESS and improve the availability and timeliness 

of high-quality road weather information. Clarus aims to leverage State DOT investments 

to create a road weather observation data management system that is national in scope. 

The initiative will build upon the RWIS that many state DOTs have been deploying for 

years, primarily in support of winter maintenance activities. MDSS is a decision support 

tool that integrates relevant road weather forecasts, maintenance rules of practice, and 

maintenance resource data to provide winter maintenance managers with recommended 

road treatment strategies.190 Additional information on the Clarus initiative is available at 

the ITS JPO’s Web site at www.its.dot.gov/clarus and information on the MDSS project is available on the Road Weather Management program Web site at www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/weather/

mitigating_impacts/programs.htm#p3. 

Findings

Benefits

Evaluation data show that 80 to 94 percent of motorists who use traveler information Web 

sites think road weather information enhances their safety and prepares them for adverse 

road weather conditions.191 Although quantitative impacts of road weather advisory systems 

are difficult to measure on a regional basis, warning systems that use flashers or DMS to 

alert drivers of reduced visibility or wind hazards have proven effective on short sections of 

roadway prone to these hazards.192 Evaluation data show that drivers pay attention to these 

types of warning systems and will slow down or speed up as recommended to improve 

traffic speed uniformity and reduce crash risk.193

High-quality road weather information can benefit travelers, commercial vehicle operators, 

emergency responders, and agencies who construct, operate, and maintain roadways. RWIS 

are now a critical component of many agencies’ winter maintenance programs. Accurate 

and timely road weather information helps maintenance managers react proactively before 

problems arise. Maintenance managers indicate that effective anti-icing and pre-wetting 

strategies reduce sanding applications by 20 to 30 percent, decrease chemical applications 

by 10 percent, and reduce chloride and sediment runoff in local waterways.194 Evaluation 

data show that anti-icing programs can lower snow and ice control costs by 10 to 50 percent 

and reduce crash rates by 7 to 83 percent (figure 6).195

Experience with anti-icing

programs has demonstrated crash 

rate reductions from 7 to 83 percent.
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | road weather Management 57

80

60

40

20

0

Figure 6 – Impact of Anti-Icing Programs on Weather Related Crashes

Reduction in Crashes (%)

Kamloops, BC

Colorado

Idaho

7 14

83

Table 5 presents qualitative ratings of the impact of road weather management ITS applications under each of the six ITS goals. All the strategies have been found effective in improving safety. Studies on the usage of surveillance technologies and treatment strategies have 

shown productivity improvements. Surveys have shown that both agency personnel and the 

general public are satisfied with road weather information dissemination.

Table 5—Road Weather Management Benefits Summary Safety Mobility Efficiency Productivity Energy and

EnvironmentCustomerSatisfaction

Surveillance, Monitoring, and 

Prediction ● ● ✚

Information Dissemination

(Advisory Strategies) ● ✚

Traffic Control

(Control Strategies) ✚

Response and Treatment

(Treatment Strategies) ● ✚ ✚

● Substantial positive impacts ✚ Positive impacts

❍ Negligible impacts ✱ Mixed results

✖ Negative impacts blank Not enough data
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

58 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Costs

As with most ITS deployments, costs of road weather management systems vary based on 

several factors, including their scope, complexity and particular technology or technologies under consideration. Often costs are estimated based on similar systems because 

precise records are not available and multiple organizations involved in the deployment 

make traceability from various funding sources difficult.

Automated wind warning systems were installed at two rural Oregon locations to alert 

motorists of high crosswind conditions. Each automated wind warning system is estimated to cost $90,000; annual operations and maintenance (O&M) costs are estimated 

at $3,000 to $3,500.196

Nine respondents to a fixed automated spray technology (FAST) survey indicated that cost 

of installations varied greatly, $22,000 to $4 million, depending on coverage area, site location, accessibility of existing utilities, system functionality and features, and market factors. 

O&M costs of FAST systems are relatively low compared to the installation costs.197

Based on data from early AVL implementers across the U.S., the capital costs of AVL 

systems are highly dependent on the level of software customization of commercial offthe-shelf packages, as well as the type of sensors installed on the maintenance vehicles 

and how the vehicle was equipped prior to the AVL installation. When the systems were 

installed was also a factor as the cost of AVL technology has dropped over time. Based 

on six deployments, the cost per vehicle ranged from $1,250 to $5,800. For several deployments, communications cost ranged from $40 to $60 per month per vehicle.198 Data from 

five states show that the addition of various advanced technology applications such as 

radar, sensors, and control units can add $20,000 to $30,000 to the cost of a regular snowplow.199

Road weather information can be disseminated to travelers via several media. In January 

2003, Montana DOT implemented its 511 system to provide travelers with traffic and road 

weather conditions. The 511 traveler information system is a part of the Greater Yellowstone Regional Travel and Weather Information Systems project. Annual operating costs 

for 2004 were $195,453 and for 2005 costs were $195,930. These costs included contracted 

services and equipment leases, toll charges, marketing, and operations for the statewide 

alert system.200

Benefit-Cost Studies

Several benefit-cost studies of road weather management technologies have been 

conducted and all found positive benefit-to-cost ratios. Staff meteorologists, stationed at 

the transportation management center in Salt Lake City, Utah, provided detailed weather 

forecast information to winter maintenance personnel, reducing labor and materials costs 

for snow and ice control activities and yielding a benefit-to-cost ratio of 10:1.201 A study 

of a weather and road condition controlled system of VSL signs in Finland showed favorable results for deployment along highly trafficked road segments. Starting benefit-to-cost 

ratios ranged from 1.1:1 to 1.9:1. The ratio was higher if safety assumptions were higher and 

there was greater use of higher speed limits.202 With more efficient application of anti-icing 

chemicals and abrasives, reduced maintenance costs, reduced delay, and increased safety; 

benefit-to-cost ratios for RWIS and anti-icing strategies range from 2:1 to 5:1.203

Data from five states show that

the addition of various advanced 

technology applications such as

radar, sensors, and control units 

can add $20,000 to $30,000 to the cost 

of a regular snowplow.
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | road weather Management 59

Deployment

A survey of each of the 50 states conducted in 2006 revealed that state DOTs collect weather 

information from ESS, the National Weather Service, and other sources and distribute it 

in real time to a variety of users. Table 6 shows the number of State DOTs that distribute 

weather warnings and forecasts to different types of organizations. State DOTs distribute 

real-time weather warnings most often with public traveler information agencies (26 states), 

followed by traffic management agencies (22 states), incident management agencies (21 

states), state policy (17 states), and public safety agencies (16 states). State DOTs send 

weather warnings to data archives and to private traveler information organizations in six 

states; five State DOTs distribute weather warnings to other States. The distribution of 

weather forecasts follows a similar distribution pattern with about half as many State DOTs 

sharing this more detailed weather information as share simple weather warnings.

The 2006 survey of each of the 50 states about deployment of ITS technologies in rural 

areas and on a statewide basis is the source of deployment statistics presented later in 

this chapter, unless otherwise noted. 

Table 6—Communication of Weather Warnings and Forecasts Statewide

Agency Type Receiving Real-Time 

Distribution of Weather Information

Number of State 

DOTs Sending 

Weather

Warnings

Number of State 

DOTs Sending 

Weather

Forecasts

Traveler Information—Public Sector 26 15

Incident Management 22 10

Traffic Management 21 10

State Police 17 8

Local Government 11 4

Public Safety 16 6

Data Archiving 6 5

Traveler Information—Private Sector 6 2

Other States 5 4
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

60 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

lessons learned 

Provide adequate training to maintenance 

crews in order to build support for the use 

of an advanced decision support tool.

The Maintenance Decision Support System deployed by the Maine Department of 

Transportation (MaineDOT) offered a useful winter storm planning tool that supplemented other resources in some important 

ways. First, the MDSS added capabilities that 

the agency previously did not have including pavement temperature forecast trends, 

bridge and pavement frost forecasts, and a 

tool that could provide pavement treatment 

recommendations based on an analysis of 

multiple weather parameters. Second, the 

MDSS offered an integrated platform for the 

display and analysis of National Weather Service forecasts in a user-friendly geographical 

information system format. MaineDOT found 

its experience overall with the MDSS to be a 

beneficial one.

(Continued on next page.)

Selected Highlights from the ITS Knowledge

Resources on Road Weather Management

Surveillance, Monitoring, and Prediction 

Surveillance, monitoring, and prediction of weather and road conditions enable the appropriate management actions to mitigate the impacts of any adverse conditions.

Surveillance, Monitoring, and Prediction

Deployment

The use of sensors to track weather is popular among State DOTs. Thirty-eight (38) 

states use in-pavement or road sensors to track pavement conditions; the same number deploy ESS in rural areas. Fifteen (15) states use sensors to monitor water levels 

on roadways.

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety In Vantage, Washington, the deployment of an automated anti-icing 

system on I-90 was projected to eliminate up to 80 percent of snow 

and ice related crashes.204

Productivity Through the Utah DOT Weather Operations Program, meteorologists based at the transportation management center use information from ESS in the field to provide detailed forecasts to winter maintenance personnel, saving $2.2 million per year in labor 

and materials for snow and ice control activities. This reduction 

is approximately 18 percent of the 2004-2005 labor and material 

costs.205

Customer

Satisfaction

In interviews following the deployment of two new ESS equipped 

with pole-mounted closed circuit television (CCTV) cameras and 

sensors to measure an array of environmental conditions, the 

Washington State DOT road maintenance crews ranked pavement 

condition data from ESS as the most useful information, followed 

by camera images, and radar data on the Internet. The maintenance 

superintendent reported that the ESS data and camera images 

helped staff become more productive by allowing them to check 

road conditions in outlying areas and minimizing unnecessary 

trips.206
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | road weather Management 61

Surveillance, Monitoring, and Prediction

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Detection subsystem: 

•	 Environmental Sensor Station (Weather Station): $30K-$49K

•	 Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Video Camera: $9K-$19K

Transportation Management Center subsystem: 

•	 Road Weather Information System (RWIS): $11K

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem: 

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Oregon: Automated wind warning systems were installed at two rural Oregon locations 

to alert motorists of high crosswind conditions. Message signs are located at each end 

of the corridor or bridge where motorists can decide to wait until the winds die down or 

to take a longer alternative route. The systems, which are similar, consist of a local wind 

gauge (anemometer) with continuous input to a flashing beacon on a static message 

sign. Communication to the warning signs is automated and is provided by using dialup phone service. The warning signs are activated when average wind speeds reach a 

predetermined threshold. The severity is automatically recorded. Once verified by staff 

at the transportation management center, a warning message is posted to the Oregon 

DOT TripChek Web site. The signs are deactivated when the wind speed drops below 

the threshold. Each automated wind warning system is estimated to cost $90,000; 

O&M costs are estimated to range from $3,000 to $3,500 annually.

207

Ohio: In 2003, the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) expanded its RWIS 

with the addition of 86 environmental sensor stations to the 72 already in operation. 

The 158 ESS provide coverage of all 88 Ohio counties, making it the largest deployment of RWIS ESS in the U.S. Information from the ESS is processed by a central server 

located in Columbus. The data are used by ODOT maintenance personnel to make 

road treatment decisions to control snow and ice. Eighty-six (86) ESS were installed 

with 2 more sites planned in the following construction season. The deployment was 

contracted as a product purchase wherein the vendor was responsible for equipment 

installation. ODOT required that the ESS be compliant with the National Transportation Communications for ITS Protocol and support wireless communication. The 

contract also included a two-year service agreement (recurring costs over 2 years) for 

maintenance support 365 days a year, 24 hours a day, and 7 days a week with penalties 

imposed for down sites. ESS expansion cost totaled $3.699 million (2003).208

Maryland: A fog detection system is being planned in response to a serious multivehicle crash that occurred in May 2003 along I-68 near Big Savage Mountain in Maryland. The new system will make use of existing infrastructure at two locations and 

includes a new RWIS. The existing RWIS at Big Savage and Keysers Ridge will be modified to identify low visibility conditions and alert drivers via warning signs. The third 

location, Friendsville, will be equipped with an ESS and warning signs. The cost to 

modify Big Savage and Keyser sites was $75,000 per location. The cost of new infrastructure at Friendsville was $125,000.

209

lessons learned 

(Continued from previous page.)

Provide training to staff before introducing 

MDSS and provide ongoing support after 

implementation. 

In order to achieve the full benefits of an 

MDSS, users need to fully understand how 

it works, how to interpret the information it 

offers, and how best to apply it in support of 

decision making. This type of training needs 

to occur before the tool is even introduced.

•	 Offer the MDSS tool initially to one of the 

State’s more progressive crews.

An MDSS is more complex technology compared with many of the systems used 

throughout Maine and other States. MaineDOT selected Scarborough crews to test the 

new system based in part on their enthusiasm and willingness to work with the MDSS 

throughout the winter season. More progressive crews can serve as an example and can 

provide training to other crews.212
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

62 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

lessons learned 

Integrate weather information into transportation management center (TMC) operations to manage traffic in a more responsive and effective way during weather 

events.

Weather events have both major and minor 

impacts on transportation management operations. During seasonal weather events, these 

impacts may include reduced traffic flow or 

increased traffic incidents. At other times, 

natural disasters (such as hurricanes, blizzards, and severe summer storms) have major 

impacts on transportation management operations. During these events, major routing 

changes, dramatic traffic bottlenecks, or complete transportation shutdowns may occur. 

Integrating weather information and systems 

across multiple agencies and organizations 

can help TMCs conduct their operations more 

effectively. TMCs must evaluate which concepts and specific methods will work best for 

them in meeting their needs.

•	 Continuously update weather information.

TMCs should have an automated process or 

other robust structure in place for the continuous updating of weather information. 

While this function may be performed using 

weather information from the Internet, more 

highly-integrated methods include contractor-provided surface transportation weather 

forecasts, field observers or probes providing scheduled weather and driving condition 

information, and meteorology staff located 

within the TMC forecasting and interpreting 

weather information.216

Surveillance, Monitoring, and Prediction

Benefit-Cost Studies

Utah: Staff meteorologists, stationed at the transportation management center in 

Salt Lake City provided detailed weather forecast information to winter maintenance 

personnel, reducing labor and materials costs for snow and ice control activities and 

yielding a benefit-to-cost ratio of 10:1.210

Oregon: The benefit-to-cost ratios calculated for two automated wind warning systems deployed in Oregon were 4.13:1 and 22.80:1.211

Information Dissemination 

Information dissemination technologies help road weather managers notify travelers of 

any adverse conditions.

Information Dissemination

Deployment

The Internet is the medium most commonly used by state agencies to disseminate 

weather information on a statewide basis; 37 states distribute weather information 

via Web sites. Other popular media for statewide distribution of weather information 

are DMS (reported by 29 states) and highway advisory radio (reported by 20 states). 

According to a 2006 survey of the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas, 49 metropolitan areas reported using DMS to disseminate weather advisories.

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety A wet pavement detection system deployed on a temporary detour 

route along I-85 in North Carolina warned of wet pavement or standing water during rainstorms, yielding a 39 percent reduction in the 

yearly rate of crashes under wet conditions.213

Customer

Satisfaction

Ninety-four (94) percent of surveyed users of a road weather information Web site covering roadways in Washington agree that the 

weather information made travelers better prepared for their trips. 

Over half of the respondents (56 percent) agreed the information 

helped them avoid travel delays.214
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | road weather Management 63

Information Dissemination

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Information subsystem: 

•	 Dynamic Message Sign: $48K-$119K

•	 Portable Dynamic Message Sign: $18.6K-$24K

•	 Highway Advisory Radio: $15K-$35K

Transportation Management Center subsystem: 

•	 Software for Traffic Information Dissemination: $17K-$21K

•	 Labor for Traffic Information Dissemination: $107K-$131K (annually)

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem: 

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Montana: In January 2003, Montana DOT implemented its 511 system to provide travelers with traffic and road weather conditions. The 511 traveler information system is 

a part of the Greater Yellowstone Regional Travel and Weather Information Systems 

project. The cost to implement the system was $188,000 and included system development, voice recognition technology, marketing, and a one-time improvement for 

the addition of regional reports, AMBER (America’s Missing: Broadcast Emergency

Response) Alerts, homeland security alerts, and general transportation alerts. Operating costs for 2004 were $195,453 and for 2005 costs were $195,930. These costs 

included contracted services and equipment leases, toll charges, marketing, and operating cost for the statewide alert system.215
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

64 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Traffic Control

Traffic control technologies improve traveler safety under poor weather conditions. A 

variety of technologies allow these control measures to be taken quickly in response to 

developing adverse weather.

Traffic Control

Deployment

Almost half of all states (24) use ITS technologies to manage traffic diversions in 

response to road closures due to weather events. The same number of states use ESS 

to determine the need to implement temporary restrictions on vehicles. Eight states 

use VSL to respond to weather conditions.

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety A VSL system implemented along I-75 in Tennessee to control traffic during foggy conditions, and close the freeway if necessary, 

has dramatically reduced crashes. While there had been over 200 

crashes, 130 injuries, and 18 fatalities on this highway section since 

the interstate opened in 1973, a 2003 report noted that only one 

fog-related crash occurred on the freeway since installation of the 

system in 1994.217

Mobility An investigative study sponsored by the Minnesota DOT found that 

optimizing traffic signals along an arterial corridor to accommodate 

adverse winter weather conditions yielded an eight percent reduction in delay. The study also noted that the existing signal timing 

plans were sufficient to accommodate the lower traffic volumes and 

lower speeds during winter weather.218

Productivity During a 1998 snow storm, the Minnesota DOT reduced roadway 

clearance costs by 18 percent on I-90 by activating a freeway gate 

closure system to limit vehicle interference and reduce snow compaction problems that increase work for plows.219

Customer 

Satisfaction

Survey results in Finland indicate that 90 percent of drivers found 

weather-controlled VSL signs to be useful.220
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | road weather Management 65

Traffic Control

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Control subsystem: 

•	 Fixed Lane Signal: $5K-$6K

•	 Signal Controller and Cabinet: $8K-$14K

Roadside Detection subsystem: 

•	 Remote Traffic Microwave Sensor on Corridor: $9K-$13K per sensor

•	 Environmental Sensor Station (Weather Station): $30K-$49K

Roadside Information subsystem: 

•	 Dynamic Message Sign: $48K-$119K

•	 Highway Advisory Radio: $15K-$35K

Transportation Management Center subsystem: 

•	 Labor for Traffic Information Dissemination: $107K-$131K (annually)

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem: 

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Finland: Approximately 350 km of the main road network have been equipped with 

VSL signs; most systems are weather-controlled. The systems consist of DMS, ESS, 

traffic monitoring stations, and CCTV cameras. The number of units and spacing varies 

for dual carriageways and single carriageways. The average implementation costs on 

dual carriageways (divided highways) are 80,000 €/km (almost double the amount for 

single carriageways (roadway with no physical separation)). Communications cabling is 

the major cost driver. Average maintenance costs for dual carriageways, which include 

replacement investments for a 20-year life, are 3,500 €/km/year. Costs are at the 2004 

level.221

Benefit-Cost Studies

Finland: A study of a weather and road condition controlled system of VSL signs 

in Finland showed favorable results for deployment along heavily traveled road segments. Starting benefit-to-cost ratios ranged from 1.1:1 to 1.9:1. The ratio was higher if 

safety assumptions were higher and there was greater use of higher speed limits.222
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

66 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Response and Treatment 

A variety of ITS applications are being deployed in the United States to support roadway 

treatments necessary in response to weather events. These applications may provide for 

automated treatment of the road surface at fixed locations, such as anti-icing systems 

mounted on bridges in cold climates. They may also enhance the efficiency and safety 

of mobile winter maintenance activities, for example, through AVL technologies on snow 

plows supporting a computer-aided dispatch system.

Response and Treatment

Deployment

Twenty (20) states use automatic bridge anti-icing systems and 13 states equip a portion of their snow plow fleet with AVL, communications, and sensors to track distribution of chemical treatments.

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety Summary Finding: Analysis of fixed anti-icing systems deployed 

on bridges in Utah, Minnesota, and Kentucky found crash reductions from 25 to 100 percent. 223

Mobility In Finland, an RWIS that automatically communicated actual and 

forecast data to road maintenance personnel was estimated to save 

an average of 23 minutes per deicing activity and improve traffic 

conditions. 224

Productivity Winter maintenance personnel indicated that anti-icing techniques 

limit snow/ice bonding on roadways, improve plow efficiency, reduce 

the time required to clear snow/ice from roadways, reduce maintenance costs (overtime pay and materials), and reduce the need for 

abrasive cleanup activities.225

Energy and 

Environment

Winter maintenance personnel from several agencies indicated that 

use of RWIS decreases salt usage and anti-icing techniques limit 

damage to roadside vegetation, groundwater, and air quality (in 

areas where abrasives are applied).226
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | road weather Management 67

Response and Treatment

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Control subsystem: 

•	 Automatic Anti-icing System—Short Span: $22K

•	 Automatic Anti-icing System—Long Span: $45K-$446K

Roadside Detection subsystem: 

•	 Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Video Camera: $9K-$19K 

Transportation Management Center subsystem: 

•	 Road Weather Information System (RWIS): $11K

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem: 

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)

•	 900 MHz Spread Spectrum Radio: $8.2K (per link)

•	 Wireless: $1.1K-$1.7K (annually)

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Utah and Canada: Nine respondents to a FAST survey indicated that cost of installations varied greatly, $22,000 to $4 million, depending on coverage area, site location, accessibility of existing utilities, system functionality and features, and market 

factors. Three installations illustrate the median cost range: 

A FAST installation on a bridge on I-315 in Utah cost $250,000.

In Ontario, Canada, a demonstration FAST installation on a bridge and approach was 

$300,000 Canadian dollar (CAD) or $14.20/ft2

 (CAD). Operating costs were $15,000 

(CAD) or $0.70/ ft2 (CAD).

For later FAST deployments in Ontario, the cost of the basic spray systems ranged 

from $90/ft2 (CAD) to $370/ft2 (CAD) on two-lane structures. The cost for the advanced 

RWIS station associated with each FAST deployment was estimated at $93,000 (CAD).

O&M costs of the FAST systems are relatively low compared to the installation costs.227

Kansas: The Kansas DOT sponsored a study of the use of AVL technologies for highway maintenance activities, particularly snow removal. A statewide system equipping 

585 vehicles was estimated to cost approximately $9 million and about $800,000 per 

year for maintenance. The implementation cost for a dedicated data channel to the 

existing 800 MHz radio system was estimated at $6 million. The high communications cost is consistent with other AVL deployments. The AVL unit cost is estimated 

at $3,500 per vehicle.

228
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

68 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Response and Treatment

Costs

United States: Based on data from early AVL implementers across the U.S., the capital costs of AVL systems are highly dependent on the level of software customization 

of commercial off-the-shelf packages as well as the type of sensors installed on the 

maintenance vehicles and how the vehicle was equipped prior to the AVL installation. 

When the systems were installed was also a factor as the cost of AVL technology has 

dropped over time. Based on six deployments, the cost ranged from $1,250 to $5,800

per vehicle. For several deployments, communications cost ranged from $40 to $60

per month per vehicle.

229

Iowa, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Arizona, and California: The addition of various 

advanced technology applications such as radar, sensors, and control units can add 

$20,000 to $30,000 to the cost of a regular snowplow.230

Benefit-Cost Studies

Utah, Minnesota, and Kentucky: Analysis of fixed anti-icing systems deployed 

on bridges in Utah, Minnesota, and Kentucky found benefit-to-cost ratios of 1.8:1 

to 3.4:1.231

Kansas: A Kansas DOT study found that the application of AVL to highway winter maintenance vehicles could result in a benefit-to-cost ratio ranging from at least 

2.6:1, using conservative assumptions, to 24:1 or higher based on moderate assumptions.232

Washington and Finland: With more efficient application of anti-icing chemicals and 

abrasives, reduced maintenance costs, reduced delay, and increased safety, benefitto-cost ratios for RWIS and anti-icing strategies range from 2:1 to 5:1.233
318 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

University for the Oregon DOT, Alaska DOT, and U.S. DOT, Report No. SPR-3(076). Bozeman, MT. August 2006. Lesson ID: 2007-00409

186 Where the Weather Meets the Road: A Research Agenda for Improving Road Weather Services, The National Academy of Sciences, National Research 

Council. Washington, DC. April 2004.

187 “Road Weather Management Program,” U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Web site URL www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/Weather/q1_

roadimpact.htm. Last Accessed 20 February 2008.

188 Sources with supporting information:

Pisano, Paul, et al. “U.S. Highway Crashes in Adverse Road Weather Conditions,” Paper Presented at the American Meteorological 

Society Annual Meeting, New Orleans, LA, 20–24 January 2008.

Where the Weather Meets the Road: A Research Agenda for Improving Road Weather Services, The National Academy of Sciences, National 

Research Council. Washington, DC. April 2004.

189 Goodwin, L. Weather Impacts on Arterial Traffic Flow, Mitretek Systems. Falls Church, VA. December 2002.

190 Sources with supporting information: 

“Clarus Initiative,” U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Web site URL www.clarusinitiative.org. Last Accessed 14 December 

2007.

“Road Weather Management Program,” U.S DOT Federal Highway Administration, Web site URL ops.fhwa.dot.gov/weather/mitigating_impacts/programs.htm#3. Last Accessed 14 December 2007.

191 Sources that support these findings:

Evaluation of Rural ITS Information Systems along U.S. 395, Spokane, Washington, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, EDL No. 13955. 

8 January 2004. Benefits ID: 2004-00274

Final Evaluation Report: Evaluation of the Idaho Transportation Department Integrated Road-Weather Information System, U.S. DOT Federal Highway 

Administration, EDL No. 14267. 2 February 2006. Benefits ID: 2008-00522

192 Sources that support these findings:

Cooper, B.R. and Helen E. Sawyer. Assessment Of M25 Automatic Fog-Warning System—Final Report, Safety Resource Centre, Transportation 

Research Laboratory. Crowthorne, Berkshire, United Kingdom. 1993. Benefits ID: 2005-00283

Fog Project on I–75 between Chattanooga and Knoxville, Tennessee ITS State Status Report. October 2000. U.S. DOT Web site URL www.its.

dot.gov/staterpt/tn.htm. Last Accessed 7 November 2001. Benefits ID: 2001-00219

Hogema, Jeroen and Richard van der Horst. Evaluation of A16 Motorway Fog-Signaling System with Respect to Driving Behavior, Transportation 

Research Board, Report No. TRR 1573. Washington, DC. 1995. Benefits ID: 2000-00022

Kumar, Manjunathan and Christopher Strong. Comparative Evaluation of Automated Wind Warning Systems, Prepared by the Montana State 

of University for the California DOT, Oregon DOT, and U.S. DOT. February 2006. Benefits ID: 2008-00523

Perrrin, Joseph and Brad Coleman. Adverse Visibility Information System Evaluation (ADVISE): Interstate 215 Fog Warning System—Final Report,

Prepared by the University of Utah for the Utah DOT, Report No. UT-02.12. Salt Lake City, UT. June 2003. Benefits ID: 2005-00281

Ulfarsson, Gudmundur F., et al. TRAVELAID, Prepared by the University of Washington for the Washington State Transportation 

Commission and the U.S. DOT. December 2001. Benefits ID: 2002-00240

193 Sources that support these findings:

Cooper, B.R. and Helen E. Sawyer. Assessment of M25 Automatic Fog-Warning System: Final Report, Safety Resource Centre, Transportation 

Research Laboratory. Crowthorne, Berkshire, United Kingdom. 1993. Benefits ID: 2005-00283

Fog Project on I–75 between Chattanooga and Knoxville, Tennessee ITS State Status Report. October 2000. U.S. DOT Web site URL www.its.

dot.gov/staterpt/tn.htm. Last Accessed 7 November 2001. Benefits ID: 2001-00219

Hogema, Jeroen and Richard van der Horst. Evaluation of A16 Motorway Fog-Signaling System with Respect to Driving Behavior, Transportation 

Research Board, Report No. TRR 1573. Washington, DC. 1995. Benefits ID: 2000-00022

Kumar, Manjunathan and Christopher Strong. Comparative Evaluation of Automated Wind Warning Systems, Prepared by the Montana State 

of University for the California DOT, Oregon DOT, and U.S. DOT. February 2006. Benefits ID: 2008-00523

Perrrin, Joseph and Brad Coleman. Adverse Visibility Information System Evaluation (ADVISE): Interstate 215 Fog Warning System—Final Report,
endnotes 319

Prepared by the University of Utah for the Utah DOT, Report No. UT-02.12. Salt Lake City, UT. June 2003. Benefits ID: 2005-00281

194 O’Keefe, Katie and Xianming Shi. Synthesis of Information on Anti-icing and Pre-wetting for Winter Highway Maintenance Practices in North America: 

Final Report, Prepared by the Montana State University for the Pacific Northwest Snowfighters Association and the Washington State 

DOT. 19 August 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00524

195 Sources that support these findings:

Breen, Bryon D. Anti-Icing Success Fuels Expansion of the Program in Idaho, Idaho Transportation Department, Snow and Ice Pooled Fund 

Cooperative Program, Web page URL www.sicop.net/US–12%20Anti%20Icing%20Success.pdf. Last Accessed 5 October 2001. Benefits 

ID: 2001-00214

Breen, Bryon D. Anti-Icing Success Fuels Expansion of the Program in Idaho, Idaho Transportation Department, Snow and Ice Pooled Fund 

Cooperative Program, Web page URL www.sicop.net/US–12%20Anti%20Icing%20Success.pdf. Last Accessed 5 October 2001. Benefits 

ID: 2007-00336

Case Study #6: Winter Maintenance Innovations Reduce Accidents and Costs—City of Kamloops, Prepared by the McCormick Rankin Corporation 

and Ecoplans Limited for the Insurance Corporation of British Columbia and Environment. Canada. 2004. Benefits ID: 2008-00526

O’Keefe, Katie and Xianming Shi. Synthesis of Information on Anti-icing and Pre-wetting for Winter Highway Maintenance Practices in North America: 

Final Report, Prepared by the Montana State University for the Pacific Northwest Snowfighters Association and the Washington State 

DOT. 19 August 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00525

196 Kumar, Manjunathan and Christopher Strong. Comparative Evaluation of Automated Wind Warning Systems, Prepared by the Montana State 

of University for the California DOT, Oregon DOT, and U.S. DOT. February 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00141

197 Shi, Xianming, et al. Vehicle-Based Technologies for Winter Maintenance: The State of the Practice—Final Report, Transportation Research Board, 

NCHRP, Project 20-7/Task 200. Washington, DC. September 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00142

198 Shi, Xianming, et al. Vehicle-Based Technologies for Winter Maintenance: The State of the Practice—Final Report, Transportation Research Board, 

NCHRP, Project 20-7/Task 200. Washington, DC. September 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00142

199 Sources that support these findings:

Andrle, Stephen J., et al. Highway Maintenance Concept Vehicle—Final Report: Phase Four, Iowa State University, Center for Transportation 

Research and Education. Ames, IA. June 2002. Costs ID: 2008-00143

Kack, David and Eli Cuelho. Needs Assessment and Cost-Benefit Analysis of RoadViewTM Advanced Snowplow Technology System, Sixth International 

Symposium on Snow Removal and Ice Control Technology, Transportation Research Circular, Number E-C063. Washington, DC. June 

2004. Costs ID: 2008-00144

200 “Greater Yellowstone Regional Traveler and Weather Information Systems (GYRTWIS) 511 Implementation,” U.S.DOT Federal Highway 

Administration, ITS Joint Program Office. Washington, DC. July 2004 and July 2006. Costs ID: 2005-00089

201 Shi, X., et al. Evaluation of Utah Department of Transportation’s Weather Operations/RWIS Program: Phase I, Prepared by the Montana State of 

University for the Utah DOT. February 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00527

202 Schirokoff, A., P. Rama, and A. Tuomainen. “Country-Wide Variable Speed Limits?,” Paper Presented at the XIII International Road 

Weather Conference (SIRWEC). Torino, Italy. 25–27 March 2006. Benefits ID: 2008-00528

203 Sources that support these findings:

Pilli-Sihvola, Yrjo, et al. Road Weather Service System in Finland and Savings in Driving Costs, Transportation Research Board, Report No. TRR 

1387. Washington, DC. 1993. Benefits ID: 2007-00499

Stowe, Robert. “A Benefit/Cost Analysis of Intelligent Transportation System Applications for Winter Maintenance,” Paper Presented at 

the 80th Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting. Washington, DC. 7–11 January 2001. Benefits ID: 2001-00178

204 Stowe, Robert. “Benefit/Cost Analysis of Intelligent Transportation System Applications for Winter Maintenance,” Paper Presented at 

the 80th Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 7–11 January 2001. Benefits ID: 2007-00437

205 Shi, X., et al. Evaluation of Utah Department of Transportation’s Weather Operations/RWIS Program: Phase I, Prepared by the Montana State 

University for the Utah DOT. February 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00527

206 Evaluation of Rural ITS Information Systems along U.S. 395, Spokane, Washington, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, EDL No. 13955. 8 

January 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00484
320 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

207 Kumar, Manjunathan and Christopher Strong. Comparative Evaluation of Automated Wind Warning Systems, Prepared by the Montana State 

of University for the California DOT, Oregon DOT, and U.S. DOT. February 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00141

208 Ohio DOT Roadway Weather Information System (RWIS) Expansion, Ohio DOT. Columbus, OH. 2003. Costs ID: 2004-00071

209 I-68 Fog Detection System Planning Report, Sabra, Wang, and Associates. Baltimore, MD. 7 November 2003. Costs ID: 2005-00092

210 Shi, X., et al. Evaluation of Utah Department of Transportation’s Weather Operations/RWIS Program: Phase I, Prepared by the Montana State of 

University for the Utah DOT. February 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00527

211 Kumar, Manjunathan and Christopher Strong. Comparative Evaluation of Automated Wind Warning Systems, Prepared by the Montana State 

of University for the California DOT, Oregon DOT, and U.S. DOT. February 2006. Benefits ID: 2008-00529

212 A Case Study of the Maintenance Decision Support System (MDSS) in Maine, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration. September 2007. 

Lesson ID: 2007-00405

213 Lowry, Stephen D. Traffic Safety Effects of a Wet Pavement Detection System Installed on a North Carolina Interstate: A Statistical Summary of Crash 

Data for a Temporary On-Site Detour inside an I-485 Construction Zone in Mecklenburg County. North Carolina DOT. August 2004. Benefits ID: 

2008-00530

214 Evaluation of Rural ITS Information Systems along U.S. 395, Spokane, Washington, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, EDL No. 13955. 8 

January 2004. Benefits ID: 2004-00274

215 “Greater Yellowstone Regional Traveler and Weather Information Systems (GYRTWIS) 511 Implementation,” U.S.DOT Federal Highway 

Administration, ITS Joint Program Office. Washington, DC. July 2004 and July 2006. Costs ID: 2005-00089

216 Integration of Emergency and Weather Elements into Transportation Management Centers, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-HOP-06-090, EDL No. 14247. 28 February 2006. Lesson ID: 2007-00353

217 Best Practices for Road Weather Management: Version 2.0, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Road Weather Management Program, 

Report No. FHWA-OP-03-081. 2003. Benefits ID: 2008-00531

218 Maki, Pamela J. Adverse Weather Traffic Signal Timing, Prepared by Short Elliott Hendrickson for the Minnesota DOT, Web page URL trafficware.infopop.cc/downloads/00005.pdf. 2002. Last Accessed 14 December 2007. Benefits ID: 2001-00216

219 Documentation and Assessment of Mn/DOT Gate Operations, Prepared by BRW for the Minnesota DOT. St. Paul, MN. October 1999. Benefits 

ID: 2001-00215

220 Pilli-Sihvola, Yrjo and Lahesmaa Jukka. Weather-Controlled Road and Investment Calculations, Finnish National Road Administration. Southeastern Region, Kouvola. December 1995. Benefits ID: 2007-00503

221 Schirokoff, A., P. Rama, and A. Tuomainen. “Country-Wide Variable Speed Limits?,” Paper Presented at the XIII International Road 

Weather Conference (SIRWEC). Torino, Italy. 25–27 March 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00145

222 Schirokoff, A., P. Rama, and A. Tuomainen. “Country-Wide Variable Speed Limits?,” Paper Presented at the XIII International Road 

Weather Conference (SIRWEC). Torino, Italy. 25–27 March 2006. Benefits ID: 2008-00528

223 Khattak, A. P. and Geza Pesti. Bridge Prioritization for Installation of Automatic Anti-Icing Systems in Nebraska, Proceedings of the 2003 MidContinent Transportation Research Symposium. Ames, IA. 21–22 August 2003. Benefits ID: 2008-00534

224 Pilli-Sihvola, Yrjo, et al. Road Weather Service System in Finland and Savings in Driving Costs, Transportation Research Board, Report No. TRR 

1387. Washington, DC. 1993. Benefits ID: 2000-00085

225 Boselly, Edward S. Benefit/Cost Study of RWIS and Anti-icing Technologies: Final Report, Transportation Research Board, NCHRP, Report No. 

20-7(117). Washington, DC. March 2001. Benefits ID: 2007-00469

226 Boselly, Edward S. Benefit/Cost Study of RWIS and Anti-icing Technologies: Final Report, Transportation Research Board, NCHRP, Report No. 

20-7(117). Washington, DC. March 2001. Benefits ID: 2007-00470

227 Shi, Xianming, et al. Vehicle-Based Technologies for Winter Maintenance: The State of the Practice—Final Report, Transportation Research Board, 

NCHRP, Project 20-7/Task 200. Washington, DC. September 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00142

228 Meyer, Eric, I. Ahmed. “Benefits-Cost Assessment of Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) in Highway Maintenance,” Paper Presented at 

the 83rd Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting. Washington, DC. 11–15 January 2004. Costs ID: 2008-00146

229 Shi, Xianming, et al. Vehicle-Based Technologies for Winter Maintenance: The State of the Practice—Final Report, Transportation Research Board, 

NCHRP, Project 20-7/Task 200. Washington, DC. September 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00142
endnotes 321

230 Sources that support these findings:

Andrle, Stephen J., et al. Highway Maintenance Concept Vehicle—Final Report: Phase Four, Iowa State University, Center for Transportation 

Research and Education. Ames, IA. June 2002. Costs ID: 2008-00143

Kack, David and Eli Cuelho. Needs Assessment and Cost-Benefit Analysis of RoadViewTM Advanced Snowplow Technology System, Sixth International 

Symposium on Snow Removal and Ice Control Technology, Transportation Research Circular, Number E-C063. Washington, DC. June 

2004. Costs ID: 2008-00144

231 Khattak, A. P. and Geza Pesti. Bridge Prioritization for Installation of Automatic Anti-Icing Systems in Nebraska, Proceedings of the 2003 MidContinent Transportation Research Symposium. Ames, IA. 21–22 August 2003. Benefits ID: 2008-00534

232 Meyer, Eric and I. Ahmed. “Benefit-Cost Assessment of Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) in Highway Maintenance,” Paper Presented 

at the 83rd Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting. Washington, DC. 11–15 January 2004. Benefits ID: 2008-00536

233 Sources that support these findings:

Pilli-Sihvola, Yrjo, et al. Road Weather Service System in Finland and Savings in Driving Costs, Transportation Research Board, Report No. TRR 

1387. Washington, DC. 1993. Benefits ID: 2007-00499

Stowe, Robert. “A Benefit/Cost Analysis of Intelligent Transportation System Applications for Winter Maintenance,” Paper Presented at 

the 80th Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting. Washington, DC. 7–11 January 2001. Benefits ID: 2001-00178

234 National Strategy to Reduce Congestion on America’s Transportation Network, U.S DOT. May 2006.

235 Sources that support these findings:

Bushman, R. and C. Berthelot. “Estimating the Benefits of Deploying Intelligent Transportation Systems in Work Zones,” Presentation 

at the 83rd Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 11–15 January 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00326

Chu, L., H. Kim, H. Liu, and W. Recker. “Evaluation of Traffic Delay Reduction from Automatic Workzone Information Systems Using 

Micro-Simulation,” Paper Presented at the 84th Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 9–13 January 2005. 

Benefits ID: 2007-00400

236 Sources that support these findings:

Bushman, R. and C. Berthelot. “Estimating the Benefits of Deploying Intelligent Transportation Systems in Work Zones,” Presentation 

at the 83rd Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 11–15 January 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00326

Scriba, Tracy. “Knowing Ahead of Time,” Transportation Management and Engineering. May 2005. Benefits ID: 2007-00327

237 Sources that support these findings:

Fontaine, M.D., P. Carlson, and G. Hawkins, Use of Innovative Traffic Control Devices to Improve Safety at Short-Term Rural Work Zones, Texas 

Transportation Institute, Report No. 1879-S. College Station, TX. 2000. Benefits ID: 2007-00331

Garber, N. and S. Patel. Effectiveness of Changeable Message Signs with Radar in Controlling Vehicle Speeds in Work Zones, Virginia Transportation 

Research Council, Report No. VTRC-95-R4. Charlottesville, VA. 1994. Benefits ID: 2007-00332

Garber, N. and S. Srinivasan, Effectiveness of Changeable Message Signs with Radar in Controlling Vehicle Speeds in Work Zones, Virginia Transportation Research Council, Report No. VTRC-98-R10. Charlottesville, VA. 1998. Benefits ID: 2007-00330

McCoy, P. J., J. Bonneson, and J. Kollbaum. Speed Reduction Effects of Speed Monitoring Displays with Radar in Work Zones on Interstate Highways,

Transportation Research Board, Report No. TRR 1509. Washington, DC. 1995. Benefits ID: 2007-00329

238 Sources that support these findings:

Fontaine, M., P. Carlson, and G. Hawkins. Use of Innovative Traffic Control Devices to Improve Safety at Short-Term Rural Work Zones, Prepared by 

the Texas Transportation Institute for the Texas DOT. 2000. Benefits ID: 2007-00331

Fontaine, Michael D. and Steven D. Schrock. “Feasibility of Real-Time Remote Speed .Enforcement in Work Zones,” Paper Presented at 

the 81st Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 13–17 January 2002. Benefits ID: 2007-00490

Garber, N. and Surbhi T. Patel, Effectiveness of Changeable Message Signs in Controlling Vehicle Speeds in Work Zones: Final Report, Virginia Transportation Research Council, Report No. VTRC 95-R4. Charlottesville, VA. August 1994. Benefits ID: 2007-00332

McCoy, P. J., J. Bonneson, and J. Kollbaum. Speed Reduction Effects of Speed Monitoring Displays with Radar in Work Zones on Interstate Highways,

Transportation Research Board, Report No. TRR 1509. Washington, DC. 1995. Benefits ID: 2007-00329
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | roadway operations and Maintenance 69

WORK ZONE ITS DEPLOYMENT

COSTS RANGED FROM $100,000

TO $2.5 MILLION WITH THE

 MAJORITY RANGING FROM

$150,000 TO $500,000. Roadway Operations and 

Maintenance

Roadways

Operating and maintaining transportation systems is costly. Many State DOTs are implementing ITS to better manage roadway maintenance efforts and to enhance safety and 

mobility on the transportation system. ITS applications in operations and maintenance 

focus on integrated management of maintenance fleets, specialized service vehicles, 

hazardous road conditions remediation, and work zone mobility and safety. Systems and 

processes are required to monitor, analyze, and disseminate roadway/infrastructure data 

for operational, maintenance, and managerial uses. ITS can help secure the safety of workers and travelers in a work zone while facilitating traffic flow through and around the 

construction area.

Information dissemination technologies can be deployed temporarily, or existing systems 

can be updated periodically, to provide information on work zones or other highway maintenance activities. Several ITS technologies can help State DOTs with asset management 

including fleet tracking and automated data collection for monitoring the condition of 

highway infrastructure. ITS applications in work zones include the temporary implementation of traffic management or incident management capabilities. These temporary systems 

can be stand-alone implementations or they may supplement existing systems in work 

areas during construction. Other applications for managing work zones include measures 

to control vehicle speeds and notify travelers of changes in lane configurations or travel 

times and delays through the work zones. In fact, work zone management systems are the 

most widely studied example of the information dissemination technologies mentioned 

above. ITS may also be used to manage traffic along detour routes during full road closures 

to facilitate rapid and safe reconstruction projects.

The roadway operations and maintenance technologies profiled in this chapter support the 

U.S. DOT’s Congestion Initiative, as outlined in the May 2006 document National Strategy to 

Reduce Congestion on America’s Transportation Network. One element of the national strategy is 

to reduce congestion by promoting operational and technical improvements that have the 

potential to enable existing roadways to operate more efficiently. One group of improvements identified in the national strategy is work zone safety and mobility.234 For more 

information, visit the Congestion Initiative Web site: www.fightgridlocknow.gov.

Findings

Benefits

ITS technologies deployed for roadway operations and maintenance activities can have 

system-wide impacts. Network simulation models estimate that smart work zones can 

reduce total delay by 41 to 75 percent.235 During freeway reconstruction projects, evaluation 

data suggest these technologies can cut traffic queues in half.236

In addition to improving mobility, work zone ITS can improve safety. Evaluation data show 

that areas equipped with speed monitoring displays can decrease vehicle speeds by 4 to 

6 mi/h237 and reduce the number of speeding vehicles by 25 to 78 percent.238 In addition 

to controlling traffic speed, smart work zones improve driver behavior. Evaluation data 

show that dynamic lane merge systems help reduce driver confusion at merge points and 

reduce aggressive driving.239

In rural areas, ITS technologies can improve the efficiency and effectiveness of operations and maintenance activities. With improved communication links between operation 

centers and field equipment, maintenance personnel can spend more time improving 

Roadway Operations and

Maintenance Categories in

the ITS Knowledge Resources

Information Dissemination 

Portable Dynamic Message Signs 

Highway Advisory Radio 

Internet/Wireless/Phone 

Asset Management 

Fleet Management 

Infrastructure Management 

Work Zone Management 

Temporary Traffic Management 

Temporary Incident Management 

Lane Control 

Variable Speed Limit 

Speed Enforcement 

Intrusion Detection 

Road Closure Management
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

70 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

roadway conditions instead of traveling to remote sites to manually update or confirm the 

operation of field devices.240

As depicted in table 7, evaluations have documented the ability of work zone management 

systems to positively impact transportation operations in five of the six ITS goal areas: 

safety, mobility, efficiency, productivity, and customer satisfaction. Highlights of these 

research findings are presented later in this chapter. Several studies have shown that 

providing information to travelers regarding work zone and other maintenance activities 

can reduce related congestion. As further illustrated in figure 7, automated work zone 

information systems (AWIS) have reduced delay from 46 to 55 percent in three locations 

studied.241

Table 7—Roadway Operations and Maintenance Benefits Summary Safety Mobility Efficiency Productivity Energy and Environment

CustomerSatisfaction

Information Dissemination ✚

Asset Management ●

Operations and Fleet

Management ✚

Work Zone Management ● ● ✚ ✚ ✚

● Substantial positive impacts ✚ Positive impacts

❍ Negligible impacts ✱ Mixed results

✖ Negative impacts blank Not enough data

simulation models estimate that

smart work zones can reduce total

delay by 41 to 75 percent.
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | roadway operations and Maintenance 71

50

40

30

20

10

0

Figure 7 – Delay Reduction with AWIS

Reduction in Traveler Delay (%)

55

46

50

Interstate 95

MP150-154, NC

Interstate 5

Los Angeles, CA

Interstate 15

Devore, CA

Costs

A review of work zone ITS deployments from 17 states showed that the costs vary greatly 

depending on several key factors: (1) purchasing vs. leasing system equipment, (2) temporary vs. permanent components of the project (e.g., equipment used in a work zone is later 

deployed as permanent equipment on the same or different project), and (3) size and function of the system. Costs ranged from $100,000 to $2.5 million with the majority of systems 

ranging from $150,000 to $500,000.242

Deployment

The use of ITS applications in work zones is popular among state DOTs. A survey of each 

of the 50 states conducted in 2006 revealed that state DOTs use a variety of media to 

disseminate information about work zones; 44 states use portable dynamic message signs 

(DMS), 39 states use the Internet, and 29 states use highway advisory radio (HAR). This 

same survey revealed that more than two-thirds (38) use ITS technologies such as lane 

control signs, portable DMS, and dynamic lane merge systems to notify travelers of changes 

in lane configurations approaching work zones. More than half of the states (29) use ITS 

technologies, either as stand-alone implementations or to supplement existing systems, 

to support temporary traffic management in work zones.

Respondents to the 2006 survey exhibited variability in their willingness to use ITS for asset 

management. Nine states use automatic vehicle location (AVL), computer-aided dispatch, 

and handheld computers supporting data entry and dispatch-field communications help 

manage vehicles; 39 states use sensors and automated data collection systems to monitor 

the condition of the highway infrastructure. 

The 2006 survey of each of the 50 states about deployment of ITS technologies in rural 

areas and on a statewide basis is the source of deployment statistics presented later in 

this chapter.
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

72 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Selected Highlights from the ITS Knowledge

Resources on Roadway Operations and

Maintenance

Information Dissemination

Information dissemination technologies can be deployed temporarily or existing systems 

can be updated periodically to provide information on work zones or other highway maintenance activities. Examples of these systems include dynamic message signs, highway 

advisory radio, Internet Web sites, wireless devices, and telephone services.

Information Dissemination

Deployment

Many states use a variety of media to disseminate information about work zones; 44 

states use portable dynamic message signs, 39 use the Internet, and 29 use HAR.

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Mobility Summary Finding: AWIS prevent severe congestion at work zones 

and reduce delay by 46 to 55 percent (see figure 7).243

Mobility In Devore, California, a real-time work zone traveler information 

system on I-15 contributed to a 50 percent decrease in maximum 

peak period delay.244

Customer 

Satisfaction

In North Carolina, a survey of residents living near Smart Work 

Zone systems on I-95 found that over 95 percent of motorists surveyed would support use of these systems in the future.245

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Information subsystem: 

•	 Dynamic Message Sign: $48K-$119K

•	 Dynamic Message Sign—Portable: $18.6K-$24K

Roadside Detection subsystem:

•	 Portable Traffic Management System: $78K-$97K

Transportation Management Center subsystem: 

•	 Software for Traffic Information Dissemination: $17K-$21K

•	 Labor for Traffic Information Dissemination: $107K-$131K (annually)

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem: 

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | roadway operations and Maintenance 73

Information Dissemination

Costs

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Minnesota: The Minnesota DOT’s Construction Office and Traffic Office developed 

a specification for a dynamic late merge system and worked closely with the vendor 

capable of providing the system. The deployed system provided guidance to motorists on proper lane usage via portable DMS. When a preset congestion level was 

reached, the signs were activated. When traffic returned to free-flow conditions, the 

signs returned to “dark mode.” The costs provided were based on four study locations: 

three in urban settings and one in a rural location. The cost of vehicle detection was 

approximately $300 per day and three signs cost $600 per day for a total cost of 

$900 per day per direction.

246

Illinois: The Illinois DOT used work zone ITS in the I-64 add-lane construction project 

to monitor traffic, reduce congestion, and promote safety. The work zone ITS—also 

referred to as the Traffic Monitoring System—included 12 DMS located within and 

in advance of the work zone, and a total of 10 vehicle detection stations within and 

at the exit and entrance of the work zone. The data collected by the detectors were 

processed by a commercial off-the-shelf software package. Real-time information 

about traffic conditions was posted to the signs and automatically posted to a project 

Web site. The system was deployed for 30 months at a cost of $14,500 per calendar 

month for a total cost of $435,000. The total cost of the system was less than one 

percent of the total construction cost. The system was leased as part of the overall 

construction contract.247

Illinois: The Illinois DOT (IDOT) decided to use ITS in a 40-mile work zone for a major 

bridge and highway reconstruction along I-55 south of Springfield. The ITS—referred 

to as the Real-Time Traffic Control System—consisted of 17 remotely-controlled portable DMS, eight portable vehicle detectors, and four portable cameras linked to a 

base station server via wireless communication. The system covered the work zone 

area as well as the northbound and southbound approaches to the work zone. IDOT 

indicated significant cost savings by leasing the system as a bid item. The cost of leasing the system was $785,000, which represented approximately two percent of the 

total reconstruction contract cost of $35 million. The system was deployed for a total 

of 16 months from February 2001 to May 2002.248
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

74 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Asset Management

Several applications help State DOTs with asset management including fleet tracking applications, as well as automated data collection applications for monitoring the condition 

of highway infrastructure.

Asset Management

Deployment

Nine states use ITS technologies, such as automated vehicle location, computer-aided 

dispatch, and handheld computers supporting data entry and dispatch-field communications, to help manage maintenance vehicles; 39 states use sensors and automated 

data collection systems to monitor the condition of the highway infrastructure.

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Productivity In Montana, weigh-in-motion (WIM) sensors were installed 

directly in freeway travel lanes to continuously collect truck 

weight and classification data at 28 sites. The study found that 

if freeway pavement designs were based on fatigue calculations 

derived from comprehensive WIM data instead of weigh station data, the State would save about $4.1 million each year in 

construction costs. The pavement fatigue calculations based on 

WIM data were 11 percent lower on Interstate roadways and 26 

percent lower on non-Interstate, primary roadways.249

Costs

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Southeast Michigan: The Southeast Michigan Snow and Ice Management project is 

a multi-agency AVL system that will use 500 highway maintenance vehicles equipped 

with global positioning system receivers and sensors to monitor snow plow use, rate 

of application for deicing materials, and air and road temperatures. Each vehicle will 

use 900 MHz communications, and transmit data to a centralized system where the 

data will be uploaded onto an Internet server and made available to other agencies. 

Nearly $8.2 million has been spent to equip approximately 400 vehicles with sensors 

and communications infrastructure.250
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | roadway operations and Maintenance 75

Work Zone Management

ITS applications in work zones include the temporary implementation of traffic management or incident management capabilities. These temporary systems can be stand-alone 

implementations or they may supplement existing systems in the area during construction. 

Other applications for managing work zones include measures to control vehicle speeds 

and notify travelers of changes in lane configurations or travel times and delays through 

the work zones. Systems for work zone incident management can also be used to more 

quickly detect incidents and better determine the appropriate degree of response needed, 

thereby limiting the amount and duration of additional capacity restrictions. ITS may also 

be used to manage traffic along detour routes during full road closures to facilitate rapid 

and safe reconstruction projects.

Work Zone Management

Deployment

The use of ITS applications in work zones is popular among state DOTs. More than 

two-thirds of states (38) use ITS technologies—such as lane control signs, portable 

DMS, and dynamic lane merge systems—to notify travelers of changes in lane configurations approaching work zones. More than half of the states (29) use ITS technologies, either as stand-alone implementations or to supplement existing systems, 

to support temporary traffic management in work zones. Seventeen (17) states deploy 

temporary incident management systems to facilitate safe clearance of incidents that 

occur near work zones; 16 states use ITS technologies to manage traffic along detour 

routes during full road closures. Only two states (California and Tennessee) use automated work zone intrusion detection and warning systems, and only one state (Illinois) uses automated speed enforcement in work zones.

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety Summary Finding: In North Carolina and Arkansas, work zones 

equipped with AWIS had fewer crashes compared to similar 

sites without the technology.251

Mobility A dynamic lane merge system deployed in a work zone outside 

Detroit increased PM peak period travel speeds by 15 percent. 

AM peak period speeds did not change.252

Efficiency In Minneapolis-St. Paul, traffic speed data collected at two 

freeway work zones indicated that when portable traffic management systems were deployed, peak period work zone traffic 

throughput increased by four to seven percent.253

Productivity The Illinois DOT reduced operating costs during the reconstruction of I-55 by deploying an automated traffic control system and 

eliminating the need for constant traffic monitoring.254

Customer

Satisfaction

The Illinois DOT reported a high level of satisfaction with an 

automated traffic control system deployed during the I-55 reconstruction project.255

lessons learned 

Consider deploying ITS in a work zone to 

improve traffic safety and mobility during 

construction.

The Arkansas Highway and Transportation 

Department, upon undertaking a large and 

complex construction project, assessed the 

challenges associated with the extensive work 

zones and implemented an automated work 

zone information systems to cover the I-30 

work zone corridor. The objectives of the AWIS 

were to improve safety and mobility during 

construction.

•	 Maintain flexibility when deploying ITS in 

highly variable environments. 

Arkansas’ effort to reconstruct and repair 

more than 350 miles of roadway was a large, 

complex undertaking with constantly changing configurations. As a result, the calibration of ITS became an important issue and 

required one full-time employee devoted 

exclusively to maintaining all sensors.

•	 Realize that ITS are just one part of a successful work zone management plan. 

Intelligent transportation systems are only 

one part of a work zone management plan. 

ITS components can be instrumental in 

improving the safety of a work zone. However, 

they are not a cure all for eliminating the traveler’s exposure to hazards that a work zone 

imposes. Based on Arkansas’ experience, 

ITS helped reduce the number of crashes; but 

crashes, including fatal ones, were not fully 

avoided.
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

76 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Work Zone Management

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Detection subsystem: 

•	 Remote Traffic Microwave Sensor on Corridor: $9K-$13K per sensor

•	 Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Video Camera: $9K-$19K

Roadside Information subsystem: 

•	 Dynamic Message Sign—Portable: $18.6K-$24K

•	 Highway Advisory Radio: $15K-$35K

•	 Highway Advisory Radio Sign: $5K-$9K

Roadside Detection subsystem:

•	 Portable Traffic Management System: $78K-$97K

•	 Transportation Management Center subsystem: 

Software for Traffic Information Dissemination: $17K-$21K

•	 Labor for Traffic Information Dissemination: $107K-$131K (annually)

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem: 

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)

lessons learned 

Conduct necessary pre-implementation 

tests in order to secure smooth system 

operations.

In deploying ITS during rebuilding of the “Big 

I” interchange in Albuquerque, the New Mexico State Highway and Transportation Department found a number of ways to help ensure 

operational efficiency of ITS resources. 

•	 Grant ample start up time when implementing new ITS technologies. 

Problems will arise, such as with sensor 

operation, communications, license applications, component calibration, hardware, 

or software. These issues will take time to 

address and need to be identified as soon as 

possible before going “live”.

For instance, the mobile traffic monitoring 

and management system used by the department for the “Big I” interchange ITS deployment in Albuquerque was designed to be 

portable and use wireless communication. 

Wireless communication links were tested 

prior to the installation of field elements 

to ensure adequate bandwidth availability. The complete mobile traffic monitoring 

and management system was brought online 

two weeks prior to the start of construction 

allowing time for thorough pre-construction 

testing.

(Continued on next page.)
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | roadway operations and Maintenance 77

Work Zone Management

Costs

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Michigan: Michigan DOT leased a dynamic lane merge system for an I-94 reconstruction project at a cost of $120,000. The subcontract period of performance was for six 

months during each of two years. Each of the two six-month periods included installation, testing, and operation time. The system included five dynamic lane merge trailers spaced 1,500 feet apart and in advance of the work zone.256

Michigan: In Lansing, a planning study was conducted to evaluate the feasibility of 

implementing real-time work zone traffic information during a major freeway reconstruction and rehabilitation project on I-496. The total project investment was over 

$40 million. The real-time traffic information component of the work zone management system was estimated to cost $1,900,000. In addition, the costs for project design, 

contract administration, and construction engineering were estimated at $600,000. 

Overall, the cost to design the system, furnish and install hardware and software components, and operate and maintain the system for the duration of one year was estimated at $2,500,000.

257

North Carolina: The North Carolina DOT leased its first smart work zone system 

along I-95 near Fayetteville at a cost of $235,000. The lease consisted of three contract pay items: mobilization, monthly rental, and remobilization. The successful bid 

was guaranteed for 4 months usage not to exceed 10 months. The total bid breakout 

was: $75,000 for mobilization, $15,000 per month for equipment rental, and $10,000

for remobilization.258

Benefit-Cost Studies

United States: Based on a review of work zone ITS deployments from 17 states, the 

estimated benefit-to-cost ratio ranged from 2:1 to 42:1 depending upon conditions 

and assumptions.259

Michigan: The use of ITS for temporary construction zone management in Lansing 

yielded a benefit-to-cost ratio of 1.97:1 and a net benefit of $4,874,000. The benefitto-cost ratio was calculated by dividing the benefits of the system ($9,874,000) by the 

overall cost of the deployment ($5,000,000 which included $2,500,000 for opportunity 

costs).260

lessons learned 

(Continued from previous page.)

•	 Keep the future in perspective when planning and deploying a traveler information 

system. 

Because New Mexico’s State Highway and 

Transportation Department planned for 

future use, the agency used a combination 

of equipment purchases and rentals for its 

project to rebuild the “Big I” interchange in 

Albuquerque. Once the project ended, the 

department was able to reuse the purchased 

equipment as part of a permanent freeway 

management system.
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview
endnotes 321

230 Sources that support these findings:

Andrle, Stephen J., et al. Highway Maintenance Concept Vehicle—Final Report: Phase Four, Iowa State University, Center for Transportation 

Research and Education. Ames, IA. June 2002. Costs ID: 2008-00143

Kack, David and Eli Cuelho. Needs Assessment and Cost-Benefit Analysis of RoadViewTM Advanced Snowplow Technology System, Sixth International 

Symposium on Snow Removal and Ice Control Technology, Transportation Research Circular, Number E-C063. Washington, DC. June 

2004. Costs ID: 2008-00144

231 Khattak, A. P. and Geza Pesti. Bridge Prioritization for Installation of Automatic Anti-Icing Systems in Nebraska, Proceedings of the 2003 MidContinent Transportation Research Symposium. Ames, IA. 21–22 August 2003. Benefits ID: 2008-00534

232 Meyer, Eric and I. Ahmed. “Benefit-Cost Assessment of Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) in Highway Maintenance,” Paper Presented 

at the 83rd Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting. Washington, DC. 11–15 January 2004. Benefits ID: 2008-00536

233 Sources that support these findings:

Pilli-Sihvola, Yrjo, et al. Road Weather Service System in Finland and Savings in Driving Costs, Transportation Research Board, Report No. TRR 

1387. Washington, DC. 1993. Benefits ID: 2007-00499

Stowe, Robert. “A Benefit/Cost Analysis of Intelligent Transportation System Applications for Winter Maintenance,” Paper Presented at 

the 80th Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting. Washington, DC. 7–11 January 2001. Benefits ID: 2001-00178

234 National Strategy to Reduce Congestion on America’s Transportation Network, U.S DOT. May 2006.

235 Sources that support these findings:

Bushman, R. and C. Berthelot. “Estimating the Benefits of Deploying Intelligent Transportation Systems in Work Zones,” Presentation 

at the 83rd Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 11–15 January 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00326

Chu, L., H. Kim, H. Liu, and W. Recker. “Evaluation of Traffic Delay Reduction from Automatic Workzone Information Systems Using 

Micro-Simulation,” Paper Presented at the 84th Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 9–13 January 2005. 

Benefits ID: 2007-00400

236 Sources that support these findings:

Bushman, R. and C. Berthelot. “Estimating the Benefits of Deploying Intelligent Transportation Systems in Work Zones,” Presentation 

at the 83rd Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 11–15 January 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00326

Scriba, Tracy. “Knowing Ahead of Time,” Transportation Management and Engineering. May 2005. Benefits ID: 2007-00327

237 Sources that support these findings:

Fontaine, M.D., P. Carlson, and G. Hawkins, Use of Innovative Traffic Control Devices to Improve Safety at Short-Term Rural Work Zones, Texas 

Transportation Institute, Report No. 1879-S. College Station, TX. 2000. Benefits ID: 2007-00331

Garber, N. and S. Patel. Effectiveness of Changeable Message Signs with Radar in Controlling Vehicle Speeds in Work Zones, Virginia Transportation 

Research Council, Report No. VTRC-95-R4. Charlottesville, VA. 1994. Benefits ID: 2007-00332

Garber, N. and S. Srinivasan, Effectiveness of Changeable Message Signs with Radar in Controlling Vehicle Speeds in Work Zones, Virginia Transportation Research Council, Report No. VTRC-98-R10. Charlottesville, VA. 1998. Benefits ID: 2007-00330

McCoy, P. J., J. Bonneson, and J. Kollbaum. Speed Reduction Effects of Speed Monitoring Displays with Radar in Work Zones on Interstate Highways,

Transportation Research Board, Report No. TRR 1509. Washington, DC. 1995. Benefits ID: 2007-00329

238 Sources that support these findings:

Fontaine, M., P. Carlson, and G. Hawkins. Use of Innovative Traffic Control Devices to Improve Safety at Short-Term Rural Work Zones, Prepared by 

the Texas Transportation Institute for the Texas DOT. 2000. Benefits ID: 2007-00331

Fontaine, Michael D. and Steven D. Schrock. “Feasibility of Real-Time Remote Speed .Enforcement in Work Zones,” Paper Presented at 

the 81st Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 13–17 January 2002. Benefits ID: 2007-00490

Garber, N. and Surbhi T. Patel, Effectiveness of Changeable Message Signs in Controlling Vehicle Speeds in Work Zones: Final Report, Virginia Transportation Research Council, Report No. VTRC 95-R4. Charlottesville, VA. August 1994. Benefits ID: 2007-00332

McCoy, P. J., J. Bonneson, and J. Kollbaum. Speed Reduction Effects of Speed Monitoring Displays with Radar in Work Zones on Interstate Highways,

Transportation Research Board, Report No. TRR 1509. Washington, DC. 1995. Benefits ID: 2007-00329
322 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

239 Sources that support these findings:

Evaluation of 2004 Dynamic Late Merge System, Prepared by URS for the Minnesota DOT. St. Paul, MN. 28 December 2004. Benefits ID: 

2007-00318

Intelligent Transportation Systems in Work Zones: A Case Study—Dynamic Lane Merge System, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, EDL 

No. 14011. October 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00403

240 ATIS Evaluation Framework, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-06-066, EDL No. 14313. April 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00537

241 Sources that support these findings:

Bushman, R. and C. Berthelot. “Estimating the Benefits of Deploying Intelligent Transportation Systems in Work Zones,” Presentation 

at the 83rd Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 11–15 January 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00326

Chu, L., H. Kim, H. Liu, and W. Recker. “Evaluation of Traffic Delay Reduction from Automatic Workzone Information Systems Using 

Micro-simulation,” Presentation to the Transportation Research Board 84th Annual Meeting. Washington, DC. 9–13 January 2005. 

Benefits ID: 2007-00400

Lee, Eul-Bum and Changmo Kim. “Automated Work Zone Information System (AWIS) on Urban Freeway Rehabilitation: California 

Implementation,” Paper Presented at the 85th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 22–26 January 

2006. Benefits ID: 2006-00293

242 Fontaine, Mike. “Operational and Safety Benefits of Work Zone ITS,” Presentation to “ITS in Work Zones” Workshop/Peer Exchange. 

September 2005. Costs ID: 2006-00109

243 Sources that support these findings:

Bushman, R. and C. Berthelot. “Estimating the Benefits of Deploying Intelligent Transportation Systems in Work Zones,” Presentation 

at the 83rd Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting. Washington DC. 11–15 January 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00326

Lee, Eul-Bum and Changmo Kim. “Automated Work Zone Information System (AWIS) on Urban Freeway Rehabilitation: California 

Implementation,” Paper Presented at the 85th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 22–26 January 

2006. Benefits ID: 2006-00293

244 Lee, Eul-Bum and Changmo Kim. “Automated Work Zone Information System (AWIS) on Urban Freeway Rehabilitation: California 

Implementation,” Paper Presented at the 85th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 22–26 January 

2006. Benefits ID: 2006-00293

245 Bushman, R. and C. Berthelot. Effect of Intelligent Transportation Systems in Work Zones: Evaluation of North Carolina Smart Work Zones—Final 

Report, North Carolina DOT. September 2004. Benefits ID: 2008-00533

246 Groth, Sue. “Mn/DOT Work Zone ITS Contracts and Specification,” Presentation to “ITS in Work Zones” Workshop/Peer Exchange. 

September 2005. Costs ID: 2006-00109

247 Sneed, Brian. “I-64 Add-lane Traffic Monitoring System,” Presentation to “ITS in Work Zones” Workshop/Peer Exchange. September 

2005. Correspondence with Mr. Brian Sneed, Illinois DOT ITS Engineer. 22 June 2007. Costs ID: 2007-00126

248 Intelligent Transportation Systems in Work Zones: A Case Study—Real Time Work Zone Traffic Control System, Prepared for the U.S. DOT Federal 

Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-HOP-04-018, EDL No. 13984. Washington, DC. October 2004. Costs ID: 2006-00107

249 Stephens, Jerry, et al. An Evaluation of Montana’s State Truck Activities Reporting System. Prepared by the Montana State University for the 

Montana DOT. Bozeman, MN. 11 August 2003. Benefits ID: 2003-00268

250 Shi, Xianming, et al. Vehicle-Based Technologies for Winter Maintenance: The State of the Practice, Transportation Research Board, NCHRP, Project 

20-7/Task 200. September 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00142

251 Sources that support these findings:

Scriba, Tracy. “Knowing Ahead of Time,” Transportation Management and Engineering. May 2005. Correspondence with Mr. Steve Kite, North 

Carolina DOT. 13 February 2007. Benefits ID: 2007-00407

Tudor, Lorie, et al. “Deployment of Smart Work Zone Technology in Arkansas,” Paper Presented at the 82nd Annual Meeting of the 

Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 12–16 January 2003. Benefits ID: 2004-00271
endnotes 323

252 Intelligent Transportation Systems in Work Zones: A Case Study—Dynamic Lane Merge System, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, EDL 

No. 14011. October 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00317

253 Portable Traffic Management System Smart Work Zone Application: Operational Test Evaluation Report, Report Prepared by SRF Consulting Group 

for the Minnesota DOT, Report No. 0942089.7/11. May 1997. Benefits ID: 2007-00325

254 Intelligent Transportation Systems in Work Zones: A Case Study—Real Time Work Zone Traffic Control System, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-HOP-04-018, EDL No. 13984. October 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00404

255 Intelligent Transportation Systems in Work Zones: A Case Study—Real Time Work Zone Traffic Control System, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-HOP-04-018, EDL No. 13984. October 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00405

256 Intelligent Transportation Systems in Work Zones: A Case Study—Dynamic Lane Merge System, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, 

EDL No. 14011. October 2004. Correspondence with Mr. Jeff Grossklaus, Michigan DOT, November 2006 and January 2007. Costs ID: 

2007-00110

257 Kratofil, Joseph, A. Jr. “A Benefit-Cost Analysis for the Use of Intelligent Transportation Systems Technology for Temporary Construction Zone Management on the I-496 Reconstruction in Lansing, Michigan,” Prepared for Louis A. Reibling, Ph.D. in Partial Completion 

of the Degree of Master of Science in Administration, Central Michigan University, EDL No. 13591. Mt. Pleasant, MI. 14 March 2001. 

Benefits ID: 2007-00111

258 Kite, Steve. “SMART Work Zones: Technology for Work Zone Management—Making Work Zones Work Better Through Innovations in 

Technologies, Practices, and Products,” North Carolina DOT Presentation, Web page URL www.ncdot.org/doh/preconstruct/traffic/

conference/reports/tc2.pdf. Last Accessed 12 December 2007. Costs ID: 2006-00106

259 Fontaine, Mike. “Operational and Safety Benefits of Work Zone ITS,” Presentation to “ITS in Work Zones” Workshop/Peer Exchange. 

September 2005. Costs ID: 2006-00109

260 Kratofil, Joseph, A. Jr. “A Benefit-Cost Analysis for the Use of Intelligent Transportation Systems Technology for Temporary Construction Zone Management on the I-496 Reconstruction in Lansing, Michigan,” Prepared for Louis A. Reibling, Ph.D. in Partial Completion 

of the Degree of Master of Science in Administration, Central Michigan University, EDL No. 13591. Mt. Pleasant, MI. 14 March 2001. 

Costs ID: 2007-00111

261 “National Transit Database,” U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administration, Web site URL www.ntdprogram.gov/ntdprogram/ntd.htm. Last 

Accessed 9 August 2007.

262 Furth, Peter G., et al. TCRP Report 113: Using Archived AVL-APC Data to Improve Transit Performance and Management, Transportation Research 

Board, Transit Cooperative Research Program. Washington, DC. 2006.

263 “Mobility Services for All Americans,” U.S. DOT ITS Joint Program Office Web site URL www.its.dot.gov/msaa/index.htm. Last Accessed 

13 November 2007.

264 “Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) Quarterly Newsletter—Spring 2007,” U.S. DOT Web site URL www.its.dot.gov/icms/index.htm. 

Last Accessed 13 November 2007. 

265 “Transit Impact Matrix,” U.S. DOT Web site URL itsweb.mitretek.org/its/aptsmatrix.nsf/viewbyEfficiency?OpenView. Last Accessed 12 

December 2007.

266 Bruun, Eric C. “Technological Maturity of ITS and Scheduling and Integrated Service Options to Transit Planners,” Paper Presented at 

the 86th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 21–25 January 2007.

267 Sources that support these findings:

APTS Benefits, U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administration. November 1995. Benefits ID: 2000-00028

Strathman, J., et al. “Evaluation of Transit Operations: Data Applications of Tri-Met’s Automated Bus Dispatching System,” 

Transportation, Vol. 29, No. 3. August 2002. Cited in Furth, Peter G., et al. Uses of Archived AVL—APC Data to Improve Transit Performance and 

Management: Review and Potential, Transit Cooperative Research Program Web Document No. 23. June 2003. Benefits ID: 2000-00151

Milwaukee County Transit System, Status Report, Milwaukee County. Milwaukee, WI. July 1995. Benefits ID: 2000-00110

268 Sources with results used to construct this range of impacts include (listed alphabetically by study location per figure 8): 

Chada, Shireen and Robert Newland. Effectiveness of Bus Signal Priority: Final Report, Prepared by the University of South Florida for the 

Florida DOT and U.S. DOT, Report No. NCTR-416-04, EDL No. 13651. Tallahassee, FL. January 2002. Benefits ID: 2007-00345
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | transit management 79

FIFTY-SIX (56) PERCENT OF

TRANSIT BUSES IN MAJOR

METROPOLITAN AREAS ARE 

EQUIPPED WITH AVL 

TECHNOLOGIES. Transit Management

Transit

The transit industry in the United States consists of over 140,000 vehicles, 48 billion passenger miles of travel, and $8.5 billion in passenger fares. Over the past 10 years the transit 

industry has grown by over 20 percent—faster than either highway or air travel.261

Transit operations and fleet management ITS applications improve transit reliability 

through implementation of automated vehicle location (AVL) and computer-aided dispatch 

(CAD) systems which can reduce passenger wait times. The systems enhance security 

and improve incident management through improved vehicle-to-dispatch communications, enabling quicker response to aggressions, accidents and vehicle breakdowns. Speedy 

response to these types of incidents minimizes vehicle downtime and improves service reliability. Information on current vehicle location and schedule status can also support transit 

signal priority, which improves transit trip times and schedule adherence. Data records 

from AVL/CAD systems, along with automated passenger counters, are enabling a transition to improved transit planning and management strategies which rely on large quantities 

of data regarding system operations. This contrasts with many traditional management 

strategies which were developed to accommodate minimal data on system operations, 

limited by manual data collection requirements.262 Vehicle monitoring technologies can 

allow transit vehicles to perform self-diagnostic tests and automatically alert maintenance 

personnel of potential problems, either immediately via AVL/CAD systems or through 

routine downloads at vehicle maintenance facilities. 

Public access to bus location data and schedule status information is increasingly popular 

on transit agency Web sites. Passengers can confirm scheduling information, improve 

transfer coordination, and reduce wait times. In addition, electronic transit status information signs at bus stops help passengers manage their time, and on-board systems 

such as next-stop audio annunciators help passengers in unfamiliar areas reach their 

destinations. 

Web-based multi-modal trip planners are in development, providing information on trip 

travel times by both automobile and public transportation services. The Federal Transit 

Administration is sponsoring development of such a system managed by the Regional 

Transportation Authority of Northeast Illinois. The system will enable Chicago area travelers to navigate an extensive network of bus and rail services, tollways, expressways, and 

major arterials. The concept of the Chicago area Web-based Multi-Modal Trip Planning 

System is to integrate driving itineraries, transit trip planners, and real-time monitoring 

systems to provide side-by-side comparisons of trip itineraries using transit, driving, or any 

combination of non-motorized modes such as biking and walking. The goal is to create a 

comprehensive decision support tool for choosing travel options that incorporate convenience, efficiency, and cost—from the traveler’s perspective. 

A growing role for ITS in the transit industry includes support for bus rapid transit (BRT). 

These transit lines typically supplement infrastructure-based improvements with transit 

ITS to provide service qualities approaching those of rail transit facilities. Infrastructurebased improvements to BRT lines include enhanced shelters, level boarding facilities, 

and priority treatments such as dedicated transit lanes or queue-jump lanes at congested 

intersections. ITS technologies typically deployed include transit signal priority and AVL/

CAD for enhanced schedule performance, and improvements to traveler information that 

include in-vehicle annunciators and the provision of wayside arrival time information at 

major stops along the line. 

Transit Management Categories 

in the ITS Knowledge Resources

Operations and Fleet Management 

Automatic Vehicle Location and 

Computer-Aided Dispatch 

Transit Signal Priority

Maintenance 

Planning 

Service Coordination 

Information Dissemination

In-Vehicle Systems 

In-Terminal/Wayside

Internet/Wireless/Phone

Transportation Demand

 Management 

Ride Sharing/Matching 

Dynamic Routing/Scheduling 

Safety and Security 

In-Vehicle Surveillance 

Facility Surveillance 

Employee Credentialing 

Remote Disabling Systems 
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

80 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Other ITS Knowledge Resource 

Categories Related to transit 

Management

Refer to other chapters in this document.

Electronic Payment and Pricing

Transit Fare Payment

Multi-use Payment

Traveler Information

Pre-Trip Information

En Route Information

Information Management

Data Archiving

Collision Avoidance

Obstacle Detection

Lane Change Assistance

Lane Departure Warning

Road Departure Warning

Forward Collision Warning

Rear Impact Warning

Driver Assistance

Precision Docking

Coupling/Decoupling

ITS applications can also support transportation demand management activities including 

carpooling and ridesharing services, and enable flexible, door-to-door paratransit service 

that is typically provided for disabled travelers. Computer databases and Internet technologies can facilitate ride sharing and carpool matching services to reduce peak period 

travel along major commuter routes. Paratransit services increase public access to transit 

resources where coverage is limited or provide service to those who cannot access standard 

service. ITS can improve these services through data collection technology and software 

supporting better coordination of service providers and scheduling of trips, or by supporting innovative strategies, such as route deviation or zone-based demand-responsive feeder 

service to fixed routes. These latter strategies enable transit systems to provide access 

for those living in close proximity to scheduled transit services but unable to reach them. 

Use of ITS technologies to support paratransit services represents another growing area 

of transit ITS deployment. Applications for human services transportation that improve 

scheduling and service coordination among multiple providers can be cost-effective and 

provide enhanced service to travelers. Several of these concepts are included in the Mobility Services for All Americans (MSAA) initiative discussed below.

Transit ITS services include a number of other ITS applications that can help transit agencies increase safety and security, as well as enhance the operational efficiency of the 

Nation’s transit systems. Advanced software and communications enable data as well 

as voice to be transferred between transit management centers and transit vehicles for 

increased safety and security, improved transit operations, and more efficient fleet operations. Transit management centers in several cities have the ability to monitor in-vehicle 

and in-terminal surveillance systems to improve quality of service and improve the safety 

and security of passengers and operators.

Several ITS technologies discussed elsewhere in this document have significant impacts 

on public transit systems. Electronic fare payment systems offer significant potential for 

transit agencies to streamline cash-handling processes and the potential for simplifying 

traveler access to multiple transit systems in a region. Also of interest are advanced traveler information systems (ATIS), which can include transit information, as in the case of 

the multi-modal trip planner discussed above. ITS data archiving can provide important 

information for transit planning and management. Finally, several vehicle-based collision 

avoidance technologies have been tested on transit vehicles and show promise for lessening the likelihood of crashes involving transit vehicles.

In addition to the ITS technologies profiled in this chapter, two major ITS initiatives will 

impact the development of ITS technologies for transit: MSAA and Integrated Corridor 

Management (ICM). 

The goal of the MSAA initiative is to improve transportation services and simplify access 

to employment, healthcare, education, and other community activities by means of the 

advanced technologies of ITS and through extending transportation service partnerships 

with consumers and human service providers at the Federal, State, and local levels. Several 

ITS technologies profiled in this chapter will be deployed in support of this initiative including integrated vehicle dispatching and scheduling, AVL, communication systems, electronic 

payment systems/financial tracking and billing systems, and ATIS.263

The purpose of the ICM initiative is to demonstrate that ITS technologies can be used to 

efficiently and proactively manage the movement of people and goods in major transportation corridors by facilitating integration of the management of all networks in a corridor. 

The results of the initiative will help to facilitate widespread use of ICM tools and strategies 

to improve mobility through integrated management of transportation assets. The ICM 
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | transit management 81

initiative will also demonstrate how proven and emerging ITS technologies can be used 

to coordinate the operations between separate corridor networks (including both transit 

and roadway facilities) to increase the effective use of the total transportation capacity 

of the corridor.264

Additional information on both of these initiatives is available at the ITS JPO’s Web site: 

www.its.dot.gov/msaa and www.its.dot.gov/icms. 

Findings

Benefits

Fleet management applications can improve both the experience of transit riders and 

the efficiency of transit operations by enabling more efficient planning, scheduling, and 

management of transit assets and resources. Transit agencies have reported reductions 

in fleet requirements ranging from two to five percent as a result of improved fleet utilization.265 For large agencies even small percentage gains can represent large amounts of 

actual operating cost savings.266 Deployment of AVL/CAD and scheduling software has 

enabled cost savings for paratransit providers through better planning of trips. An innovative application of these technologies has also demonstrated that agencies operating fixed 

routes can provide the option of demand-responsive services. 

Improving schedule reliability improves travelers’ experiences by reducing wait time anxiety 

and simplifying successful connections to other transit services. Data from transit systems 

in Portland, Oregon; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; and Baltimore, Maryland show that AVL/CAD 

systems have improved schedule adherence by 9 to 23 percent. The systems enable better 

monitoring of transit system status by transit dispatchers and allow appropriate responses 

to early arrivals, bus bunching, and other operational challenges as they arise.267 Figure 

8 shows the range of documented experiences with improvements in transit travel times 

after the implementation of transit signal priority, with improvements ranging from 1.5 

to 15 percent.268 Several studies show a range of measurements, typically representing 

measurements during peak periods and off-peak periods, or results for a variety of signal 

priority scenarios tested. Transit signal priority is often implemented on a conditional basis 

intended to help transit vehicles improve schedule performance by granting signal priority 

when vehicles are behind schedule. This practice can lead to a reduced need for recovery 

time in the scheduled trip and improve transit travel times. Archived data from AVL/CAD 

systems can also facilitate these types of schedule improvements.

Table 8 lists qualitative ratings for the impact of ITS applications for transit under each 

of the ITS goal areas identified by the U.S. DOT. These ratings demonstrate that each of 

the transit ITS applications have positive impacts on travelers’ experiences. Applications 

supporting transit operations and fleet management provide substantial cost savings to 

transit operators, reduce transit vehicle emissions and energy consumption, and improve 

traveler mobility. Technologies supporting paratransit systems—listed under transportation demand management—have cost savings benefits for paratransit operators and 

improve customer experiences.

AVL/CAD Systems improved schedule

adherence by 9 to 23 percent in 

3 u.s. cities.
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

82 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

Figure 8 – Transit Travel Time Improvements with Transit Signal Priority Travel Time Reduction (%)

Ann Arbor, MI

Arlington, VA

China

Helsinki, Finland

Los Angeles, CA

Toronto, Canada

European Cities

Portland, OR

Sapporo, Japan

Seattle, WA

6

9.1

4

10.3

11

7.5

1.5

4.3

6.1

4.9 5

15

2

6

Table 8—Transit Management Benefits Summary Safety Mobility Efficiency Productivity 

Energy andEnvironmentCustomerSatisfaction

Operations and Fleet

Management ● ✚ ● ✚ ●

Information Dissemination ●

Transportation Demand

Management ● ✚

Safety and Security ✚ ✚

● Substantial positive impacts ✚ Positive impacts

❍ Negligible impacts ✱ Mixed results

✖ Negative impacts blank Not enough data
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | transit management 83

Costs

Based on survey results from over 100 transit agencies and equipment suppliers, the trend 

in mobile data terminals (MDTs) is more functionality and lower unit, installation, maintenance, and repair costs. MDTs are multifunctional on-board devices that support twoway communication between the vehicle and the control center. The majority of MDTs are 

used to download driver manifests, collect driver data such as sign on/sign off and start 

run/end run, count passengers boarding and alighting, and to function as an emergency 

alarm. Capital costs for MDTs typically range between $1,000 and $4,000 per unit with 

installation costs frequently between $500 and $1,000.269 In 2007, a comprehensive cost 

assessment of BRT components was conducted and found that on-board security systems typically cost approximately $10,000 per vehicle.270

Deployment

Figure 9 shows deployment trends for three key transit management technologies from 

2000 to 2006, based on a survey of the country’s 78 largest metropolitan areas. The use of 

AVL on fixed-route buses has expanded rapidly during this period, growing from 32 percent 

in 2000 to almost 60 percent in 2006. The percentage of demand-responsive paratransit 

vehicles under CAD has grown equally as fast. In 2006, 56 percent of demand-responsive paratransit vehicles operated under CAD. About one-third of fixed-route buses are 

equipped with sensors that monitor vehicle components in real time, although deployment 

of this technology has leveled off in the past few years.

In 2006, the survey of metropolitan areas was expanded to the country’s 108 largest 

metropolitan areas. This survey is the source of deployment statistics presented later in 

this chapter. 

Figure 9 – Deployment Trends for Transit Management Technologies, 2000-2006

Automatic

Vehicle Location

Remote Monitoring

Computer

Aided Dispatch

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

‘00 ’02 ‘04 ’05 ‘06

Year

Coverage (%)

capital costs for mobile data 

terminals typically range between 

$1,000 and $4,000 per unit.
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

84 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Selected Highlights from the ITS Knowledge

Resources on Transit Management

Operations and Fleet Management

Transit operations and fleet management technologies improve transit reliability through 

implementation of AVL and CAD systems. These systems may also be implemented with 

in-vehicle self-diagnostic equipment to automatically alert maintenance personnel of potential problems. Automated passenger counters can provide additional data to support service 

planning. Service coordination, technologies can help assure connections between transit 

services at transfer points through a service commonly known as connection protection. 

Transit signal priority systems, through coordination with arterial management systems, 

can improve service quality and transit agency productivity.

Operations and Fleet Management

Deployment

The use of ITS to support fleet management has experienced wide acceptance among 

transit agencies in major metropolitan areas. More than half (56 percent) of fixedroute transit buses in the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas are equipped with 

AVL; 56 percent of demand-responsive paratransit vehicles operate under CAD; and 

30 percent of fixed-route transit buses are equipped with technology to monitor vehicle components in real time. Thirty-nine (39) percent of transit agencies in these 108 

metropolitan areas archive data on transit operations for later use.

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Mobility Summary Finding: Studies from transit systems in Portland, Oregon; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; and Baltimore, Maryland show that AVL/

CAD systems have improved schedule adherence by 9 to 23 percent.271

Mobility In Eindhoven, the Netherlands, on-board computers recorded daily 

transit performance. This information was used to plan minimum 

transit route times and increase schedule reliability.272

Efficiency In Portland, Oregon, evaluation data show that AVL/CAD increased 

the effective capacity of the bus system by providing the same level 

of service to a greater number of travelers using the same equipment.273

Productivity Analysis of archived bus travel time and passenger load data from 

the AVL/CAD system deployed in Portland, Oregon found that scheduled time on 81 of 104 routes could be shortened while the remaining 23 required additional time. Identified schedule changes could 

potentially yield $7 million in annual operating cost savings.274
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | transit management 85

Operations and Fleet Management

Benefits

Customer 

Satisfaction

The Connection Protection system deployed by the Utah Transit 

Authority helped assure connections between higher frequency 

light rail transit service and lower frequency bus routes. The system 

resulted in a small, but not statistically significant, increase in the 

number of travelers satisfied with their travel experience: 87 percent 

with Connection Protection compared to 85 percent without it.275

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Transit Management Center subsystem:

•	 Upgrade for Automated Scheduling, Run Cutting, or Fare Payment: $19K-$39K

•	 Integration for Automated Scheduling, Run Cutting, or Fare Payment: $219K-$486K

Transit Center Labor: $100K-$400K (annually)

•	 Transit Vehicle On-Board subsystem:

•	 Cell-Based Communication Equipment: $0.14K-$0.23K

•	 Global Positioning System (GPS)/Differential GPS (DGPS) for Vehicle Location: 

$0.5K-$2K

•	 Trip Computer and Processor: $0.1K-$0.12K

•	 Automatic Passenger Counting System: $0.98K-$9.8K 
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

86 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Operations and Fleet Management

Costs

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Worldwide: Costs data were obtained from various BRT projects either underway or 

planned and made available to transit professionals and policy makers in planning 

and decision making related to implementing different components of BRT systems. 

The data are representative of BRT development costs. On-board performance monitoring systems typically cost approximately $2,000 per vehicle and AVL systems cost 

around $8,000 per vehicle.

276

Montana: The Billings METropolitan Special Transit, a paratransit service, spent 

approximately $43,500 to add AVL technology to its fleet of 15 vehicles.277

Massachusetts: The cost of the capital infrastructure for the Cape Cod Advanced 

Public Transit Systems—which included radio tower upgrades, local area network 

upgrades, 100 AVL/MDT units, and software upgrades—was $634,582. This cost 

roughly represents $6,346 per unit for 100 units. Given that the Cape Cod project 

was an early demonstration project, upgrades to the existing communications system were necessary. Such requirements and associated costs may not be required by 

other agencies deploying AVL/MDT capabilities.278

Michigan: The Flint Mass Transportation Authority (MTA) developed a plan to deploy 

ITS technologies to improve effectiveness and efficiency of transit service in Genessee County. The MTA budgeted $5,000 per bus and $1 million for the central system to implement a county-wide AVL system. The total capital cost was $1,750,000

for 150 vehicles with an estimated $250,000 for annual operations and maintenance 

(O&M) cost. To collect detailed transit passenger ridership information, the Flint MTA 

planned to install automatic passenger counters on 10 MTA fixed-route vehicles and 

rotated the vehicles with counters amongst all fixed routes. The costs were estimated 

at $50,000 ($2,500 per vehicle) and O&M at $10,000 per year. On-board diagnostics are planned for 100 vehicles to support more efficient maintenance operations and on-road trouble-shooting. Costs are estimated at $200,000 for capital and 

$20,000 annually for O&M.279
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | transit management 87

Operations and Fleet Management: Transit Signal Priority

Transit signal priority systems use sensors to detect approaching transit vehicles and alter 

traffic signal timing to improve transit performance. For example, some systems extend the 

duration of green signals for public transportation vehicles when necessary.

Operations and Fleet Management—Transit Signal Priority

Deployment

Two percent of signalized intersections in the country’s 108 largest metropolitan 

areas are equipped with transit signal priority.

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Mobility Summary Finding: Experience in 13 cities in the U.S. and abroad 

show 1.5 to 15 percent improvement in bus travel time due to 

transit signal priority.280 This range represents experience with 

a variety of transit service types under varying traffic conditions. 

Several studies show significant reductions in travel time variability, with a corresponding improvement in on-time performance.

Mobility Transit signal priority implemented as part of the Metro Rapid 

BRT service in Los Angeles yielded travel time improvements of 

7.5 percent and signal delay reduction of 36 and 33 percent on 

two test corridors. 281

Productivity In the central area of Chicago, a feasibility study indicated that 

driver assistance technologies and transit signal priority for 

BRT would be cost-effective for deployment on proposed busways.282

Energy and

Environment

Simulation of a transit signal priority system along a heavily traveled corridor in Arlington County, Virginia found a two to three 

percent reduction in fuel consumed by buses across a number 

of priority scenarios.283

Customer

Satisfaction

Surveys found that riders on Vancouver’s 98 B-line BRT service, 

which implemented transit signal priority to improve schedule reliability, rated the service highly with regard to on-time 

performance and service reliability (an average of 8 points on a 

10-point scale).284
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

88 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Operations and Fleet Management—Transit Signal Priority

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Control subsystem:

•	 Signal Controller Upgrade for Signal Control: $2.4K-$6K

•	 Roadside Signal Preemption/Priority: $5K-$6K

Transit Vehicle On-Board subsystem:

•	 Signal Preemption/Priority Emitter: $0.5K-$2.1K

•	 Preemption/Priority Transponder: $0.07K

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem:

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

United States: The need to upgrade or replace traffic signal software and controllers 

are key cost drivers in transit signal priority projects. Costs can be under $5,000 per 

intersection if existing software and controller equipment can be used. The costs can 

rise to $20,000 to $30,000 per intersection if software and control equipment are to 

be replaced.285

California: Stage one of the Watt Avenue corridor in Sacramento, California consisted 

of deployment of a transit priority system using Type 2070 controllers for 20 intersections, priority emitters for 60 transit vehicles, 14 closed circuit television cameras, 1 

weigh-in-motion station, 4 DMS, and associated communication infrastructure. The 

fiber optic communication infrastructure connects the field devices with the County 

Traffic Operations Center (TOC) and the County TOC to the Caltrans/California Highway Patrol Regional Transportation Management Center. The cost to implement stage 

one was estimated at $1.5 million.

286

California: The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, in partnership with the City of Los Angeles DOT, conducted the Metro Rapid Demonstration Program, a BRT full-deployment feasibility project, along two major arterials. The 

two Metro Rapid lines—Wilshire-Whittier and Ventura—began operations on June 

24, 2000. A critical element of the Metro Rapid Program is the transit signal priority 

system. This system serves to improve on-time performance, provides real-time next 

bus arrival information to passengers waiting at bus stations, and assists fleet management by recording travel time for each bus run. The system is deployed at approximately 211 intersections, covering 42.4 miles along both Metro Rapid lines. The total 

cost for the system was $4,243,000, which equates to approximately $20,000 per 

intersection or $100,000 per mile.

287
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | transit management 89

Information Dissemination

Information dissemination Web sites allow passengers to confirm scheduling information, 

improve transfer coordination, and reduce wait times. Electronic transit status information 

signs at bus stops help passengers manage their time and on-board systems such as nextstop audio annunciators help passengers in unfamiliar areas reach their destinations.

Information Dissemination

Deployment

The use of ITS technologies to provide real-time transit information remains limited to 

a small portion of transit agencies. Ten (10) percent of transit terminals in the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas have in-terminal information systems that provide real-time transit information. Transit agencies in 18 of these 108 metropolitan 

areas use automated telephone systems to disseminate real-time transit schedule 

adherence status or arrival and departure times to the public. Transit agencies in 6 

of the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas use in-vehicle systems for providing 

information on routes, schedules, and fares.

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Customer

Satisfaction

Summary Finding: Evaluation data show that passengers who use 

real-time bus or tram departure information signs find them useful. 

At the Acadia National Park in Maine, 90 percent of visitors using 

the signs said they made travel easier.288 Several surveys in Helsinki, 

Finland found 66 to 95 percent of travelers regarded similar signs 

useful.289

Customer 

Satisfaction

The ROUTES (Rail, Omnibus, Underground, Travel Enquiry System) 

computerized travel enquiry system used by the London Transport 

in England helped 13 percent of travelers change their travel modes 

to transit, which generated an estimated £1.3 million of additional 

revenue for bus companies, £1.2 million for the underground, and 

£1 million for railways.290
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

90 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Information Dissemination

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Transit Management Center subsystem:

•	 Transit Center Hardware: $8K-$10K

•	 Transit Center Software, Integration: $792K-$1671K

•	 Transit Center Labor: $100K-$400K (annually)

Transit Vehicle On-Board subsystem:

•	 Cell-Based Communication Equipment: $0.14K-$0.23K

•	 Global Positioning System (GPS)/Differential GPS (DGPS) for Vehicle Location: 

$0.5K-$2K

•	 Trip Computer and Processor: $0.1K-$0.12K

Remote Location subsystem:

•	 Transit Status Information Sign: $4K-$8K

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Oregon: The Portland Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District (TriMet) 

deployed a real-time traveler information system, Transit Tracker, beginning in 2001. 

Transit Tracker provides riders with a real-time estimate of the expected time the next 

transit vehicle will arrive. The system covers all light rail stops and each of TriMet’s 

7,700 bus stops. Information is available at all rail stations and 13 bus stops via phone 

and a dedicated Web site. A rough cost estimate for the field equipment (designing, 

purchasing, and installing the dynamic message signs (DMS) at 13 bus stops and all 

rail stations), servers, and Web development for Transit Tracker is $1,075,000. O&M 

costs for Transit Tracker are estimated to be roughly $95,000 per year.

291

Michigan: The Flint MTA identified the cost for an advanced traveler information 

system consisting of a fleet-wide on-board announcement system, real-time arrivaldeparture information, and a Web-based trip planner; $1.5 million is budgeted for 

capital cost with $225,000 annually for O&M cost.292

Worldwide: In 2007, a comprehensive cost assessment of BRT components was 

conducted and found that on-board security systems typically cost approximately 

$10,000 per vehicle. On-board passenger information systems typically cost approximately $4,000 per vehicle and signs at BRT stations typically cost $6,000 per 

sign.

293
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | transit management 91

Transportation Demand Management

Transportation demand management services, such as ride sharing/matching and dynamic 

routing/scheduling, increase public access to transit service.

Transportation Demand Management

Deployment

A significant number of transit agencies in major metropolitan areas use ITS technologies to improve transportation demand management efforts. Twenty-five (25) percent of transit agencies in the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas offer ride sharing and carpool matching services; 17 percent use AVL and CAD to support dynamic 

routing and scheduling; and 29 percent use ITS technologies to coordinate passenger 

transfers between vehicles or between transit systems.

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Productivity An evaluation of scheduling software for the paratransit service in 

Billings, Montana found that the break-even point for savings as a 

result of the software implementation was a three percent improvement in efficiency, while the evaluation found that the software 

enabled a seven percent increase in rides per hour of service and an 

increase in rides per mile of just over three percent.294 Scheduling 

software enabled St. John’s County in northeast Florida to reduce 

office staff from 9 to 4.5 full-time equivalents, despite a doubling of 

daily trips on the paratransit service, saving $58,000 per year.295

Route-deviation service can be less expensive than pure demandresponsive paratransit service while providing the additional important benefit of providing easy access to traditional transit routes 

for some patrons requiring door-to-door service. Experience with 

the Omnilink system in Prince William County, Virginia suggests 

that with less than 20 passengers per hour, adding 10 minutes of 

recovery time allows accommodation of one or two deviations per 

hour for routes taking approximately 35 minutes to drive without 

deviations.296

Customer 

Satisfaction

Interviews with transit operators and dispatchers for the consolidated transit service in Lake Tahoe, California found operators 

were generally satisfied with the MDTs deployed for communicating with dispatch. Dispatchers indicated that the precise location 

of the vehicles provided by the AVL system was useful. Both felt 

the scheduling capabilities provided were less than optimal for 

such a small demand-responsive service (five vehicles), but that the 

technologies provided useful capabilities for future service expansion.297
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

92 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Transportation Demand Management

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Transit Management Center subsystem:

•	 Transit Center Hardware: $8K-$10K

•	 Transit Center Software, Integration: $792K-$1671K

•	 Upgrade for Automated Scheduling, Run Cutting, or Fare Payment: $19K-$39K

•	 Integration for Automated Scheduling, Run Cutting, or Fare Payment:

 $219K-$486K

•	 Transit Center Labor: $100K-$400K (annually)

Transit Vehicle On-Board subsystem:

•	 Cell-Based Communication Equipment: $0.14K-$0.23K

•	 Global Positioning System (GPS)/Differential GPS (DGPS) for Vehicle Location: 

$0.5K-$2K

•	 Trip Computer and Processor: $0.1K-$0.12K

•	 Automatic Passenger Counting System: $0.98K-$9.8K

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Montana: The Billings METropolitan Special Transit System—a paratransit service 

that operates within the Billings, Montana city limits—deployed a computer-aided 

scheduling and dispatching software system at a cost of $83,575. A software maintenance fee is charged at $11,835 per year.

298

New Mexico: Client Referral, Ridership, and Financial Tracking (CRRAFT), a Webbased system that integrates human services transportation with the daily operating 

procedures and administration of multiple rural transit agencies, cost about $1 million

to implement.299 Operating costs for CRRAFT are about $95,000 annually.

300 Building 

on the success of CRRAFT, the Alliance for Transportation Institute developed a plan 

and implemented smart card technology—the Intelligent, Coordinated Transit Smart 

Card Technology Project (ICTransit Card)—to provide cost-effective, seamless, and 

convenient transportation services in a rural setting. The cost of the ICTransit Card 

system is approximately $635,700.

301 Operating costs for the ICTransit Card system 

are about $93,000 annually with about $40,000 shared with the annual operations 

forCRRAFT.302

lessons learned 

Adjust bus schedules to assure adequate 

time to accomplish rail-to-bus connections, given the risk of late train arrivals 

at connecting stations.

The Connection Protection system in Utah 

improves the reliability of transfers from the 

higher frequency light rail trains to the lower 

frequency bus services at connecting rail stations. Many transit agencies look to schedule 

adherence by their operators as a key performance indicator; hence, there is a built-in 

disincentive for bus operators to create delays 

by waiting for late arriving passengers.

•	 Coordinate bus schedules closely with 

rail schedules to maximize the likelihood 

of successful rail-to-bus connections.

Some of the bus operators in Utah commented 

that the rail and bus schedules are not adequately coordinated and adjusted to assure 

optimal connection time. The operators recommended making adjustments on the busiest routes first, as those are where the most 

problems are encountered.

Transit system managers need to examine 

the patterns of late train events at stations 

that service their bus routes and determine 

whether current bus schedules are adequately 

synchronized with the rail schedules. Adjustment strategies may include: extending the 

departure times from the stations serviced 

by rail, relative to the rail arrival schedules 

or building in additional recovery time at 

appropriate points on the bus route to allow 

operators to make up time and get back on 

schedule.303
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | transit management 93

Safety and Security 

Advanced software and communications enable data as well as voice to be transferred 

between transit management centers and transit vehicles for increased safety and security. 

Transit management centers can monitor in-vehicle and in-terminal surveillance systems, 

sometimes including video, to improve quality or the safety and security of passengers 

and operators. Silent distress alarms enable drivers to notify dispatch of on-board security 

situations and remote disabling systems can prevent hijacking of transit vehicles. 

Safety and Security

Deployment

ITS technologies are used by many metropolitan transit agencies to enhance transit safety and security. Forty-three (43) percent of transit buses in the country’s 108 

largest metropolitan areas are equipped with in-vehicle surveillance systems, either 

audio or video, and 31 percent of transit depots in these 108 metropolitan areas were 

equipped with facility surveillance. In contrast, remote disabling systems remain far 

less popular, with only 2 percent of transit buses in these 108 metropolitan areas 

equipped with remote disabling systems.

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety In Denver, on-board silent alarms installed on Regional Transportation District buses contributed to a 33 percent reduction in bus 

passenger assaults between 1992 and 1997.304

Customer 

Satisfaction

The Ann Arbor, Michigan transit authority installed on-board camera systems to increase safety and security. The cameras were often 

noticed by passengers, but the system only provided a significant 

feeling of additional security when respondents were traveling at 

night. Respondents to a survey rated police presence as giving 

them the greatest sense of security, followed closely by increased 

lighting. Emergency phones and video cameras had less impact.305
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

94 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Safety and Security

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Transit Management Center subsystem:

•	 Video Monitors for Security System: $2K-$5K

•	 Hardware for Security System: $13K-$19K

•	 Labor for Security System: $293K-$359K (annually)

Transit Vehicle On-Board subsystem:

•	 Security Package: $3.3K-$6K

Remote Location subsystem:

•	 Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Camera: $2K-$5K

•	 Transit Status Information Sign: $4K-$8K

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

United States: Based on the results of a high-level scan on the use and adoption of advanced technology by public transit agencies, a video monitoring system 

costs approximately $10,000 per vehicle. However, the addition of other integrated 

systems such as automated passenger counters, event recorders, voice annunicators, 

and equipment health monitoring may only cost a few thousand dollars more.306

Michigan: The Flint MTA budgeted $1,250,000 to deploy digital video systems fleetwide (250 vehicles at an estimated cost of $5,000 per vehicle). O&M costs were estimated at $175,000 per year.

307

lessons learned 

Enhance overall transit safety and security programs by implementing video 

assessment systems.

Transit management can achieve significant 

returns on most of its safety and security 

investments by deploying a video assessment 

system that leverages an agency’s other safety 

and security assets. The primary advantage to 

video assessment systems is their ability to 

record and archive information for real-time 

and archival use.

For example, the New Jersey Transit (NJ Transit)

video assessment system is effective because 

of the interdisciplinary, multi-agency, multijurisdictional way in which it is used. The 

functional requirements for the system were 

defined under the direction of the NJ Transit 

police chief, who worked closely with the 

head of the Information Technology Department who, in turn, specified the technical 

aspects of the system. The police chief culled 

requirements not only from transit operations, but from strong working relationships 

with the New Jersey State Police, Amtrak, 

New York City Metropolitan Transportation 

Authority, and the Port Authority of New York 

and New Jersey.308
endnotes 323

252 Intelligent Transportation Systems in Work Zones: A Case Study—Dynamic Lane Merge System, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, EDL 

No. 14011. October 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00317

253 Portable Traffic Management System Smart Work Zone Application: Operational Test Evaluation Report, Report Prepared by SRF Consulting Group 

for the Minnesota DOT, Report No. 0942089.7/11. May 1997. Benefits ID: 2007-00325

254 Intelligent Transportation Systems in Work Zones: A Case Study—Real Time Work Zone Traffic Control System, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-HOP-04-018, EDL No. 13984. October 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00404

255 Intelligent Transportation Systems in Work Zones: A Case Study—Real Time Work Zone Traffic Control System, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-HOP-04-018, EDL No. 13984. October 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00405

256 Intelligent Transportation Systems in Work Zones: A Case Study—Dynamic Lane Merge System, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, 

EDL No. 14011. October 2004. Correspondence with Mr. Jeff Grossklaus, Michigan DOT, November 2006 and January 2007. Costs ID: 

2007-00110

257 Kratofil, Joseph, A. Jr. “A Benefit-Cost Analysis for the Use of Intelligent Transportation Systems Technology for Temporary Construction Zone Management on the I-496 Reconstruction in Lansing, Michigan,” Prepared for Louis A. Reibling, Ph.D. in Partial Completion 

of the Degree of Master of Science in Administration, Central Michigan University, EDL No. 13591. Mt. Pleasant, MI. 14 March 2001. 

Benefits ID: 2007-00111

258 Kite, Steve. “SMART Work Zones: Technology for Work Zone Management—Making Work Zones Work Better Through Innovations in 

Technologies, Practices, and Products,” North Carolina DOT Presentation, Web page URL www.ncdot.org/doh/preconstruct/traffic/

conference/reports/tc2.pdf. Last Accessed 12 December 2007. Costs ID: 2006-00106

259 Fontaine, Mike. “Operational and Safety Benefits of Work Zone ITS,” Presentation to “ITS in Work Zones” Workshop/Peer Exchange. 

September 2005. Costs ID: 2006-00109

260 Kratofil, Joseph, A. Jr. “A Benefit-Cost Analysis for the Use of Intelligent Transportation Systems Technology for Temporary Construction Zone Management on the I-496 Reconstruction in Lansing, Michigan,” Prepared for Louis A. Reibling, Ph.D. in Partial Completion 

of the Degree of Master of Science in Administration, Central Michigan University, EDL No. 13591. Mt. Pleasant, MI. 14 March 2001. 

Costs ID: 2007-00111

261 “National Transit Database,” U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administration, Web site URL www.ntdprogram.gov/ntdprogram/ntd.htm. Last 

Accessed 9 August 2007.

262 Furth, Peter G., et al. TCRP Report 113: Using Archived AVL-APC Data to Improve Transit Performance and Management, Transportation Research 

Board, Transit Cooperative Research Program. Washington, DC. 2006.

263 “Mobility Services for All Americans,” U.S. DOT ITS Joint Program Office Web site URL www.its.dot.gov/msaa/index.htm. Last Accessed 

13 November 2007.

264 “Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) Quarterly Newsletter—Spring 2007,” U.S. DOT Web site URL www.its.dot.gov/icms/index.htm. 

Last Accessed 13 November 2007. 

265 “Transit Impact Matrix,” U.S. DOT Web site URL itsweb.mitretek.org/its/aptsmatrix.nsf/viewbyEfficiency?OpenView. Last Accessed 12 

December 2007.

266 Bruun, Eric C. “Technological Maturity of ITS and Scheduling and Integrated Service Options to Transit Planners,” Paper Presented at 

the 86th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 21–25 January 2007.

267 Sources that support these findings:

APTS Benefits, U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administration. November 1995. Benefits ID: 2000-00028

Strathman, J., et al. “Evaluation of Transit Operations: Data Applications of Tri-Met’s Automated Bus Dispatching System,” 

Transportation, Vol. 29, No. 3. August 2002. Cited in Furth, Peter G., et al. Uses of Archived AVL—APC Data to Improve Transit Performance and 

Management: Review and Potential, Transit Cooperative Research Program Web Document No. 23. June 2003. Benefits ID: 2000-00151

Milwaukee County Transit System, Status Report, Milwaukee County. Milwaukee, WI. July 1995. Benefits ID: 2000-00110

268 Sources with results used to construct this range of impacts include (listed alphabetically by study location per figure 8): 

Chada, Shireen and Robert Newland. Effectiveness of Bus Signal Priority: Final Report, Prepared by the University of South Florida for the 

Florida DOT and U.S. DOT, Report No. NCTR-416-04, EDL No. 13651. Tallahassee, FL. January 2002. Benefits ID: 2007-00345
324 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Crout, David. “Transit Signal Priority Evaluation,” Paper Presented at the ITS America 13th Annual Meeting and Exposition, Minneapolis, MN. May 2003. Benefits ID: 2003-00265

Dion, Francois, et al. “Evaluation of Transit Signal Priority Benefits along a Fixed-Time Signalized Arterial,” Paper Presented at the 81st 

Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC. 13–17 January 2002. Benefits ID: 2007-00348

Greenough and Kelman. “ITS Technology Meeting Municipal Needs—The Toronto Experience,” Paper Presented at the 6th World 

Congress Conference on ITS. Toronto, Canada. 8–12 November 1999. Benefits ID: 2007-00362

“ITS developed by Japanese Police,” Japan Traffic Management Technology Association, Institute of Urban Traffic Research. (Undated) 

Benefits ID: 2000-00073

Lehtonen, Mikko and Risto Kulmala. “The Benefits of a Pilot Implementation of Public Transport Signal Priorities and Real-Time 

Passenger Information,” Paper Presented at the 81st Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 13–17 January 

2002. Benefits ID: 2007-00392

Los Angeles Metro Rapid Demonstration Program: Final Report, Prepared by Transportation Management and Design, Inc. for the Los Angeles 

County Metropolitan Transportation Authority and the Los Angeles DOT. March 2002. Benefits ID: 2008-00544

“Telematics Applications Programme, 4th Framework Programme,” RTD&D 1994–1998, Web site URL www.cordis.lu/telematics/tap_

transport/research/10.html. Last Accessed 15 November 2004. Benefits ID: 2000-00135

Wang, Yinhai, et al. Comprehensive Evaluation on Transit Signal Priority System Impacts Using Field Observed Traffic Data, TransNow Report 

(TNW2007-06), University of Washington. Seattle, WA. 15 June 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00538

269 Harman, Lawrence J. and Uma Shama. TCRP Synthesis 70: Mobile Data Terminals—A Synthesis of Transit Practice, Transportation Research 

Board, Transit Cooperative Research Program. Washington, DC. 2007. Costs ID: 2008-00147

270 Kittelson and Associates, et al. TCRP Report 118: Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide, Transportation Research Board, Transit Cooperative 

Research Program. Washington, DC. 2007. Costs ID: 2008-00148

271 Sources that support these findings:

APTS Benefits, Report Prepared by the U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administration. November 1995.

Milwaukee County Transit System, Status Report, Milwaukee County. July 1995. Benefits ID: 2000-00110

Strathman, J., et al. “Evaluation of Transit Operations: Data Applications of Tri-Met’s Automated Bus Dispatching System,” 

Transportation, Vol. 29, No. 3. August 2002. Cited in Furth, Peter G., et al. Uses of Archived AVL—APC Data to Improve Transit Performance and 

Management: Review and Potential, Transit Cooperative Research Program Web Document No. 23. June 2003. Benefits ID: 2000-00151

272 Furth, Peter G. and Theo H. J. Muller. “Integrating Bus Service Planning with Analysis, Operational Control, and Performance Monitoring,” Paper Presented at the ITS America 10th Annual Meeting. Boston, MA. 1–4 May 2000. Benefits ID: 2000-00163

273 Strathman, James G., et.al. “Service Reliability Impacts of Computer-Aided Dispatching and Automatic Vehicle Location Technology: A 

Tri-Met Case Study,” Transportation Quarterly, Vol. 54, No. 3. Summer 2000. Benefits ID: 2000-00151

274 Strathman, J., et al. “Evaluation of Transit Operations: Data Applications of Tri-Met’s Automated Bus Dispatching System,” Transportation, Vol. 29, No. 3. August 2002. Cited in Furth, Peter G., et al. Uses of Archived AVL—APC Data to Improve Transit Performance and Management: 

Review and Potential, Transit Cooperative Research Program Web Document No. 23. June 2003. Benefits ID: 2000-00151

275 Evaluation of Utah Transit Authority’s Connection Protection System, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-05-005, 

EDL No. 14074. 12 May 2004. Benefits ID: 2008-00539

276 Kittelson and Associates, et al. TCRP Report 118: Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide, Transportation Research Board, Transit Cooperative 

Research Program. Washington, DC. 2007. Costs ID: 2008-00148

277 Kack, David and Deepu Philip. An Evaluation of RouteMatch Software in the Billings MET Special Transit System, Montana State University. Bozeman, MT. 2 May 2007. Costs ID: 2008-00149

278 Evaluation of the Cape Cod Advanced Public Transit System Phases I and II—Final Report, U.S. DOT, EDL No. 14096. Washington, DC. January 

2003. Costs ID: 2008-00150

279 ITS Implementation Plan, Prepared by the IBI Group for the Flint Mass Transportation Authority. Flint, MI. June 2005. Costs ID: 

2008-00151
endnotes 325

280 Sources with results used to construct this range of impacts include (listed alphabetically by study location per figure 8): 

Chada, Shireen, and Robert Newland. Effectiveness of Bus Signal Priority: Final Report, Prepared by the University of South Florida for the 

Florida DOT and the U.S. DOT, Report No. NCTR-416-04, EDL No. 13651. Tallahassee, FL. January 2002. Benefits ID: 2007-00345

Crout, David. “Transit Signal Priority Evaluation,” Paper Presented at the ITS America 13th Annual Meeting and Exposition, Minneapolis, MN. 19–22 May 2003. Benefits ID: 2003-00265

Dion, Francois, et al. “Evaluation of Transit Signal Priority Benefits along a Fixed-Time Signalized Arterial,” Paper Presented at the 81st 

Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board., Washington, DC. 13–17 January 2002. Benefits ID: 2007-00348

Greenough and Kelman. “ITS Technology Meeting Municipal Needs—The Toronto Experience,” Paper Presented at the 6th World 

Congress Conference on ITS. Toronto, Canada. 8–12 November 1999. Benefits ID: 2007-00362

“ITS developed by Japanese Police,” Japan Traffic Management Technology Association, Institute of Urban Traffic Research, . (Undated.) 

Benefits ID: 2000-00073

Lehtonen, Mikko and Risto Kulmala. “The Benefits of a Pilot Implementation of Public Transport Signal Priorities and Real-Time 

Passenger Information,” Paper Presented at the 81st Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 13–17 January 

2002. Benefits ID: 2007-00392

Los Angeles Metro Rapid Demonstration Program: Final Report, Prepared by Transportation Management and Design, Inc. for the Los Angeles 

County Metropolitan Transportation Authority and the Los Angeles DOT. Los Angeles, CA. March 2002. Benefits ID: 2008-00544

“Telematics Applications Programme, 4th Framework Programme,” RTD&D 1994–1998, Web site URL www.cordis.lu/telematics/tap_

transport/research/10.html. Last Accessed 15 November 2004. Benefits ID: 2000-00135

Wang, Yinhai, et al. Comprehensive Evaluation on Transit Signal Priority System Impacts Using Field Observed Traffic Data, TransNow Report 

(TNW2007-06), University of Washington. Seattle, WA. 15 June 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00538

281 Los Angeles Metro Rapid Demonstration Program: Final Report, Prepared by Transportation Management and Design Inc., for the Los Angeles 

County Metropolitan Transportation Authority and the Los Angeles DOT. Los Angeles, CA. March 2002. Benefits ID: 2008-00544

282 Shladover, Steven E., et al. Assessment of the Applicability of Cooperative Vehicle—Highway Automation Systems to Bus Transit and Intermodal Freight: 

Case Study Feasibility Analyses in the Metropolitan Chicago Region, Report No. UCB-ITS-PRR-2004-26, University of California, PATH Program. 

Berkeley, CA. 19 August 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00460

283 Dion, Francois, et al. “Evaluation of Transit Signal Priority Benefits along a Fixed-Time Signalized Arterial,” Paper Presented at the 81st 

Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 13–17 January 2002. Benefits ID: 2003-00256

284 98 B-line Bus Rapid Transit Evaluation Study, Prepared by the IBI Group for Transport Canada. 29 September 2003. Benefits ID: 

2008-00545

285 Transit Signal Priority (TSP): A Planning and Implementation Handbook, Prepared by ITS America. May 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00155

286 Maas, Doug and Marc Porter. “Watt Avenue—Deployment of an ITS Corridor,” Paper Presented at the 13th ITS America Annual Meeting. 19–22 May 2003. Costs ID: 2004-00083

287 Metro Rapid Demonstration Program Evaluation Report, U.S DOT Federal Transit Administration. July 2001. Costs ID: 2008-00156

288 Acadia National Park Field Operational Test: Visitor Survey, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, EDL No. 13806. February 2003. Benefits 

ID: 2007-00438

289 Lehtonen, Mikko and Risto Kulmala. “The Benefits of a Pilot Implementation of Public Transport Signal Priorities and Real-Time 

Passenger Information,“ Paper Presented at the 81st Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 13–17 January 

2002. Benefits ID: 2007-00391

290 “Survey Finds London Transit Info Changes Behavior, Creates Revenue,” Inside ITS, Page 8. 9 March 1998. Benefits ID: 2000-00060

291 Real-time Bus Arrival Information Systems Return-on-Investment Study, U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administration. Washington, DC. August 

2006. Costs ID: 2008-00152

292 ITS Implementation Plan, Prepared by the IBI Group for the Flint Mass Transportation Authority. Flint, MI. June 2005. Costs ID: 

2008-00151

293 Kittelson and Associates, et al. TCRP Report 118: Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide, Transportation Research Board, Transit Cooperative 

Research Program. Washington, DC. 2007. Costs ID: 2008-00148
326 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

294 Kack, David and Deepu Philip. An Evaluation of RouteMatch Software in the Billings MET Special Transit System, Montana State University. Bozeman, MT. 2 May 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00540

295 Northeast Florida Rural Transit Intelligent Transit System, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-OP-03-124, EDL No. 

13848. February 2003. Benefits ID: 2008-00541

296 Bruun and Marx. OmniLink—A Case Study of a Successful Flex-Route Capable ITS Implementation, Transportation Research Board, Report No. 

TRR 1971. Washington, DC. 2006. Cited in Eric C. Bruun. “Technological Maturity of ITS and Scheduling and Integrated Service Options 

to Transit Planners,” Paper Presented at the 86th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 21–25 January 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00542

297 Evaluation of the South Lake Tahoe Coordinated Transit System (CTS) Project: Phase III Evaluation U.S. DOT, EDL No. 14316. 14 April 2006. Benefits 

ID: 2008-00543

298 Kack, David and Deepu Philip. An Evaluation of RouteMatch Software in the Billings MET Special Transit System, Montana State University. Bozeman, MT. 2 May 2007. Costs ID: 2008-00149

299 Rural Transit ITS Best Practices, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-OP-03-077, EDL No. 13784. March 2003. 

Costs ID: 2004-00074

300 Correspondence with Mr. Eric F. Holm, Program Manager, Alliance for Transportation Research Institute. 23 March 2005. Costs ID: 

2008-00153

301 Intelligent, Coordinated Transit Smart Card Technology (ICTransit Card), University of New Mexico, Alliance for Transportation Research (ATR) 

Institute. Albuquerque, NM. September 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00154

302 Correspondence with Mr. Eric F. Holm, Program Manager, Alliance for Transportation Research Institute. 23 March 2005. Costs ID: 

2008-00153

303 Evaluation of Utah Transit Authority’s Connection Protection System, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-05-005, 

EDL No. 14074. 12 May 2004. Lesson ID: 2006-00229

304 Denver Regional Transportation District Automatic Vehicle Location System, U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administration, Report No. DOT-VNTSCFTA-00-04, EDL No. 13589. August 2000. Benefits ID: 2007-00463

305 Wallace, Richard, R., et al. “Passenger Reactions to Transit Safety Measures,” Transportation Research Board, Report No. TRR 1666, 

EDL No. 13148. 1999. Benefits ID: 2007-00422

306 Advanced Public Transportation Systems: State of the Art—Update 2006, U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administration, Report No. FTA-NJ-26-7062-06.1. 

30 March 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00133

307 ITS Implementation Plan, Prepared by the IBI Group for the Flint Mass Transportation Authority. Flint, MI. June 2005. Costs ID: 

2008-00151

308 Advanced Public Transportation Systems: State of the Art—Update 2006, U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administration, Report No. FTA-NJ-26-7062-06.1. 

30 March 2006. Lesson ID: 2008-00430

309 “TMS Performance Monitoring, Evaluation, and Reporting,” Presentation by the University of Virginia and SAIC. March 2006.

310 Sources and supporting information:

Integration of Emergency and Weather Elements into Transportation Management Centers, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-HOP-06-090, EDL No. 14247. 28 February 2006. 

Guidelines for Transportation Management Systems Maintenance Concept and Plans, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-OP-04-011, EDL No. 13882. 31 December 2002.

311 Transportation Management Center Concepts of Operation: Implementation Guide, .U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWAOP-99-029, EDL No. 11494. December 1999. 

312 Sources supporting this range include:

2006 Annual Report SMART SunGuide Transportation Management Center (TMC), Florida DOT, District IV. January 2007. Costs ID: 

2007-00120

Burk, Brian D. “Combined Transportation, Emergency and Communications Center: A Partnership of Performance,” Presented at 14th 

ITS America Annual Meeting. San Antonio, TX. May 2004. Costs ID: 2005-00093
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | transportation management centers 95

The capital cost of

physical TMC components

can range from $1.8 million

to $11.0 million per facility.

Transportation

Management Centers

Management and Operations 

Transportation management centers (TMCs), sometimes called traffic management centers 

and traffic operations centers (TOCs), coordinate ITS operations. TMCs can be owned or 

operated by a single agency or multiple transportation agencies and perform an array of 

functions including data acquisition, command and control, computing, and communications for many types of ITS applications.

TMCs are integral to a variety of management and operations strategies discussed throughout this report: traffic incident management, emergency management, electronic payment 

and congestion pricing, traveler information, and information management. While some 

of these strategies can be implemented in a stand-alone manner, others cannot, and each 

is enhanced through participation in a TMC. Careful planning is needed to gain the best 

performance through participation in a TMC. For example, TMCs provide an opportunity 

for centralized collection of data collected by ITS; however, TMC performance requirements 

are necessary during archived data management systems development for the succesful 

development of such a system. 

Coordination through a TMC can also improve the performance of the various strategies 

discussed earlier in this report. TMCs are often the venue for the instantaneous communication and coordination among various transportation organizations that enable improved 

system performance. For example, inclusion of road weather management personnel in 

TMC operations can facilitate the implementation of a variety of traffic management strategies, in addition to snow and ice control, to mitigate the impact of inclement weather. 

TMCs can be operated under several different business models. TMCs operated by a single 

agency have the simplest business model. These TMCs are able to focus resources on 

specific agency goals, coordination requirements, and explicit performance measures. Joint 

TMCs, however, are more complex. Joint operation of TMCs by multiple agencies complicates the task of TMC stakeholders and decision-makers charged with developing realistic 

planning and performance measures needed to rationalize TMC investments. 

To date, most evaluation efforts that discuss TMC operations focus on specific programs 

such as incident management, emergency management, or traffic control. Since evaluation data that explicitly quantifies the impacts of integrated systems is limited, evaluators charged with determining the potential impacts of these deployments typically rely 

on estimation, simulation, and surveying techniques to approximate system impacts.309

Reports also include lessons learned to help improve operational procedures, strategies, 

and policies.

Transportation Management 

Center Categories in the ITS 

Knowledge Resources

Transportation Management

Centers
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

96 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Findings

Benefits

A TMC integrates a variety of ITS applications to facilitate the coordination of information 

and services within the transportation system. Some of these applications perform more 

effectively because they are supported by other applications within a TMC. As such, while 

it is difficult to isolate the impacts of a TMC and evaluate them using explicit performance 

measures, experts agree that without the enhanced operational coordination that a TMC 

offers, the result would be increased congestion, reduced traffic safety, and noteworthy 

inconvenience to the traveling public. 

A TMC can be implemented as either a virtual system accessible via remote device(s) or 

a physical system where single or multiple stakeholder operators are located in a permanent structure and have centralized access to multiple applications. Co-locating stakeholder operators can improve interagency coordination and communications resulting in 

improved efficiency and productivity throughout the transportation network. For example, 

if one operator’s system experiences failures, other operators may be able to implement 

mitigation responses to ease the impacts on the traveling public. 

Overall, the benefits of a TMC vary greatly depending on its purpose, configuration, service 

responsibilities, performance, and level of integration. Integrated transportation management systems have the potential to produce the following benefits: 

	Improved traffic management, advisory strategies, and control actions

	Improved timeliness and accuracy of information provided to the traveling public 

	Increased efficiency of maintenance operations

	More effective use of personnel and resources

	Enhanced institutional, procedural, and operational integration and coordination310

Costs

The cost of TMCs can vary greatly. Primary cost drivers include the size of the facility, the 

number of agencies present, and the number of functions performed by the facility.311 Planners typically examine the following cost categories to help assure costs are accounted for 

early and budgets can be adequately funded.

TMC facilities, communications, and hardware

The cost of a TMC can depend on the size and complexity of building construction, number 

of agencies housed, and functionality supported. As illustrated in figure 10, the capital cost 

of physical components can range from $1.8 million to $11.0 million per facility,312 and have 

annual operations and maintenance (O&M) costs that range from $50,000 to $1.8 million 

per year.313 The higher costs reflect the complexity of a large facility that supports multiple 

agencies and integrates multiple functions. The lower costs are for a smaller facility that 

supports a single agency or agency function.

TMC annual O&M costs can range 

from $50,000 to $1.8 million per year.
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | transportation management centers 97

Central hardware costs can exceed $200,000 if regional communications and system integration are required, and the O&M costs for central hardware can range from $40,000 

to $55,000 per year.314 These costs, however, can be much less for smaller TMCs that do 

not incur large initial costs for computer systems and work stations, and do not require 

complex or customized communication systems. Another significant budget item is the 

visual displays needed for control room operations. The cost of video walls and monitors 

can range between $100,000 and $345,000, and the O&M costs can range from $35,000 to 

$55,000 per year.315

10

8

6

4

2

0

Figure 10 – TMC Initial Capital Costs

Cost ($ millions)

1.8

10

11

5

7.8

Transportation Management Centers

Lake County, IL

(small metro)

Chicago, IL

(large metro)

District 4, FL

(large regional)

Austin/Travis, TX

(small regional)

Utah

(statewide)

System integration and software

The cost of integration can vary depending on the current level of integration and specific 

operational needs of the transportation management system. Software integration costs 

vary significantly, ranging from $250,000 to $4.0 million. Annual O&M costs can range 

from $50,000 to $100,000.316
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

98 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Telecommunications

Establishing communications between TMCs and field devices can be the most expensive 

part of a transportation management system and require careful examination of life cycle 

costs with due consideration given to policy and technical issues. The Tennessee DOT evaluated the life cycle cost of leased service versus an owned service and concluded, based 

largely on the cost of maintaining a fiber optic communications plant, that leased services 

that included a favorable maintenance agreement would be more cost-effective.317

The cost of installing fiber optic cable can vary greatly. Installation cost increases significantly in areas where new underground conduit is required. For Florida DOT District VI, 

the cost to install fiber optic cable in existing conduit was estimated at $25,600 per mile.318

However, in Broward County, where new conduit components were required, fiber optic 

communications cost between $79,200 per mile and $105,600 per mile.319

Staffing requirements

Proper staffing and scheduling are needed for effective operations. Payroll costs typically 

account for the greatest percentage of a TMC operating budget. The number of operators, supervisors, and technical staff (i.e., software support, communications support, and 

systems engineering support) can depend on the size and complexity of the transportation 

management system, functional role of the TMC, and the hours of operation.320

The annual staffing costs for a medium to large TMC that provides peak period service or 

24/7 operational support can range from $280,000 to more than $1.20 million depending 

on the number of TMC operators, administrative staff requirements, and level of technical 

support needed.321 The labor costs for a smaller TMC that can provide part-time operator 

and technical support for limited incident management or special event coverage can 

cost between $54,000 and $130,000 per year.322 In addition, training during the first year of 

operations is estimated at $20,000.323

Operations and maintenance

TMC maintenance plans typically include life cycle cost estimates for building facilities, 

power supplies, central hardware and software, control systems, commercial off-the-shelf 

(COTS) products, video displays, Web sites, and media connections.324

Deployment

Figure 11 shows the functional capabilities of TMCs operated by freeway and arterial 

management agencies. The results are based on a 2006 survey of 102 freeway management agencies and 170 arterial management agencies. Capabilities reported by a high 

percentage of both types of TMC include incident management, network surveillance and 

data collection, and dissemination of data to travelers and other agencies, as well as 

traffic management for special events and evacuation. In general, a higher percentage of 

freeway TMCs report individual capabilities, indicating that they perform multiple functions to a greater degree than do arterial TMCs. Functions for which freeway TMCs have a 

particularly clear advantage are: providing en route information to travelers, conducting 

environmental monitoring, and carrying out road weather management. On the other 

hand, arterial agencies much more often report a capability for corridor management and 

traffic signal coordination.
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | transportation management centers 99

The 2006 survey of freeway management and arterial management agencies in the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas is the source of deployment statistics presented later 

in this chapter.

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Figure 11 – Functional Capabilities of Transportation Management Centers

Agencies Reporting Capability (%)

Information dissemination

to other agencies

Network or roadway surveillance and data collection

Special event traffic management

En route driver information

Emergency services traffic control coordination

Evacuation management and

traffic coordination

Road weather management

Network performance monitoring, evaluation, and reporting

Corridor management/traffic signal

coordination and control

Environmental monitoring

Ramp management and control

Lane management and control

Incident management

Arterial Management Agencies Freeway Management Agencies
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

100 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

lessons learned 

Integrate emergency information into 

transportation management center (TMC) 

operations to improve performance and 

increase public mobility, safety, and security during regional emergencies.

The effects of both weather and emergency 

events on transportation operations can be 

significant and require an effective, coordinated response. Improvements in integrating 

emergency information into TMC operations 

result in improved public mobility, safety, and 

security. Lessons learned for enhancing operations during regional emergencies include:

•	 Co-locate operations of multiple agencies 

within the region. 

The physical integration of operations leverages the resources of each agency to develop 

a center with more capabilities. The benefits 

of shared operations include reduced costs 

and increased awareness of the actions of 

other agencies.

•	 Create a restricted-access Web site for 

participating agencies. 

A Web site with restricted access enables 

trained partner agencies with password 

accounts to share data, confident that the 

data have come from a trusted source, i.e., 

one of their TMC partners. Along the Pennsylvania Turnpike, TMCs and other authorized 

organizations access a Web site operated by 

the Pennsylvania Emergency Management 

Agency. The restricted-access Web site allows 

for a two-way flow of highly accurate incident 

information, with higher reliability than publicly-available Web sites.

Selected Highlights from the ITS Knowledge

Resources on Transportation Management Centers

Transportation Management Centers

TMCs are physical locations used to coordinate the activities of ITS operations. They can 

be owned or operated by a single agency or multiple transportation agencies and perform 

an array of functions including data acquisition, command and control, computing, and 

communications for many types of ITS applications.

Transportation Management Center

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Transportation Management Center subsystem:

•	 Basic Facilities and Communications for Large Area: $4,314K-$9,860K

•	 Basic Facilities and Communications for Medium Area: $4304K

•	 Basic Facilities and Communications for Large Area: $3766K

•	 Video Monitors, Wall for Incident Detection: $44K-$80K

•	 Software for Incident Detection: $83K-$101K

•	 Labor for Incident Detection: $751K-$917K for multiple staff (annually)

•	 Hardware, Software for Traffic Surveillance: $131K-$160K

•	 Integration for Traffic Surveillance: $219K-$267K

•	 Software for Traffic Information Dissemination: $17K-$21K

•	 Integration for Traffic Information Dissemination: $83K-$101K

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

TMC/Traffic Operations Center Facility

•	 Illinois: Lake County TMC for advanced signal control cost $1.8 million.

325

•	 Texas: A shared regional transportation, emergency, and communications center 

in Austin and Travis Counties cost $5 million.

326

•	 Utah: The Utah DOT TOC that supports road weather management, traffic surveillance, incident management, ramp metering, signal control, and information dissemination cost $7.8 million.

327

•	 Illinois: The Chicago TMC that supports emergency management, signal control, 

and traveler information cost $10 million.

328

•	 Florida: Florida DOT District IV TMC shared by four agencies supports incident 

and emergency management, traffic surveillance, information dissemination, interactive traveler information services (511), and transit management at a cost of 

$11 million.

329
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | transportation management centers 101

lessons learned 

Prioritize constraints when designing a 

transportation management center (TMC) 

work schedule to help alleviate the complexity of scheduling problems.

TMC staffing and scheduling depends on a

number of factors. Policies establish the 

work rules that are applied in the context of 

employee availability and preferences, work 

demands, and budgetary limitations, all of 

which create scheduling constraints. Conflicting constraints often cause problems that 

must be resolved by the schedule administrator to generate the most desirable schedule.

•	 Recognize that equipment availability and 

the size of a TMC are constraints because 

they limit the number of employees who 

can work during a shift. 

The number of operators who can work during a shift is constrained by the number of 

workstations available, which in turn may be 

limited by space or funds. The consideration 

of equipment must also include contingencies if a piece of equipment should need to 

be repaired or replaced.

•	 Prioritize constraints when designing a 

work schedule. 

The complexity of generating a staffing schedule increases as the number of constraints 

increase. One method to help alleviate the 

complexity of scheduling problems is to prioritize the constraints. A common method 

used to prioritize constraints using software 

is to classify each constraint as a hard constraint that must be satisfied or a soft constraint that may be violated to resolve scheduling conflicts.

Transportation Management Center

Costs

Software and Integration

•	 Virginia: Integration of the Virginia State Police computer-aided dispatch system 

with the Richmond Smart Traffic Center for enhanced traveler information and incident location data cost $250,000.

330

•	 Florida: In Florida DOT Districts IV and VI, central software and integration costs 

varied between $250,000 for COTS products and $2 million for custom designs 

requiring software development.331

•	 Illinois: Software development and systems integration at the Chicago TMC cost 

$4 million.

332

•	 Utah: Software licensing and updates at the Utah DOT TOC cost $5 million.

333

Telecommunications

•	 Illinois: Life cycle cost estimates for four different communication network options 

designed to connect the Illinois DOT District 8 TOC to ITS field devices on 105 centerline miles of roadway range from $43 million to $52.5 million.

334

•	 Utah: The fiber optic network installed through the Salt Lake Valley to connect the 

CommuterLink system with its field devices cost approximately $51.2 million.

335

•	 Florida: In District VI, the cost to install fiber optic cable in existing conduit over 

a distance of 21.3 miles was estimated to cost $25,600 per mile. Annual cost estimates to lease telephone lines with T1 and T3 capability ranged from $5,600 to 

$10,000 and $25,000 to $132,000, respectively.336

•	 Florida: In Broward County, the cost to install fiber optic cable in new conduit (with junction boxes, splicing, and terminators) was estimated to range from 

$79,200 to $105,600 per mile.

337

Labor

•	 Utah: The costs of personnel working at the CommuterLink system are estimated 

at $400,000 per year.

338

•	 Florida: The labor costs to operate the TMCs in three DOT Districts ranged from 

$300,000 to $1.2 million per year.

339

•	 United States: Estimated personnel operations cost (system operators, administration, and technical support)340

– Regional TMC (27 staff, continuous 24/7 operations): $1.3 million per year

– Large TMC (seven staff, weekday 12/5 operations): $476,500 per year

– Medium TMC (four staff, weekday peak period 8/5 operations): 

$277,900 per year

– Small TMC (one staff equivalent, special event or incident response only): 

$53,600 per year

•	 Arizona: Labor costs for the Arizona TMC are estimated at $920,000 per year. 

Staffing includes four supervisors, nine operators, and three part-time interns that 

support 24/7 statewide incident management, traffic management, and traveler information functions.341
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

102 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Transportation Management Center

Costs

Operations and Maintenance

•	 United States: Estimated TMC operations cost (building O&M, utilities, communications equipment and services, computers and software licenses, and miscellaneous).342

– Regional/Statewide TMC (continuous 24/7 operations): $1.8 million per year

– Large TMC (weekday 12/5 operations): $180,700 per year

– Medium TMC (weekday peak period 8/5 coverage): $109,400 per year

– Small TMC (special event or incident response only): $46,900 per year

•	 Arizona: The Maricopa Association of Governments estimated it would cost 

$660,000 per year to maintain regional communications between the TMC, local 

facilities, and public safety centers.343

•	 Arizona: Operating costs for the Arizona TMC are estimated at $1.08 million per 

year with a breakout as follows: 344

•	 Equipment and supplies: $320,000

•	 Operations support: $300,000

•	 Utilities: $200,000

•	 Building maintenance: $120,000

•	 Software licenses: $100,000

•	 Training: $40,000

•	 Florida: Florida District IV TMC maintenance costs range from approximately 

$294,000 (2005) to $320,000 (2006) per year.

345
326 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

294 Kack, David and Deepu Philip. An Evaluation of RouteMatch Software in the Billings MET Special Transit System, Montana State University. Bozeman, MT. 2 May 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00540

295 Northeast Florida Rural Transit Intelligent Transit System, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-OP-03-124, EDL No. 

13848. February 2003. Benefits ID: 2008-00541

296 Bruun and Marx. OmniLink—A Case Study of a Successful Flex-Route Capable ITS Implementation, Transportation Research Board, Report No. 

TRR 1971. Washington, DC. 2006. Cited in Eric C. Bruun. “Technological Maturity of ITS and Scheduling and Integrated Service Options 

to Transit Planners,” Paper Presented at the 86th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 21–25 January 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00542

297 Evaluation of the South Lake Tahoe Coordinated Transit System (CTS) Project: Phase III Evaluation U.S. DOT, EDL No. 14316. 14 April 2006. Benefits 

ID: 2008-00543

298 Kack, David and Deepu Philip. An Evaluation of RouteMatch Software in the Billings MET Special Transit System, Montana State University. Bozeman, MT. 2 May 2007. Costs ID: 2008-00149

299 Rural Transit ITS Best Practices, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-OP-03-077, EDL No. 13784. March 2003. 

Costs ID: 2004-00074

300 Correspondence with Mr. Eric F. Holm, Program Manager, Alliance for Transportation Research Institute. 23 March 2005. Costs ID: 

2008-00153

301 Intelligent, Coordinated Transit Smart Card Technology (ICTransit Card), University of New Mexico, Alliance for Transportation Research (ATR) 

Institute. Albuquerque, NM. September 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00154

302 Correspondence with Mr. Eric F. Holm, Program Manager, Alliance for Transportation Research Institute. 23 March 2005. Costs ID: 

2008-00153

303 Evaluation of Utah Transit Authority’s Connection Protection System, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-05-005, 

EDL No. 14074. 12 May 2004. Lesson ID: 2006-00229

304 Denver Regional Transportation District Automatic Vehicle Location System, U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administration, Report No. DOT-VNTSCFTA-00-04, EDL No. 13589. August 2000. Benefits ID: 2007-00463

305 Wallace, Richard, R., et al. “Passenger Reactions to Transit Safety Measures,” Transportation Research Board, Report No. TRR 1666, 

EDL No. 13148. 1999. Benefits ID: 2007-00422

306 Advanced Public Transportation Systems: State of the Art—Update 2006, U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administration, Report No. FTA-NJ-26-7062-06.1. 

30 March 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00133

307 ITS Implementation Plan, Prepared by the IBI Group for the Flint Mass Transportation Authority. Flint, MI. June 2005. Costs ID: 

2008-00151

308 Advanced Public Transportation Systems: State of the Art—Update 2006, U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administration, Report No. FTA-NJ-26-7062-06.1. 

30 March 2006. Lesson ID: 2008-00430

309 “TMS Performance Monitoring, Evaluation, and Reporting,” Presentation by the University of Virginia and SAIC. March 2006.

310 Sources and supporting information:

Integration of Emergency and Weather Elements into Transportation Management Centers, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-HOP-06-090, EDL No. 14247. 28 February 2006. 

Guidelines for Transportation Management Systems Maintenance Concept and Plans, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-OP-04-011, EDL No. 13882. 31 December 2002.

311 Transportation Management Center Concepts of Operation: Implementation Guide, .U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWAOP-99-029, EDL No. 11494. December 1999. 

312 Sources supporting this range include:

2006 Annual Report SMART SunGuide Transportation Management Center (TMC), Florida DOT, District IV. January 2007. Costs ID: 

2007-00120

Burk, Brian D. “Combined Transportation, Emergency and Communications Center: A Partnership of Performance,” Presented at 14th 

ITS America Annual Meeting. San Antonio, TX. May 2004. Costs ID: 2005-00093
endnotes 327

Krueger, C., et al. The Chicago Traffic Management Center Preliminary Design Study Planning Effort, Chicago DOT. 2003. Costs ID: 2008-00157

Lake County TMC Study: Implementation Phasing Plan—Version 2.0, Prepared by the National Engineering Technology Corporation. Report 

No. DCN 2020IIPPR2.0. Arlington Heights, IL. September 2003. Costs ID: 2008-00158

Perrin, Joseph, Rodrigo Disegni, and Bhargava Rama. Advanced Transportation Management System Elemental Cost Benefit Assessment, Prepared 

by the University of Utah for the Utah DOT and the U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration. March 2004. Costs ID: 2004-00086

313 Sources supporting this range include:

2005 Annual Report SMART SunGuide Transportation Management Center (TMC), Florida DOT, District IV. January 2006. Correspondence with 

Mr. Steve Corbin, FDOT District IV, ITS Operations Manager. 28 March 2006. Costs ID: 2006-00097

2006 Annual Report SMART SunGuide Transportation Management Center (TMC), Florida DOT, District IV. January 2007. Correspondence with 

Mr. Steve Corbin, FDOT District IV, ITS Operations Manager. February 2007. Costs ID: 2007-00120

MAG Regional Concept of Transportation Operations, Technical Memorandum No. 5/6, Prepared by Kimley-Horn for the Maricopa Associated of 

Governments (MAG). Phoenix, AZ. 7 January 2004. Costs ID: 2008-00159

Transportation Management Center: Business Planning and Plans Handbook, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, TMC Pooled Fund 

Study. December 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00160

Transportation Management Center Staffing and Scheduling for Day-to-Day Operations, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration. January 2006. 

Costs ID: 2008-00161

314 Intelligent Transportation System Deployment Analysis System Customization: Technical Memorandum No. 4—Florida-Specific Intelligent Transportation 

System Deployment Costs Version 2, Prepared by the Florida DOT. Tallahassee, FL. August 2004. Costs ID: 2008-00162

315 Intelligent Transportation System Deployment Analysis System Customization: Technical Memorandum No. 4—Florida-Specific Intelligent Transportation 

System Deployment Costs Version 2, Prepared by the Florida DOT. Tallahassee, FL. August 2004. Costs ID: 2008-00162

316 Sources supporting this range include:

Intelligent Transportation System Deployment Analysis System Customization: Technical Memorandum No. 4—Florida-Specific Intelligent Transportation 

System Deployment Costs Version 2, Prepared by the Florida DOT. Tallahassee, FL. August 2004. Costs ID: 2008-00162

Robison, David, Matt Sargent, and Steve Beckwith. Challenges Faced and Tactics Used to Integrate Real-Time State Police CAD Data with the VDOT 

Richmond District Smart Traffic Center: Lessons Learned Document, Virginia DOT. January 2005. Correspondence with Mr. Robb Alexander on 

6 April 2006. Costs ID: 2006-00095

317 Guidelines for Transportation Management Systems Maintenance Concept and Plans, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-OP-04-011, EDL No. 13882. 31 December 2002. Costs ID: 2008-00163

318 Intelligent Transportation System Deployment Analysis System Customization: Technical Memorandum No. 4—Florida-Specific Intelligent Transportation 

System Deployment Costs Version 2, Prepared by the Florida DOT. Tallahassee, FL. August 2004. Costs ID: 2008-00162

319 Intelligent Transportation System Deployment Analysis System Customization: Technical Memorandum No. 4—Florida-Specific Intelligent Transportation 

System Deployment Costs Version 2, Prepared by the Florida DOT. Tallahassee, FL. August 2004. Costs ID: 2008-00162

320 MAG Regional Concept of Transportation Operations, Technical Memorandum No. 5/6, Prepared by Kimley-Horn for the Maricopa Associated 

of Governments (MAG). Phoenix, AZ. 7 January 2004. Costs ID: 2008-00159

321 Sources supporting this range include:

Intelligent Transportation System Deployment Analysis System Customization: Technical Memorandum No. 4—Florida-Specific Intelligent Transportation 

System Deployment Costs Version 2, Prepared by the Florida DOT. Tallahassee, FL. August 2004. Costs ID: 2008-00162

Transportation Management Center: Business Planning and Plans Handbook, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, TMC Pooled Fund 

Study. December 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00160

322 Sources supporting this range include:

Intelligent Transportation System Deployment Analysis System Customization: Technical Memorandum No. 4—Florida-Specific Intelligent Transportation 

System Deployment Costs Version 2, Prepared by the Florida DOT. Tallahassee, FL. August 2004. Costs ID: 2008-00162

Lake County TMC Study: Implementation Phasing Plan—Version 2.0, Prepared by the National Engineering Technology Corporation. Report 

No. DCN 2020IIPPR2.0. Arlington Heights, IL. September 2003. Costs ID: 2008-00158
328 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

323 Lake County TMC Study: Implementation Phasing Plan—Version 2.0, Prepared by the National Engineering Technology Corporation. Report 

No. DCN 2020IIPPR2.0. Arlington Heights, IL. September 2003. Costs ID: 2008-00158

324 Guidelines for Transportation Management Systems Maintenance Concept and Plans, Prepared by PB Farradyne for the U.S. DOT Federal Highway 

Administration, Report No. FHWA-OP-04-011. 31 December 2002. Costs ID: 2008-00163

325 Lake County TMC Study: Implementation Phasing Plan—Version 2.0, Prepared by the National Engineering Technology Corporation. Report 

No. DCN 2020IIPPR2.0. Arlington Heights, IL. September 2003. Costs ID: 2008-00158

326 Burk, Brian D. “Combined Transportation, Emergency and Communications Center: A Partnership of Performance,” Presented at 14th 

ITS America Annual Meeting. San Antonio, TX. May 2004. Costs ID: 2005-00093

327 Perrin, Joseph, Rodrigo Disegni, and Bhargava Rama. Advanced Transportation Management System Elemental Cost Benefit Assessment, Prepared by the 

University of Utah for the Utah DOT and the U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration. March 2004. Costs ID: 2004-00086

328 Krueger, C., et al. The Chicago Traffic Management Center Preliminary Design Study Planning Effort, Chicago DOT. 2003. Costs ID: 2008-00157

329 2006 Annual Report SMART SunGuide Transportation Management Center (TMC), Florida DOT, District IV. January 2007. Correspondence with 

Mr. Steve Corbin, FDOT District IV, ITS Operations Manager. February 2007. Costs ID: 2007-00120

330 Robison, David, Matt Sargent, and Steve Beckwith. Challenges Faced and Tactics Used to Integrate Real-Time State Police CAD Data with the VDOT 

Richmond District Smart Traffic Center: Lessons Learned Document, Virginia DOT. January 2005. Correspondence with Mr. Robb Alexander on 

6 April 2006. Costs ID: 2006-00095

331 2006 Annual Report SMART SunGuide Transportation Management Center (TMC), Florida DOT, District IV. January 2007. Correspondence with 

Mr. Steve Corbin, FDOT District IV, ITS Operations Manager. February 2007. Costs ID: 2007-00120

332 Krueger, C., et al. The Chicago Traffic Management Center Preliminary Design Study Planning Effort, Chicago DOT. 2003. Costs ID: 2008-00157

333 Perrin, Joseph, Rodrigo Disegni, and Bhargava Rama. Advanced Transportation Management System Elemental Cost Benefit Assessment, Prepared 

by the University of Utah for the Utah DOT and the U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration. March 2004. Costs ID: 2004-00086

334 Siesel, Douglas E. and Brian A. Sneed. “Traffic Operations Center/ITS Field Components Communication Study,” Paper Presented to 

the 13th ITS America Annual Meeting. Minneapolis, MN. 19–22 May 2003. Costs ID: 2004-00070

335 Perrin, Joseph, Rodrigo Disegni, and Bhargava Rama. Advanced Transportation Management System Elemental Cost Benefit Assessment, Prepared 

by the University of Utah for the Utah DOT and the U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration. March 2004. Costs ID: 2004-00086

336 Intelligent Transportation System Deployment Analysis System Customization: Technical Memorandum No. 4—Florida-Specific Intelligent Transportation 

System Deployment Costs Version 2, Prepared by the Florida DOT. Tallahassee, FL. August 2004. Costs ID: 2008-00162

337 Intelligent Transportation System Deployment Analysis System Customization: Technical Memorandum No. 4—Florida-Specific Intelligent Transportation 

System Deployment Costs Version 2, Prepared by the Florida DOT. Tallahassee, FL. August 2004. Costs ID: 2008-00162

338 Perrin, Joseph, Rodrigo Disegni, and Bhargava Rama. Advanced Transportation Management System Elemental Cost Benefit Assessment, Prepared 

by the University of Utah for the Utah DOT and the U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration. March 2004. Costs ID: 2004-00086

339 Intelligent Transportation System Deployment Analysis System Customization: Technical Memorandum No. 4—Florida-Specific Intelligent Transportation 

System Deployment Costs Version 2, Prepared by the Florida DOT. Tallahassee, FL. August 2004. Costs ID: 2008-00162

340 Transportation Management Center: Business Planning and Plans Handbook, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, TMC Pooled Fund 

Study. December 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00160

341 Transportation Management Center Staffing and Scheduling for Day-to-Day Operations, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration. January 2006. 

Costs ID: 2008-00161

342 Transportation Management Center: Business Planning and Plans Handbook, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, TMC Pooled Fund 

Study. December 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00160

343 MAG Regional Concept of Transportation Operations, Technical Memorandum No. 5/6, Prepared by Kimley-Horn for the Maricopa Associated of 

Governments (MAG). Phoenix, AZ. 7 January 2004. Costs ID: 2008-00159

344 Transportation Management Center Staffing and Scheduling for Day-to-Day Operations, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration. January 2006. 

Costs ID: 2008-00161
endnotes 329

345 Sources supporting this range include:

2005 Annual Report SMART SunGuide Transportation Management Center (TMC), Florida DOT, District IV. January 2006. Correspondence with 

Mr. Steve Corbin, FDOT District IV, ITS Operations Manager. 28 March 2006. Costs ID: 2006-00097

2006 Annual Report SMART SunGuide Transportation Management Center (TMC), Florida DOT, District IV. January 2007. Correspondence with 

Mr. Steve Corbin, FDOT District IV, ITS Operations Manager. February 2007 Costs ID: 2007-00120

346 National Strategy to Reduce Congestion on America’s Transportation Network, Prepared by the U.S. DOT. May 2006.

347 “ITS Deployment Statistics Knowledge Resource,” U.S. DOT, Web site URL www.itsdeployment.its.dot.gov. Last Accessed 12 December 

2007.

348 “Next Generation 9-1-1 Overview,” U.S. DOT Web site URL www.its.dot.gov/ng911/ng911_overview.htm. Last Accessed 31 December 

2007.

349 Sources that support these findings:

“1996 ITS Tour Report: Eastern North America,” Institute of Transportation Engineers 1996 ITS World Congress, Vol. 1, Pages 4–5. 1997. 

Benefits ID: 2000-00123

Bertini, R., et al. Evaluation of Region 2 Incident Response Program Using Archived Data, Portland State University Report No. PSU-CE-TRG-01-01. 

Portland, OR. June 2001. Benefits ID: 2007-00483

Performance Evaluation of CHART—Coordinated Highways Action Response Team—Year 2002, University of Maryland, College Park and Maryland State Highway Administration. College Park, MD. November 2003. Benefits ID: 2007-00425

Petrov, A., et al. “Evaluation of the Benefits of a Real-Time Incident Response System,” Paper Presented at the 9th World Congress on 

Intelligent Transport Systems. Chicago, IL. 14–17 October 2002. Benefits ID: 2007-00485

“1996 ITS Tour Report: Eastern North America,” Institute of Transportation Engineers 1996 ITS World Congress, Vol. 1, Pages 4–5. 1997. 

Benefits ID: 2000-00123

350 Sources that support these findings:

“CDOT Launches Courtesy Patrol on I-70 West,” Colorado DOT. Denver, CO. 4 March 2005. Costs ID: 2006-00101

“Freeway Service Patrol: ‘About FSP’’ and ‘Facts at a Glance’ Web Site,” Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority. 22 June 

2006. Web site URL www.metro.net/news_info/facts.htm. Last Accessed 12 December 2007. Costs ID: 2006-00102

Hagen, Larry, Huaguo Zhou, and Harkanwal Singh. Road Ranger Benefit-Cost Analysis, Prepared by the University of South Florida for the 

Florida DOT. November 2005. Correspondence with the report authors (Larry Hagen and Huaguo Zhou). 2006. Costs ID: 2006-00103

HELP Annual Operating Report, July 1, 2004–June 30, 2005, Tennessee DOT. Nashville, TN. October 2005. Costs ID: 2006-00096

MDOT Freeway Courtesy Patrol in Southeast Michigan: 2004 Evaluation Report, Southeast Michigan Council of Governments. Detroit, MI. May 

2005. Costs ID: 2006-00104

351 Sources that support these findings:

Cuciti, P. and B. Janson. “Incident Management via Courtesy Patrol: Evaluation of a Pilot Project in Colorado,” Paper Presented at the 

74th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. January 1995. Benefits ID: 2000-00068

Fenno, D. and M. Ogden. “Freeway Service Patrols: A State of the Practice,” Paper Presented at the 77th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. January 1998. Benefits ID: 2000-00130

Highway Helper Summary Report—Twin Cities Metro Area, Minnesota DOT. St. Paul, MN. July 1994. Benefits ID: 2000-00009

Latoski, S., et al. “Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation of Hoosier Helper Freeway Service Patrol,” Journal of Transportation Engineering, Vol. 125, 

No. 5. September/October 1999. Benefits ID: 2000-00002

352 Evaluation of Intelligent Transportation Infrastructure Program (ITIP) in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S. DOT, EDL No. 13777. 5 

September 2002. Benefits ID: 2003-00257

353 Perrin, Joseph, Rodrigo Disegni, and Bhargava Rama. Advanced Transportation Management System Elemental Cost Benefit Assessment, Prepared 

by the University of Utah for the Utah DOT and the U.S. DOT. March 2004. Costs ID: 2004-00086

354 Performance Evaluation of CHART—Coordinated Highways Action Response Team—Year 2002, University of Maryland, College Park and Maryland State Highway Administration. College Park, MD. November 2003. Benefits ID: 2007-00425
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | traffic incident management 103

Service patrols Cover

Almost half (48 percent)

of freeway miles in major

metropolitan areas.

Traffic Incident

Management

Management and Operations

Managing traffic incidents is a proven strategy for addressing significant portions of the 

Nation’s traffic congestion problems. Approximately 25 percent of all delay is the result of 

incidents on roadways.346 Traffic crashes are the most time-consuming of these incidents, 

but the more numerous cases of stalled vehicles, roadway debris, and other incidents also 

contribute significantly to the problem.

Traffic incident management programs are widely deployed in metropolitan areas and 

are being extended into rural areas through a growing number of statewide programs. 

These programs make use of a variety of ITS technologies to successfully detect, manage, 

and clear traffic incidents; improving safety for travelers by reducing the risk of secondary 

crashes; and reducing time lost and fuel wasted in traffic backups. 

To successfully manage traffic incidents, these programs utilize ITS deployed specifically 

to detect and manage traffic incidents, as well as components deployed for traveler information, freeway management, and arterial roadway management.

A variety of surveillance and detection technologies can help detect incidents quickly 

including inductive loop, microwave or acoustic vehicle detectors, and camera systems 

providing video surveillance of roadways. Information from wireless enhanced 9-1-1 

systems, Mayday and automated collision notification (ACN) systems, as well as roadside 

call boxes can also help incident management personnel identify incidents quickly. Mobilization and response may include automated vehicle location (AVL) and computer-aided 

dispatch (CAD) systems, as well as response routing systems to help incident response 

teams arrive swiftly. Service patrols, which preceded the emergence of ITS technologies, 

are now frequently incorporated into traffic incident management programs. The patrol 

vehicles and staff, supported by an array of other ITS components, enable significant 

reductions in the time to respond to and clear incidents. 

Several components of incident management systems help travelers safely negotiate travel 

around incidents on the roadway and facilitate the rapid and safe clearance of incidents and 

reopening of travel lanes. In some locations, incident management personnel can directly 

post incident-related information to roadside traveler information devices such as dynamic 

message signs (DMS) or highway advisory radio (HAR). On-site or transportation management center-based personnel can also relay messages to traveler information, freeway 

management, or arterial management systems, providing incident information to travelers 

via additional means including 511 systems and traveler information Web sites. Several 

technologies are available to speed the investigation of incident scenes and record necessary information for later analysis. Temporary traffic control devices help ensure the safety 

of incident responders and provide for the safe travel of vehicles around incident sites.

Traffic incident management programs are typically implemented concurrently with freeway management systems, but it is important to keep in mind that arterials can be included 

in incident management programs as well. Coverage of arterials by incident management 

programs is increasing: data collected in 2006 indicates that 6 percent of arterial streets 

have video monitoring for detection, and 11 percent have service patrols.347

Many of the techniques used to address unplanned traffic incidents are also used to 

manage operations during planned special events, which the freeway management chapter 

discusses in great detail. In addition, the emergency management chapter discusses ITS 

applied to larger scale emergencies such as hazardous materials incidents and evacuations 

for man-made or natural disasters.

Traffic Incident Management 

Categories in the ITS Knowledge 

Resources

Surveillance and Detection

Detectors

Imaging/Video

Wireless Enhanced 9-1-1

Mayday/Automated Collision

Notification

Call Boxes

Traveler Reported

Mobilization and Response

Automatic Vehicle Location/

Computer-Aided Dispatch

Response Routing

Service Patrols

Information Dissemination

Dynamic Message Signs 

Highway Advisory Radio 

Clearance and Recovery

Investigation

Imaging/Video

Temporary Traffic Control
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

104 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

In addition to the ITS technologies profiled in this chapter, the Next Generation 9-1-1 

(NG9-1-1) initiative, a major ITS initiative currently being conducted by the U.S. DOT, has the 

potential to improve emergency communication which would, in turn, improve notification 

of traffic incidents. The NG9-1-1 initiative will establish the foundation for public emergency 

services in a wireless environment and enable an enhanced 9-1-1 system compatible with 

any communications device. The goal of the NG9-1-1 initiative is to enable the transmission of voice, data, or video from different types of communication devices to public safety 

answering points and onto emergency responder networks.348 Additional information on 

this initiative is available at the ITS JPO’s Web site: www.its.dot.gov/ng911.

Findings

Benefits

Traffic incident management programs have demonstrated success under each of the goals 

of ITS, as summarized in table 9. The most significant finding is likely the ability of the 

programs to dramatically reduce the duration of traffic incidents, from 15 to 65 percent, 

with the bulk of studies finding savings of 30 to 40 percent (as shown in figure 12).349 These 

reductions in incident duration impact the safety of travelers through reduced likelihood 

of secondary incidents, affect the mobility and economic productivity of travelers through 

reduced incident related delay and associated costs, and impact the environment through 

reduced fuel consumption by idling vehicles. Service patrols are perhaps the most prominent and widely evaluated component of traffic incident management programs. Reports 

assessing customer satisfaction with the programs are unanimously positive. 

Costs

As can be seen in figure 13, State DOTs can spend between $5.6 million and $13.6 million 

per year on service patrols. Regional service patrols are often in the range from $1.5 

million to $2.5 million per year. However, for large, densely populated areas such as Los 

Angeles, California, the cost can be upwards of $20.5 million per year, or as low as $0.4 

million in the Salt Lake City, Utah area. The cost of service patrols vary considerably 

depending on population, number of freeway miles covered, and the types and hours of 

services provided.350

Table 9—Traffic Incident Management Benefits Summary Safety Mobility Efficiency Productivity Energy and

EnvironmentCustomerSatisfaction

Traffic Incident Management ● ● ● ● ● ●

● Substantial positive impacts ✚ Positive impacts

❍ Negligible impacts ✱ Mixed results

✖ Negative impacts blank Not enough data

Other ITS Knowledge Resource 

Categories Related to Traffic

INCIDENT Management

Refer to other chapters in this document.

Freeway Management

Special Event Transportation

Management

Emergency Management

Response and Recovery: Emergency

Vehicle Signal Preemption

Emergency Medical Services
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | traffic incident management 105

80

60

40

20

0

Figure 12 – Impact of Incident Management Programs on Incident Duration Average Reduction in Incident Duration (%)

Fairfax, VA

Oregon (Hwy 18)

Oregon (1-5)

Maryland

Atlanta, GA

Salt Lake City, UT

Albuquerque, NM

San Antonio, TX

Benefit-Cost Studies

Service patrols have also been the subject of numerous benefit-to-cost analyses over the 

course of their deployment, with 26 studies of the programs completed in 23 U.S. cities 

between 1994 and 2005. These studies document benefit-to-cost ratios ranging from 2:1 

to 36:1.351

20

15

10

5

0

Figure 13 – Annual Cost Ranges of State DOT and Regional Service Patrols Dollars (Millions)

State DOT Service Patrols Regional Service Patrols

$13.6

$5.6

$20.5

$2.4 $1.5 $2.5

$0.6

Florida DOT

Denver, CO

Tennessee DOT

Broward County, FL

Los Angeles, CA SE Michigan

Salt Lake City, UT

Historical data show that service 

patrols had benefit-to-cost ratios 

ranging from 2:1 to 36:1.
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

106 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Service Patrols Popular With 

Travelers

Proactive incident management via service 

patrols represent a service heartily welcomed 

by travelers, as witnessed by these comments 

received by operating agencies:

•	 “This is the best service the State provides. I was back on the road within 30 

minutes...He was very nice, friendly and 

was concerned for safety...” along I-55 in 

Memphis, Tennessee

•	 “The service was wonderful...great experience all around. Other States need to 

provide this also.” Washington 

•	 “Very glad to see him. He got us off the 

side and in a safe location and was very 

reassuring. It would be excellent if every 

State had this service...” along I-75 in 

Chattanooga, Tennessee

•	 “...like a guardian angel. He replaced the 

tire, checked the air, and even removed a 

dead bird from our front grill. Within fifteen minutes of the ‘disaster’ we were on 

our way home ....” Virginia

Deployment

The use of ITS technologies to improve traffic incident management is common in major 

metropolitan areas. Figure 14 shows trends for the deployment of key traffic incident 

management technologies based on changes in coverage of surveillance technologies on 

freeways and arterial streets from 1997 to 2006. These data are from a survey of 78 major 

metropolitan areas conducted over this period. As figure 14 shows, surveillance of arterial 

streets lags behind that of freeways. 

Public safety agencies are beginning to take advantage of ACN systems to detect incidents. 

As of 2006, public safety agencies in 11 of the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas 

have access to ACN and public safety agencies in eight of these 108 metropolitan areas 

have access to advanced ACN that includes information on the severity of a vehicle crash. 

Public safety agencies in 11 of these 108 metropolitan areas have access to commercial 

ACN systems such as OnStar®.

Sharing data on the type, severity, and location of traffic incidents is a common practice of 

traffic incident management agencies. Sixty-eight (68) traffic incident management agencies in the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas share traffic incident data with public 

safety agencies, which tend to reciprocate the sharing of these data. Forty (40) traffic 

incident management agencies in these 108 metropolitan areas share traffic incident data 

with arterial management agencies. 

In 2006, the survey of metropolitan areas was expanded to the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas. This survey is the source of deployment statistics presented later in this 

chapter unless otherwise noted.

Figure 14 – Deployment Trends for ITS Technology on Freeways and Arterials 

Supporting Incident Management

Freeway

Service patrols

Surveillance cameras

Free cell phone call to 

a dedicated number

Incident detection 

algorithm

Call boxes

Arterial

Service patrols

Surveillance cameras

50

40

30

20

10

0

‘97 ’99 ‘00 ’02 ‘04 ’05 ‘06

Year

Freeway Miles Covered (%)
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | traffic incident management 107

Selected Highlights from the ITS Knowledge

Resources on Traffic Incident Management

Surveillance and Detection

A variety of surveillance and detection technologies can help detect incidents quickly 

including inductive loop or acoustic vehicle detectors, and camera systems providing 

frequent still images or full-motion video. Information from wireless 9-1-1 systems, Mayday, 

ACN systems, and roadside call boxes help incident management system personnel 

identify incidents quickly.

Surveillance and Detection

Deployment

A variety of technologies are used to detect incidents. Traffic surveillance cameras 

monitor 34 percent of freeway miles in the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas. 

Free cellular telephone calls to a dedicated number are available for 24 percent of 

the freeway miles, automatic incident detection systems monitor 17 percent, and call 

boxes monitor 12 percent.

Surveillance and Detection

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Customer

Satisfaction

Transportation management center staff in Pittsburgh indicated 

that a real-time traffic information system used to monitor traffic density and congestion was useful and helped improve coverage for incident management.352

Surveillance and Detection

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Detection subsystem: 

•	 Inductive Loops on Corridor: $3K-$8K

•	 Remote Traffic Microwave Sensor on Corridor: $9K-$13K per sensor 

•	 Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Video Camera: $9K-$19K

Transportation Management Center subsystem: 

•	 Software for Incident Detection: $83K-$101K

•	 Labor for Incident Detection: $751K-$917K for multiple staff (annually)

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem: 

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)

studies of traffic incident

management programs have found 

incident duration reductions of

15 to 65 percent.
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

108 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

lessons learned 

Develop an incident management program strategy and plan.

Incident management yields significant benefits through reduced vehicle delays and 

enhanced safety to motorists through the 

reduction of incident frequency, and improved 

response and clearance times. Across the 

nation, many existing incident management 

programs have delivered significant and measurable benefits. Many communities have 

found that it is necessary to prepare a strategic plan to develop a strong incident management program.

•	 Consider the needs of the program’s customers—the traveling public. 

To achieve high levels of information dissemination, efforts should be coordinated with the 

media and employers in the area.

•	 Adopt a structured strategic planning 

process for incident management at the 

regional and statewide levels.

(Continued on next page.)

Surveillance and Detection

Costs

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Utah: The Utah CommuterLink advanced transportation management system 

includes over 230 cameras to observe incidents and congested areas. Camera coverage is primarily on freeways and grade-separated facilities; however, there are some 

deployments at key intersections on surface streets. The capital cost of the cameras, 

$8.4 million, includes the cameras and installation. Operational cost of the cameras 

is $75,600 per year.

353

Mobilization and Response

Mobilization and response may include AVL and CAD systems, as well as response routing 

systems, to help incident response teams arrive swiftly.

Mobilization and Response

Deployment

Sixty-three (63) of the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas use AVL/CAD on fire, 

rescue and/or emergency medical services (EMS) vehicles and 95 of the country’s 108 

largest metropolitan areas use AVL/CAD on law enforcement vehicles, to assist in 

locating and assigning appropriate response to traffic incidents. 

Service patrols cover nearly half (48 percent) of freeway miles and 11 percent of arterial miles in the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas.

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety The Coordinated Highway Action Response Team in Maryland 

reduced incident duration and related secondary incidents by 

29 percent in 2002, eliminating 377 crashes within its coverage 

area.354

Mobility Summary Finding: Traffic incident management programs have 

reported reductions in incident duration from 15 to 65 percent.355

Productivity Summary Finding: Delay savings identified in studies of freeway 

service patrols implemented in Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota; 

Denver, Colorado; Northwest Indiana; and Oregon documented 

annual benefits of $1.2 million to $3.2 million, through reductions 

in incident-related congestion.356

Energy and 

Environment

Reductions in incident-related delay also lead to fuel savings and 

related emissions reductions. A benefit-to-cost analysis of Florida’s 

Road Ranger service patrol documented a savings of 1.7 million gallons of fuel across the state in 2004.357
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | traffic incident management 109

Mobilization and Response

Benefits

Customer 

Satisfaction

Summary Finding: Service patrols are well-received by the public. Operating agencies often receive thank you letters from grateful 

motorists assisted by service patrols. (See sidebar on page 106.)358

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Transportation Management Center subsystem: 

•	 Labor for Incident Response: $107K-$131K (annually)

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Tennessee: The Tennessee DOT HELP program began in July 1999 for the purposes 

of reducing traffic congestion, improving safety, and assisting motorists in distress. 

HELP is a component of the DOT’s statewide ITS program called SmartWay. Annual 

operating costs include salaries, vehicle operation and maintenance, fuel, supplies, 

and other related operating costs. The total annual operating cost for FY 2006 was 

$6.5 million. Total annual operating cost for FY 2005 was $5.6 million.

359, 360

Florida: Road Ranger is the name of the highway service patrol program in Broward 

County, Florida. The Road Ranger program includes contracted services and leased 

vehicles. The program utilizes 11 vehicles covering approximately 58 centerline miles 

on portions of I-95 and I-75, and all of I-595. Road Rangers provide 24-hour service. 

The 2006 annual operating cost for Florida DOT District IV Road Ranger Program was 

$2.5 million.

361

Florida: The Severe Incident Response Vehicle (SIRV) program provides a 24-hour incident command station and support to Florida DOT and Road Rangers during major 

incidents such a tractor-trailer rollovers, hazardous material incidents, and fatalities. 

The SIRV services are contracted out. Originally launched as a pilot program, the SIRV 

program was awarded in October 2006 with funding through 2012. The 2006 annual 

operating cost for the SIRV program was $500,000.

362

Virginia: One of the findings in a 2003 Virginia DOT Concept Study was that there 

would be significant benefit to integrating the Virginia State Police (VSP) Division 1 

CAD system and the Richmond Smart Traffic Center (STC). Data from the VSP CAD 

system would contain near real-time status of events dispatched to the police. The 

development of the STC integration was completed during 2003-2004; project costs 

were $249,200.

363

lessons learned 

(Continued from previous page.)

With a structured strategic planning process, multiple agencies can participate in 

the program knowing that their needs are 

understood by their partners. The process 

should include a detailed analysis of resource 

needs, with each partner agency’s contribution to the resource pool clearly defined. 

The phased implementation plan should be 

a multi-agency effort.

•	 Develop a combined strategy and implementation plan for coordinated arterial 

signal control during incidents.

Route diversion has proven to be an effective 

tool, especially during major incidents. Professionals that control the arterial traffic signals and those that run the freeway management systems usually operate out of different 

divisions and sometimes different agencies. 

A combined strategy and implementation 

plan will bring these groups together to coordinate effective diversion routes.366
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

110 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Mobilization and Response

Benefit-Cost Studies

Georgia: The Highway Emergency Response Operators motorist assistance patrol 

program and NaviGAtor incident management activities in the Atlanta area saved 

more than 187 million dollars yielding a benefit-to-cost ratio over 4:1.364

Indiana: The Hoosier Helper freeway service patrol program in Northwest Indiana 

had a projected benefit-to-cost ratio of nearly 5:1 for daytime operations, and over 13:1 

for 24-hour operations.365

Information Dissemination

Information dissemination systems help travelers navigate safely around incidents. Incident 

management personnel can provide incident-related information directly to travelers.

Information Dissemination

Deployment

Many traffic incident management agencies use roadside systems to notify travelers 

of traffic incidents on both freeways and arterial streets. Seventy-nine (79) percent of 

traffic incident management agencies in the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas 

disseminate traffic incident information on freeways using DMS and 46 percent use 

HAR to do so. Sixteen (16) percent of traffic incident management agencies in the 

country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas disseminate traffic incident information on 

arterial streets using DMS and 6 percent use HAR.

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Information subsystem: 

•	 Dynamic Message Sign: $48K-$119K

•	 Portable Dynamic Message Sign: $18.6K-$24K

•	 Highway Advisory Radio: $15K-$35K

Transportation Management Center subsystem: 

•	 Software for Traffic Information Dissemination: $17K-$21K

•	 Labor for Traffic Information Dissemination: $107K-$131K (annually)

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem::

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | traffic incident management 111

Information Dissemination

Costs

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Florida: In 2006, Florida DOT District IV deployed 31 DMS. The cost of deployment was 

$11 million and included the signs, associated structures, foundations, controllers, 

cabinets, and installation, plus approximately 37 miles of in-ground fiber optic communications. The operating cost covered electricity and was estimated at $22,320 per 

year. Maintenance costs of approximately $620,000 included spare parts, and labor 

for trouble-shooting problems and preventative maintenance. DMS maintenance was 

contracted out. Florida DOT notes that employing an ITS maintenance contractor “...

helps to avoid/minimize system downtime, reduces total cost of operation, improves 

effectiveness, and extends the life of ITS assets.” Forty-one (41) additional DMS were 

planned for 2007.367

lessons learned 

Provide joint training among incident

re-sponse agencies to improve response 

times and on-site management.

Training and knowledge of incident responders provides the necessary details to deploy the 

appropriate personnel and equipment. Training 

the responding agency personnel on a regular 

basis helps improve coordination, communication, and trust among agencies and other 

responders (e.g. safety service patrols, towing 

and recovery service providers, fire, rescue, and 

EMS). Fostering these relationships improves 

response times and on-site management of an 

incident, resulting in improved clearance times. 

•	 As an example, at the TransGuide Center in 

San Antonio, regional partners participate in 

three variations of training activities: mock 

incidents, tabletop exercises, and classroom 

workshops. Each activity is structured in 

such a manner as to encourage participation 

by each responder.

Joint training among agencies may improve 

relationships and the understanding of each 

agency’s role in the effective clearance of an 

incident.370
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

112 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Clearance and Recovery 

Several technologies are available to speed the investigation of incident scenes and record 

necessary information for later analysis. Temporary traffic control devices help ensure 

the safety of incident responders and provide for the safe travel of vehicles around the 

incident site.

Clearance and Recovery

Deployment

Fifty-four (54) percent of law enforcement agencies in the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas use automated measuring equipment to investigate major traffic incidents. More than two-thirds (69 percent) of freeway management agencies and onethird of arterial management agencies in these 108 metropolitan areas use temporary 

traffic control devices, such as portable DMS and lane control technologies, to help 

ensure the safety of traffic incident scenes.

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Transportation Management Center subsystem: 

•	 Automated Incident Investigation System: $14.1K

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Arizona: Computer-aided incident investigation equipment was purchased as part 

of the Phoenix, Arizona model deployment to reduce incident clearance time and 

improve the quality of crash investigations. The initial cost of the project, $147,000, 

included hardware, software, and training. Operating and maintenance costs were 

$4,305 per year (not including labor).368

Minnesota: Minnesota DOT and the Minnesota State Patrol have implemented a 

pilot automated field reporting system that enables law enforcement officials to use 

an in-vehicle computer to record and submit incident information. Costs are $8,000 

to $10,000 per vehicle.

369

lessons learned 

Cultivate relationships with fire, rescue, and 

emergeny medical service agencies when 

developing a coordinated multi-agency 

traffic incident management program.

The transportation communities’ objectives 

of improved incident response and clearance include: safe and timely removal of all 

vehicles, wreckage, and debris, and restoring 

the roadway back to its full capacity, while 

maintaining the safety of the responders and 

motorists. Fire, rescue, and emergency medical service agencies have different priorities 

when responding to traffic incidents. Their 

first concern is the safety of the victims and 

motorists. Getting traffic flowing again is a 

secondary issue. Including fire, rescue, and 

EMS in the planning and development of an 

incident management program and maintaining consistent communication will help 

secure their cooperation during an incident. 

Traffic management agencies may even want 

to consider providing the fire, rescue, and 

EMS agencies with an enticement, such as 

providing a CCTV feed for video surveillance. 

Goodwill gestures help cultivate multi-agency 

ties. Effective communication through relationship building is key to a successful incident management program.371
endnotes 329

345 Sources supporting this range include:

2005 Annual Report SMART SunGuide Transportation Management Center (TMC), Florida DOT, District IV. January 2006. Correspondence with 

Mr. Steve Corbin, FDOT District IV, ITS Operations Manager. 28 March 2006. Costs ID: 2006-00097

2006 Annual Report SMART SunGuide Transportation Management Center (TMC), Florida DOT, District IV. January 2007. Correspondence with 

Mr. Steve Corbin, FDOT District IV, ITS Operations Manager. February 2007 Costs ID: 2007-00120

346 National Strategy to Reduce Congestion on America’s Transportation Network, Prepared by the U.S. DOT. May 2006.

347 “ITS Deployment Statistics Knowledge Resource,” U.S. DOT, Web site URL www.itsdeployment.its.dot.gov. Last Accessed 12 December 

2007.

348 “Next Generation 9-1-1 Overview,” U.S. DOT Web site URL www.its.dot.gov/ng911/ng911_overview.htm. Last Accessed 31 December 

2007.

349 Sources that support these findings:

“1996 ITS Tour Report: Eastern North America,” Institute of Transportation Engineers 1996 ITS World Congress, Vol. 1, Pages 4–5. 1997. 

Benefits ID: 2000-00123

Bertini, R., et al. Evaluation of Region 2 Incident Response Program Using Archived Data, Portland State University Report No. PSU-CE-TRG-01-01. 

Portland, OR. June 2001. Benefits ID: 2007-00483

Performance Evaluation of CHART—Coordinated Highways Action Response Team—Year 2002, University of Maryland, College Park and Maryland State Highway Administration. College Park, MD. November 2003. Benefits ID: 2007-00425

Petrov, A., et al. “Evaluation of the Benefits of a Real-Time Incident Response System,” Paper Presented at the 9th World Congress on 

Intelligent Transport Systems. Chicago, IL. 14–17 October 2002. Benefits ID: 2007-00485

“1996 ITS Tour Report: Eastern North America,” Institute of Transportation Engineers 1996 ITS World Congress, Vol. 1, Pages 4–5. 1997. 

Benefits ID: 2000-00123

350 Sources that support these findings:

“CDOT Launches Courtesy Patrol on I-70 West,” Colorado DOT. Denver, CO. 4 March 2005. Costs ID: 2006-00101

“Freeway Service Patrol: ‘About FSP’’ and ‘Facts at a Glance’ Web Site,” Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority. 22 June 

2006. Web site URL www.metro.net/news_info/facts.htm. Last Accessed 12 December 2007. Costs ID: 2006-00102

Hagen, Larry, Huaguo Zhou, and Harkanwal Singh. Road Ranger Benefit-Cost Analysis, Prepared by the University of South Florida for the 

Florida DOT. November 2005. Correspondence with the report authors (Larry Hagen and Huaguo Zhou). 2006. Costs ID: 2006-00103

HELP Annual Operating Report, July 1, 2004–June 30, 2005, Tennessee DOT. Nashville, TN. October 2005. Costs ID: 2006-00096

MDOT Freeway Courtesy Patrol in Southeast Michigan: 2004 Evaluation Report, Southeast Michigan Council of Governments. Detroit, MI. May 

2005. Costs ID: 2006-00104

351 Sources that support these findings:

Cuciti, P. and B. Janson. “Incident Management via Courtesy Patrol: Evaluation of a Pilot Project in Colorado,” Paper Presented at the 

74th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. January 1995. Benefits ID: 2000-00068

Fenno, D. and M. Ogden. “Freeway Service Patrols: A State of the Practice,” Paper Presented at the 77th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. January 1998. Benefits ID: 2000-00130

Highway Helper Summary Report—Twin Cities Metro Area, Minnesota DOT. St. Paul, MN. July 1994. Benefits ID: 2000-00009

Latoski, S., et al. “Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation of Hoosier Helper Freeway Service Patrol,” Journal of Transportation Engineering, Vol. 125, 

No. 5. September/October 1999. Benefits ID: 2000-00002

352 Evaluation of Intelligent Transportation Infrastructure Program (ITIP) in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S. DOT, EDL No. 13777. 5 

September 2002. Benefits ID: 2003-00257

353 Perrin, Joseph, Rodrigo Disegni, and Bhargava Rama. Advanced Transportation Management System Elemental Cost Benefit Assessment, Prepared 

by the University of Utah for the Utah DOT and the U.S. DOT. March 2004. Costs ID: 2004-00086

354 Performance Evaluation of CHART—Coordinated Highways Action Response Team—Year 2002, University of Maryland, College Park and Maryland State Highway Administration. College Park, MD. November 2003. Benefits ID: 2007-00425
330 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

355 Sources that support these findings:

Bertini, R., et al. Evaluation of Region 2 Incident Response Program Using Archived Data, Portland State University, Report No. PSU-CE-TRG-01-01. 

Portland, OR. June 2001. Benefits ID: 2007-00483

Performance Evaluation of CHART—Coordinated Highways Action Response Team—Year 2002, University of Maryland, College Park and Maryland State Highway Administration. College Park, MD. November 2003. Benefits ID: 2007-00425

Petrov, A., et al. “Evaluation of the Benefits of a Real-Time Incident Response System,” Paper Presented at the 9th World Congress on 

Intelligent Transport Systems. Chicago, IL. 14–17 October 2002. Benefits ID: 2007-00485

1996 ITS Tour Report: Eastern North America, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1996 ITS World Congress, Vol. 1. Pages 4–5. 1997. 

Benefits ID: 2000-00123

356 Sources that support these findings:

Bertini, Robert L. et al. Evaluation of Region 2 Incident Response Program Using Archived Data, Prepared by the Portland State University for the 

Oregon DOT, Report No. PSU-CE-TRG-01-01. 30 June 2001. Benefits ID: 2006-00298

Cuciti, P. and B. Janson. “Incident Management via Courtesy Patrol: Evaluation of a Pilot Program in Colorado,” Paper Presented at the 

74th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. January 1995. Benefits ID: 2000-00068

Highway Helper Summary Report—Twin Cities Metro Area, Minnesota DOT Report No. TMC 07450-0394. St. Paul, MN. July 1994. Benefits ID: 

2000-00009

Latoski, S., et al. “Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation of Hoosier Helper Freeway Service Patrol,” Journal of Transportation Engineering, Vol. 125, 

No. 5. September/October 1999. Benefits ID: 2000-00002

357 Hagen, Larry, Huaguo Zhou, and Harkanwal Singh. Road Ranger Benefit Cost Analysis, Prepared by the Center for Urban Transportation 

Research, University of South Florida for the Florida DOT. Report No. BD544-14. November 2005. Benefits ID: 2007-00314.

358 Sources that support these findings:

HELP Annual Operating Report: July 1, 2004—June 30, 2005, Published by the Office of Highway Incident Management, Tennessee DOT. 

October 2005. Benefits ID: 2007-00309

Todd, P. N. 1997 “What the customer had to say,” Virginia DOT Safety Service Patrol Report. 1997. Benefits ID: 2000-00029

359 HELP Annual Operating Report: July 1, 2005—June 30, 2006, Published by the Office of Highway Incident Management, Tennessee DOT. 

September 2006. Costs ID: 2007-00119

360 HELP Annual Operating Report: July 1, 2004—June 30, 2005, Published by the Office of Highway Incident Management, Tennessee DOT. 

October 2005. Costs ID: 2006-00096

361 2006 Annual Report SMART SunGuide Transportation Management Center (TMC), Florida DOT, District IV. January 2007. Correspondence with 

Mr. Steve Corbin, FDOT District IV, ITS Operations Manager. February 2007 Costs ID: 2007-00120

362 2006 Annual Report SMART SunGuide Transportation Management Center (TMC), Florida DOT, District IV. January 2007. Correspondence with 

Mr. Steve Corbin, FDOT District IV, ITS Operations Manager. February 2007 Costs ID: 2007-00120

363 Robison, David, Matt Sargent, and Steve Beckwith. Challenges Faced and Tactics Used to Integrate Real-Time State Police CAD Data with the VDOT 

Richmond District Smart Traffic Center: Lessons Learned Document, Virginia DOT. January 2005. Correspondence with Mr. Robb Alexander on 

6 April 2006. Costs ID: 2006-00095

364 Guin, Angshuman, et al. Benefits Analysis for the Georgia Department of Transportation NaviGAtor Program: Final Report, Prepared by URS Corporation for the Georgia DOT. August 2006. Benefits ID: 2007-00466

365 Latoski, S., et al. “Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation of Hoosier Helper Freeway Service Patrol,” Journal of Transportation Engineering, Vol. 125, 

No. 5. September/October 1999. Benefits ID: 2000-00002

366 Incident Management Successful Practices: A Cross-Cutting Study, U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administration and Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-99-018/FTA-TRI-11-99-09, EDL No. 11484. April 2000. Lesson ID: 2006-00263

367 2006 Annual Report SMART SunGuide Transportation Management Center (TMC), Florida DOT, District IV. January 2007. Correspondence with 

Mr. Steve Corbin, FDOT District IV, ITS Operations Manager. February 2007 Costs ID: 2007-00120

368 Phoenix Metropolitan Model Deployment Initiative Evaluation Report (Final Draft). U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWAOP-00-015, EDL No. 12743. April 2000. Costs ID: 2003-00027
endnotes 331

369 Rural ITS Toolbox, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-OP-01-030, EDL No. 13477. November 2001. Costs ID: 

2003-00029

370 Incident Management Successful Practices: A Cross-Cutting Study, U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administration and Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-99-018/FTA-TRI-11-99-09, EDL No. 11484. April 2000. Lesson ID: 2006-00264

371 Incident Management Successful Practices: A Cross-Cutting Study, U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administration and Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-99-018/FTA-TRI-11-99-09, EDL No. 11484. April 2000. Lesson ID: 2006-00265

372 National ITS Architecture Documents: Security, U.S. DOT, EDL No. 14063. October 2003. 

373 “Emergency Transportation Operations Overview,” U.S. DOT, ITS Joint Program Office, Web site URL www.its.dot.gov/eto/eto_overview.

htm. Last Accessed 31 December 2007.

374 Hazardous Materials Safety and Security Technology Field Operational Test Volume II: Evaluation Final Report Synthesis, U.S. DOT Federal Motor 

Carrier Safety Administration, EDL No. 14095. 11 November 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00491

375 Common Issues in Emergency Transportation Operations Preparedness and Response: Results of the FHWA Workshop Series, U.S. DOT Federal Highway 

Administration, Report No. FHWA-HOP-07-090. February 2007.

376 “GIS-based Disaster Management Systems: a Cogent Data Framework,” Paper Presented at the 85th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 22–26 January 2006.

377 Managing Demand Through Travel Information Services, Prepared for the U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWAHOP-05-005, EDL No. 14072. 2005. Benefits ID: 2007-00409

378 Hazardous Material Transportation Safety and Security Field Operational Test: Final Report—Deployment Team, U.S. DOT Federal Motor Carrier 

Safety Administration. 31 August 2004. Costs ID: 2006-00100

379 Sources that support these findings:

Benefits and Costs of Full Operations and ITS Deployment: A 2003 Simulation for Cincinnati, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report 

No. FHWA-JPO-04-031, EDL No. 13979. May 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00164

Benefits and Costs of Full Operations and ITS Deployment: A 2003 Simulation for Seattle, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-JPO-04-033, EDL No. 13977. May 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00165

Benefits and Costs of Full Operations and ITS Deployment: A 2025 Forecast for Tucson, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-JPO-04-032, EDL No. 13978. May 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00166

380 Hazardous Materials Safety and Security Technology Field Operational Test Volume II: Evaluation Final Report Synthesis, U.S. DOT Federal Motor 

Carrier Safety Administration, EDL No. 14095. 11 November 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00491

381 Hazardous Materials Safety and Security Technology Field Operational Test Volume II: Evaluation Final Report Synthesis, U.S. DOT Federal Motor 

Carrier Safety Administration, EDL No. 14095. 11 November 2004. Benefits ID: 2006-00291

382 Hazardous Material Transportation Safety and Security Field Operational Test (FOT) Final Report—Deployment Team, U.S. DOT Federal Motor Carrier 

Safety Administration. 31 August 2004. Costs ID: 2006-00100

383 Hazardous Materials Safety and Security Technology Field Operational Test Volume II: Evaluation Final Report Synthesis, U.S. DOT Federal Motor 

Carrier Safety Administration, EDL No. 14095. 11 November 2004. Benefits ID: 2006-00291

384 Automated Collision Notification (ACN) Field Operational Test (FOT) Evaluation Report, U.S. DOT National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 

Report No. DOT-HS-809-304, EDL No. 13830. February 2001. Costs ID: 2008-00167

385 Metropolitan Model Deployment Initiative: San Antonio Evaluation Report (Final Draft). U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-OP-00-017, EDL No. 12883. May 2000. Benefits ID: 2007-00375

386 A Study of the Impact of Nine Transportation Management Projects on Hurricane Evacuation Preparedness, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, EDL No. 13940. November 2003. Costs ID: 2005-00091

387 “Transportation and Emergency Services: Identifying Critical Interfaces, Obstacles, and Opportunities,” Paper Presented at the 85th 

Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 22–26 January 2006. Benefits ID: 2008-00546

388 ITS Implementation Plan, Prepared by the IBI Group for the Flint Mass Transportation Authority. Flint, MI. June 2005. Costs ID: 

2008-00151
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | emergency management 113

Eighty (80) percent of 

emergency management

vehicles in major metropolitan areas operate under 

computer-aided dispatch. Emergency Management

Management and Operations

In the United States, there are over 400 tropical storms, hurricanes, tornadoes, and hazardous materials (HAZMAT) incidents that require evacuation each year. In order to minimize 

loss of life and improve safety, prompt action is required from multiple agencies before, 

during, and after each event. Responders must reach the scene, victims must be evacuated, 

and clearance and recovery resources must arrive on time. Each day, smaller scale emergencies occur in communities and emergency responders must travel quickly and safely 

to fires, traffic crashes, or crime scenes. ITS applications for emergency management aim 

to improve public safety by giving agencies the tools and equipment they need to plan for 

and implement response actions quickly and efficiently.

Safe and secure transport of HAZMAT includes vehicle tracking, roadside detection, driver 

authentication, and route planning. Vehicle-mounted hardware provides the capability to 

track HAZMAT shipments and support the notification of management centers when a 

shipment deviates from its intended route. Roadside detectors can monitor for the presence of hazardous shipments in sensitive areas and, if electronic tag information is available on the detected vehicle, confirm that the shipment is on the expected route. Driver 

authentication technology can confirm that the individual operating a HAZMAT vehicle 

is authorized to do so and report operation by unexpected drivers to public safety entities. ITS can also provide assistance to commercial vehicle operators via electronic route 

planning services, ensuring compliance with HAZMAT shipment restrictions along planned 

travel routes.372

Advanced automated collision notification (ACN) and telemedicine address the detection 

of and response to incidents such as vehicle collisions or other incidents requiring emergency responders. In rural areas, response time for emergency medical services is greater 

than in metropolitan areas, resulting in more severe consequences for those in need of 

medical assistance. Advanced ACN systems can notify emergency personnel and provide 

them with valuable information on the crash including location, crash characteristics, 

and possibly relevant medical information regarding the vehicle occupants. Telemedicine 

systems provide a link between responding ambulances and emergency medical facilities, 

enabling doctors to advise emergency medical personnel regarding treatment of patients 

en route to the hospital. ACN systems are also discussed in the collision notification 

chapter of this report.

The freeway management chapter discusses how lane management techniques such as 

reversible flow lanes are often used for evacuation during emergencies. The collision notification chapter discusses systems that notify emergency responders when crashes occur.

A variety of sensors deployed on the transportation infrastructure can help provide an early 

warning system to detect large-scale emergencies including natural disasters (hurricanes, 

earthquakes, floods, blizzards, tsunamis, etc.) and technological and man-made disasters (hazardous materials incidents; nuclear power plant accidents; and acts of terrorism 

including nuclear, chemical, biological, and radiological weapons attacks). In the event of 

a large-scale emergency, ITS applications can assist with response management through 

services such as the tracking of emergency vehicle fleets using automated vehicle location 

(AVL) technology and two-way communications between emergency vehicles and dispatchers. When responding to emergencies of any scale, emergency vehicle signal preemption 

implemented through coordination with arterial management agencies, can speed the 

safe arrival of emergency responders on scene. Evacuation operations often require a 

coordinated emergency response involving multiple agencies, various emergency centers, 

Emergency Management Categories 

in the ITS Knowledge Resources

Hazardous Materials Management

Tracking

Detection

Driver Authentication

Route Planning

Emergency Medical Services

Advanced Automated Collision

Notification

Telemedicine

Response and Recovery

Early Warning System

Response Management

Emergency Vehicle Signal

Preemption

Evacuation and Re-Entry

Management

Emergency Traveler Information
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

114 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Other ITS Knowledge Resource 

Categories Related to EMERGENCY 

Management

Refer to other chapters in this document.

Freeway Management

Lane Management: Emergency

Evacuation

Collision Notification Systems

Mayday/Automated Collision 

Notification 

Advanced Automated Collision 

Notification

and numerous response plans. Integration with traffic and transit management systems 

enables emergency information to be shared between public and private agencies and the 

traveling public. This communication and cooperation also enables the use of the variety 

of ITS information dissemination capabilities to provide emergency traveler information. 

Improvements in the command and control of emergency management can lead to 

increased cooperation among agencies. An interoperable communications network and 

the use of common terminology between agencies can lead to more reliable and effective 

emergency operations. Studies of ITS deployed to enhance emergency response have 

shown the potential of these technologies to assist organizations in improving emergency 

response actions.

The Emergency Transportation Operations initiative, undertaken by the U.S. DOT’s ITS 

Joint Program Office (JPO), supports the development of new of tools, techniques, technical guidance, and standards necessary for state and local agencies and their private 

sector partners to improve emergency management. Effective real-time management of 

transportation during major incidents results in more timely responses to highway and 

HAZMAT incidents, and shorter incident durations. This initiative aims to improve the 

management of all forms of transportation emergencies through the application of ITS 

technologies. Advances in in-vehicle communication and information systems will provide 

access to essential real-time data about an incident and about transportation conditions 

on all routes throughout the affected region.373 Additional information on this initiative is 

available at the ITS JPO’s Web site: www.its.dot.gov/eto.

Findings

Benefits

ITS applications for emergency management can improve the efficiency of transportation 

capacity during emergencies, increase productivity for HAZMAT shipping operations, and 

improve overall traveler safety and security (see table 10). Evaluation data collected from 

a number of studies suggest that customer satisfaction with emergency management is 

largely positive. Stakeholders perceive positive impacts and indicate that these technologies are widely accepted. 

The HAZMAT Safety and Security Technology Field Operational Test (FOT) tested a 

variety of technologies designed to improve the security of HAZMAT shipments. In this 

study, it was estimated that the technologies would reduce the risk and vulnerability of 

HAZMAT shipments and therefore reduce the potential consequences of a terrorist attack 

on HAZMAT shipments by 36 percent. Through improved operations for carriers, the technologies were found to have a payback period of 3 to 34 months across the range of technologies and shipment types studied.374

Successful operations for emergency management require agencies to communicate and 

coordinate effectively with little or no notice at times when resources may be limited. To 

help optimize the effectiveness of available resources, agencies can use ITS technologies 

to prioritize, allocate, track, and coordinate the deployment of personnel, supplies, and 

equipment.375 Different agencies, however, can have different core missions and are sometimes unaware of the capabilities and priorities of other agencies. Transportation agencies, 

for example, may focus on reducing the time to restore normal traffic conditions, while 

an emergency services agency may focus on improving safety for responders.376 Although 

contraflow freeway operations

in south carolina enabled 

76 percent increase in traffic 

volumes.
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | emergency management 115

goals and objectives may differ significantly between agencies, most officials agree that 

ITS technology can be used to promote interagency coordination and improve emergency 

management. This coordination can beget significant improvements in evacuation and 

re-entry management, such as the 76 percent increase in traffic volumes accomplished 

with freeway contraflow operations in South Carolina as residents returned following a 

hurricane evacuation.377

Table 10—Emergency Management Benefits Summary Safety Mobility Efficiency Productivity Energy and

EnvironmentCustomerSatisfaction

Hazardous Materials

Management ● ●

Emergency Medical Services ✱

Response and Recovery ●

● Substantial positive impacts ✚ Positive impacts

❍ Negligible impacts ✱ Mixed results

✖ Negative impacts blank Not enough data

Costs

The HAZMAT Transportation Safety and Security FOT was conducted to assess commercially-available, off-the-shelf technology that could be deployed in the near term to enhance 

the safety and security of HAZMAT transportation operations. Part of the assessment 

included collecting cost data for the different technologies. The study found that the technologies that enhance the safety and security of HAZMAT transportation operations range 

in cost from $250 to $3,500 per vehicle. These estimates represent only the hardware 

installed on the trucks in commercial quantities. The costs provided did not reflect the 

price of servers and dispatch systems amortized over the number of vehicles since this 

can vary widely depending on customer setup. While none of the technologies tested 

was described as prototypes, several had limited prior field usage outside of government 

applications.378

The Federal Highway Administration initiated a study to explore the benefits and costs of 

fully deploying operational strategies and integrating ITS in metropolitan areas. Seattle, 

Cincinnati, and Tucson were selected as large, medium, and small metropolitan areas, 

respectively. Strategies included for Seattle and Cincinnati were identified through the 

next 25 years and brought forward to the current year (2003); while those for Tucson were 

forecasted for 2025. One of the strategies identified was emergency management systems. 

For each of the three metropolitan areas the amount of deployment and coverage were 

identified. Deployment data included the number of emergency vehicles and ambulances 

equipped with control service, AVL, and telemedicine. Percentages of emergency vehicles 

technologies that enhance the 

safety and security of hazmat 

transportation operations range in 

cost from $250 to $3,500 per vehicle.
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

116 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

and ambulances defined the amount of coverage. The annualized life cycle costs of emergency management systems were estimated at $1.8 million for Seattle, $1.8 million for 

Cincinnati, and $2.1 million for Tucson.379 See sample costs of ITS deployments in the tables 

below for more specific examples of other emergency management systems.

Deployment

Figure 15 shows deployment trends for three key ITS technologies used in emergency 

management from 2000 to 2006, based on a multi-year survey of the country’s 78 largest 

metropolitan areas. As of 2006, 80 percent of emergency management vehicles operate 

under computer-aided dispatch (CAD), an increase from 67 percent in 2000. As of 2006, 

20 percent of emergency management vehicles are equipped with in-vehicle navigation, 

up from almost no deployment in 2000. Also as of 2006, 6 percent of emergency management vehicles were equipped with the on-board equipment needed for emergency vehicle 

preemption. Additionally, 21 percent of traffic signals in the country’s 108 metropolitan 

areas were equipped with the roadside components of emergency vehicle preemption.

In 2006, the survey of metropolitan areas was expanded to the country’s 108 largest 

metropolitan areas. This survey is the source of deployment statistics presented later 

in this chapter.

Figure 15 – Deployment Trends for Emergency Management Systems

Vehicle Navigation

Computer

Aided Dispatch

Traffic Signal

Preemption

80

60

40

20

0

‘00 ’02 ‘04 ’05 ‘06

Year

Coverage (%)
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | emergency management 117

Selected Highlights from the ITS Knowledge

Resources on Emergency Management

Hazardous Material Management

ITS applications associated with HAZMAT shipments can accomplish four major functions 

intended to provide safe and secure transport of hazardous materials by road:

	Vehicle-mounted hardware provides the capability to track HAZMAT shipments and 

support notification of management centers when a shipment deviates from its intended route. 

	Roadside detectors can monitor for the presence of hazardous shipments in sensitive 

areas and, if electronic tag information is available on the detected vehicle, confirm 

that the shipment is on the expected route. 

	Driver authentication technology can confirm that the individual operating a HAZMAT 

vehicle is authorized to do so and report operation by unexpected drivers to public 

safety entities. 

	ITS can also provide assistance to commercial vehicle operations via electronic route 

planning services, ensuring compliance with HAZMAT shipment restrictions along 

planned travel routes.

Hazardous Material Management

Deployment

ITS technology to assist emergency management agencies in managing hazardous 

materials shipments is not widely used. For example, only four of the country’s 108 

largest metropolitan areas use roadside detectors to monitor for the presence of hazardous shipments in sensitive areas. Only five of these 108 metropolitan areas use 

vehicle-mounted hardware to track HAZMAT shipments and detect when a shipment 

deviates from its intended route. In contrast, 24 of these 108 metropolitan areas use 

driver authentication technology to confirm that the individual operating a HAZMAT 

vehicle is authorized to do so.

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety The HAZMAT Safety and Security Technology FOT tested a variety of technologies intended to improve the security and operational efficiency of HAZMAT shipments. A qualitative assessment 

found that the technologies tested, combined with best practices 

in motor carrier driver and safety management, and incident 

response, had the potential to improve the safety of HAZMAT shipments by truck.

The study also found that cosmbinations of the technologies tested 

had the ability to improve security by addressing shipment vulnerabilities. The tested technologies were estimated to reduce by 36 

percent the potential costs of terrorist attacks.380
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

118 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Hazardous Material Management

Benefits

Productivity The HAZMAT Safety and Security Technology FOT found that many 

of the technologies tested yielded productivity benefits to motor 

carriers in the form of more efficient operations, with the combined 

technologies of wireless communications with global positioning 

system (GPS) capabilities providing the greatest benefits. The time 

period of payback of investment costs was 3 to 34 months across 

the range of technologies and shipment types evaluated. 381

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Fleet Management Center subsystem: 

•	 Software Upgrade for HAZMAT Management: $19K-$39K

•	 Hardware Upgrade for HAZMAT Management: $3K

•	 Electronic Cargo Seal Reader: $0.3K-$1.4K

Commercial Vehicle On-Board subsystem: 

•	 Electronic Cargo Seal—Reusable: $0.034K-$0.42K

•	 Autonomous Tracking Unit: $0.35K-$0.8K 

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

United States: The HAZMAT Transportation Safety and Security FOT was conducted 

to assess commercially-available, off-the-shelf technology that could be deployed in 

the near term to enhance the safety and security of HAZMAT transportation operations. Part of the assessment included collecting cost data of the different technologies. Fleet-wide management software and licensing to support mapping and tracking 

of HAZMAT shipments ranges from $10,000 to $33,000. Biometric systems evaluated 

consisted of predominately fingerprint and, to a lesser degree, facial recognition technologies to provide secure access for authorized personnel. Most systems evaluated 

were compatible with smart cards and other technologies. The average cost of a complete biometrics system is $1,000.382

Benefit-Cost Studies

United States: Assuming full deployment across the motor carrier industry, the combined benefit-to-cost ratios, across all load types and technology combinations in the 

HAZMAT Safety and Security Technology FOT, range from 1.3:1 to 96.9:1. These ratios 

include benefits to motor carriers as well as societal benefits, with the proportion 

varying with, among other things, the potential consequences of a terrorist attack 

involving the goods shipped. Bulk fuel carriers are expected to experience 60 to 72 

percent of the benefits, less-than-truckload carriers 81 to 92 percent, bulk chemical 

carriers 5 to 13 percent, and carriers of truckload explosives 1 to 3 percent.383
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | emergency management 119

Emergency Medical Services

Advanced ACN and telemedicine address the detection of and response to incidents such 

as vehicle collisions or other incidents requiring emergency responders. In rural areas, 

response time for emergency medical services is greater than in metropolitan areas, resulting in more severe consequences for those in need of medical assistance.

Emergency Medical Services

Deployment

Public safety agencies in 20 of the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas have 

access to ACN and public safety agencies in 10 of these 108 metropolitan areas have 

access to advanced ACN that includes information on the severity of a vehicle crash. 

Public safety agencies in 17 of these 108 metropolitan areas have access to commercial ACN systems such as OnStar®. More widespread is telemedicine, i.e., providing 

an audio and/or video link between responding ambulances and nearby emergency 

medical facilities. Telemedicine is in use in 46 of the country’s largest 108 metropolitan areas.

Emergency Medical Services: Advanced Automated Collision

Notification

Advanced ACN systems use vehicle-mounted sensors and wireless communication to 

notify emergency personnel and provide them with valuable information on the crash 

including location, crash characteristics, and possibly relevant medical information regarding the vehicle occupants.

Emergency Medical Services—Advanced Automated Collision Notification

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Emergency Response Center subsystem: 

•	 Emergency Management Communications Software: $5K-$10K

•	 Hardware, Software Upgrade for Enhanced 9-1-1 and Mayday: $102K-$175K

•	 Emergency Response Labor: $73K-$240K (annually)
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

120 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Emergency Medical Services—Advanced Automated Collision Notification

Costs

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

New York: The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s Office of Vehicle 

Safety Research conducted an ACN FOT to demonstrate the feasibility of fielding an 

ACN system and to measure the benefits of an ACN system to victims of motor vehicle 

crashes. The ACN test area covered rural and suburban areas of Erie County, New 

York. The dispatch center equipment capital costs were approximately $23,300. These 

costs covered personal computers, uninterruptible power supplies, fax modems, Ethernet cards, phone equipment, and the purchase of software for the dispatch equipment at both the Erie County Sheriff’s Office and the Erie County Medical Center. 

The costs of developing the dispatch center equipment were $152,400. These costs 

included dispatch system design, design and development of dispatch communications software, design and development of dispatcher user interface, system integration efforts, and conducting dispatcher system component tests. The costs of installing the dispatch center equipment at the sheriff’s office and medical center were 

approximately $5,600. These costs included expenses to install computer equipment 

and telephone lines. The dispatch center training costs were approximately $5,000. 

These costs included expenses for initial training and continuing tests at the sheriff’s 

office and medical center. The repair and maintenance costs for the dispatch center 

equipment were approximately $15,000. These costs included expenses for routine 

maintenance checks, updating software, and resolving voice quality problems. These 

costs do not include routine operating costs such as monthly phone costs.384

Emergency Medical Services: Telemedicine 

Telemedicine systems provide a link between responding ambulances and nearby emergency medical facilities, enabling doctors to advise emergency medical personnel regarding 

treatment of patients en route to the hospital.

Emergency Medical Services—Telemedicine

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Customer

Satisfaction

The LifeLink project in San Antonio, Texas enabled emergency 

room doctors to communicate with emergency medical technicians 

using two-way video, audio, and data communications. Technicians 

and doctors had mixed opinions about the system; however, it was 

expected that this technology would have more positive impacts in 

rural areas.385
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | emergency management 121

Response and Recovery

In the event of a large-scale emergency, ITS applications can assist with response management through services such as the tracking of emergency vehicle fleets using AVL technology and two-way communications between emergency vehicles and dispatchers. Evacuation operations often require a coordinated emergency response involving multiple 

agencies, various emergency centers, and numerous response plans. Integration with traffic 

and transit management systems enables emergency information to be shared between 

public and private agencies and the traveling public. This communication and cooperation 

also enables the use of the variety of ITS information dissemination capabilities to provide 

emergency traveler information.

Response and Recovery

Deployment

The use of ITS technologies to improve emergency response and recovery is quite 

common of emergency management agencies and almost universal among law 

enforcement agencies. Emergency management agencies in 63 of the country’s 108 

largest metropolitan areas and law enforcement agencies in 94 of these metropolitan areas use AVL/CAD to assist in locating and assigning appropriate responders 

to incidents. Many emergency management agencies use ITS to support evacuation 

and re-entry management. Emergency management agencies in 37 of the country’s 

108 largest metropolitan areas and 81 law enforcement agencies in these metropolitan areas use integrated ITS and communications technology to coordinate evacuation management with different agencies.

Response and Recovery: Early Warning System

The variety of sensors deployed on the transportation infrastructure can help provide 

an early warning system to detect large-scale emergencies including natural disasters 

(hurricanes, earthquakes, floods, blizzards, tsunamis, etc.) and technological and manmade disasters (HAZMAT incidents; nuclear power plant accidents; and acts of terrorism 

including nuclear, chemical, biological, and radiological weapons attacks). Early warning 

systems monitor alerting and advisory systems, ITS sensors and surveillance systems, 

field reports, and emergency call-taking systems to identify emergencies and notify all 

responding agencies of detected emergencies.
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

122 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Response and Recovery—Early Warning System

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Detection subsystem: 

•	 Inductive Loops on Corridor: $3K-$8K

•	 Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Video Camera: $9K-$19K

Transportation Management Center subsystem: 

•	 Hardware, Software for Traffic Surveillance: $131K-$160K

Emergency Response Center subsystem: 

•	 Emergency Response Hardware: $8K-$10K

•	 Emergency Response Software: $68K-$146K

•	 Emergency Management Communications Software: $5K-$10K

•	 Emergency Response Labor: $73K-$240K (annually)

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem: 

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)

Early Warning Costs

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Louisiana: In order to better manage hurricane-related evacuations, the Louisiana 

Department of Transportation and Development worked with the United States Geological Survey (USGS) to deploy information stations. The information stations—part 

of the USGS Hydrowatch program for monitoring hydrological data in flood-prone 

states—are fitted with vehicle detectors. These information stations gather and transmit real-time data on traffic and water level conditions along evacuation routes. Data 

are transmitted via satellite communications. An information station costs approximately $26,000 and operating and maintenance costs are approximately $14,000 per 

year.

386
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | emergency management 123

Response and Recovery: Response Management 

Response management may include the tracking of emergency vehicle fleets using AVL 

technology and two-way communications between emergency vehicles and dispatchers. 

Integration with traffic and transit management systems enables emergency information 

to be shared between public and private agencies and the traveling public.

Response and Recovery—Response Management

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Customer 

Satisfaction

Survey responses collected from 166 key professionals at state and 

local agencies in five states (Kentucky, Georgia, Tennessee, North 

Carolina, and South Carolina) indicated the following ITS technologies have the highest potential to benefit emergency transportation 

operations: 387

•	 Interoperable radio communications

•	 Dynamic message signs

•	 GPS and geographical information systems 

•	 CCTV roadway surveillance 

•	 Enhanced 9-1-1

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Emergency Response Center subsystem: 

•	 Emergency Response Hardware: $8K-$10K

•	 Emergency Response Software: $68K-$146K

•	 Emergency Management Communications Software: $5K-$10K

•	 Emergency Response Labor: $73K-$240K (annually)

Emergency Vehicle On-Board subsystem: 

•	 Communications Interface: $0.3K-$2K

•	 Signal Preemption Emitter: $0.5K-$2.1K

Transportation Management Center subsystem: 

•	 Integration for Traffic Information Dissemination: $83K-$101K

•	 Labor for Regional Control: $214K-$262K (annually)

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Michigan: The Flint Mass Transportation Authority developed a plan to deploy ITS 

technologies throughout the agency. Establishing a back-up emergency management 

center for coordinated emergency response between agencies was identified as one of 

the longer term priorities. Costs were estimated at $500,000 for capital and $50,000 

per year for operations and maintenance.388
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

124 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Response and Recovery: Emergency Vehicle Signal

Preemption 

Signal preemption systems for emergency vehicles use sensors to detect an approaching 

emergency vehicle and provide a green signal to the vehicle.

Response and Recovery—Emergency Vehicle Signal Preemption

Deployment

Preemption for emergency vehicles has nearly doubled from 2000 to 2006, and is 

deployed at more than 20 percent of signalized intersections. Six percent of the emergency vehicle fleet is equipped to operate traffic signals supporting preemption. 

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety A study in Houston, Texas found signal preemption reduced average emergency vehicle response times by 16 percent in 1 fire district, and by 23 percent in another.389

Mobility A simulation study in the Virginia suburbs of Washington, D.C. 

found emergency vehicle preemption caused minimal increases in 

average travel times (2.4 percent) for all traffic.390

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Control subsystem: 

•	 Signal Controller Upgrade for Signal Control: $2.4K-$6K

•	 Roadside Signal Preemption/Priority: $5K-$6K

Emergency Vehicle On-Board subsystem: 

•	 Signal Preemption/Priority Emitter: $0.5K-$2.1K

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem: 

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Canada: Several intersections in British Columbia were equipped for emergency vehicle preemption. The siren of an emergency vehicle is detected and initiates a green 

signal for the oncoming vehicle. Pedestrian crossing signals are switched to DON’T 

WALK. When the system has been activated, a visual verification system (set of blueand-white lights) indicates that the intersection is controlled by an emergency vehicle 

preemption system. The system costs $4,000 per intersection, but can be less if 

multiple intersections are equipped.391

lessons learned 

Effectively communicate plans for implementing contraflow operations during hurricane evacuations.

Most state emergency management officials 

recognize that providing contraflow operations (i.e., opening all lanes of a roadway to 

travel in a single direction) is an effective way 

to evacuate an area before a hurricane. However, understanding how the reversed roadways should function is essential for achieving acceptable levels of performance. Sharing 

information and coordinating with adjacent 

states at the agency level is vital to the success of an evacuation using contraflow lanes, 

as is educating the public to understand what 

is expected of them.

	Coordinate plans across state lines. 

Talks between Mississippi and Louisiana officials resulted in an agreement in June 2003 

for contraflow operations on I-59 in Mississippi to occur if Louisiana implements a contraflow plan on I-59 in Louisiana.

	Conduct face-to-face strategy meetings.

(Continued on next page.)
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | emergency management 125

Response and Recovery: Evacuation and Re-Entry Management

Evacuation operations often require a coordinated emergency response involving multiple 

agencies, various emergency centers, and numerous response plans. Various communication technologies can support the management of evacuations, which may also include a 

variety of traffic and transit management activities.

Response and Recovery—Evacuation and Re-Entry Management

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Efficiency In South Carolina, dynamic message signs and highway advisory 

radio systems made it easier for hurricane evacuees to return home 

during the aftermath of Hurricane Floyd (1999). Traffic volume during the evacuation, when outbound traffic used only one side of 

the freeway, was 44 percent less than the traffic volume during the 

return trip when inbound traffic used both sides of the freeway.392

An assessment of the hurricane evacuation plan in Hampton 

Roads, Virginia found that lane reversal is warranted for any hurricane predicted to make landfall as a Category 4 or 5 storm, and 

is strongly recommended for any Category 3 storm. In addition, the 

study found that with lane reversal, increasing ramp metering rates 

reduces ramp queuing and allows more efficient use of available 

mainline capacity.393

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Emergency Response Center subsystem: 

•	 Emergency Response Hardware: $8K-$10K

•	 Emergency Response Software: $68K-$146K

•	 Emergency Management Communications Software: $5K-$10K

•	 Emergency Response Labor: $73K-$240K (annually)

Emergency Vehicle On-Board subsystem: 

•	 Communications Interface: $0.3K-$2K

•	 Signal Preemption Emitter: $0.5K-$2.1K

Transportation Management Center subsystem: 

•	 Integration for Traffic Information Dissemination: $83K-$101K

•	 Labor for Regional Control: $214K-$262K (annually)

lessons learned 

(Continued from previous page.)

In 2003, Mississippi sponsored a conference 

on emergency management practices called 

the EmTech.Com Symposium, and representatives from multiple State and Federal agencies attended. The consensus among participants was that meetings helping to coordinate across state and agency boundaries 

were very important.

•	 Educate the public about contraflow operations.

The Georgia DOT expanded its traveler information and its traveler assistance programs 

during evacuations and implemented a public 

education campaign creating maps, posters, 

and information sheets.394
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

126 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Response and Recovery: Emergency Traveler Information

Integration with traffic and transit management systems enables emergency information to 

be shared between public and private agencies and the traveling public. This communication and cooperation also enables the use of the variety of ITS information dissemination 

capabilities to provide emergency traveler information.

Response and Recovery—Emergency Traveler Information 

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Information subsystem: 

•	 Dynamic Message Sign: $48K-$119K

•	 Dynamic Message Sign—Portable: $18.6K-$24K

•	 Highway Advisory Radio: $15K-$35K

•	 Highway Advisory Radio—Sign: $5K-$9K

Emergency Response Center subsystem: 

•	 Emergency Response Hardware: $8K-$10K

•	 Emergency Response Software: $68K-$146K

•	 Emergency Management Communications Software: $5K-$10K

•	 Emergency Response Labor: $73K-$240K (annually)

Transportation Management Center subsystem: 

•	 Integration for Traffic Information Dissemination: $83K-$101K

•	 Labor for Regional Control: $214K-$262K (annually)

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission expanded its statewide

advanced traveler information system to better inform motorists of traffic, 

weather, and emergency conditions along the turnpike. The overall project cost 

was $8.2 million.

395

lessons learned 

Utilize traveler information services to 

alert the public of disaster events and 

reduce public panic.

Advanced traveler information systems 

(ATIS), such as 511, are essential decision 

support systems that enable travelers to 

make informed decisions to manage their 

trip details. ATIS and 511 enable emergency 

management and transportation data to be 

integrated, providing richer real-time content 

to emergency service managers. Providing 

traveler information services helps improve 

the safety and mobility of travelers.

Site-specific traveler information devices, 

such as dynamic message signs and highway 

advisory radio, are becoming more common. 

ATIS, 511 telephone, and the Internet offer 

“on demand” information critical for calming 

a panicked public. In addition, ATIS and 511 

coupled with automated feeds to the media 

allow broadcasters to provide approved vital 

information from emergency operations center managers to the public.

•	 Automate information integration using 

intelligent systems such as ATIS and 511.

Dissemination of public information is often 

time-consuming and, if not planned properly, drains resources from the immediate 

emergency management efforts. Pre-event 

planning helps agencies identify how to better manage the information collection and 

distribution processes. ATIS and 511 strive to 

provide accurate, real-time information not 

only to residents with access to broadcast 

media, but also to truckers, tourists, and others in the impacted area.396
endnotes 331

369 Rural ITS Toolbox, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-OP-01-030, EDL No. 13477. November 2001. Costs ID: 

2003-00029

370 Incident Management Successful Practices: A Cross-Cutting Study, U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administration and Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-99-018/FTA-TRI-11-99-09, EDL No. 11484. April 2000. Lesson ID: 2006-00264

371 Incident Management Successful Practices: A Cross-Cutting Study, U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administration and Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-99-018/FTA-TRI-11-99-09, EDL No. 11484. April 2000. Lesson ID: 2006-00265

372 National ITS Architecture Documents: Security, U.S. DOT, EDL No. 14063. October 2003. 

373 “Emergency Transportation Operations Overview,” U.S. DOT, ITS Joint Program Office, Web site URL www.its.dot.gov/eto/eto_overview.

htm. Last Accessed 31 December 2007.

374 Hazardous Materials Safety and Security Technology Field Operational Test Volume II: Evaluation Final Report Synthesis, U.S. DOT Federal Motor 

Carrier Safety Administration, EDL No. 14095. 11 November 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00491

375 Common Issues in Emergency Transportation Operations Preparedness and Response: Results of the FHWA Workshop Series, U.S. DOT Federal Highway 

Administration, Report No. FHWA-HOP-07-090. February 2007.

376 “GIS-based Disaster Management Systems: a Cogent Data Framework,” Paper Presented at the 85th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 22–26 January 2006.

377 Managing Demand Through Travel Information Services, Prepared for the U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWAHOP-05-005, EDL No. 14072. 2005. Benefits ID: 2007-00409

378 Hazardous Material Transportation Safety and Security Field Operational Test: Final Report—Deployment Team, U.S. DOT Federal Motor Carrier 

Safety Administration. 31 August 2004. Costs ID: 2006-00100

379 Sources that support these findings:

Benefits and Costs of Full Operations and ITS Deployment: A 2003 Simulation for Cincinnati, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report 

No. FHWA-JPO-04-031, EDL No. 13979. May 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00164

Benefits and Costs of Full Operations and ITS Deployment: A 2003 Simulation for Seattle, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-JPO-04-033, EDL No. 13977. May 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00165

Benefits and Costs of Full Operations and ITS Deployment: A 2025 Forecast for Tucson, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-JPO-04-032, EDL No. 13978. May 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00166

380 Hazardous Materials Safety and Security Technology Field Operational Test Volume II: Evaluation Final Report Synthesis, U.S. DOT Federal Motor 

Carrier Safety Administration, EDL No. 14095. 11 November 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00491

381 Hazardous Materials Safety and Security Technology Field Operational Test Volume II: Evaluation Final Report Synthesis, U.S. DOT Federal Motor 

Carrier Safety Administration, EDL No. 14095. 11 November 2004. Benefits ID: 2006-00291

382 Hazardous Material Transportation Safety and Security Field Operational Test (FOT) Final Report—Deployment Team, U.S. DOT Federal Motor Carrier 

Safety Administration. 31 August 2004. Costs ID: 2006-00100

383 Hazardous Materials Safety and Security Technology Field Operational Test Volume II: Evaluation Final Report Synthesis, U.S. DOT Federal Motor 

Carrier Safety Administration, EDL No. 14095. 11 November 2004. Benefits ID: 2006-00291

384 Automated Collision Notification (ACN) Field Operational Test (FOT) Evaluation Report, U.S. DOT National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 

Report No. DOT-HS-809-304, EDL No. 13830. February 2001. Costs ID: 2008-00167

385 Metropolitan Model Deployment Initiative: San Antonio Evaluation Report (Final Draft). U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-OP-00-017, EDL No. 12883. May 2000. Benefits ID: 2007-00375

386 A Study of the Impact of Nine Transportation Management Projects on Hurricane Evacuation Preparedness, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, EDL No. 13940. November 2003. Costs ID: 2005-00091

387 “Transportation and Emergency Services: Identifying Critical Interfaces, Obstacles, and Opportunities,” Paper Presented at the 85th 

Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 22–26 January 2006. Benefits ID: 2008-00546

388 ITS Implementation Plan, Prepared by the IBI Group for the Flint Mass Transportation Authority. Flint, MI. June 2005. Costs ID: 

2008-00151
332 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

389 Emergency Response Management System Study, Prepared by Traffic Engineers, Inc. for the Houston Metropolitan Transit Authority. Houston, TX. April 1991. Benefits ID: 2002-00227

390 Evaluation of Emergency Vehicle Signal Preemption on the Route 7 Virginia Corridor. U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWARD-99-070. July 1999. Benefits ID: 2000-00125

391 Rural ITS Toolbox, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-OP-01-030, EDL No. 13477. November 2001. Costs ID: 

2003-00018

392 Managing Demand Through Travel Information Services, Prepared for the U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWAHOP-05-005, EDL No. 14072. 2005. Benefits ID: 2007-00409

393 “An Operational Analysis of the Hampton Roads Hurricane Evacuation Traffic Control Plan,” Paper Presented at the 86th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 21–25 January 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00547

394 A Study of the Impact of Nine Transportation Management Projects on Hurricane Evacuation Preparedness, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, 

EDL No. 13940. November 2003. Lesson ID: 2005-00138

395 Cortelazzi, Lou, et al. Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission’s Advanced Traveler Information System (ATIS) Phase III Project, Pennsylvania Turnpike 

Commission, EDL No. 14308. April 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00168

396 David Lively, M.A. David and Osama Elhamshary. Lessons Learned From Advanced Traveler Information Systems: Applications for Emergency 

Management and Long Term Disaster Recovery, California DOT. April 2004. Lesson ID: 2006-00316

397 Advanced Public Transportation Systems: State of the Art Update 2006, U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administration, Report No. FTA-NJ-26-7062-06.1. 

30 March 2006.

398 Congestion Pricing—A Primer Report, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-HOP-07-074. December 2006.

399 “National Strategy to Reduce Congestion,” U.S. DOT Web site URL www.fightgridlocknow.gov. Last Accessed 29 February 2008.

400 Burris, Mark and Ashley Yelds. “Using ETC to Provide Variable Tolling: Some Real-World Results,” Paper Presented at the 10th ITS 

America Annual Meeting, Boston, MA. 1–4 May 2000. Benefits ID: 2000-00168

401 Pennsylvania Turnpike Value Pricing Study, Prepared by Wilbur Smith Associates for the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission, Executive 

Summary, Pages ES-5 and ES-6. March 2004. Benefits ID: 2008-00548

402 Sources that support these findings:

2005 Regional Value Pricing Corridor Evaluation and Feasibility Study: Dallas/Fort Worth—Value Pricing History and Experience, North Central Texas 

Council of Governments. Arlington, TX. June 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00549

Douma, Frank, Johanna Zmud, and Tyler Patterson. “Pricing Comes to Minnesota: Baseline Attitudinal Evaluation of the I-394 HOT 

Lane Project,” Paper Presented at the 85th Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting. Washington, DC. 22–26 January 2006. 

Benefits ID: 2008-00550

403 2005 Regional Value Pricing Corridor Evaluation and Feasibility Study: Dallas/Fort Worth—Value Pricing History and Experience, North Central Texas 

Council of Governments. Arlington, TX. June 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00549

404 Sources that support these findings:

Benefits and Costs of Full Operations and ITS Deployment: A 2003 Simulation for Cincinnati, Prepared for the U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWAJPO-04-031, EDL No. 13979. May 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00164

Benefits and Costs of Full Operations and ITS Deployment: A 2003 Simulation for Seattle, Prepared for the U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-JPO-04-033, 

EDL No. 13977. May 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00165

Benefits and Costs of Full Operations and ITS Deployment: A 2025 Forecast for Tucson, Prepared for the U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-JPO-04-032, 

EDL No. 13978. May 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00166

405 Central London Congestion Charging: Impacts Monitoring—Fifth Annual Report, Transport for London. July 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00551

406 Klodzinski, Jack, Eric Gordin, and Haitham M. Al-Deek. “Evaluation of Impacts from Deployment of an Open Road Tolling Concept 

for a Mainline Toll Plaza,” Paper Presented at the 86th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 21–25 

January 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00552

407 Ayman, Mohamed, et al. “Safety Considerations in Designing Electronic Toll Plazas: Case Study,” ITE Journal, Page 20. March 2001. 

Benefits ID: 2001-00179
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | electronic payment and pricing 127

electronic payment and pricing 

categories in the its knowledge 

resources

Toll Collection

Transit Fare Payment

Parking Fee Payment

Multi-use Payment

Pricing

Nearly all (95 percent)

of toll plazas in major 

metropolitan areas are 

equipped with electronic

toll collection. Electronic Payment

and Pricing

Management and Operations

Electronic payment systems employ various communication and electronic technologies 

to facilitate commerce between travelers and transportation agencies. 

Electronic toll collection (ETC) systems support the collection and processing of toll plaza 

transactions without requiring the driver to stop and pay manually, increasing operational 

efficiency and convenience for tollway travelers. ETC systems operate as either integrated 

multi-state systems such as the E-ZPass system, or single-state or single toll authority 

systems such as the Oklahoma Turnpike system. ETC can reduce fuel consumption and 

emissions at toll booths by minimizing delays, queuing, and idling time.

Transit fare payment systems can provide increased convenience to customers and generate significant cost savings to transportation agencies by increasing the efficiency of cashhandling processes and improving administrative controls. Public transportation users 

can select from a variety of fare products such as magnetic stripe cards (read-only or 

read-write), smart cards with varying levels of memory and computing power, or use credit 

cards to pay for transportation services.397 Fare transaction machines can read and write to 

multiple types of media and fare products, and regional processing centers can consolidate 

financial information and streamline fare transaction management for multiple transit 

agencies. Billing systems supporting transit fare payment can be used in the coordination 

of human service transportation, linking the reservation system to a payment system that 

tracks billing to different mobility programs depending on client eligibility. 

Electronic parking fee payment systems can provide similar benefits to parking facility operators, simplifying payment for customers and reducing congestion at parking facilities.

Multi-use payment systems can make transit payment more convenient. Payment for bus, 

rail, and other public- or private-sector goods and services can be made simply by passing 

a smart-card-sized device over an automated transaction processor located at terminal 

gates, on-board bus fareboxes, or check-out counters of participating merchants. Fare 

transaction processors access information on smart cards and communicate account 

activity to a regional database. Centralized systems can track the location and activity of 

smart cards and limit unauthorized use of individual accounts. In addition, merchants who 

provide convenient access to smart card processors can be identified and receive special 

incentives for promoting use of transit services.

Congestion pricing, also known as road pricing or value pricing, refers to charging motorists a fee that varies with the level of congestion. Value pricing reflects the idea that road 

pricing directly benefits motorists through reduced congestion and improved roadways. 

To eliminate additional congestion, most pricing schemes are set up electronically to offer 

a more reliable trip time without creating additional delay. Pricing is different from tolling 

in that pricing strategies are used to manage congestion or demand for highway travel, 

while tolling is used to generate revenue to repay a bond or debt.

There are four main types of congestion pricing strategies:398

	Variable priced lanes including express toll lanes and high-occupancy toll

(HOT) lanes.

	Variable tolls on entire roadways or roadway segments, i.e., changing flat toll rates.

on existing toll roads to variable rates based on congestion levels.

	Cordon charge, i.e., charging a fee to enter or drive in a congested area.

	Area-wide charge including distance-based charging or mileage fees.

The arterial management and freeway management chapters discuss pricing on these 

particular types of facilities, as a lane management technique.
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

128 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

other its knowledge resource 

categories related to electronic 

payment and pricing

Arterial Management

Lane Management: Pricing

Freeway Management

Lane Management: Pricing

The electronic payment and pricing applications profiled in this chapter, particularly variable tolling and congestion pricing, are a key element of the U.S. DOT’s Congestion Initiative, as outlined in the May 2006 document National Strategy to Reduce Congestion on America’s 

Transportation Network. A major component of the Congestion Initiative is the Urban Partnership Agreement program, through which the U.S. DOT plans to partner with selected 

metropolitan areas to demonstrate strategies with proven effectiveness in reducing traffic 

congestion.399

Under the Urban Partnership Agreement, the U.S. DOT and its partners have agreed to 

demonstrate some combination of the following four strategies with a combined track record 

of effectiveness in reducing traffic congestion, collectively referred to as the “Four Ts:”

	Tolling—Implementing broad congestion pricing or variable tolling demonstrations. 

	Transit—Creating or expanding express bus services or bus rapid transit (BRT), which 

will benefit from the free-flow traffic conditions generated by congestion pricing or 

variable tolling. 

	Telecommuting—Securing agreements from major area employers to establish or expand telecommuting and flexible scheduling programs. 

	Technology and operations—Utilizing cutting edge technological and operational approaches to improve system performance.

For more information, visit the Congestion Initiative Web site: www.fightgridlocknow.gov.

Findings

Benefits

ETC and variable pricing strategies help transportation agencies address traffic congestion.

ETC is one of the most successful ITS applications with numerous benefits related to delay 

reductions, improved throughput, and fuel economy. With advanced technologies such 

as open road tolling (ORT), toll transactions can be processed automatically at freeway 

speeds reducing the need for tollbooth barriers and improving performance. Concepts of 

ORT can be incorporated into new toll plaza designs or constructed at existing plazas that 

currently have speed-controlled, dedicated ETC lanes.

On freeways, variable pricing strategies are effective at influencing traveler behavior. In rural 

areas with little congestion, research shows that approximately 20 percent of motorists will 

modify their travel schedules to take advantage of off-peak toll discounts.400 In urban areas, 

however, where heavy congestion and extended peak periods are typical; demand management strategies may require large toll differentials.401 Although initial public support for 

such tolls may be low, research indicates that road users value time savings and are willing 

to pay a price to avoid congestion and delay.402 In California, for example, public support 

for variable tolling on State Route 91 was initially low, but after 18 months of operations, 

nearly 75 percent of the commuting public expressed approval of virtually all aspects of 

the Express Lanes program.403

Other pricing strategies such as cordon charging are also effective. In London, congestion charging remains politically sensitive, but evaluations have shown that the 

pricing program has been effective at reducing congestion and generating revenue for 

transit improvements. 
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | electronic payment and pricing 129

Table 11 illustrates that electronic payment and pricing strategies have had significant 

impact under many of the ITS goal areas. Electronic toll collection is a proven technology that greatly reduced toll plaza delays, with corresponding improvements in capacity, 

agency cost savings, and fuel consumption reductions. Transit fare payments can provide 

similar mobility improvements for transit travelers by simplifying the boarding experience, 

improving customer satisfaction, and making it easier to take advantage of transit services. 

Parking and multi-use payment cards have been well received by travelers in several implementations. Congestion pricing strategies, as discussed above, have shown improvements 

in mobility, productivity, fuel consumption, and customer satisfaction.

Table 11—Electronic Payment and Pricing Benefits Summary Safety Mobility Efficiency Productivity Energy and Environment

CustomerSatisfaction

Toll Collection ✱ ● ● ● ●

Transit Fare Payment ● ● ●

Parking Fee Payment ✚ ●

Multi-Use Payment ●

Pricing ● ● ● ✚

● Substantial positive impacts ✚ Positive impacts

❍ Negligible impacts ✱ Mixed results

✖ Negative impacts blank Not enough data

Costs

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) initiated a study to explore the benefits and 

costs of fully deploying operational strategies and integrating ITS in metropolitan areas. 

Seattle, Cincinnati, and Tucson were selected as large, medium, and small metropolitan 

areas, respectively. Strategies included for Seattle and Cincinnati were based on 2003 traffic conditions while those for Tucson were based on forecast traffic conditions for 2025. 

The analysis considered a 25 year period. The annual costs to implement, operate, and 

maintain each system were adjusted to 2003 dollars. One of the strategies identified was 

electronic transit fare payment. For each of the three metropolitan areas, deployment 

(the number of transit vehicles) and proportional coverage (the percentage of fixed-route 

transit vehicles) were identified. The annualized life cycle costs for electronic transit fare 

payment systems were estimated at $5.9 million for Seattle, $2.4 million for Cincinnati, and 

$1.1 million for Tucson.404 See sample costs of ITS deployments in the tables below for more 

specific examples of other electronic payment and pricing systems.
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

130 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Benefit-Cost Studies

A benefit-cost analysis of the central London congestion charging scheme suggests that 

the identified benefits exceeded the costs of operations by a ratio of around 1.5:1 with an 

£5 charge, and by a ratio of 1.7:1 with an £8 charge405.

Deployment

Figure 16 shows deployment trends for two forms of electronic payment—toll collection 

and transit fare payment—based on a multi-year survey of the country’s 78 largest metropolitan areas from 2000 to 2006. ETC is nearly universal, with more than 90 percent of toll 

plazas and more than 80 percent of toll lanes in the 78 metropolitan areas equipped with 

ETC. Many transit agencies as well are offering customers the option of electronic payment. 

Customers can pay with magnetic card readers on more than 60 percent of transit buses 

in these 78 metropolitan areas and pay with “smart cards” on nearly one-third of transit 

buses in these 78 metropolitan areas.

In 2006, the survey of metropolitan areas was expanded to the country’s 108 largest 

metropolitan areas. This survey is the source of deployment statistics presented later in 

this chapter.

Figure 16 – Deployment Trends for Electronic Toll Collection

and Fare Payment, 2000-2006

Plazas with ETC

Lanes with ETC

Buses with magnetic 

card readers

Buses with smart

card readers

100

80

60

40

20

0

‘00 ’02 ‘04 ’05 ‘06

Year

Coverage (%)

a study of the congestion charging 

scheme in central london found

benefits exceeding costs by a ratio

of 1.5:1 for a £5 charge and 1.7:1 for an

£8 charge.
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | electronic payment and pricing 131

Selected Highlights from the ITS Knowledge

Resources on Electronic Payment and Pricing

Toll Collection 

ETC supports the collection of payment at toll plazas using automated systems to increase 

the operational efficiency and convenience of toll collection. Systems typically consist of 

vehicle-mounted transponders identified by readers located in dedicated and/or mixeduse lanes at toll plazas.

Toll Collection

Deployment

ETC is nearly universal in major metropolitan areas. Ninety-five (95) percent of toll 

plazas in the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas are equipped with ETC.

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety In Florida, the addition of ORT to an existing ETC mainline toll 

plaza decreased crashes by an estimated 22 to 26 percent.406

An earlier experience in Florida found that driver uncertainty 

about toll plaza configuration and traffic speeds contributed to 

a 48 percent increase in crashes at plazas with traditional ETC 

lanes.407

Mobility In Florida, the addition of ORT to an existing ETC mainline toll 

plaza decreased delay by 50 percent for manual cash customers 

and by 55 percent for automatic coin machine customers, and 

increased speed by 57 percent in the express lanes.408

Efficiency On the Tappan Zee Bridge toll plaza in New York City, a manual 

toll lane can accommodate 400 to 450 vehicles per hour, while 

an electronic lane peaks at 1,000 vehicles per hour.409

Productivity On the Oklahoma Turnpike, the cost to operate an ETC lane is 

approximately 91 percent less than the cost to staff a traditional 

toll lane.410

Energy and

Environment

An evaluation of ETC at three major toll plazas outside Baltimore, Maryland indicated these systems can reduce environmentally harmful emissions by 16 to 63 percent.411
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

132 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

lessons learned 

Consider open road tolling to increase 

mobility at toll facilities.

Open road tolling is the collection of tolls by 

purely electronic means using gantry-based 

electronic tolling and enforcement systems. 

ORT provides the technological approach to 

enabling the use of pricing for traffic management without requiring vehicles to stop and 

pay a toll. In most existing charging schemes, 

vehicles are identified via a transponder. 

Vehicles without a transponder are identified 

by a video image of the license plate, which 

is then checked against a record of electronic 

toll collection account holders or vehicles 

registered by drivers who have paid a toll 

over the telephone or Internet. License plates 

that cannot be reconciled to an account and 

have not registered can be charged a premium fee using the auto registration to send 

an invoice, or are identified as violators and 

processed accordingly.

(Continued on next page.)

Toll Collection

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Toll Plaza subsystem: 

•	 Electronic Toll Reader: $2K-$5K

•	 High-Speed Camera: $7K-$10K

Toll Administration subsystem: 

•	 Toll Administration Hardware: $5.9K-$8.8K

•	 Toll Administration Software: $38K-$76K 

Roadside Telecommunication subsystem: 

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Florida: To provide expanded mobility, the Miami-Dade Expressway Authority will 

convert toll operations to ORT during 2007 through 2011. The authority owns and 

operates a network of five expressway segments, which cover 31 centerline miles, in 

metropolitan Miami. The ORT program capital cost is estimated at $56.5 million: 

$20.8 million for project development, public outreach, and system-wide technology 

development (e.g., back office processing), and $35.7 million for infrastructure and 

roadside technology along the five expressway segments. The fiber optic backbone 

needed to connect the roadside equipment to the host location will be provided by 

others; hence, the associated cost is not included in the above estimate.412

California: Four managed lanes are being planned along 26 miles of the I-5 North 

Coast in San Diego County. The project includes seven ETC sites, seven direct access 

ramps from local streets, and designated slip ramps providing access between the 

managed lanes and the general purpose lanes. The preliminary cost estimate for ETC 

(roadside equipment, structures, communication interface, and system tracking) on 

the managed lanes is $1.7 million which includes a 30-percent contingency.413
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | electronic payment and pricing 133

Transit Fare Payment

Electronic transit fare payment systems, often enabled by smart card or magnetic stripe 

technologies, can provide increased convenience to customers and generate significant 

cost savings to transportation agencies by increasing the efficiency of money handling 

processes and improving administrative controls.

Transit Fare Payment

Deployment

Nearly two-thirds (64 percent) of fixed-route transit buses in the country’s 108 largest 

metropolitan areas are equipped with magnetic stripe readers and 31 percent of fixedroute transit buses in these 108 metropolitan areas are equipped with “smart cards.”

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Mobility Summary Finding: Proof-of-payment systems that use ticket vending/validating machines can reduce boarding times by up to 38 

percent.415

Efficiency In the Puget Sound region of Washington, a fare payment integration system that used joint passes to allow base fares to be transferred between agencies increased the percentage of riders that 

made transfers from 41 percent in 2001 to 60 percent in 2004.416

Customer 

Satisfaction

A Chicago Transit Authority survey of smart card users found that 

features related to convenience, rail use, and speed were most liked 

by program participants; 21 percent rated convenience over the 

magnetic stripe card as their single favorite feature of the system. 

The most desired features were the multi-use functions and ability 

to recharge the smart card via the Internet and credit card.417

lessons learned 

(Continued from previous page.)

•	 In Toronto on Highway 407, non-registered 

autos can use the electronically tolled 

highway, but are charged a hefty premium. 

Trucks, however, have to have a transponder and if not are considered violators.

ORT represents a significant technical jump 

compared to traditional tolling systems. From 

an operational point of view, the handling of 

violators and control of operational costs 

need to be carefully addressed. While using 

ORT can reduce costs associated with manual 

toll collection, the reduction in labor costs 

might be somewhat offset by the increase in 

need for image-based transactions and violation processing.414
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

134 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Transit Fare Payment

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Transit Management subsystem: 

•	 Upgrade for Automated Scheduling, Run Cutting, or Fare Payment: $19K-$38K

•	 Integration for Automated Scheduling, Run Cutting, or Fare Payment: $214K-$476K

•	 Further Software Upgrade for E-Fare Payment: $38K-$57

Transit Vehicle On-Board subsystem: 

•	 Electronic Farebox: $0.6K-$1.1K

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Massachusetts: The Silver Line Waterfront Rapid Transit service represents a new 

branch of BRT to the South Boston waterfront and Logan International Airport. The 

Silver Line is being implemented in three phases. For Phase II, the Massachusetts Bay 

Transportation Authority installed two fare vending machines—one full service and 

one cashless—at each of the airport terminal stops. The total cost of the deployment 

was $1.26 million. Full service machines cost $35,494 each and cashless machines 

cost $23,420 each. Construction and installation costs totaled $275,000; infrastructure was an additional $593,000.

418

Washington D.C. Metropolitan Area: The Northern Virginia Transportation Commission worked closely with the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority 

(WMATA) to develop a Regional Software Maintenance Agreement. This agreement 

protects and ensures the participation of smaller transit agencies in the Regional 

SmarTrip® Rollout. Prior to the agreement, the smaller agencies were expected to pay 

$70,000 per year to maintain their fare collection systems. For many this amount was 

almost as much as the total farebox revenues. Under the agreement, smaller agencies 

will spend $30,000 per year for the first two years, and approximately $23,000 per 

year thereafter. Software support, trouble-shooting, updates, and technical support 

are included under the agreement.419

Worldwide: Costs data were obtained from various BRT projects, either underway or 

planned, and made available to transit professionals and policy makers in planning 

and decision making related to implementing different components of BRT systems. 

The data are representative of BRT development costs. On-board smart card fare 

collection systems typically cost approximately $20,000 per vehicle and off-board 

smart card media systems cost around $65,000 per machine.

420

New Mexico: Building on the success of Client Referral, Ridership, and Financial 

Tracking (CRRAFT), the Alliance for Transportation Institute developed a plan and 

implemented smart card technology—the Intelligent, Coordinated Transit Smart 

Card Technology Project (ICTransit Card)—to provide cost-effective, seamless, and 

convenient transportation services in a rural setting. The cost of the ICTransit Card 

system was approximately $635,700.

421 Operating costs for the ICTransit Card system 

are about $93,000 each year with about $40,000 shared with the annual operations 

forCRRAFT.422
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | electronic payment and pricing 135

Parking Fee Payment

Electronic parking fee payment systems can provide benefits to parking facility operators, 

simplify payment for customers, and reduce congestion at parking facility entrances and exits. 

These payment systems can be enabled by any of a variety of technologies including magnetic 

stripe cards, smart cards, in-vehicle transponders, or vehicle-mounted bar codes.

Parking Fee Payment

Deployment

Electronic payment systems at parking facilities are in use in 25 of the country’s 108 

largest metropolitan areas.

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Productivity At the end of June 2004, the Washington, D.C. region Metrorail service required that contactless electronic payment cards be used to 

pay for parking at all Metrorail stations. In the following 2 months, 

purchases of the cards increased from 8,000 per month to 75,000 

per month.423

Customer 

Satisfaction

In the Washington, D.C. region, contactless electronic payment 

cards used to pay both parking fees and subway fares were considered easy to use by over 97 percent of card holders surveyed. Usefulness of the cards was rated at 4.85 on a scale of 1 (low) to 5 (high).424

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Transit Management subsystem: 

•	 Integration for Auto. Scheduling, Run Cutting, or Fare Payment: $219K-$486K

Parking Management subsystem: 

•	 Entrance/Exit Ramp Meters: $2K-$K4

•	 Tag Readers: $2K-$4K

•	 Database and Software for Billing & Pricing: $10K-$15K

•	 Parking Monitoring System: $19K-$41K

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Washington, D.C.: WMATA expanded the capability of its SmarTrip® contactless smart card system by linking it to multiple bus and rail fare collection systems throughout the Washington, D.C. area. Since its introduction in early 1999, the 

SmarTrip® card has achieved significant market penetration for use in the WMATA 

Metrorail system and associated parking facilities. A Regional Customer Service 

Center performs cross-jurisdictional management, distribution, and reconciliation 

tasks. The cost of the center includes contracted services, a central database, a 

point-of-sale network and devices, and existing system software upgrades. Total 

capital cost: $25.537 million (2002-2003). Operations and maintenance (O&M) cost: 

$3.45 million per year (2002-2003).425
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

136 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Multi-Use Payment

Multi-use payment systems can make transit payment more convenient. Payment for bus, 

rail, and other public- or private-sector goods and services can be made using transit fare 

cards at terminal gates, or at check-out counters of participating merchants located near 

transit stations. Multi-use systems may also incorporate the ability to pay highway tolls 

with the same card.

Multi-Use Payment

Deployment

Multi-use payment systems that can be used to pay for both transit fares and tolls are 

in use in 15 of the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas.

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Customer

Satisfaction

In Central Florida, smart cards designed to work with transit, parking, and ETC systems were evaluated during a field operational test. 

Focus group participants indicated that the card provided convenience and improved their transportation experience.426

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Transit Management subsystem: 

•	 Upgrade for Automated Scheduling, Run Cutting, or Fare Payment: $19K-$39K

•	 Integration for Automated Scheduling, Run Cutting, or Fare Payment: $219K-

$486K

•	 Further Software Upgrade for E-Fare Payment: $39K-$58K

Transit Vehicle On-Board subsystem: 

•	 Electronic Farebox: $0.6K-$1.2K
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | electronic payment and pricing 137

Pricing

Congestion pricing, also known as road pricing or value pricing, employs the use of technologies to vary the cost to use a transportation facility or network based on demand or 

the time of day. Pricing strategies include: variable priced lanes, variable tolls on entire 

roadways or roadway segments, cordon charging, area-wide charging, and fast and intertwined regular lanes.

Pricing

Deployment

Congestion pricing remains uncommon in major metropolitan areas according to a 

2006 survey. Only 3 of the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas (Chicago, Denver, 

and New York) employ congestion pricing on their freeways, and only 1 (Los Angeles) 

employs congestion pricing on arterial streets.

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Mobility On the New Jersey Turnpike, E-ZPass participation and variable 

tolling were projected to decrease peak period traffic congestion at 

urban interchanges by 15 to 20 percent and have minimal impacts 

on non-turnpike diversion routes.427 In London, congestion pricing 

(cordon charging) decreased inner city traffic congestion by about 

20 percent.428

Productivity Congestion mitigating benefits of cordon charging in London 

enabled taxi drivers to cover more miles per hour, service more riders, and decrease operating costs per passenger-mile.429

Energy and 

Environment

Congestion charging in London led to reductions in emmisions of 8 

percent in oxides of nitrogen, 7 percent in airborn particulate matter, and 16 percent in carbon dioxide when compared to data from 

2002 and 2003 prior to the introduction of congestion charging.430

Customer 

Satisfaction

In Minneapolis, Minnesota, survey data collected prior to the 

deployment of MnPASS Express Lanes (HOT lanes) on I-394 were 

examined to determine travelers’ willingness-to-pay to avoid congestion. The results indicated that 59 percent of travelers would pay 

$2 to save 20 minutes; 40 percent would pay $2 to save 15 minutes; 23 percent would pay $2 to save 10 minutes; and less than 10 

percent would pay $2 to save 5 minutes. Willingness-to-pay also 

decreased as toll rates increased. Virtually no one was willing to 

pay more than $6 for any amount of time savings.431

lessons learned 

Consider various toll schemes to push traffic 

demand away from peak periods.

The advent of electronic toll collection has provided new tools for traffic management. Manual toll collection’s inherent limitations did not 

provide the flexibility required to use pricing 

as a means to manage traffic. As a result, there 

are now a variety of toll schemes that may be 

employed to distribute traffic flow more evenly 

throughout the day.

•	 Implement time-of-day tolling as a means to 

push traffic demand away from peak periods.

Toll rates are fixed by time of day and day of 

week, usually at one-hour intervals. Peak prices 

on weekdays are generally highest and pricing 

is adjusted typically every few weeks based on 

hourly volumes. Setting prices based on time 

of day is relatively simple to implement from a 

technology perspective. When rate schedules 

are published, this approach is easy for the driving public to understand, but it does not offer 

the flexibility of other methods in updating the 

toll rates.

•	 Consider dynamic pricing, based on current 

conditions, to shift traffic demand.

Dynamic pricing adds a level of traffic management sophistication over time-of-day tolling. 

With dynamic pricing, tolls are based on actual 

traffic conditions, changing to maximize some 

specific objective such as speed, volume, traffic 

density, or travel time.434
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

138 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Pricing

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Detection subsystem: 

•	 Inductive Loop Surveillance on Corridor: $3K-$8K

Roadside Control subsystem: 

•	 Fixed Lane Signal: $5K-$6K

Roadside Information subsystem: 

•	 Dynamic Message Sign: $48K-$119K

Transportation Management Center subsystem: 

•	 Hardware, Software for Traffic Surveillance: $131K-$160K

•	 Integration for Traffic Surveillance: $219K-$267K

•	 Software for Traffic Information Dissemination: $17K-$21K

•	 Integration for Traffic Information Dissemination: $83K-$101K

Toll Plaza subsystem: 

•	 Electronic Toll Reader: $2K-$5K

•	 High-Speed Camera: $7K-$10K

Toll Administration subsystem: 

•	 Toll Administration Hardware: $5.4K-$8.1K

•	 Toll Administration Software: $39K-$78K

Roadside Telecommunications subsystem: 

•	 Conduit Design and Installation—Corridor: $50K-$75K (per mile)

•	 Fiber Optic Cable Installation: $20K-$52K (per mile)
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | electronic payment and pricing 139

Pricing

Costs

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Georgia: In 2005, the Georgia State Road and Tollway Authority received a grant 

through the FHWA Value Pricing Pilot Program to investigate the application of value 

pricing to the high-occupancy vehicle (HOV)/BRT project along the I-75/I-575 corridors. The project entailed 26 miles, 9 points of access to the managed lanes, tolling equipment, and a back office system. Cost estimates of operational concepts for 

converting HOV lanes to managed lanes on I-75/I-575 ranged from $20.9 million to 

$23.7 million. Both plans assumed that tolls would be levied based on distance traveled. During the more congested periods higher toll rates (per mile rate) would be 

in effect, with lower per mile tolls in effect during lesser congested periods. The toll 

schedule would vary, but the pricing scheme would be fixed. HOVs were assumed to 

travel in the managed lanes at no charge.432

London: Congestion charging in London improves efficiency, reduces pollution, and 

raises revenue for transit improvements. Championed by the Mayor of London, the 

program requires motorists to pay a fee of £8 per day to drive within the inner city of 

London on workdays between 7:00 AM and 6:30 PM. Enforcement is achieved using 

a network of fixed and mobile video cameras that record images of vehicles in the 

congestion charging zone. Optical character recognition technology and automatic 

number plate recognition computer systems interpret and decipher the license plate 

numbers and map them against a pay list. If the system shows a payment is outstanding, the image is checked manually to confirm the vehicle make and model matches 

the license registration before a penalty is issued. Images of vehicles in good standing 

are removed from the system. O&M costs are estimated at £92 million per year.

433

lessons learned 

Include high-occupancy toll lanes to alleviate peak period congestion.

High-occupancy toll lane facilities charge 

single-occupancy vehicles (SOV) for the use 

of a high-occupancy vehicle lane. Access into 

the HOT lane remains free for transit vehicles, 

vanpools, and carpools. The toll charged for 

SOVs is dynamically adjusted to ensure traffic 

congestion does not exceed an established 

threshold for all vehicles in the HOV lanes. 

Toll collection is performed electronically 

to provide non-stop toll collection. Tolls are 

charged at fixed points along the facility.

As peak period congestion continues to be 

a problem throughout the United States, 

agencies are looking towards tolling technologies as a mitigation technique. Varying 

tolls based on the time of day and/or current traffic conditions allows agencies to 

shift traffic demand away from normal peak 

periods, resulting in a more effective traffic 

management process. The advent of HOT 

lane facilities provides the option for drivers 

willing to pay a premium to experience less 

congested travel, creating better traffic distribution across road networks.435
332 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

389 Emergency Response Management System Study, Prepared by Traffic Engineers, Inc. for the Houston Metropolitan Transit Authority. Houston, TX. April 1991. Benefits ID: 2002-00227

390 Evaluation of Emergency Vehicle Signal Preemption on the Route 7 Virginia Corridor. U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWARD-99-070. July 1999. Benefits ID: 2000-00125

391 Rural ITS Toolbox, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-OP-01-030, EDL No. 13477. November 2001. Costs ID: 

2003-00018

392 Managing Demand Through Travel Information Services, Prepared for the U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWAHOP-05-005, EDL No. 14072. 2005. Benefits ID: 2007-00409

393 “An Operational Analysis of the Hampton Roads Hurricane Evacuation Traffic Control Plan,” Paper Presented at the 86th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 21–25 January 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00547

394 A Study of the Impact of Nine Transportation Management Projects on Hurricane Evacuation Preparedness, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, 

EDL No. 13940. November 2003. Lesson ID: 2005-00138

395 Cortelazzi, Lou, et al. Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission’s Advanced Traveler Information System (ATIS) Phase III Project, Pennsylvania Turnpike 

Commission, EDL No. 14308. April 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00168

396 David Lively, M.A. David and Osama Elhamshary. Lessons Learned From Advanced Traveler Information Systems: Applications for Emergency 

Management and Long Term Disaster Recovery, California DOT. April 2004. Lesson ID: 2006-00316

397 Advanced Public Transportation Systems: State of the Art Update 2006, U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administration, Report No. FTA-NJ-26-7062-06.1. 

30 March 2006.

398 Congestion Pricing—A Primer Report, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-HOP-07-074. December 2006.

399 “National Strategy to Reduce Congestion,” U.S. DOT Web site URL www.fightgridlocknow.gov. Last Accessed 29 February 2008.

400 Burris, Mark and Ashley Yelds. “Using ETC to Provide Variable Tolling: Some Real-World Results,” Paper Presented at the 10th ITS 

America Annual Meeting, Boston, MA. 1–4 May 2000. Benefits ID: 2000-00168

401 Pennsylvania Turnpike Value Pricing Study, Prepared by Wilbur Smith Associates for the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission, Executive 

Summary, Pages ES-5 and ES-6. March 2004. Benefits ID: 2008-00548

402 Sources that support these findings:

2005 Regional Value Pricing Corridor Evaluation and Feasibility Study: Dallas/Fort Worth—Value Pricing History and Experience, North Central Texas 

Council of Governments. Arlington, TX. June 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00549

Douma, Frank, Johanna Zmud, and Tyler Patterson. “Pricing Comes to Minnesota: Baseline Attitudinal Evaluation of the I-394 HOT 

Lane Project,” Paper Presented at the 85th Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting. Washington, DC. 22–26 January 2006. 

Benefits ID: 2008-00550

403 2005 Regional Value Pricing Corridor Evaluation and Feasibility Study: Dallas/Fort Worth—Value Pricing History and Experience, North Central Texas 

Council of Governments. Arlington, TX. June 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00549

404 Sources that support these findings:

Benefits and Costs of Full Operations and ITS Deployment: A 2003 Simulation for Cincinnati, Prepared for the U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWAJPO-04-031, EDL No. 13979. May 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00164

Benefits and Costs of Full Operations and ITS Deployment: A 2003 Simulation for Seattle, Prepared for the U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-JPO-04-033, 

EDL No. 13977. May 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00165

Benefits and Costs of Full Operations and ITS Deployment: A 2025 Forecast for Tucson, Prepared for the U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-JPO-04-032, 

EDL No. 13978. May 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00166

405 Central London Congestion Charging: Impacts Monitoring—Fifth Annual Report, Transport for London. July 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00551

406 Klodzinski, Jack, Eric Gordin, and Haitham M. Al-Deek. “Evaluation of Impacts from Deployment of an Open Road Tolling Concept 

for a Mainline Toll Plaza,” Paper Presented at the 86th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 21–25 

January 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00552

407 Ayman, Mohamed, et al. “Safety Considerations in Designing Electronic Toll Plazas: Case Study,” ITE Journal, Page 20. March 2001. 

Benefits ID: 2001-00179
endnotes 333

408 Klodzinski, Jack, Eric Gordin, and Haitham M. Al-Deek. “Evaluation of Impacts from Deployment of an Open Road Tolling Concept 

for a Mainline Toll Plaza,” Paper Presented at the 86th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 21–25 

January 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00553

409 Lennon, L. “Tappan Zee Bridge E-Z Pass System Traffic and Environmental Studies,” Paper Presented at the Institute of Transportation 

Engineers 64th Annual Meeting. Washington, DC. 1994. Benefits ID: 2000-00099

410 “Innovative Toll Collection System Pays Off for Motorists and Agencies,” U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWASA-97-088. Washington, DC. 1997. Costs ID: 2003-00036

411 Saka, Anthony and Dennis Agboh. “Assessment of the Impact of Electronic Toll Collection on Mobile Emissions in the Baltimore 

Metropolitan Area,” Paper Presented at the 81st Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting. Washington, DC. 13–17 January 2002. 

Benefits ID: 2005-00284

412 Miami-Dade Expressway Authority: Open Road Tolling Master Plan—2007–2011, Prepared by Dade Transportation Consultants for the MiamiDade Expressway Authority. March 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00169

413 I-5 North Coast Managed Lanes Value Pricing Study Concept Plan—Volume I, Prepared by PB Consult for the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). April 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00170

414 Washington State Comprehensive Tolling Study: Final Report—Volume 2: Background Paper #8: Toll Technology Considerations, Opportunities, and Risks,

Prepared by the IBI Group and Cambridge Systematics for the Washington State DOT. 20 September 2006. Lesson ID: 2007-00390

415 Characteristics of Bus Rapid Transit for Decision Making, Prepared by the U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administration, Report No. 

FTA-VA-26-7222-2004.1. August 2004. Benefits ID: 2008-00554

416 Miller, Mark A., et al. Transit Service Integration Practices: An Assessment of U.S. Experiences, Prepared by the University of California, Partners 

for Advanced Transit and Highways (PATH), Report No. UCB-ITS-PRR-2005-7. Berkeley, CA. 25 March 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00555

417 Foote, Peter J. and Darwin G. Stuart. “Testing Customer Acceptance of SmartCards at the Chicago Transit Authority,” Paper Presented 

at the 81st Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 13–17 January 2002. Benefits ID: 2002-00244

418 Silver Line Waterfront Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Project 2007 Evaluation, U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administration. Report No. 

FTA-DC-26-7248-2007.02. 1 June 2007. Costs ID: 2008-00171

419 “Project Report SmarTrip Regional Rollout,” Prepared by the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission for the U.S. DOT Federal 

Transit Administration. 6 February 2007. Costs ID: 2008-00132

420 Kittelson and Associates, et al. TCRP Report 118: Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide, Transportation Research Board, Transit Cooperative 

Research Program. Washington, DC. 2007. Costs ID: 2008-00148

421 Intelligent, Coordinated Transit Smart Card Technology (ICTransit Card), University of New Mexico, Alliance for Transportation Research (ATR) 

Institute. Albuquerque, NM. September 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00154

422 Correspondence with Mr. Eric Holm, Program Manager, Alliance for Transportation Research Institute. 23 March 2005. Costs ID: 

2008-00153

423 Miller, Mark A., et al. Transit Service Integration Practices: An Assessment of U.S. Experiences, Prepared by the University of California, Partners 

for Advanced Transit and Highways (PATH), Report No. UCB-ITS-PRR-2005-7. Berkeley, CA. 25 March 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00556

424 Miller, Mark A., et al. Transit Service Integration Practices: An Assessment of U.S. Experiences, Prepared by the University of California, Partners 

for Advanced Transit and Highways (PATH), Report No. UCB-ITS-PRR-2005-7. Berkeley, CA. 25 March 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00557

425 “Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority’s (WMATA) SmarTrip® Regional Customer Service Center,” U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, ITS Joint Program Office. Washington DC. February 2004. Costs ID: 2004-00073

426 Orlando Regional Alliance for Next Generation Electronic Payment Systems (ORANGES) Evaluation Final Report: Electronic Payment Systems Field 

Operational Test, U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administration, EDL No. 14268. 6 December 2004. Benefits ID: 2008-00558

427 Pennsylvania Turnpike Value Pricing Study, Prepared by Wilbur Smith Associates for the Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission, Executive 

Summary, Pages ES-5 and ES-6. March 2004. Benefits ID: 2008-00548

428 Todd Litman. London Congestion Pricing: Implications for Other Cities, Victoria Transport Policy Institute. British Columbia, Canada. 10 January 2006. Benefits ID: 2007-00333

429 Todd Litman. London Congestion Pricing: Implications for Other Cities, Victoria Transport Policy Institute. British Columbia, Canada. 10 January 2006. Benefits ID: 2008-00585
334 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

430 Central London Congestion Charging: Impacts monitoring—Fifth Annual Report, Transport for London. London, England. July 2007. Benefits ID: 

2008-00584

431 Douma, Frank, Johanna Zmud, and Tyler Patterson. “Pricing Comes to Minnesota: Baseline Attitudinal Evaluation of the I-394 HOT 

Lane Project,” Paper Presented at the 85th Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting. Washington, DC. 22–26 January 2006. 

Benefits ID: 2008-00550

432 Value Pricing on the I-75 HOV/BRT Project, Prepared by HNTB for the Georgia State Road and Tollway Authority. Atlanta, GA. April 2006. 

Costs ID: 2007-00128

433 Todd Litman. London Congestion Pricing: Implications for Other Cities, Victoria Transport Policy Institute. British Columbia, Canada. 10 January 2006. Costs ID: 2007-00127

434 Washington State Comprehensive Tolling Study: Final Report—Volume 2: Background Paper #8: Toll Technology Considerations, Opportunities, and Risks,

Prepared by the IBI Group and Cambridge Systematics for the Washington State DOT. 20 September 2006. Lesson ID: 2007-00394

435 Washington State Comprehensive Tolling Study: Final Report—Volume 2: Background Paper #8: Toll Technology Considerations, Opportunities, and Risks,

Prepared by the IBI Group and Cambridge Systematics for the Washington State DOT. 20 September 2006. Lesson ID: 2007-00394

436 National Strategy to Reduce Congestion on America’s Transportation Network, U.S. DOT. May 2006.

437 “Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) Quarterly Newsletter—Spring 2007,” U.S. DOT ITS Joint Program Office, Web site URL www.

its.dot.gov/icms/index.htm. Last Accessed 13 November 2007.

438 Vasudevan, Meenakshy, Karl Wunderlich, James Larkin, and Alan Toppen. “A Comparison of Mobility Impacts on Urban Commuting 

Between Broadcast Advisories and Advanced Traveler Information Services,” Paper Presented at the 84th Annual Transportation 

Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 9–13 January 2005. Benefits ID: 2005-00285

439 “ATIS U.S. Business Models Review,” U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Web page URL ops.fhwa.dot.gov/travelinfo/resources/

atis_bm.htm. Last Accessed 2 October 2007. 

440 America’s Travel Information Number: Implementation and Operational Guidelines for 511 Services Version 3.0, 511 Deployment Coalition. September 

2005. Benefits ID: 2007-00301

441 511 Deployment Costs: A Case Study, 511 Deployment Coalition. November 2006. Costs ID: 2007-00125

442 Shah, Vaishali, et al. “An Assessment of the Potential of ATIS to Reduce Travel Disutility in the Washington, DC Region,” Paper Presented 

at the 82nd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 12–16 January 2003. Benefits ID: 2003-00266

443 Sources that support these findings:

Detroit Freeway Corridor ITS Evaluation, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, EDL No. 13586. July 2001. Benefits ID: 2001-00213

ITS Impacts Assessment for Seattle MMDI Evaluation: Modeling Methodology and Results, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, EDL No. 

11323. September 1999. Benefits ID: 2001-00199

444 Air Quality Study of the SmarTraveler Advanced Traveler Information Service, Tech Environmental. Waltham, MA. July 1993. Benefits ID: 

2000-00004

445 Intelligent Transportation Systems at the 2002 Salt Lake City Winter Olympic Games: Event Study Traffic Management and Traveler Information, U.S. DOT 

Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-OP-03-135, EDL No. 13850. 29 April 2003. Benefits ID: 2006-00290

446 “Costs for the Alaska Traveler Information System,” U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, ITS Joint Program Office. Washington, 

DC. 24 July 2006. Correspondence with Ms. Jill Sullivan, ITS/Iways Coordinator, Division of Program Development ADOT&PF. July 2007. 

Costs ID: 2007-00129

447 Model Deployment of a Regional, Multi-Modal 511 Traveler Information System: Final Report, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report 

No. FHWA-JPO-06-013, EDL No. 14248. 30 September 2005. Costs ID: 2006-00099

448 Best Practices for Traveler Information Websites: Lessons Learned From Top Traffic and Transit Website Winners, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration. June 2006. Lesson ID: 2006-00317

449 Travel Time Messaging on Dynamic Message Signs—Houston, TX, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-HOP-05-051. 

May 2005. Benefits ID: 2007-00304

450 America’s Travel Information Number: Implementation and Operational Guidelines for 511 Services Version 3.0, 511 Deployment Coalition. September 

2005. Benefits ID: 2007-00301
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | traveler information 141

Almost all (93 percent)

major metropolitan

areas distribute traveler

information using

internet web sites. Traveler Information

Management and Operations

Public and private agencies that collect, process, and broadcast traveler information can 

help travelers make more informed decisions regarding departure times, route choice, and 

mode of travel. With timely traveler information, travelers can defer or delay trips, select 

alternate routes, or use transit services to help reduce congestion. Travelers may also 

decide to drive a different vehicle or use snow tires or chains based on weather-related 

traveler information. In recent years, traveler information seekers have come to expect reliable access to timely and detailed information about traffic conditions, weather conditions, 

transit schedules, work zones, and special events. 

ITS applications providing traveler information can provide assistance to travelers prior to 

their trip or while en route. Pre-trip information includes traffic, road weather, transit, and 

work zone information most commonly posted on Internet Web sites, made available on 

511 or other telephone systems, or broadcast on local media such as radio and TV. En route 

information can be made available via roadside or in-terminal message signs, or via various devices in the vehicle. These applications include technologies that collect real-time 

data from one or more agencies or sources, process the data into meaningful information 

useful to travelers, and then provide the information to travelers.

ITS can support tourism and special events by providing information to travelers in unfamiliar areas as well as travelers and patrons that need guidance during major events 

such as sporting events or concerts. These types of information services typically focus 

on traveler convenience and improving access to local businesses. Information provided 

can include features such as electronic yellow pages, parking availability, and options for 

electronic payment.

This chapter focuses on traveler information systems that typically draw information 

from multiple sources across a metropolitan area or region. The chapters on arterial, 

freeway, transit, traffic incident, and road weather management discuss experiences 

of agencies collecting information on the system for which they are responsible and 

providing it to travelers.

The traveler information ITS technologies profiled in this chapter are a key element of the 

U.S. DOT’s Congestion Initiative, as outlined in the May 2006 document National Strategy to 

Reduce Congestion on America’s Transportation Network. 436 The Congestion Initiative highlights 

the need to advance low-cost operational and technological improvements to traveler 

information in order to reduce congestion. 

In addition, the Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) initiative, a major ITS initiative 

being conducted by the U.S. DOT, seeks to demonstrate that ITS technologies can be used 

to efficiently and proactively manage the movement of people and goods in major transportation corridors by facilitating integration of the management of all networks in a corridor. 

The results of the initiative will help to facilitate widespread use of ICM tools and strategies 

to improve mobility through integrated management of transportation assets.437

Additional information on these initiatives is available at the Congestion Initiative and ITS 

JPO’s Web sites: www.fightgridlocknow.gov and www.its.dot.gov/icms. 

Traveler Information Categories 

in the ITS Knowledge Resources

Pre-Trip Information 

Internet/Wireless 

511 

Other Telephone 

TV/Radio 

Kiosks 

En Route Information 

Wireless 

511 

Other Telephone 

Radio 

In-Vehicle Systems 

Tourism and Events 

Travel Services 

Advanced Parking 
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

142 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Other ITS Knowledge Resource 

Categories Related to Traveler 

Information

Refer to other chapters in this document.

Arterial Management

Information Dissemination

Freeway Management

Information Dissemination

Transit Management

Information Dissemination

Traffic Incident Management

Information Dissemination

Road Weather Management

Information Dissemination

Findings

Benefits

Evaluation of traveler information services show that these systems are well received by 

those that use them. Benefits are found in the form of improved on-time reliability, better 

trip planning, and reduced early and late arrivals. Studies show that drivers who use routespecific travel time information instead of area-wide traffic advisories can improve on-time 

performance by 5 to 13 percent.438 Although the overall number of people who use traveler 

information on a daily basis represents a relatively small portion of travelers in a region, 

demand can be extremely high during periods of severe weather, emergencies, or special 

events. Traveler information systems during these periods have recorded extremely high 

usage. Currently, the most successful traveler information systems are those that have 

been deployed with significant public sector support.439 511 deployments, for example, 

have been very successful. Recent evaluation data show that customer satisfaction with 

regional 511 deployments range from 68 to 92 percent (figure 17)440

Table 12 summarizes the results of findings in the ITS Benefits Database, noting that 

traveler information systems have demonstrated the ability to improve mobility for travelers using them. The systems can also enhance network traffic distribution, modestly 

improving effective capacity and reducing fuel consumption and related emissions. As 

discussed above, several evaluations have documented positive customer satisfaction 

ratings for the systems.

100

80

60

40

20

0

Figure 17 – Traveler Satisfaction with 511 Telephone Traveler Information Systems Satisfied (%)

68 71 75

90 90.3 92.3

Washington State

Arizona

Virginia

Montana

Salt Lake City, UT

San Francisco, CA
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | traveler information 143

Table 12—Traveler Information Benefits Summary Safety Mobility Efficiency Productivity 

Energy andEnvironmentCustomerSatisfaction

Pre-Trip Information ✚ ✚ ✚ ●

En Route Information ✚ ●

Tourism and Events ●

● Substantial positive impacts ✚ Positive impacts

❍ Negligible impacts ✱ Mixed results

✖ Negative impacts blank Not enough data

Costs

The 511 Deployment Coalition conducted an in-depth cost analysis based on the experience from nine 511 deployers. The nine 511 systems include six statewide systems—Utah, 

Arizona, North Carolina, Virginia, Kansas, and Washington—and three metropolitan/

regional systems in Florida: Tampa, Southeast Florida, and Central Florida (see figure 

18 below). On average the statewide systems cost approximately $2.5 million to design, 

implement, and operate during the first year. The range is from just under $1 million to just 

over $5 million; however, most of the system costs were closer to $1 million to $2 million. 

On average the metropolitan systems cost $1.8 million to design, implement, and operate 

during the first year. The range is from just over $1.5 million to just over $2 million.441

$5

$4

$3

$2

$1

$0

Figure 18 – Total Costs ($ millions) of Nine 511 Deployments

Cost ($ millions)

Utah

Arizona

North Carolina

Virginia

Kansas

Washington State

Tampa

SE Florida

Central Florida

1.8 1.8

3.2

5.2

1.0 1.2

2.3

1.5

1.8

Statewide Metropolitan/Regional

customer satisfaction with

regional 511 deployments ranges

from 68 to 92 percent.

Adapted from 511 Deployment Costs: A Case Study, 511 Deployment Coalition. November 2006
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

144 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Deployment

Figure 19 shows trends for adoption of various traveler information media, based on a 

multi-year survey of the country’s 78 largest metropolitan areas from 2000 to 2006. The 

two most popular media for distributing traveler information involve the Internet. Almost 

all of the 78 metropolitan areas use Web sites to distribute traveler information. E-mail 

is the next most popular medium, followed by automatic telephone and pagers. The use 

of these media continues to grow, whereas the use of facsimile as a traveler information 

distribution medium is on the decrease. Thirty (30) of the 78 metropolitan areas use dedicated TV to distribute traveler information and 18 use kiosks, a medium which has seen 

no growth in recent years. 

In 2006, the survey of metropolitan areas was expanded to the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas. This survey is the source of deployment statistics presented later in this 

chapter unless otherwise stated. 

Figure 19 – Trends for Adoption of Traveler Information Media, 2000-2006

Dedicated Cable TV

Telephone

Web site

Pagers

Interactive TV

Kiosks

E-Mail

Facsimile

80

60

40

20

0

‘00 ’02 ‘04 ’05 ‘06

Year

Number of Metropolitan areas

on average, statewide 511 systems

cost approximately $2.5 million 

to design, implement, and operate

during the first year.
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | traveler information 145

Selected Highlights from the ITS Knowledge

Resources on Traveler Information 

Pre-Trip Information

Pre-trip traveler information provided via Internet Web sites, other wireless devices, 511 

telephone numbers, other telephone services, television, radio, or kiosks allows users to 

make more informed decisions for trip departure, route choice, and mode of travel.

Pre-Trip Information

Deployment

The most common medium for disseminating pre-trip information is the Internet, 

employed by freeway management agencies in 72 metropolitan areas and by arterial 

agencies in 52 metropolitan areas, out of a total of 108 metropolitan areas surveyed. 

Next in popularity was TV and radio, reported in 53 metropolitan areas for freeways 

and 47 for arterials. A 511 telephone information service for pre-trip information was 

reported in use by freeway and arterial agencies in 39 and 25 metropolitan areas, 

respectively. Kiosks were in use in 11 metropolitan areas.

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Mobility A simulation study in the Washington, D.C. area found that regular 

users of pre-trip traveler information reduced travelers’ frequency 

of early and late arrivals by 56 and 52 percent, respectively.442

Efficiency Summary Finding: Modeling studies in Detroit, Michigan and 

Seattle, Washington have shown slight improvements in corridor 

capacity with the provision of traveler information.443

Energy and 

Environment

In Boston, Massachusetts, a modeling study estimated that 

changes in travel behavior due to better traveler information would 

result in a 25 percent reduction in volatile organic compounds, 

a 1.5 percent decline in nitrogen oxides, and a 33 percent decrease 

in carbon monoxide.444

Customer 

Satisfaction

During the 2002 Winter Olympic Games in Salt Lake City, Utah, a 

survey about the CommuterLink Web site showed that 41 percent 

of visitors and 70 percent of residents were aware of the Web site. 

Overall, 98 percent of visitors and 97 percent of residents who used 

the Web site said it worked well for them.445
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

146 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

lessons learned 

Assess what users want when developing 

a traveler information Web site.

The number of traveler information Web sites 

has increased over time as has the quality 

of the sites and the users’ expectations. The 

availability of additional real-time information as a result of the Federal Highway 

Administration Office of Operations RealTime System Management Information Program will enable significant improvements 

in traveler information provision. Based on 

interviews with developers of top traffic and 

transit information Web sites, recommendations have been summarized on how developers of such Web sites should assess what 

their users want. The existing experience with 

traveler information Web sites should facilitate the dissemination of the information in 

an efficient and effective manner.

•	 Check out other existing Web sites.

TRIMARC (www.trimarc.org) provides travelers 

with information for the Interstate highway 

system within the greater Louisville/Southern Indiana urbanized area. The developers 

of this site accessed other traveler information sites for ideas to ensure ease of use, and 

consequently designed the site with the ability to click on signs or cameras to get more 

detailed information. 

(Continued on next page.)

Pre-Trip Information

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Information Service Provider subsystem: 

•	 Information Service Provider Hardware: $23K-$34K

•	 Information Service Provider Software: $267K-$535K

•	 Information Service Provider Labor: $254K-$363K (annually)

Remote Location subsystem: 

•	 Informational Kiosk: $11K-$24K

Transportation Management subsystem: 

•	 Hardware for Traffic Information Dissemination: $3K

•	 Software for Traffic Information Dissemination: $17K-$21K

•	 Integration for Traffic Information Dissemination: $83K-$101K

•	 Labor for Traffic Information Dissemination: $107K-$131K (annually)

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Alaska: The Alaska 511 traveler information system under the Condition Acquisition 

and Reporting System (CARS)/511 pooled-fund consortium cost approximately 

$1.210 million to develop and implement. The system provides near real-time transportation system information. A consultant hosts the Alaska CARS and 511 databases. The Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities pays annual 

fees to the consultant for these services. Operations and maintenance (O&M) costs 

were $136,400, $171,500, and $170,300 for 2004, 2005, and 2006, respectively.446

Arizona: The Arizona 511 Model Deployment included a number of key enhancements 

to the previous statewide 511 system. The total capital cost of the enhanced 511 system was approximately $1.412 million with annual operating costs for the first year at 

approximately $293,000. Operating costs for future years are estimated at $210,000 

annually. Federal funding for the model deployment totaled $1.14 million. Remaining 

funding came from Arizona DOT and its 511 partners.447
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | traveler information 147

En Route Information

En route traveler information provided via wireless devices, 511 telephone numbers, other 

telephone services, radio, and in-vehicle signing allows users to make informed decisions 

regarding alternate routes and expected arrival times.

En Route Information

Deployment

The most common media for disseminating en route information are dynamic message signs (DMS) and highway advisory radio (HAR). DMS are in use to disseminate 

en route information on freeways in 86 of 108 metropolitan areas, and on arterials in 

51 metropolitan areas. HAR was reported on freeways and arterials in 51 and 42 metropolitan areas, respectively. The types of en route information disseminated varied 

widely. The most common types of messages reported on freeway DMS were incident 

information (89 metropolitan areas), maintenance and construction information (83), 

and amber alerts (82). Next in popularity were congestion (59 metropolitan areas), 

diversions (56), and weather alerts (49). Less common were travel time (27 metropolitan areas), public service announcements (28), and special events (25).

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Mobility In Houston, real-time travel time information posted on DMS influenced drivers’ route choice. Eighty-five (85) percent of respondents 

indicated that they changed their route based on the information 

provided. (Of these respondents, 66 percent said that they saved 

travel time as a result of the route change, 29 percent were not 

sure). Overall, drivers were primarily interested in seeing incident 

and travel time information.449

Customer 

Satisfaction

Summary Finding: Customer satisfaction with regional 511 deployments range from 68 to 92 percent. In 2004, 92.3 percent of users 

surveyed in the San Francisco Bay Area were satisfied with 511 and, 

in Montana, 90.3 percent were satisfied. On the I-81 corridor in Virginia, 99 percent of users surveyed said they would call again. 

In 2005, the 511 model deployment evaluation project in Arizona 

found that 71 percent of users were satisfied. In Washington, satisfaction levels were at 68 percent and 87 percent of the callers said 

they would call again.450

lessons learned 

(Continued from previous page.)

	Obtain feedback from users.

Developers of successful traveler information 

Web sites mentioned receiving user feedback and using these comments to address 

technical issues or update the information 

provided. Houston TranStar looks for continuous improvement, reviewing the site on a 

monthly basis and implementing new features 

every two or three months. Others, such as 

the Denver Regional Transportation District, 

have developed beta-test groups of Web site 

users who try out new features and comment 

on redesigns.448
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

148 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

En Route Information

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Information subsystem: examples include

•	 Dynamic Message Sign: $48K-$119K

Information Service Provider subsystem: 

•	 Information Service Provider Hardware: $23K-$34K

•	 Information Service Provider Software: $267K-$535K

•	 Information Service Provider Labor: $254K-$363K (annually)

Remote Location subsystem: 

•	 Informational Kiosk: $11K-$24K

Transportation Management subsystem: 

•	 Hardware for Traffic Information Dissemination: $3K

•	 Software for Traffic Information Dissemination: $17K-$21K

•	 Integration for Traffic Information Dissemination: $83K-$101K

•	 Labor for Traffic Information Dissemination: $107K-$131K (annually)

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

United States: Based on an in-depth cost analysis of the experience of nine 511 

deployers, the total costs (to design, implement, and operate for one year) averaged 

approximately $2.5 million among six statewide systems and $1.8 million among three 

metropolitan systems. The nine systems represent conditions that others are likely 

to experience (e.g., large-scale deployments undergoing major enhancements, a 

variety of traveler information service offerings, system development from scratch). 

The average O&M cost ranged from under $0.50 per call to just under $2.50 per 

call.

451

lessons learned 

Pursue a vigorous 511 marketing program, 

especially to promote new types of information targeted to specific user groups.

The Arizona DOT Model Deployment featured 

a large number of enhancements to the existing statewide Arizona 511 system. Awareness 

of 511 and its various features is a necessary 

prerequisite to system utilization and the 

benefits associated with its usage. Therefore, 

marketing is a critical activity.

•	 Use dynamic message signs to advertise 

511 systems to reach travelers en route.

The DOT conducted an aggressive marketing campaign using the region’s DMS. The 

message, “Road Conditions, Dial 511,” was 

posted simultaneously on all DMS located 

on Interstate and state highways throughout 

the state, 24 hours per day for a seven-day 

period. During the campaign, daily call volumes increased over 30-fold. The percentage 

of cellular phone calls also increased dramatically during this period, suggesting that many 

travelers who saw the DMS message called 

511 while still en route.

(Continued on next page.)
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | traveler information 149

lessons learned 

(Continued from previous page.) 

•	 Be sure to market new information to the 

types of users who would be most interested in that information.

For a traditional roadway-oriented system, 

the addition of multi-modal information is 

not enough to stimulate significant usage 

of that information. The Arizona DOT found 

that simply adding new information to target 

other travelers such as transit users was not 

necessarily sufficient to stimulate use of that 

information. The lack of utilization of the new 

information types significantly impacted the 

ability of the 511 deployers to achieve objectives related to stimulating consideration of 

transit as an alternate mode. This suggests 

deployers may not necessarily assume there 

is latent demand for new information or that 

interested users will become aware of it without targeted marketing.452

Tourism and Events

Tourism and event-related travel information systems focus on the needs of travelers in 

areas unfamiliar to them or when traveling to major events such as sporting events or 

concerts. These services address issues of mobility and traveler convenience. Information 

provided can include electronic yellow pages as well as transit and parking availability.

Tourism and Events

Deployment

In a 2006 survey of state DOTs, 40 states reported having a statewide Web site supporting travel services. Among the types of roadway information provided were work 

zone/construction (reported by 37 states), road closures (32), incidents (27), weather 

information (27), road surface conditions (24), closed circuit television images (26), 

detours (21), congestion (18), alternate routes (16) and speeds (15). Tourism information was also provided: special events (13 states), maps (13), points of interest (8), 

directions (6), hotel accommodations (6), and restaurants (4). Additionally, advanced 

parking systems supported travel services in metropolitan areas. In a survey of 108 

metropolitan areas in 2006, 15 of the 108 metropolitan areas reported dissemination 

of parking availability on DMS on freeways and 12 metropolitan areas reported doing 

so on arterial streets. 

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Customer 

Satisfaction

In Kentucky, 94 percent of travelers surveyed said they were satisfied with the information provided by 511 Tourism Service operators.453

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Roadside Information subsystem: 

•	 Dynamic Message Sign: $48K-$119K

Information Service Provider subsystem: 

•	 Information Service Provider Labor: $254K-$363K (annually)

Remote Location subsystem: 

•	 Informational Kiosk: $11K-$24K

Transportation Management subsystem: 

•	 Software for Traffic Information Dissemination: $17K-$21K

•	 Integration for Traffic Information Dissemination: $83K-$101K

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Kentucky: The Kentucky 511 Traffic and Travel Information System was expanded to 

include tourism information services in southern and eastern Kentucky through ITS 

Integration Program FY 2002 funds. Implementation costs for the 511 Tourism Service 

were $361,760. The costs to operate and maintain the 511 tourism service for 2003 to 

2006 totaled $4,138,213.

454 
334 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

430 Central London Congestion Charging: Impacts monitoring—Fifth Annual Report, Transport for London. London, England. July 2007. Benefits ID: 

2008-00584

431 Douma, Frank, Johanna Zmud, and Tyler Patterson. “Pricing Comes to Minnesota: Baseline Attitudinal Evaluation of the I-394 HOT 

Lane Project,” Paper Presented at the 85th Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting. Washington, DC. 22–26 January 2006. 

Benefits ID: 2008-00550

432 Value Pricing on the I-75 HOV/BRT Project, Prepared by HNTB for the Georgia State Road and Tollway Authority. Atlanta, GA. April 2006. 

Costs ID: 2007-00128

433 Todd Litman. London Congestion Pricing: Implications for Other Cities, Victoria Transport Policy Institute. British Columbia, Canada. 10 January 2006. Costs ID: 2007-00127

434 Washington State Comprehensive Tolling Study: Final Report—Volume 2: Background Paper #8: Toll Technology Considerations, Opportunities, and Risks,

Prepared by the IBI Group and Cambridge Systematics for the Washington State DOT. 20 September 2006. Lesson ID: 2007-00394

435 Washington State Comprehensive Tolling Study: Final Report—Volume 2: Background Paper #8: Toll Technology Considerations, Opportunities, and Risks,

Prepared by the IBI Group and Cambridge Systematics for the Washington State DOT. 20 September 2006. Lesson ID: 2007-00394

436 National Strategy to Reduce Congestion on America’s Transportation Network, U.S. DOT. May 2006.

437 “Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) Quarterly Newsletter—Spring 2007,” U.S. DOT ITS Joint Program Office, Web site URL www.

its.dot.gov/icms/index.htm. Last Accessed 13 November 2007.

438 Vasudevan, Meenakshy, Karl Wunderlich, James Larkin, and Alan Toppen. “A Comparison of Mobility Impacts on Urban Commuting 

Between Broadcast Advisories and Advanced Traveler Information Services,” Paper Presented at the 84th Annual Transportation 

Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 9–13 January 2005. Benefits ID: 2005-00285

439 “ATIS U.S. Business Models Review,” U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Web page URL ops.fhwa.dot.gov/travelinfo/resources/

atis_bm.htm. Last Accessed 2 October 2007. 

440 America’s Travel Information Number: Implementation and Operational Guidelines for 511 Services Version 3.0, 511 Deployment Coalition. September 

2005. Benefits ID: 2007-00301

441 511 Deployment Costs: A Case Study, 511 Deployment Coalition. November 2006. Costs ID: 2007-00125

442 Shah, Vaishali, et al. “An Assessment of the Potential of ATIS to Reduce Travel Disutility in the Washington, DC Region,” Paper Presented 

at the 82nd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 12–16 January 2003. Benefits ID: 2003-00266

443 Sources that support these findings:

Detroit Freeway Corridor ITS Evaluation, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, EDL No. 13586. July 2001. Benefits ID: 2001-00213

ITS Impacts Assessment for Seattle MMDI Evaluation: Modeling Methodology and Results, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, EDL No. 

11323. September 1999. Benefits ID: 2001-00199

444 Air Quality Study of the SmarTraveler Advanced Traveler Information Service, Tech Environmental. Waltham, MA. July 1993. Benefits ID: 

2000-00004

445 Intelligent Transportation Systems at the 2002 Salt Lake City Winter Olympic Games: Event Study Traffic Management and Traveler Information, U.S. DOT 

Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-OP-03-135, EDL No. 13850. 29 April 2003. Benefits ID: 2006-00290

446 “Costs for the Alaska Traveler Information System,” U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, ITS Joint Program Office. Washington, 

DC. 24 July 2006. Correspondence with Ms. Jill Sullivan, ITS/Iways Coordinator, Division of Program Development ADOT&PF. July 2007. 

Costs ID: 2007-00129

447 Model Deployment of a Regional, Multi-Modal 511 Traveler Information System: Final Report, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report 

No. FHWA-JPO-06-013, EDL No. 14248. 30 September 2005. Costs ID: 2006-00099

448 Best Practices for Traveler Information Websites: Lessons Learned From Top Traffic and Transit Website Winners, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration. June 2006. Lesson ID: 2006-00317

449 Travel Time Messaging on Dynamic Message Signs—Houston, TX, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-HOP-05-051. 

May 2005. Benefits ID: 2007-00304

450 America’s Travel Information Number: Implementation and Operational Guidelines for 511 Services Version 3.0, 511 Deployment Coalition. September 

2005. Benefits ID: 2007-00301
endnotes 335

451 511 Deployment Costs: A Case Study, 511 Deployment Coalition. November 2006. Costs ID: 2007-00125

452 Model Deployment of a Regional, Multi-Modal 511 Traveler Information System: Final Report, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report 

No. FHWA-JPO-06-013, EDL No. 14248. 30 September 2005. Lesson ID: 2006-00241

453 Yusuf, Juita-Elena (Wie), Candice Wallace, and Steven Kreis. Evaluation of the Eastern Kentucky Rural Highway Information Project 511 Tourism 

Service, University of Kentucky, Kentucky Transportation Center, Report No. KTC-06-10/RS-F2-03-1F, EDL No. 14307. May 2006. Benefits 

ID: 2007-00306

454 Yusuf, Juita-Elena (Wie), Candice Wallace, and Steven Kreis. Evaluation of the Eastern Kentucky Rural Highway Information Project 511 Tourism 

Service, University of Kentucky, Kentucky Transportation Center, Report No. KTC-06-10/RS-F2-03-1F, EDL No. 14307. May 2006. Correspondence with Mr. Wayne Bates, Kentucky Transportation Cabinet. 10 March 2006. Costs ID: 2007-00124

455 Archived Data Management Systems: A Cross-Cutting Study, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-05-044, EDL 

No. 14128. Washington, DC. December 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00173

456 Furth, Peter G., et al. Uses of Archived AVL-APC Data to Improve Transit Performance and Management: Review and Potential, Transportation 

Research Board, Transit Cooperative Research Program, Web Document No. 23, Appendix A. Washington DC. June 2003. Benefits ID: 

2008-00587

457 Stephens, Jerry, et al. An Evaluation of Montana’s State Truck Activities Reporting System, Prepared by the Montana State University for the 

Montana DOT. 11 August 2003. Benefits ID: 2003-00268

458 Sources that support these findings:

National Evaluation of the TMC Applications of Archived Data Operational Test—ADMS Virginia, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, 

Report No. FHWA-JPO-06-014, EDL No. 14250. August 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00560

Smith, Brian L. and Ramkumar Venkatanarayana. “Usage Analysis of a First Generation ITS Data Archive: Lessons Learned in the 

Development of a Novel Information Technology Application,” Paper Presented at the 85th Annual Transportation Research Board 

Meeting. Washington, DC. 22–26 January 2006.

459 Archived Data Management Systems: A Cross-Cutting Study, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-05-044, EDL 

No. 14128. Washington, DC. December 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00173

460 National Evaluation of the TMC Applications of Archived Data Operational Test—ADMS Virginia, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, 

Report No. FHWA-JPO-06-014, EDL No. 14250. August 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00174

461 “Cost Estimate for Nevada Archived Data User Service (ADUS),” U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, ITS Joint Program Office. 

Washington DC. May 2001. Costs ID: 2003-00038

462 Liu, Henry X., et al. A Literature and Best Practices Scan: ITS Data Management and Archiving, University of Wisconsin. Madison, WI. May 2002. 

Benefits ID: 2008-00559

463 Archived Data Management Systems: A Cross-Cutting Study, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-05-044, EDL 

No. 14128. Washington, DC. December 2005. Lesson ID: 2007-00385

464 Archived Data Management Systems: A Cross-Cutting Study, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-05-044, EDL 

No. 14128. Washington, DC. December 2005. Lesson ID: 2007-00385

465 Sources that support these findings:

Jones, Crystal. “Perspective on Freight Congestion,” Public Roads, Vol. 71, No. 1. July/August 2007.

Wilson, Rosalyn. “Embracing Security as a Core Business Function,” 17th Annual State of Logistics Report, Sponsored by the Council 

of Supply Chain Management Professionals. Washington, DC. 19 June 2006.

466 Richeson, Kim E. Introductory Guide to CVISN, Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, Report No. POR-99-7186, Preliminary Version P.2. Laurel, MD. February 2000.

467 Rodier, Caroline J., et al. “Virtual Commercial Vehicle Compliance Stations: A Review of Legal and Institutional Issues,” Paper Presented 

at 85th Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 22–26 January 2006.

468 PrePass statistics from: “PrePass,” PrePass, Web site URL www.prepass.com/Pages/Home.aspx . Last Accessed 14 March 2008.

NORPASS statistics from: “NORPASS,” NORPASS—North American Preclearance and Safety System, Web site URL www.norpass.net/

index.html.Last Accessed 14 March 2008.
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | information management 151

ARTERIAL MANAGEMENT

AGENCIES FREQUENTLY USE 

ARCHIVED DATA TO SUPPORT 

TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND MANAGEMENT, OPERATIONS PLANNING

AND ANALYSIS, AND CAPITAL

PLANNING.

Information Management

Management and Operations

Intelligent transportation systems collect vast amounts of data on the operational status 

of the transportation system. Archiving and analyzing this data can provide significant 

benefits to transportation agencies.

Archived data management systems (ADMS) collect data from ITS applications and assist 

in transportation administration, policy evaluation, safety, planning, program assessment, operations research, and other applications. Small-scale data archiving systems 

can support a single agency or operations center, while larger systems support multiple 

agencies and can act as a regional warehouse for ITS data. Transportation management 

centers (TMCs) provide an opportunity for centralized collection of data collected by ITS. 

However, TMC performance requirements are necessary during ADMS development for 

the succesful development of such a system. Example uses of archived ITS data include 

the following: 

	Incident management programs may review incident locations to schedule staging 

and patrol routes, and frequencies for service patrol vehicles.

	Historical traffic information can be used to develop predictive travel times. 

	Transit agencies may review schedule performance data archived from automatic vehicle location, computer-aided dispatch systems and/or automatic passenger counting 

systems to design more effective schedules and route designs, or to manage operations more efficiently.

The collection and storage of data on transportation system performance often occurs 

at TMCs. The transportation management centers chapter discusses TMCs in detail. In 

addition, the transit management chapter discusses the archiving and use of transit performance data. 

Findings

Benefits

Data archiving enhances ITS integration and allows for coordinated regional decision 

making. Traffic surveillance system data, as well as data collected from commercial vehicle 

operations, transit systems, electronic payment systems, and road weather information 

systems have been the primary sources of archived data available to researchers and 

planners. As more advanced data analysis techniques develop and the efficiency of data 

reporting systems are improved, additional examples of the effectiveness of information 

management systems will become available.

As shown in table 13, results of studies to date have demonstrated the cost savings that 

can be achieved by agencies making use of archived ITS data. A study reviewing over 60 

data archiving programs documented substantial returns on the investments made in 

the programs. Stakeholders making use of archived data also had positive experiences 

to report.

Information Management

Categories in the ITS Knowledge 

Resources

Data Archiving
152 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

Other ITS Knowledge Resource 

Categories Related to

INformation Management

Refer to other chapters in this document.

Transit Management

Fleet Management: Planning

Transportation Management Centers

Table 13—Information Management Benefits Summary Safety Mobility Efficiency Productivity Energy and

EnvironmentCustomerSatisfaction

Data Archiving ● ● ✚

● Substantial positive impacts ✚ Positive impacts

❍ Negligible impacts ✱ Mixed results

✖ Negative impacts blank Not enough data

Costs

The costs to develop ADMS vary based on the size of the system and features provided. 

Based on limited data available from a study of six transportation agencies that have 

established ADMS, costs for one system was $85,000 and $8 million for another. Four of 

the six systems were developed jointly with a university. Typically, the state DOT pays for 

the development with the university hosting the system. Operations and maintenance 

(O&M) costs were in a closer range, $150,000 to $350,000; these costs were usually on an 

annual basis.455

Deployment

Table 14 shows the percentage of arterial, freeway, and transit management agencies that 

reported using archived data for various functions from a survey of the country’s 108 

largest metropolitan areas in 2004. The survey covered 546 arterial agencies, 147 freeway 

agencies, and 219 transit agencies. The most common uses for archived data by arterial 

management agencies were traffic analysis, traffic management, operations planning and 

analysis, and capital planning. Most common uses for archived data reported by freeway 

agencies were traffic analysis, operations planning and analysis, dissemination to the 

public, and performance measurement. Transit agencies most frequently reported using 

archived data for operations planning, performance measurement, safety analysis, and 

dissemination to the public.

The 2004 survey of the country’s 108 largest metropolitan areas is the source of deployment 

statistics presented later in this chapter.

ADMS COSTS VARY; ESTIMATES RANGE

FROM $85,000 TO $8 MILLION DEPENDING

ON THE SIZE OF THE SYSTEM AND FEATURES 

PROVIDED.
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | information management 153

Table 14—Archived Data by Agencies in 108 Metropolitan Areas in 2004

Arterial

Management

Freeway 

Management

Transit

Management

Capital Planning and

Analysis

18% 26% 26%

Construction Impact

Determination

17% 16% 6%

Crash Prediction Modeling 4% 13% 3%

Dissemination to the Public 15% 40% 21%

Incident Detection Algorithm

Development

4% 22% 2%

Performance Measurement 16% 37% 35%

Operations Planning and 

Analysis

22% 43% 48%

Safety Analysis 17% 28% 24%

Traffic Analysis 37% 55% N/A

Traffic Management 25% 29% 8%

Traffic Simulation Modeling 17% 26% N/A

Travel Time Prediction 4% 15% N/A
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

154 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

LESSONS LEARNED 

Consider requirements definition and system design issues for archived data management systems.

ADMS offer numerous potential benefits 

including the ability to plan for operations, 

evaluate system performance, and support 

future investment decisions. During the planning and design of an ADMS, there are a number of issues that transportation agencies 

need to consider to ensure the success of 

their project. 

•	 Define the audience that will be the main 

system users so as to understand their 

data and application needs.

The Minnesota transportation management center’s database format is structured to facilitate query response to 

support a broad range of users and applications. Data formats used by the system 

include commercially-available relational 

database applications. Moreover, system 

developers focused on ensuring that all 

data were centralized and distributed via 

the Internet.

•	 Use commercially-available or open-source 

software over proprietary or custom-designed systems.

Sharing of software code with other public sector ADMS developers may result in 

development of a set of standard practices 

to assure that minimum quality standards 

are addressed. Systems that rely largely 

on open-source software to address data 

collection can collect data via the Internet, CD-ROMs, or dedicated telephone 

lines.463

Selected Highlights from the ITS Knowledge

Resources on Information Management

Data Archiving

Data archiving is the collection, storage, and distribution of ITS data for transportation planning, administration, policy, operations, safety analyses, and research. Data archiving systems 

make use of a variety of software, database, and electronic data storage technologies.

Data Archiving

Deployment

Data collection and archiving were reported by arterial management agencies in 77 

metropolitan areas, by freeway management agencies in 49 metropolitan areas, and 

by transit agencies in 38 metropolitan areas.

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Efficiency In Portland, Oregon, the Tri-Met transit agency used archived AVL 

data to construct running time distributions (by route and time 

period) and provide enhanced information to operators and dispatchers. Evaluation data indicated that the reduced variation in 

run times and improved schedule efficiency maximized the effective use of resources.456

Productivity In Montana, weigh-in-motion (WIM) sensors were installed directly 

in freeway travel lanes to continuously collect truck weight and classification data at 28 sites. The study found that if freeway pavement 

designs were based on fatigue calculations derived from comprehensive WIM data instead of available weigh station data, the State 

would save about $4.1 million each year in construction costs. The 

pavement fatigue calculations based on WIM data were 11 percent 

lower on Interstate roadways and 26 percent lower on non-Interstate primary roadways.457

Customer 

Satisfaction

In Virginia, a Web-based ADMS was deployed to provide decision 

makers and other transportation professionals with traffic, incident, and weather data needed for planning and traffic analysis. An 

assessment of Web site activity (from 2003 to 2005) indicated that 

80 percent of the Web site usage was devoted to downloading data 

files needed to create simple maps and graphics. Overall, users 

were pleased with the ability to obtain a variety of data; but they 

wanted more data on traffic counts, turning movements, and work 

zones, as well as broader coverage.458
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | information management 155

Data Archiving

Costs

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Washington, California, and Arizona: A study was conducted of six successful ADMS 

and included cost data from three of the agencies. The annual software upgrades for 

the California DOT Freeway Performance Measuring System ranged from $150,000 

to $250,000 per year and required approximately 1.5 full-time equivalent positions. 

Biannual budgets, which included software improvements, ranged from $250,000 to 

$350,000 for the Washington State Transportation Center ADMS. The annual maintenance cost for the Maricopa County Arizona Regional Archive Data Server is estimated at $150,000, but does not include hardware or software upgrades.459

Virginia: In 2002, the Federal Highway Administration awarded a field operational 

test to the Virginia DOT to use archived data to effect transportation operations and 

management decisions. The scope of the project was expanded to include applications for transportation planners as well as operators. Virginia DOT has set aside 

$300,000 annually to maintain and upgrade ADMS Virginia; maintaining the ADMS 

is estimated to require 1 to1.5 full-time equivalent positions.460

Nevada: The total cost of the Nevada DOT Freeway and Arterial System of Transportation (FAST) central system software design and development was approximately 

$4.225 million. The software provides a fully automated freeway management system, 

plus the capability to receive, collect, archive, summarize, and distribute data generated by FAST. Of the $4.225 million, the cost to develop the design for the implementation of an ADMS for FAST was approximately $225,000. This cost included needs 

assessment, update of functional requirements, update of the regional architecture 

for the Las Vegas area, and system design.461

Benefit-Cost Studies

United States: One study evaluating data archiving at more than 60 organizations 

found that data warehousing generated an average return on investment of 401 percent over 3 years.462

LESSONS LEARNED 

Engage in marketing, training, and outreach of archived data management systems.

Successful ADMS require marketing, training, 

and outreach. Transportation professionals 

may not be aware that operational data are 

being archived and may not be cognizant of 

the potential uses and benefits of the data. 

The stakeholders also may need training in 

order to more effectively utilize the data.

•	 Inform users about the quality of the data 

they are using.

•	 Agencies use different methods for data 

quality assurance and they need to share 

this information with users so that the users can make any necessary adjustments 

in their analyses.

•	 Provide training classes for system users 

so that they understand the data and applications they are using.

•	 The Washington State Transportation Center developed a formal training class for 

the archive and analysis software. A Web 

site was also created to provide training 

support.

•	 Market the potential uses of archived ITS 

data to the transportation community.

Members of the University of Washington 

staff speak at national meetings about how 

the data archive is used and why it is valuable.464 
endnotes 335

451 511 Deployment Costs: A Case Study, 511 Deployment Coalition. November 2006. Costs ID: 2007-00125

452 Model Deployment of a Regional, Multi-Modal 511 Traveler Information System: Final Report, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report 

No. FHWA-JPO-06-013, EDL No. 14248. 30 September 2005. Lesson ID: 2006-00241

453 Yusuf, Juita-Elena (Wie), Candice Wallace, and Steven Kreis. Evaluation of the Eastern Kentucky Rural Highway Information Project 511 Tourism 

Service, University of Kentucky, Kentucky Transportation Center, Report No. KTC-06-10/RS-F2-03-1F, EDL No. 14307. May 2006. Benefits 

ID: 2007-00306

454 Yusuf, Juita-Elena (Wie), Candice Wallace, and Steven Kreis. Evaluation of the Eastern Kentucky Rural Highway Information Project 511 Tourism 

Service, University of Kentucky, Kentucky Transportation Center, Report No. KTC-06-10/RS-F2-03-1F, EDL No. 14307. May 2006. Correspondence with Mr. Wayne Bates, Kentucky Transportation Cabinet. 10 March 2006. Costs ID: 2007-00124

455 Archived Data Management Systems: A Cross-Cutting Study, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-05-044, EDL 

No. 14128. Washington, DC. December 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00173

456 Furth, Peter G., et al. Uses of Archived AVL-APC Data to Improve Transit Performance and Management: Review and Potential, Transportation 

Research Board, Transit Cooperative Research Program, Web Document No. 23, Appendix A. Washington DC. June 2003. Benefits ID: 

2008-00587

457 Stephens, Jerry, et al. An Evaluation of Montana’s State Truck Activities Reporting System, Prepared by the Montana State University for the 

Montana DOT. 11 August 2003. Benefits ID: 2003-00268

458 Sources that support these findings:

National Evaluation of the TMC Applications of Archived Data Operational Test—ADMS Virginia, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, 

Report No. FHWA-JPO-06-014, EDL No. 14250. August 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00560

Smith, Brian L. and Ramkumar Venkatanarayana. “Usage Analysis of a First Generation ITS Data Archive: Lessons Learned in the 

Development of a Novel Information Technology Application,” Paper Presented at the 85th Annual Transportation Research Board 

Meeting. Washington, DC. 22–26 January 2006.

459 Archived Data Management Systems: A Cross-Cutting Study, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-05-044, EDL 

No. 14128. Washington, DC. December 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00173

460 National Evaluation of the TMC Applications of Archived Data Operational Test—ADMS Virginia, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, 

Report No. FHWA-JPO-06-014, EDL No. 14250. August 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00174

461 “Cost Estimate for Nevada Archived Data User Service (ADUS),” U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, ITS Joint Program Office. 

Washington DC. May 2001. Costs ID: 2003-00038

462 Liu, Henry X., et al. A Literature and Best Practices Scan: ITS Data Management and Archiving, University of Wisconsin. Madison, WI. May 2002. 

Benefits ID: 2008-00559

463 Archived Data Management Systems: A Cross-Cutting Study, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-05-044, EDL 

No. 14128. Washington, DC. December 2005. Lesson ID: 2007-00385

464 Archived Data Management Systems: A Cross-Cutting Study, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-05-044, EDL 

No. 14128. Washington, DC. December 2005. Lesson ID: 2007-00385

465 Sources that support these findings:

Jones, Crystal. “Perspective on Freight Congestion,” Public Roads, Vol. 71, No. 1. July/August 2007.

Wilson, Rosalyn. “Embracing Security as a Core Business Function,” 17th Annual State of Logistics Report, Sponsored by the Council 

of Supply Chain Management Professionals. Washington, DC. 19 June 2006.

466 Richeson, Kim E. Introductory Guide to CVISN, Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, Report No. POR-99-7186, Preliminary Version P.2. Laurel, MD. February 2000.

467 Rodier, Caroline J., et al. “Virtual Commercial Vehicle Compliance Stations: A Review of Legal and Institutional Issues,” Paper Presented 

at 85th Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 22–26 January 2006.

468 PrePass statistics from: “PrePass,” PrePass, Web site URL www.prepass.com/Pages/Home.aspx . Last Accessed 14 March 2008.

NORPASS statistics from: “NORPASS,” NORPASS—North American Preclearance and Safety System, Web site URL www.norpass.net/

index.html.Last Accessed 14 March 2008.
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | commercial vehicle operations 157

As of August 2007, 18 states

had completed core

deployment of CVISN and

were working on expanding 

the core capability. Commercial Vehicle

Operations

Freight

With trucks responsible for much of the overall freight movement and carrying approximately two-thirds of the value of goods in the United States, traffic conditions and operational factors that result in unreliable delivery times and missed deliveries can have major 

business implications. Recent reports indicate that business inventories are creeping up 

and reversing the trend towards leaner logistics. In 2005, increased traffic congestion, 

unpredictable travel times, and higher fuel expenditures contributed to a 17 percent 

increase in inventory-carrying costs and a $74 billion increase in trucking costs.465

ITS applications for commercial vehicle operations (CVO) are designed to enhance communication between motor carriers and regulatory agencies, particularly during interstate 

freight movement. ITS can aid both carriers and agencies in reducing operating expenses 

through increased efficiency and assist in ensuring the safety of motor carriers operating 

on the Nation’s roadways. 

The Commercial Vehicle Information System and Networks (CVISN) program has created 

a nationwide framework of communication links that State agencies, motor carriers, and 

stakeholders can use to conduct business transactions electronically. Electronic registration and permitting at State agencies allows carriers to register online, decreasing the 

turn-around time associated with permit approval. In addition, safety information exchange 

(SIE) programs have been implemented as part of CVISN to standardize the exchange 

of vehicle and driver safety information between states and jurisdictions. Enforcement 

personnel at check stations can use national database clearinghouses to confirm carrier 

regulatory compliance data and crosscheck safety assurance information.

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) has created the CVISN program 

with the goal of improving the safety and efficiency of CVO. The CVISN program includes 

a collection of information systems and communications networks that support CVO. 

These systems and networks include information systems owned and operated by governments, motor carriers, and other stakeholders. Nationwide CVISN deployment will be 

accomplished by developing and deploying information systems that will support new 

capabilities in three areas: SIE, credentials administration, and electronic screening. CVISN 

deployment in a state is measured by the achievement of a core capability within each of 

the three major capability areas.466

A State achieving a core CVISN capability is required to meet the following criteria:

•	 An organizational framework for cooperative system development has been established among State agencies and motor carriers.

•	 A State CVISN System Design has been established that conforms to the CVISN Architecture and can evolve to include new technology and capabilities.

•	 All the elements of the three capability areas have been implemented using applicable architectural guidelines, operational concepts, and standards.

Specific requirements for each of the three major capability areas are shown in table 15.

commercial vehicle operations 

Categories in the ITS Knowledge 

Resources

Credentials Administration

Electronic Funds

Electronic Registration/Permitting

Safety Assurance

Safety Information Exchange

Automated Inspection

Electronic Screening

Safety Screening

Border Clearance

Weight Screening

Credential Checking

Carrier Operations and Fleet

Management

Automatic Vehicle Location/

 Computer-Aided Dispatch

On-Board Monitoring

Traveler Information

Security Operations

Asset Tracking

Remote Disabling Systems
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

158 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Other ITS Knowledge Resource 

Categories Related to Freeway 

Management

Refer to other chapters in this document.

Intermodal Freight

Freight Tracking

Asset Tracking

Freight Terminal Processes

Drayage Operations

Freight-Highway Connector System

International Border Crossing

Processes

Table 15—CVISN Core Capability Requirements

Capability Area State CVISN Core Capabilities 

Safety 

Information

Exchange 

•	 ASPEN (or equivalent) at all major inspection sites.

•	 Connection to the Safety and Fitness Electronic Records (SAFER) system to provide exchange of interstate carrier and vehicle snapshots among states.

•	 Implementation of the Commercial Vehicle Information Exchange Window (or equivalent) system for exchange of intrastate and interstate snapshots and connection to SAFER for 

exchange of interstate snapshots. 

Credentials 

Administration

•	 Automated processing (i.e., carrier application, state application processing, credential issuance, and tax filing) of at 

least International Registration Plan (IRP) and International 

Fuel Tax Agreement (IFTA) credentials: ready to extend to other credentials (intrastate, titling, oversize/overweight, carrier 

registration, and hazardous materials (HAZMAT)). Note: processing does not necessarily include e-payment.

•	 Connection to IRP and IFTA clearinghouses.

•	 At least 10 percent of the transaction volume handled electronically, with the state ready to bring on more carriers as 

carriers sign up and ready to extend to branch offices where 

applicable. 

Electronic 

Screening 

•	 Implemented at a minimum of one fixed or mobile

inspection site.

•	 Ready to replicate at other sites. 

Electronic screening promotes safety and efficiency for commercial vehicle operators. 

Trucks equipped with low-cost, in-vehicle transponders can communicate with check 

stations. Communication equipment at the roadside can automatically query regulatory 

data as trucks approach these stations and issue a red or green light on in-vehicle transponders, so drivers know whether to continue on the mainline (bypass) or report to the 

station for possible inspection.

In the United States, there are currently two major national electronic screening programs, 

the North American Pre-clearance and Safety System (NORPASS) and the PrePassTM 

program.467 As of March 2008, the NORPASS program was available in 11 states and 

Canadian provinces and had an enrollment of more than 93,000 trucks, and the PrePassTM 

program was available in 28 states and had an enrollment of more than 423,000 trucks.468

The Oregon Green Light program has also reported significant growth. Since the first Green 

Light station was opened in 1997, 21 stations have been equipped and more than 40,000 

transponders have been distributed.469
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | commercial vehicle operations 159

Day-to-day CVO are supported by many other ITS technologies. Automated vehicle location 

(AVL) and computer-aided dispatch (CAD) technologies assist with scheduling and tracking 

of vehicle loads. On-board monitoring of cargo alerts drivers and carriers of potentially 

unsafe load conditions. Real-time traffic information dissemination helps carriers choose 

alternate routes and departure times and avoid traffic congestion and inclement weather. 

Asset tracking technologies enable motor carriers to monitor the safety and security of 

fleet assets and cargo. 

Related to CVO tehnologies are technologies that facilitate efficient freight transport—

especially across modal connections, such as truck-air, truck-rail and rail-sea—which are 

technologies discussed in the intermodal freight chapter. 

In addition to the ITS technologies profiled in this chapter, the Electronic Freight Management (EFM) initiative, a major ITS initiative being conducted by the U.S. DOT, has 

the potential to enhance CVO and freight management. Through the EFM, the U.S. DOT 

seeks to develop service-oriented, Web-based technologies that will improve information exchange between multiple entities (both government and commercial) and increase 

the efficiency of cargo transfer. The new Web-based services are intended to improve

the visibility of shipments in the supply chain, reduce redundant data entry, improve 

diagnostic tracking, simplify interfaces with government authorities, and enhance security. 470 Additional information on this initiative is available at the ITS JPO’s Web site: 

www.its.dot.gov/efm. 

Findings

Benefits

Table 16 documents experience with the ITS applications for CVO. The various strategies 

that have been evaluated have shown substantial improvements under the safety, mobility 

and productivity goal areas. Electronic credentialing reduced paperwork and saved carriers 

participating in the CVISN Model Deployment 60 to 75 percent on credentialing costs.471

Electronic screening has been shown to moderately reduce emissions through reduced 

congestion at inspection stations. Drivers and operating companies are generally satisfied 

with the various programs, though particular applications have been troubling to truck 

drivers in some instances. Both motorcoach and truck drivers held favorable opinions of 

commercial vehicle electronic clearance, while a survey of Maryland motor carriers found 

that carriers with large fleets (25 or more vehicles) conducting business with State agencies 

value electronic data interchange and Internet technologies more than small fleets.472
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

160 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Table 16—Commercial Vehicle Operations Benefits Summary Safety Mobility Efficiency Productivity Energy and Environment

CustomerSatisfaction

Credentials Administration ● ●

Safety Assurance ●

Electronic Screening ● ● ✚ ●

Carrier Operations and Fleet 

Management ● ● ●

Security Operations

● Substantial positive impacts ✚ Positive impacts

❍ Negligible impacts ✱ Mixed results

✖ Negative impacts blank Not enough data

Costs

To help States track their own progress in deploying CVISN technologies, a self-evaluation 

requirement was included in the partnership agreements between the U.S. DOT and individual States. This self-evaluation was tied to the U.S. DOT’s support of infrastructure 

deployment, and research and development in cooperation with the States. Self-evaluation 

reports are expected to foster the widespread deployment of CVISN through the sharing 

of timely, accurate, usable information among States. States now in the planning, decision making, or early deployment stages can learn from the experiences of others; and 

States further along in the deployment process can learn new ideas that might help them 

improve their existing systems and networks.473 To this end, a process for reporting CVISN 

costs data was established, and the results of the costs data collection and analysis were 

published and the costs data imported to the ITS Costs Database. Examples of the CVISN 

costs data are presented in the “Selected Highlights from the ITS Knowledge Resources 

on Commercial Vehicle Operations” section below. The reader is encouraged to access the 

ITS Costs Database for complete details on CVISN unit costs.
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | commercial vehicle operations 161

ITS strategies were identified for “full” deployment scenarios to determine the potential benefits from a coordinated and complementary system in three metropolitan areas: 

Seattle, Tucson, and Cincinnati. The ITS strategies for CVO included weigh-in-motion 

(WIM), SIE, and a combination of screening and clearance for credentials and safety. For 

Seattle and Cincinnati, the average life cycle costs of the resources necessary to implement, operate, and maintain CVO estimated for 2003 conditions were $23 million and $23.1 

million, respectively. For Tucson, the average life cycle costs of the resources necessary to 

implement, operate, and maintain CVO estimated for 2025 conditions was $20.2 million. 

It is important to note for CVO, a portion of these costs are to the private sector for the 

equipment needed on commercial trucks to enable automated screening and clearance 

deployments at check stations. The number of trucks in the scenarios ranged from 53,000 

to 60,000.474

Benefit-Cost Studies

CVISN technologies are cost-effective, increasing safety; simplifing credential checking 

and tax administration; and lowering the costs of freight handling, fleet management, and 

vehicle operations. Evaluation data have shown that costs and benefits vary depending 

on system configuration and cost, level of deployment, and the benefits of crash avoidance gained through increased compliance. Benefit-to-cost ratios range from 2:1 to 12:1 

for electronic screening,475 0.7:1 to 40:1 for electronic credentialing476, and 1.3:1 to 6.1:1 for 

roadside safety inspection systems.477

benefit-to-cost ratios range from

2:1 to 12:1 for electronic screening.
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

162 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Deployment

As of August 2007, 18 states had completed core deployment of CVISN and were working 

on expanding the core capability. Twenty-seven (27) states and the District of Columbia 

are in the process of deploying the core capability. Five states are the process of planning 

and design of their core CVISN capability.

Hawaii is developing

its CVO Business Plan

Expanded CVISN Completed—Core Development (18 States)

CVISN Core Development (27 States and D.C.)

CVISN Core Planning and Design (5 States)

Figure 20 – Status of CVISN Deployment
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | commercial vehicle operations 163

Selected Highlights from the ITS Knowledge

Resources on Commercial Vehicle Operations

Credentials Administration

Electronic registration and permitting at State agencies allows carriers to register online, 

decreasing the turn-around time associated with permit approval.

Credentials Administration

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Productivity Three motor carriers surveyed during the CVISN Model Deployment 

Initiative indicated that electronic credentialing reduced paperwork 

and saved them 60 to 75 percent on credentialing costs. In addition, 

motor carriers were able to commission new vehicles 60 percent 

faster by printing their own credential paperwork and not waiting 

for conventional mail delivery.478

Customer 

Satisfaction

Approximately 50 percent of CVISN managers surveyed indicated 

that CVISN electronic credentialing systems can save staff time and 

labor, allowing additional support to be assigned to more critical 

agency functions. Comments from several State agencies show that 

CVISN electronic credentialing and safety inspection software can 

improve data quality, reduce clerical errors, and make it easier and 

less time consuming for carriers to apply for and renew credentials.479

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Commercial Vehicle Electronic Credentialing/Administration subsystem:

•	 State Employee Labor International Registration Plan (IRP) Credentialing

(Legacy): $46K-$163K (annually)

•	 Contractor Labor for IRP Credentialing: $6.4K-$17K (annually)

•	 State Employee Labor International Fuel Tax Agreement (IFTA) Credentialing: 

$13.8K-$111.8K (annually)

Vendor Labor for IFTA Credentialing: $1K-$19.2K (annually)
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

164 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Lessons Learned

Ensure active oversight by knowledgeable 

government staff for complex ITS integration work.

As part of the national Commercial Vehicle 

Information System and Networks program, 

the State of Connecticut deployed a safety 

information exchange system. SIE is the electronic exchange of current and historical 

safety data and the supporting credential 

data regarding commercial motor carriers, 

vehicles, and drivers. In the CVISN deployment, Connecticut sought to establish and 

maintain an integrated statewide safety and 

credential data exchange network that links 

with regional and national data sources. 

Commercial Vehicle Information Exchange 

Window, a database storage and integrated 

software operating system, is being used by 

the State to access this information.

•	 Employ a technologically knowledgeable 

person to manage CVISN contractors.

(Continued on next page.)

Safety Assurance: Safety Information Exchange

Safety information exchange programs assist the safe operation of commercial vehicles, 

providing inspectors with electronic access to carrier and vehicle safety information from 

previous inspections.

Safety Assurance—Safety Information Exchange

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety The results of field testing in Connecticut indicated that inspection 

selection systems supplemented with electronic sharing of safety 

inspection data increased out-of-service order rates by two percent. Modeling efforts estimated that the systems could prevent 84 

commercial vehicle crashes per year nationwide. Further analysis 

indicated that if the system deployment was accompanied by a 10 

percent increase in motor carrier safety compliance, then the number of crashes avoided would jump to 4,332 each year.480

Customer 

Satisfaction

In 2000, a survey of Maryland motor carriers found that large fleets 

(25 or more vehicles) that conduct business with State agencies 

value electronic data interchange and Internet technologies more 

than small fleets.481

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Commercial Vehicle Safety Information Exchange (SIE) subsystem: 

•	 SIE Software Purchased Off the Shelf: $6.1K-$20.2K

•	 State Employee Labor for New SIE Software Development: $20K-$121K

•	 State Employee Labor for SIE: $20.2K-$67.1K (annually)

•	 Contractor Labor for SIE: $14.9K-$42.6K (annually)
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | commercial vehicle operations 165

Safety Assurance: Automated Inspection

Automated inspection equipment can be implemented to remotely test commercial trucks 

for faulty equipment, such as non-functioning brakes.

Safety Assurance—Automated Inspection

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety Four States (Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, and Tennessee) 

participated in a year-long test to evaluate the performance of an 

infrared brake screening system designed to inspect commercial 

vehicles for brake problems as they enter weigh stations. Eightyfour (84) percent of vehicles selected for inspection had some 

form of brake impairment compared to 34 percent under ordinary 

inspection selection procedures.483

Customer 

Satisfaction

In a survey of truck and motorcoach drivers, participants were 

asked about the utility of various ITS applications in commercial 

vehicles. Truck drivers held much less favorable opinions of automated roadside safety inspections than motorcoach drivers.484

Electronic Screening: Safety Screening

In-vehicle transponders can communicate with inspection stations to pre-screen trucks 

for safety records.

Electronic Screening—Safety Screening

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Mobility Most truck drivers and CVO inspectors surveyed during the CVISN 

Model Deployment Initiative felt that electronic screening saved 

them time.485

Customer 

Satisfaction

Motor carriers surveyed during a model deployment of CVISN were 

concerned with the cost-effectiveness of electronic screening methods and the expansion of State regulation. However, most truck 

drivers felt that electronic screening saved them time. Inspectors 

also noted that CVISN saved time, and improved the accuracy and 

speed of data reporting.486

Lessons Learned

(Continued from previous page.)

Effective development and deployment of 

complex technologies require management of contractors by a government employee with knowledge of the technologies 

and good management skills. States have 

varying levels of in-house programming, 

computer hardware, and information technology capabilities. For States that plan to 

contract out significant portions of their 

CVISN software development, it is critical 

to have an internal staff member who can 

effectively represent the State’s approach 

to administering commercial vehicle operations and enforcing regulations, so that 

the contractor-provided CVISN equipment 

and programs complement and extend the 

State’s existing work processes.482
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

166 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Electronic Screening—Safety Screening

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Commercial Vehicle Electronic Screening (Pre-Clearance) subsystem: 

•	 Mainline (High Speed) Weigh-in-Motion Scale: $59.8K-$249.2K

•	 Automated Vehicle Identification Equipment/System: $50K-$99K

•	 Contractor Labor for Electronic Screening Software Development: $196.9K-

$200.1K

•	 Costs for Marketing, Outreach, Publicity: $0.6K-$5.6K (annually)

Benefit-Cost Studies

United States: Analysis of the CVISN Model Deployment Initiative considered startup costs, operating costs, and crash avoidance from better, targeted screening over 

the expected lifetime of the technology. Without considering the cost-saving benefits 

of crash avoidance from increased motor carrier compliance, the study estimated that 

electronic screening would have a benefit-to-cost ratio of 2:1.487

Electronic Screening: Border Clearance

In-vehicle transponders can communicate with customs check points to pre-screen trucks 

for safety records, border clearance, and proper credentials.

Electronic Screening—Border Clearance

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Mobility Simulation models of traffic on the U.S.-Canadian border at the 

Ambassador Bridge connecting Detroit, Michigan with Windsor, Ontario showed that electronic border clearance could save 

equipped trucks 50 percent of the delay through customs.488

Benefit-Cost Studies

United States: A study of electronic border clearance along the mid-continent transportation corridor from Minnesota to Texas technologies found that benefit-to-cost 

ratios for motor carriers ranged from 85:1 to 718:1.489
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | commercial vehicle operations 167

Electronic Screening: Weight Screening 

In-vehicle transponders can communicate with weigh stations to pre-screen trucks for 

compliance with weight regulations. WIM scales can be used for more efficient weight 

screening.

Electronic Screening—Weight Screening

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Mobility A simulation study of an Indiana weigh station found that implementing WIM technology and equipping 40 to 50 percent of trucks 

with electronic screening transponders would significantly reduce 

queue overflows.490

Electronic Screening: Credential Checking

In-vehicle transponders can communicate with weigh stations and customs check points 

to pre-screen trucks for proper credentials.

Electronic Screening—Credential Checking

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Mobility In Colorado, an automated pre-screening system installed at three 

port-of-entry check stations allowed PrePassTM subscribers to 

bypass inspection stations if their credentials were in order. Evaluation data indicated that the automated system saved approximately 

8,000 vehicle-hours of delay per month.491

Productivity Pre-clearance systems that use interagency coordination to deploy 

interoperable electronic toll collection (ETC) and electronic screening systems improve the efficiency of motor carrier operations by 

saving them time and money. Interoperable applications incorporated into a single transponder can save carriers between $0.63 

to $2.15 per event at weigh stations. The greater the number of 

interoperable applications incorporated into a single transponder, 

the greater the benefit. The estimated benefits realized by industry 

through participation in ETC and electronic screening, when combined through interoperability, double in value.492

Energy and 

Environment

In Colorado, an automated pre-screening system installed at three 

port-of-entry check stations allowed PrePassTM subscribers to 

bypass inspection stations if their credentials were in order. Evaluation data indicated that the automated system saved 48,200 gallons of fuel per month.493
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

168 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Lessons Learned

Be sure to identify and take into account 

features unique to each State when designing and deploying ITS technology projects across multiple States.

The use of the databases and human interfaces, developed as part of the field operational test projects, varied significantly among 

the participating States. Much of the variation 

had to do with the technological and institutional environment within each State.

•	 Be sure to account for State differences in 

the commercial vehicle operating environment.

Each State has a unique operating environment for commercial vehicles that will 

need to be considered when designing 

and deploying Commercial Vehicle Information System and Networks technologies intended to be integrated with outof-state systems.

(Continued on next page.)

Electronic Screening—Credential Checking

Customer 

Satisfaction

Drivers of trucks and motorcoaches were asked about the utility of 

various ITS applications in commercial vehicles. Both motorcoach 

and truck drivers held favorable opinions of commercial vehicle 

electronic clearance.494

Carrier Operations and Fleet Management: Automatic Vehicle

Location/Computer-Aided Dispatch

AVL and CAD can assist carriers with scheduling and tracking of vehicles and freight.

Carrier Operations and Fleet Management—AVL/CAD

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Mobility In Europe, several projects investigated management systems 

designed to improve the operating efficiency of carriers. Centralized route planning systems reduced vehicle travel distances by 18 

percent and decreased travel time by 14 percent.496

Productivity A survey conducted by the American Trucking Associations Foundation found that CAD systems increased productivity 5 to 15 percent by increasing the number of pickups and deliveries per truck 

per day.497

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Commercial Vehicle subsystem: 

•	 Global Positioning System (GPS)/Differential GPS (DGPS): $0.5K-$1.8K

•	 Cargo Monitoring Sensors and Gauges: $0.13K-$0.27K

Fleet Management subsystem: 

•	 Vehicle Location Interface: $10K-$15K

•	 Software for Tracking and Scheduling: $10K-$33K
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | commercial vehicle operations 169

Carrier Operations and Fleet Management—AVL/CAD

Costs

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

United States: The HAZMAT Transportation Safety and Security Field Operational 

Test (FOT) was conducted to assess commercially-available, off-the-shelf technology 

that could be deployed in the near term to enhance the safety and security of 

HAZMAT transportation operations. Part of the assessment included collecting cost 

data of the different technologies. On-board monitoring technologies included software products to monitor engine diagnostics and vehicle maintenance that ranged in 

costs from $10,000 to $33,000.

498

Carrier Operations and Fleet Management: Traveler Information

Targeted traveler information systems can help carriers choose alternate departure times, 

avoid traffic, and arrive on time.

Carrier Operations and Fleet Management—Traveler Information

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Customer 

Satisfaction

The FleetForward operational test conducted by the American 

Trucking Associations Foundation provided commercial truckers 

with real-time traffic information to facilitate routing decisions and 

improve the operational efficiencies of motor carrier operations 

along the eastern corridor. Although operating efficiencies were 

not significantly impacted, 75 percent of motor carriers felt traffic 

information was a valuable tool for identifying congestion.499

Lessons Learned

(Continued from previous page.)

For example, during the design and deployment of the Safety and Fitness Electronic Records Data Mailbox, it became 

apparent that New York faced some significant challenges that other States did not 

encounter. New York is substantially larger 

and more geographically differentiated 

than any of the other states participating in the program, except Pennsylvania. 

New York has a border with Canada, so 

information related to Canadian provincial 

addresses is more important there than in 

other states. New York’s large cities result 

in greater statewide complexity of routes 

and commercial traffic as well as a wider 

diversity of local and regional trucking 

companies. Its large geographic area also 

means that a large number of inspectors 

use the systems.495
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

170 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Security Operations

ITS applications can be used to ensure the security and safety of motor carriers. Asset 

tracking technologies can monitor the location and condition of fleet assets (e.g., trailers, 

cabs, and trucks), and remote disabling systems can prevent the unauthorized use of fleet 

vehicles and assist in asset recovery.

Security Operations

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Commercial Vehicle subsystem: 

•	 Driver and Vehicle Safety Sensors, Software: $0.9K-$1.7K

•	 Cargo Monitoring Sensors and Gauges: $0.13K-$0.27K

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

United States: The HAZMAT Transportation Safety and Security FOT was conducted 

to assess commercially-available, off-the-shelf technology that could be deployed in 

the near term to enhance the safety and security of HAZMAT transportation operations. A digital cellular phone with pickup and delivery software with phone/on-board 

directions/mapping costs approximately $250 per vehicle. This technology would 

also include on-site vehicle disabling with the wireless panic remote. Basic asset 

tracking units using satellite, terrestrial triangulation, and global positioning systembased locators cost $139 to $500 per unit; mid-range units cost $375 to $450 per 

unit.

500
endnotes 335

451 511 Deployment Costs: A Case Study, 511 Deployment Coalition. November 2006. Costs ID: 2007-00125

452 Model Deployment of a Regional, Multi-Modal 511 Traveler Information System: Final Report, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report 

No. FHWA-JPO-06-013, EDL No. 14248. 30 September 2005. Lesson ID: 2006-00241

453 Yusuf, Juita-Elena (Wie), Candice Wallace, and Steven Kreis. Evaluation of the Eastern Kentucky Rural Highway Information Project 511 Tourism 

Service, University of Kentucky, Kentucky Transportation Center, Report No. KTC-06-10/RS-F2-03-1F, EDL No. 14307. May 2006. Benefits 

ID: 2007-00306

454 Yusuf, Juita-Elena (Wie), Candice Wallace, and Steven Kreis. Evaluation of the Eastern Kentucky Rural Highway Information Project 511 Tourism 

Service, University of Kentucky, Kentucky Transportation Center, Report No. KTC-06-10/RS-F2-03-1F, EDL No. 14307. May 2006. Correspondence with Mr. Wayne Bates, Kentucky Transportation Cabinet. 10 March 2006. Costs ID: 2007-00124

455 Archived Data Management Systems: A Cross-Cutting Study, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-05-044, EDL 

No. 14128. Washington, DC. December 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00173

456 Furth, Peter G., et al. Uses of Archived AVL-APC Data to Improve Transit Performance and Management: Review and Potential, Transportation 

Research Board, Transit Cooperative Research Program, Web Document No. 23, Appendix A. Washington DC. June 2003. Benefits ID: 

2008-00587

457 Stephens, Jerry, et al. An Evaluation of Montana’s State Truck Activities Reporting System, Prepared by the Montana State University for the 

Montana DOT. 11 August 2003. Benefits ID: 2003-00268

458 Sources that support these findings:

National Evaluation of the TMC Applications of Archived Data Operational Test—ADMS Virginia, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, 

Report No. FHWA-JPO-06-014, EDL No. 14250. August 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00560

Smith, Brian L. and Ramkumar Venkatanarayana. “Usage Analysis of a First Generation ITS Data Archive: Lessons Learned in the 

Development of a Novel Information Technology Application,” Paper Presented at the 85th Annual Transportation Research Board 

Meeting. Washington, DC. 22–26 January 2006.

459 Archived Data Management Systems: A Cross-Cutting Study, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-05-044, EDL 

No. 14128. Washington, DC. December 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00173

460 National Evaluation of the TMC Applications of Archived Data Operational Test—ADMS Virginia, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, 

Report No. FHWA-JPO-06-014, EDL No. 14250. August 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00174

461 “Cost Estimate for Nevada Archived Data User Service (ADUS),” U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, ITS Joint Program Office. 

Washington DC. May 2001. Costs ID: 2003-00038

462 Liu, Henry X., et al. A Literature and Best Practices Scan: ITS Data Management and Archiving, University of Wisconsin. Madison, WI. May 2002. 

Benefits ID: 2008-00559

463 Archived Data Management Systems: A Cross-Cutting Study, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-05-044, EDL 

No. 14128. Washington, DC. December 2005. Lesson ID: 2007-00385

464 Archived Data Management Systems: A Cross-Cutting Study, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-05-044, EDL 

No. 14128. Washington, DC. December 2005. Lesson ID: 2007-00385

465 Sources that support these findings:

Jones, Crystal. “Perspective on Freight Congestion,” Public Roads, Vol. 71, No. 1. July/August 2007.

Wilson, Rosalyn. “Embracing Security as a Core Business Function,” 17th Annual State of Logistics Report, Sponsored by the Council 

of Supply Chain Management Professionals. Washington, DC. 19 June 2006.

466 Richeson, Kim E. Introductory Guide to CVISN, Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, Report No. POR-99-7186, Preliminary Version P.2. Laurel, MD. February 2000.

467 Rodier, Caroline J., et al. “Virtual Commercial Vehicle Compliance Stations: A Review of Legal and Institutional Issues,” Paper Presented 

at 85th Annual Transportation Research Board Meeting. Washington, DC. 22–26 January 2006.

468 PrePass statistics from: “PrePass,” PrePass, Web site URL www.prepass.com/Pages/Home.aspx . Last Accessed 14 March 2008.

NORPASS statistics from: “NORPASS,” NORPASS—North American Preclearance and Safety System, Web site URL www.norpass.net/

index.html.Last Accessed 14 March 2008.
336 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

469 “Oregon.gov—Motor Carrier Transportation,” Oregon DOT, Web site URL www.oregon.gov/ODOT/MCT/GREEN.shtml. Last Accessed 

14 March 2008.

470 The Electronic Freight Management Initiative, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-HOP-06-085, EDL No. 14246. 

April 2006.

471 Evaluation of the Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Networks (CVISN) Model Deployment Initiative: Volume I—Final Report, U.S. DOT Federal 

Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-04-082, EDL No. 13677. March 2002. Benefits ID: 2002-00241

472 The national survey regarding electronic clearance is discussed in Driver Acceptance of Commercial Vehicle Operations (CVO) Technology in the 

Motor Carrier Environment, 1997, Benefits ID: 2000-00141 and the Maryland survey is detailed in Bapna and Zaveri, 2000, Benefits ID: 

2000-00165.

473 Description of Costs Data from State Self-Evaluations of Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Networks (CVISN) Deployments (October 2003 to 

October 2005), U.S. DOT Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, EDL No. 14347. 20 February 2006.

474 Sources that support these findings:

Benefits and Costs of Full Operations and ITS Deployment: A 2003 Simulation for Cincinnati, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report 

No. FHWA-JPO-04-031, EDL No. 13979. May 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00164

Benefits and Costs of Full Operations and ITS Deployment: A 2003 Simulation for Seattle, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-JPO-04-033, EDL No. 13977. May 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00165

Benefits and Costs of Full Operations and ITS Deployment: A 2025 Forecast for Tucson, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-JPO-04-032, EDL No. 13978. May 2005. Costs ID: 2008-00166

475 Sources that support these findings:

Assessment of Intelligent Transportation Systems/Commercial Vehicle Operations Users Services: ITS/CVO Qualitative Benefits/Cost Analysis—Executive 

Summary, American Trucking Associations Foundation. Alexandria, VA. 1996. Benefits ID: 2007-00456

Maze, T. and C. Monsere. “Analysis of a Multi-State Corridor Deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems for Commercial Vehicle 

Operations,” Paper Presented at the 6th World Congress Conference on ITS. Toronto, Canada. 8–12 November 1999. Benefits ID: 

2007-00447

476 Sources that support these findings:

A Report to the Maryland General Assembly Senate Budget and Taxation Committee and House Appropriations Committee regarding Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Network, Prepared by the Maryland DOT for the Maryland General Assembly. November 1998. Benefits ID: 

2000-00142

Assessment of Intelligent Transportation Systems/Commercial Vehicle Operations Users Services: ITS/CVO Qualitative Benefits/Cost Analysis—Executive 

Summary, American Trucking Associations Foundation. Alexandria, VA. 1996. Benefits ID: 2007-00455

Evaluation of the Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Networks (CVISN) Model Deployment Initiative: Volume I—Final Report, U.S. DOT Federal 

Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-04-082, EDL No. 13677. March 2002. Benefits ID: 2007-00486

Maze, T. and C. Monsere. Analysis of a Multi-State Corridor Deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems for Commercial Vehicle Operations, Paper 

Presented at the 6th World Congress Conference on ITS. Toronto, Canada. 8–12 November 1999. Benefits ID: 2001-00181

477 Sources that support these findings:

A Report to the Maryland General Assembly Senate Budget and Taxation Committee and House Appropriations Committee regarding Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Network, Prepared by the Maryland DOT for the Maryland General Assembly. November 1998. Benefits ID: 

2000-00142

Assessment of Intelligent Transportation Systems/Commercial Vehicle Operations Users Services: ITS/CVO Qualitative Benefits/Cost Analysis—Executive 

Summary, American Trucking Associations Foundation. Alexandria, VA. 1996. Benefits ID: 2007-00457

Automated Enforcement in Transportation, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Report No. IR-100. Washington, DC. December 1999. Benefits ID: 2007-00341

478 Evaluation of the Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Networks (CVISN) Model Deployment Initiative: Volume I—Final Report, U.S. DOT Federal 

Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-04-082, EDL No. 13677. March 2002. Benefits ID: 2002-00241
endnotes 337

479 Description of Benefits and Lessons Learned from State Self-Evaluations of Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Networks (CVISN) Deployments: 

Draft (October 2003 to August 2006), U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Draft. 28 February 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00561

480 Evaluation of the Commercial Vehicle Information Systems Networks (CVISN) Model Deployment Initiative (Volume 1: Final Report), U.S. DOT Federal 

Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-04-082, EDL No. 13677. March 2002. Benefits ID: 2007-00489

481 Bapna, Sanjay and Jigish Zaveri. Perceived Benefits and Utilization of Technology: A Comprehensive Survey of the Maryland Motor Carrier Industry,

Morgan State University. Baltimore, MD. 14 November 2000. Benefits ID: 2000-00165

482 CVISN Safety Information Exchange for Commercial Vehicles in Connecticut: Increasing Inspection Efficiency Through Wireless Data Access at the Roadside, 

U.S.DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-04-030, EDL No. 13981. September 2004. Lesson ID: 2006-00232

483 Evaluation of Infrared Brake Screening Technology: Final Report, U.S. DOT, Report No. DOT-MC-01-007, EDL No. 13339. December 2000. Benefits ID: 2001-00203

484 Driver Acceptance of Commercial Vehicle Operations (CVO) Technology in the Motor Carrier Environment, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, 

Report No. FHWA-JPO-97-00-10, EDL No. 714. 1997. Benefits ID: 2000-00141

485 Evaluation of the Commercial Vehicle Information Systems Networks (CVISN) Model Deployment Initiative (Volume 1: Final Report), U.S. DOT Federal 

Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-04-082, EDL No. 13677. March 2002. Benefits ID: 2007-00488

486 Evaluation of the Commercial Vehicle Information Systems Networks (CVISN) Model Deployment Initiative (Volume 1: Final Report), U.S. DOT Federal 

Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-04-082, EDL No. 13677. March 2002. Benefits ID: 2007-00487

487 Evaluation of the Commercial Vehicle Information Systems Networks (CVISN) Model Deployment Initiative (Volume 1: Final Report), U.S. DOT Federal 

Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-04-082, EDL No. 13677. March 2002. Benefits ID: 2007-00488

488 Final Evaluation Report: Ambassador Bridge Border Crossing System (ABBCS) Field Operational Test, Prepared by Booz Allen Hamilton for the 

ABBCS FOT Partners, EDL No. 13072. Detroit, MI. May 2000. Benefits ID: 2000-00129

489 Maze, T. and C. Monsere. “Analysis of a Multi-State Corridor Deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems for Commercial Vehicle 

Operations,” Paper Presented at the 6th World Congress Conference on ITS. Toronto, Canada. 8–12 November 1999. Benefits ID: 

2007-00448

490 Glassco, R. “Simulation Analysis of Congestion-Reduction Strategies at an Overloaded Weigh Station,” Paper Presented at the 6th 

World Congress Conference on ITS. Toronto, Canada. 8–12 November 1999. Benefits ID: 2001-00180

491 I-25 Truck Safety Improvements Project: Local Evaluation Report, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-05-039, 

EDL No. 14121. 29 December 2004. Benefits ID: 2008-00562

492 Electronic Toll Collection/Electronic Screening Interoperability Pilot Test Final Report Synthesis, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, EDL No. 

14256. 29 July 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00563

493 I-25 Truck Safety Improvements Project: Local Evaluation Report, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-JPO-05-039, 

EDL No. 14121. 29 December 2004. Benefits ID: 2008-00564

494 Driver Acceptance of Commercial Vehicle Operations (CVO) Technology in the Motor Carrier Environment, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, 

Report No. FHWA-JPO-97-00-10, EDL No. 714. 1997. Benefits ID: 2000-00141

495 Evaluation of the I-95 Commercial Vehicle Operations Roadside Safety and Safer Data Mailbox Field Operational Tests, U.S. DOT Federal Highway 

Administration, EDL No. 13787. 29 March 2002. Lesson ID: 2006-00236

496 “Telematics Applications Programme, 4th Framework Programme,” RTD&D 1994–1998, Web site URL www.cordis.lu/telematics/tap_

transport/research/10.html. Last Accessed 14 December 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00565

497 A Survey of the Use of Six Computing and Communications Technologies in Urban Trucking Operations, American Trucking Associations Foundation. 

Alexandria, VA. 1992. Benefits ID: 2000-00090

498 Hazardous Material Transportation Safety and Security Field Operational Test: Final Report—Deployment Team, U.S. DOT Federal Motor Carrier 

Safety Administration. 31 August 2004. Costs ID: 2006-00100

499 FleetForward Evaluation: Final Report, I-95 Corridor Coalition, EDL No. 13283. Rockville, MD. October 2000. Benefits ID: 2001-00189

500 Hazardous Material Transportation Safety and Security Field Operational Test: Final Report—Deployment Team, U.S. DOT Federal Motor Carrier 

Safety Administration. 31 August 2004. Costs ID: 2006-00100
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | intermodal freight 171

The HAZMAT transportation 

Safety and Security Field

Operational TEst found that 

basic in-vehicle tracking

equipment ranged from Intermodal Freight $429 to $995 per vehicle.

Freight

The dramatic growth in freight movement over the last several years has severely strained 

the transportation network. Landside access to U.S. ports, congestion on highways around 

major gateways, delays at border crossings, and congestion at major east-west rail interchanges have created major freight bottlenecks. 

With increasing threats to productivity (i.e., shortage of drivers, high insurance rates, highway congestion, and increasing fuel and labor costs501), ITS technologies that support 

efficient and reliable freight transportation along the supply chain and can help the freight 

industry benefit from just-in-time, lean-inventory business models. 

Freight tracking applications can monitor, detect, and communicate freight status information to ensure containers remain sealed while en route. In addition, asset tracking technologies can monitor the location and identity of containers in real time. ITS freight terminal 

processes can improve operations at freight transfer stations, using information technology to expedite procedures often carried out using paper records. These technologies 

combined can provide an electronic freight manifest, reducing shipment processing time 

and increasing the productivity of freight carriers and the freight transportation system. 

Security can be augmented by tracking devices that confirm the location and condition of 

freight as it is sealed for transfer. ITS support for drayage operations can promote the efficient transfer of cargo by truck around major port facilities, using information technology 

to provide dispatchers and truck drivers with information on vessel traffic, container/cargo 

availability, on- and off-port traffic conditions, and delay times at terminal entrances. At 

international border crossings, automating revenue transactions and faster, more efficient 

confirmation of cargo manifest information can reduce delays associated with customs 

and tax collection processing. In addition, ITS applications that optimize traffic control and 

coordinate transfers near intermodal ports of entry can help reduce the strain of increased 

freight movement on the Nation’s freight-highway connector system.

Related to intermodal freight technologies are technologies that facilitate safe and efficient motor carrier operations, which are discussed in the commercial vehicle operations 

chapter.

To support the U.S. DOT Congestion Initiative and reduce congestion at ports and terminals, the U.S. DOT developed the Framework for a National Freight Policy and implemented the 

Electronic Freight Management (EFM) initiative. 

The EFM, a major ITS initiative being conducted by U.S. DOT, seeks to develop serviceoriented Web-based technologies that have the potential to improve information exchange 

between multiple entities (both government and commercial) and increase the efficiency 

of cargo transfer. 

The Framework for a National Freight Policy lays out a vision and objectives, then details strategies and tactics that the U.S. DOT and its partners in the public and private sectors can 

pursue to achieve these objectives. A draft was developed in 2006. Since that time, the 

U.S. DOT has been soliciting feedback on the policy, in order to building support among 

stakeholders. 

For more information, visit the ITS JPO and Framework for a National Freight Policy Web sites: 

www.its.dot.gov and ostpxweb.dot.gov/freight_policy_framework.html. 

Intermodal Freight Categories in 

the ITS Knowledge Resources

Freight Tracking

Asset Tracking

Freight Terminal Processes

Drayage Operations

Freight-Highway Connector System

International Border Crossing Processes
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

172 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Other ITS Knowledge Resource 

Categories Related to

INTERMODAL FREIGHT

Refer to other chapters in this document.

Commercial Vehicle Operations

Credentials Administration

Carrier Operations and Fleet

Management

Security Operations

Findings

Benefits

Electronic supply chain manifest (ESCM) systems that automate the transfer of intelligent 

freight data between supply chain partners and government agencies have enabled freight 

operators to reduce administrative burdens, shorten processing times, and lower the cost 

of cargo movement. Initial field operational tests indicate that these automated tools, when 

applied to a domestic supply chain, can reduce the time it takes to accept and process 

cargo transfer documents by more than 50 percent.502

For international shipments, where multiple freight transactions and customs are required, 

ESCM systems can have even greater potential. An evaluation study conducted in Taiwan 

showed that approximately 70 percent of the paperwork required for international air cargo 

shipments included redundant data entry that could have been handled by automated 

ESCM systems.503

An evaluation of the potential impacts of a nationwide ESCM network estimated that 

there are about 0.17 billion air cargo shipments each year in the United States that could 

benefit from ESCM.504 With potential cost saving benefits ranging from $11.77 to $16.20 

per air-freight shipment, 505ESCM could save the freight industry more than $2 billion per 

year.506Additional data on the cost to build a nationwide network should become available 

as the system develops.

Table 17 provides an overview of evaluation findings for a variety of ITS strategies for 

intermodal freight. Most results indicate improvements in the mobility and corresponding 

productivity benefits for freight transportation companies. 

electronic supply chain manifest 

systems can reduce document

processing time for air cargo

shipments by over 50 percent.
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | INTELLIGENT infrastructure | intermodal freight intermodal freight 173

Table 17—Intermodal Freight Benefits Summary Safety Mobility Efficiency Productivity 

Energy andEnvironmentCustomerSatisfaction

Freight Tracking

Asset Tracking ✚

Freight Terminal Processes ● ● ✚

Drayage Operations

Intermodal Border Crossing 

Processes ● ●

● Substantial positive impacts ✚ Positive impacts

❍ Negligible impacts ✱ Mixed results

✖ Negative impacts blank Not enough data

Costs

The Hazardous Materials (HAZMAT) Transportation Safety and Security Field Operational 

Test (FOT) was conducted to assess commercially-available, off-the-shelf technology that 

could be deployed in the near term to enhance the safety and security of HAZMAT transportation operations. Part of the assessment included collecting cost data for the different 

technologies. Of those technologies, many support efficient and reliable freight transportation. For instance, asset tracking technologies can monitor the location and identity of 

containers in real time. The study found that basic in-vehicle tracking equipment ranged 

from $429 to $995 per vehicle. Advanced in-vehicle tracking equipment (multiple sensors) 

ranged from $1,290 to $2,275 per vehicle. Basic costs for asset tracking—tracking of trailers whether tethered or untethered—ranged from $139 to $500 per unit. Mid-range costs 

ranged from $375 to $450 per unit.507
174 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

lessons learned 

Use an interoperable transponder to maximize benefits to both the private and 

public sector.

The Washington State-British Columbia 

International Trade and Mobility Corridor program deployed ITS technologies to 

improve border crossing operations on the 

U.S.-Canadian border between Washington 

and British Columbia.

Interoperable transponders provided a variety of benefits to both the private and public 

sectors, and alleviated motor carriers from 

having to buy multiple transponders. This 

benefit was especially important as transponder-based services were expanded in 

the corridor. Interoperability of transponders 

allowed participants to successfully administer the regional trucking fleets and improve 

truck safety by sharing credentialing information electronically.

•	 Encourage freight carriers to install electronic transponders that enable faster 

border crossing.

(Continued on next page.)

Selected Highlights from the ITS Knowledge

Resources on Intermodal Freight

Freight Tracking

Freight tracking applications can monitor, detect, and communicate freight status information such as the condition and location of goods while ensuring that containerized cargo 

remains sealed within shipping containers while en route.

Freight Tracking

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Customer 

Satisfaction

An air cargo security and logistics tracking system was evaluated 

from 2000 to 2002. The goal was to assess the potential security 

and efficiency benefits of a Web-based electronic manifest system 

compared to a traditional paper-based manifest system.

Manufacturers, carriers, and airports that used the Web-based system felt it was easy to use and were very satisfied with the system’s 

performance with respect to business functions.508

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Commercial Vehicle On-Board subsystem: 

•	 Electronic Cargo Seal Disposal: $0.01K-$0.024K

•	 Electronic Cargo Seal Reusable: $0.034K-$0.42K

Fleet Management Center subsystem: 

•	 Electronic Cargo Seal Reader: $0.3K-$1.4K
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | intermodal freight 175

Asset Tracking

Asset tracking technologies can monitor the location, identity, and status of mobile or 

stored freight containers, chassis, or other transportation assets in real time.

Asset Tracking

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Commercial Vehicle On-Board subsystem: 

•	 Autonomous Tracking Unit: $0.34K-$0.8K

•	 Autonomous Tracking Unit: $0.14K-$0.4K (annual service charge)

•	 Global Positioning System (GPS)/Differential GPS (DGPS): $0.5K-$1.8K

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

United States: The HAZMAT Transportation Safety and Security FOT was conducted 

to assess commercially-available, off-the-shelf technology that could be deployed in 

the near term to enhance the safety and security of HAZMAT transportation operations. Basic in-vehicle tracking equipment ranged from $429 to $995 per vehicle. 

Advanced in-vehicle tracking equipment (multiple sensors) ranged from $1,290 to 

$2,275 per vehicle. Basic costs for asset tracking, tracking of trailers (tethered and 

untethered) ranged from $139 to $500 per unit. Mid-range costs ranged from $375 

to $450 per unit.

510

lessons learned 

(Continued from previous page.)

The deployment proved that automatic vehicle identification transponders could be used 

to monitor the legal compliance of trucks. 

These transponders enabled eligible carriers 

to bypass weigh stations within the corridor. 

The cross-border bypass provided significant 

time savings for private motor carriers, as well 

as resource savings for regulatory personnel. 

As an added benefit, because transponderequipped trucks bypassed border crossing 

queues, the border crossing times for nontransponder equipped trucks decreased.

	Be cognizant that the rate of return is dependent on the rate of participation.

Similar ITS deployments at regular roadside weigh stations may require a longer 

time period for payback of investment and 

are more sensitive to participation than 

border crossing deployments. Border crossing deployments could realize a return on 

investment the first year of deployment 

because of the high volume of transponderequipped trucks.509
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

176 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Freight Terminal Processes 

ITS freight terminal processes can improve the efficiency of freight transfers or freight 

storage by activating transponder tags to track cargo containers within the terminal as 

they are processed and sealed for transfer or storage.

Freight Terminal Processes

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Productivity The U.S. DOT evaluated a Web-based ESCM system and compared 

its performance with a traditional paper-based manifest system. 

ESCM delivered labor cost savings and time-on-task reductions 

in manifest preparation, paperwork handling, communications 

between partners, and actual load transfer times. Manufacturers 

reportedly saved more than 6 minutes per shipment, trucking 

companies saved more than 15 minutes per shipment, and airlines 

saved almost 12 minutes per shipment. The cost savings to air carriers was significant, considering the relatively small size of most air 

freight shipments compared to truckload highway shipments.512

lessons learned 

Have a management-level champion to 

facilitate recruitment of participants and 

retain operational staff.

With the support of the Office of the Secretary of Transportatioßn, the Federal Aviation 

Administration, the Federal Highway Administration Office of Freight Management and 

Operations, the American Trucking Associations Foundation led the formation of a public-private partnership to develop and test the 

electronic supply chain manifest (ESCM), the 

first operational electronic air cargo manifest 

and security system in the United States. This 

project demonstrated the improvements in 

efficiency and security of a Web-based electronic air cargo security system compared to 

traditional processes and paper-based manifest systems.

•	 Realize that lack of participation by 

enough supply chain partners will restrict 

use of an ESCM.

ESCM project participants reported that few 

of their transportation partners enrolled in 

the system. Without a larger number of participants, the benefits are difficult to quantify. 

Several participants stated that they did not 

have enough air freight shipments to adequately test the system.

The ESCM operational test successfully 

demonstrated the use of technology to create a secure intermodal electronic manifest 

system and participants reported overall satisfaction with the ESCM system. However, 

staff turnover and the lack of participation 

by supply chain partners significantly limited 

the usefulness.511
INTELLIGENT infrastructure | intermodal freight 177

Drayage Operations

ITS for drayage operations can promote the efficient loading, unloading, sorting, and transfer of cargo by implementing automated systems and robotics to optimize limited dock 

and port space.

Drayage Operations

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Mobility An analytical demand model estimated the impacts of implementing an appointment system designed to expedite cargo handling at 

transfer stations by pre-registering truck arrival times at terminal 

gates. The model indicated that if all trucks used the appointment 

system, total in-terminal time across all vehicles would decrease 

by 48 percent.513

Productivity Regional intelligent freight data networks and terminal gate scheduling systems reduce non-productive waiting time, emissions, and 

wasted fuel during idling. Evaluation data collected from the Freight 

Information Real-time System for Transport project estimated that 

savings per drayage trip to an ocean terminal would range from 

$21.36 to $247.57.514

Energy and 

Environment

In Chicago, a 2004 feasibility study indicated that automated truckway technologies (automatic truck steering, speed, and platoon 

spacing control) would save travel time and reduce fuel consumption.515
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

178 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

International Border Crossing Processes

At international border crossings, automating tax revenue transactions and faster, more 

efficient verification of cargo manifest information can reduce delays associated with multiagency processes.

International Border Crossing Processes

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Mobility Simulation models of traffic at the U.S.-Canadian border on the 

Ambassador Bridge connecting Detroit, Michigan with Windsor, Ontario showed that electronic border clearance could save 

equipped trucks 50 percent of the delay through customs.516

International Border Crossing Processes

Costs

Unit Costs Data Examples (See Appendix A for more detail)

Commercial Vehicle Electronic Credentialing/Administration subsystem: 

•	 State Employee Labor International Registration Plan (IRP) Credentialing:

$46K-$163K (annually)

•	 Contractor Labor for IRP Credentialing: $6.4K-$17K (annually)

•	 State Employee Labor International Fuel Tax Agreement (IFTA) Credentialing: 

$13.8K-$111.8K (annually)

•	 Vendor Labor for IFTA Credentialing: $1K-$19.2K (annually)

International Border Crossing Processes

Benefit-Cost Studies

United States: A study of electronic border clearance technologies in the mid-continent transportation corridor from Minnesota to Texas found that benefit-to-cost 

ratios for motor carriers range from 85:1 to 718:1.517
338 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

501 Evaluation of U.S. Commercial Motor Carrier Industry Challenges and Opportunities: Final Report, ICF Consulting, Fairfax, VA. 31 March 2003.

502 Electronic Intermodal Supply Chain Manifest Field Operational Test Evaluation Final Report, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, EDL No. 

13769. December 2002. Benefits ID: 2003-00254

503 Shon, Zhengyi, Jinn-Tsai Wong, and Teng-Wei Wang. “Measuring the Cost Savings of Applying Electronic Supply Chain Manifest in 

Air Cargo,” Paper Presented at the 85th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 22–26 January 2006. 

Benefits ID: 2008-00566

504 Electronic Supply Chain Manifest Benefit Calculations—Revised 2005, U.S. DOT Federal Aviation Administration and Federal Highway Administration. December 2005.

505 Sources that support these findings:

Electronic Supply Chain Manifest Benefit Calculations—Revised 2005, U.S. DOT Federal Aviation Administration and Federal Highway Administration. December 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00567

The Freight Technology Story: Intelligent Freight Technologies and Their Benefits, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWAHOP-05-030, EDL No. 14118. June 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00568

506 Electronic Supply Chain Manifest Benefit Calculations—Revised 2005, U.S. DOT Federal Aviation Administration and Federal Highway Administration. December 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00567

507 Hazardous Material Transportation Safety and Security Field Operational Test: Final Report—Deployment Team, U.S. DOT Federal Motor Carrier 

Safety Administration. 31 August 2004. Costs ID: 2006-00100

508 Electronic Supply Chain Manifest Benefit Calculations—Revised 2005, U.S. DOT Federal Aviation Administration and Federal Highway Administration. December 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00569

509 Washington State—British Columbia: International Mobility and Trade Corridor (IMTC), U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, EDL No. 

13952. October 2003. Lesson ID: 2006-00211

510 Hazardous Material Transportation Safety and Security Field Operational Test: Final Report—Deployment Team, U.S. DOT Federal Motor Carrier 

Safety Administration. 31 August 2004. Costs ID: 2006-00100

511 Electronic Intermodal Supply Chain Manifest Field Operational Test Evaluation Final Report, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, EDL No. 

13769. December 2002. Lesson ID: 2006-00202

512 Sources that support these findings:

Electronic Supply Chain Manifest Benefit Calculations—Revised 2005, U.S. DOT Federal Aviation Administration and Federal Highway Administration. December 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00567

Sedor, Joanne and Michael Onder. “A High-Tech Route for Freight Efficiency,” Public Roads, Vol. 69, No. 6. May/June 2006.

513 Freight Information Real-Time System for Transport (FIRST): Evaluation Final Report, U.S. DOT, EDL No. 13951. October 2003. Benefits ID: 

2004-00275

514 The Freight Technology Story: Intelligent Freight Technologies and Their Benefits, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWAHOP-05-030, EDL No. 14118. June 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00568

515 Shladover, Steven E., et al. Assessment of the Applicability of Cooperative Vehicle-Highway Automation Systems to Bus Transit and Intermodal Freight: 

Case Study Feasibility Analyses in the Metropolitan Chicago Region, University of California PATH Program, Report No. UCB-ITS-PRR-2004-26. 

Berkeley, CA. 19 August 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00461

516 Final Evaluation Report: Ambassador Bridge Border Crossing System (ABBCS) Field Operational Test, Prepared by Booz Allen Hamilton for the 

ABBCS FOT Partners, EDL No. 13072. Detroit, MI. May 2000. Benefits ID: 2000-00129

517 Maze, T. and C. Monsere. “Analysis of a Multi-State Corridor Deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems for Commercial Vehicle Operations,” Paper Presented at the 6th World Congress Conference on ITS. Toronto, Canada. 8–12 January 1999. Benefits ID: 

2007-00448

518 Sources that support these findings:

Carnell, Robert C. and Nancy J. McMillan. “Conditional Analysis of Safety Benefits of a Collision Warning System and Adaptive Cruise 

Control in Commercial Trucks,” Paper Presented at the 86th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 

21–25 January 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00570
INTELLIGENT VEHICLES 179

INTELLIGENT VEHICLES: ITS APPLICATIONS

Collision Avoidance

Driver Assistance 

Collision Notification 

In-vehicle applications of ITS use vehicle-mounted sensors and communications devices to 

assist with the safe operation of vehicles, prevent crashes, and mitigate the consequences 

of crashes that do occur. Collision avoidance systems monitor a vehicle’s surroundings and 

provide warnings to the driver regarding dangerous conditions that may lead to a collision. 

Driver assistance systems provide information and, in some cases, assume partial control 

of the vehicle to assist with the safe operation of the vehicle. With the aim of speeding 

aid to victims after a crash occurs, collision notification systems alert responders when 

a crash occurs, with more advanced systems providing additional information on crash 

characteristics that can aid medical personnel.

Vehicle infrastructure integration represents an opportunity to improve a number of the 

vehicle-based ITS applications described in the following chapters. Updated information 

provided to vehicles through in-vehicle technologies could, for example, provide warnings of cross traffic at approaching intersections or enable navigation systems to avoid 

congested areas based on current traffic conditions.

intelligent 

VEHICLES
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview
INTELLIGENT vehicles | Collision avoidance 181

Collision Avoidance Categories in 

the ITS Knowledge Resources

Intersection Collision Warning 

Obstacle Detection 

Lane Change Assistance 

Lane Departure Warning 

Rollover Warning 

Road Departure Warning 

Forward Collision Warning 

Rear Impact Warning

An integrated

countermeasure system

could prevent over 48 percent 

of rear-end, run-off-road,

and lane change crashes. Collision Avoidance

Vehicles

Collision avoidance systems use sensors and telecommunication networks to communicate 

with other vehicles as well as with the roadway infrastructure. In-vehicle warning systems 

are triggered, warning drivers when their vehicles are about to collide with another vehicle 

or with the roadside infrastructure. To improve the ability of drivers to take countermeasures, collision avoidance systems continue to be tested and deployed.

	Intersection collision warning systems (CWS) are designed to detect and warn drivers 

of approaching traffic and potential right-of-way violations at intersections.

	Obstacle detection systems use vehicle-mounted sensors to detect obstructions—

such as other vehicles, road debris, or animals—in a vehicle’s path or projected path 

and alert the driver.

	Lane change warning systems have been deployed to alert bus and truck drivers of 

vehicles, or other obstructions, in adjacent lanes when the driver prepares to change 

lanes.

	Lane departure warning (LDW) systems warn drivers that their vehicle is unintentionally drifting out of the lane.

	Rollover warning systems notify drivers when they are traveling too fast for an approaching curve, given their vehicles operating characteristics. 

	Road departure warning systems warn drivers that their vehicle is about to leave the 

roadway, whether they are approaching a curve too fast, or about to drift off the road 

on a straight roadway segment. 

	Forward collision warning (FCW) systems, also known as rear-end collision avoidance 

systems, warn drivers that they are in a conflict situation with a lead vehicle. These 

conflicts can arise when the lead vehicle is stopped, slowing, or traveling at a constant 

speed. 

	Rear-impact warning systems warn the lead vehicle driver that they are in conflict with 

a following vehicle. The warning can be presented by the lead vehicle or transmitted 

from the following vehicle to an in-vehicle warning system in the leading vehicle.

The Integrated Vehicle-Based Safety System initiative, a major ITS initiative being conducted 

by U.S. DOT, will field test several collision avoidance technologies including forward 

collision warning. The initiative aims to accelerate deployment of advanced driver safety 

systems in all new light vehicles and heavy trucks. These safety systems have the potential 

to help drivers avoid the most common types of fatal collisions: rear-end, lane-change, and 

roadway departure. The U.S. DOT is partnering to field test the next generation of safety 

systems in 2008. For more information, visit the ITS JPO’s Web site: www.its.dot.gov/ivbss.
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

182 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Findings

Benefits

Table 18 summarizes the research to date on collision avoidance systems and documents 

the potential safety benefits for each type of warning system evaluated. Several of the 

studies project positive impacts based on the prevalence of the particular crash types 

addressed, and the likelihood that the deployed systems could address these crashes. 

Others evaluated the performance of the systems in field deployments on test vehicles. 

Forward collision warning systems can reduce crashes and improve safety for commercial vehicles;518 however, these technologies can have high initial costs making it difficult 

to deploy cost-effective solutions for fleets that experience few crashes.519 For passenger 

vehicles, CWS can have much broader impacts. Working with industry, the U.S. DOT estimates that widespread deployment of integrated countermeasure systems could prevent 

over 48 percent of rear-end, run-off-road, and lane change crashes.520 This would represent 

1.8 million target crashes.

Table 18—Collision Avoidance Benefits Summary Safety Mobility Efficiency Productivity 

Energy andEnvironmentCustomerSatisfaction

Intersection Collision Warning ●

Obstacle Detection ●

Lane Change Assistance ●

Lane Departure Warning ● ●

Rollover Warning ●

Road Departure Warning ●

Forward Collision Warning ●

Rear Impact Warning

● Substantial positive impacts ✚ Positive impacts

❍ Negligible impacts ✱ Mixed results

✖ Negative impacts blank Not enough data

Costs

CWS are still somewhat in the experimental stage and have had only limited application to date.521 Rollover warning or roll stability control systems have limited commercial 

availability. Rear-impact warning or rear-end impact prevention systems are still in the 

research and development phase.522 Some of the collision avoidance systems are available 

as factory-installed options, as standard items included in the base cost of a vehicle, or as 

a component of an upgrade package.
INTELLIGENT vehicles | Collision avoidance 183

Selected Highlights from the ITS Knowledge

Resources on Collision Avoidance

Lane Departure Warning

Lane departure warning systems warn drivers that their vehicle is unintentionally drifting 

out of the lane.

Lane Departure Warning

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety In the Netherlands, a five-month field operational test (FOT) of 20 

cars equipped with LDW systems found that the number of unintentional lane crossings decreased by 35 percent on secondary 

roads and 30 percent on highways due to the use of LDW. Drivers 

also kept better course to prevent warnings.523

Energy and

Environment

In-vehicle computer visioning technology designed to detect and 

warn truck drivers of lane departure and driver drowsiness reduced 

fuel consumption by 15 percent, increased safety, and provided 

drivers with more comfortable working conditions.524

Lane Departure Warning

Costs

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

United States: LDW systems were originally developed for heavy-duty trucks and are 

transitioning to passenger vehicles. These systems have been available in Japanese 

automobiles since 2002 and entered into the U.S. market beginning with certain 2005 

model vehicles. The cost of LDW systems is difficult to quantify because they are often 

bundled with other option packages or require the purchase of an additional technology package.525
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

184 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

lessons learned 

Incorporate proven technologies and false 

alarm reduction strategies in the design 

of future automotive collision avoidance 

systems.

A field operational test of automotive collision 

avoidance systems (ACAS) was successful in 

building a production-intent, rear-end crash 

avoidance system in a passenger vehicle. This 

system integrated state-of-the-art technologies that performed forward collision warning and adaptive cruise control functions. 

In addition, this program produced a small, 

reliable fleet of ACAS-equipped vehicles that 

were used by lay people in an FOT as their 

own personal cars to experience ACAS functions under different naturalistic driving conditions.

•	 Consider state-of-the-art system design 

issues and technologies for ACAS.

The FCW function of ACAS incorporates stateof-the-art sensor technologies for short-term 

deployment plans. However, improved signal 

processing and threat assessment algorithms 

would enhance FCW alert efficacy by recognizing slower lead vehicles transitioning out of the 

path of the host vehicle. This scenario generated numerous unnecessary crash-imminent 

alerts during the FOT and even forced the 

ACC to automatically brake in response to 

lead vehicles exiting the freeway.

(Continued on next page.)

Rollover Warning

Rollover warning systems notify drivers when they are traveling too fast for an approaching curve, given their vehicle’s operating characteristics. This has been primarily a focus 

of heavy trucks.

Rollover Warning

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety Based on driving data collected during an operational test of 

several collision warning technologies installed on Freightliner 

trucks, in-vehicle rollover advisory control warning messages were 

expected to prevent 20 percent of rollover crashes caused by excessive speed in curves. For the national fleet of approximately 110,000 

tanker trucks, the warning messages have the potential to prevent 

34 crashes, 21 injuries, and 2 to 3 fatalities per year.526

Forward Collision Warning

In the application area of forward collision warning systems, microwave radar and machine 

vision technology help detect and avert vehicle collisions. These systems typically use 

in-vehicle displays or audible alerts to warn drivers of unsafe following distances. If a driver 

does not apply brakes properly in a critical situation, some systems automatically assume 

control and apply the brakes in an attempt to avoid a collision.

Forward Collision Warning

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety Based on data collected from a FOT involving 10 vehicles and 66 

drivers, an integrated system of forward collision warning and 

adaptive cruise control (ACC) functions was projected to prevent 

about 10 percent of all rear-end crashes, and 10 to 20 percent of 

severe near-crashes (with a minimum time-to-collision of less than 

3 seconds with a peak deceleration level by the host vehicle of over 

0.3g).527
INTELLIGENT vehicles | Collision avoidance 185

Lessons Learned

(Continued from previous page.)

•	 Conduct additional research to reduce false 

alarm rates.

Additional research may be necessary to reduce 

the rates of false and nuisance alerts of FCW 

and to enhance the timing of crash-imminent 

alerts for mid-term deployment plans. Proceeding with further FCW enhancement activities 

may depend on successful results from shortterm deployments and sufficient market penetration levels.530

Forward Collision Warning

Costs

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

United States: The U.S. DOT sponsored an independent evaluation of an FOT of 

three advanced intelligent vehicle safety systems: CWS, ACC, and advanced braking 

systems. The three systems were in or nearing commercial production at the time of 

the FOT and were designed for use in commercial trucks. The CWS is based on forward 

radar sensors. If the system detects a potential crash, a warning system notifies the 

driver to take corrective action through in-cab visual displays and audible alarms. For 

the installed costs, the CWS was assumed to range from $2,000 to $3,000 per tractor.

The costs were estimated based on consultation with manufacturers and suppliers, 

and engineering analysis of similar systems.528

Benefit-Cost Studies

United States: The cost-effectiveness of CWS was evaluated for large trucks and 

tractor-trailers. The results indicated that there was little or no economic justification for deploying these systems on all large trucks. With respect to tractor-trailers, 

however, future deployments were economically justified if relative deployment costs 

were lower.529
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview
INTELLIGENT vehicles | driver assistance 187

Driver Assistance Categories in 

the ITS Knowledge Resources

Navigation/Route Guidance 

Driver Communication 

With Other Drivers 

With Carrier/Dispatch 

Vision Enhancement 

Object Detection 

Adaptive Cruise Control 

Intelligent Speed Control 

Lane Keeping Assistance 

Roll Stability Control 

Drowsy Driver Warning Systems 

Precision Docking 

Coupling/Decoupling 

On-Board Monitoring 

Cargo Condition 

Safety and Security 

Vehicle Diagnostics 

Event Data Recorders

On-board safety systems

are offered as an option on 

some vehicles, often packaged 

with comfort, convenience, 

and entertainment services. Driver Assistance

Vehicles

Driver assistance refers to a collection of capabilities and associated technologies to help 

augment key driving tasks, such as navigation, speed control, and parking. These technologies continue to gain interest in the marketplace.

	In-vehicle navigation and route guidance systems with global positioning system (GPS) 

technology may reduce driver error, increase safety, and save time by improving driver 

decisions in unfamiliar areas.

	Integrated communication systems that enable drivers and dispatchers to coordinate rerouting decisions on-the-fly can also save time and money, and improve productivity.

	In-vehicle vision enhancement improves visibility for driving conditions involving reduced sight distance due to night driving, inadequate lighting, fog, drifting snow, or 

other inclement weather conditions. 

	Object detection systems, such as parking aids for passenger vehicles, warn the driver of 

an object (front, side, or back) that is in the path of or adjacent to the path of the vehicle. 

	Adaptive cruise control (ACC), intelligent speed control, and lane-keeping assistance 

assist drivers with safe vehicle operation. 

	Roll stability control systems take corrective action, such as throttle control or braking, when sensors detect that a vehicle is in a potential rollover situation. 

	Drowsy driver warning systems alert the driver that he or she is fatigued which may 

lead to lane departure or road departure. 

	Precision docking systems automate precise positioning of vehicles at loading/unloading areas. 

	Coupling/decoupling systems help vehicle operators link multiple vehicles, such as 

buses or trucks, into platoons. 

	On-board monitoring systems track and report cargo condition, safety and security 

status, and the mechanical condition of vehicles equipped with in-vehicle diagnostics. 

This information can be presented to the driver immediately, transmitted off-board, or 

stored. In the event of a crash or near-crash, in-vehicle event data recorders can record 

vehicle performance data and other input from video cameras or radar sensors to improve the post-processing of crash data. 

Many of these driver assistance systems have begun to emerge in production automobiles. 

Several other chapters in this report discuss ITS applications related to driver assistance 

technologies. Many of the technologies that enable the warning systems discussed in the 

Collision Avoidance chapter also support the driver assistance capabilities discussed in this 

chapter. Traveler information programs can provide important data to in-vehicle navigation 

systems, improving the performance of these devices. Data recorded by in-vehicle devices 

can be archived and monitored over time to improve vehicle performance and facilitate 

vehicle safety studies for future enhancements to vehicle technology. 

The Vehicle Infrastructure Integration (VII) initiative, which seeks to enhance communication between vehicles and the roadside infrastructure, will have an impact on the 

deployment of ITS applications for driver assistance in the coming years. The availability of 

enhanced information on traffic conditions has the potential to improve the performance of 

in-vehicle navigation systems. For example, information transmitted from the roadside also 

has the potential to enhance lane keeping assistance. VII has the potential to impact many 

other aspects of ITS deployment discussed throughout this report. Additional information 

on the VII initiative is available at the ITS JPO’s Web site: www.its.dot.gov/vii.
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

188 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Other ITS Knowledge Resource 

Categories Related to Driver

Assistance

Refer to other chapters in this document.

Traveler Information

Pre-Trip Information

En Route Information 

Information Management

Data Archiving

Collision Avoidance

Obstacle Detection

Lane Change Assistance

Lane Departure Warning

Road Departure Warning

Forward Collision Warning

Rear Impact Warning

Findings

Benefits

As shown in table 19, evaluations have documented the performance of in-vehicle navigation systems, driver communication systems, ACC, and roll stability control.

In-vehicle navigation and route guidance systems have gained mainstream acceptance 

and are widely available in private vehicles. Studies of the systems from the mid-to-late 

1990s identified the ability of the devices to provide mobility benefits and improve safety 

by routing travelers to limited-access freeways and major arterials. When linked to sources 

of current traffic congestion information to provide dynamic routing, one study found that 

the devices could reduce traffic congestion and thereby provide additional network capacity. 

These studies also found travelers had favorable impressions of the devices. 

Several studies have been completed assessing the potential of ACC, which is now available in some private vehicles. The most recent studies have found that the systems are 

most effective at improving safety when bundled with collision warning systems. With 

widespread deployment, ACC has the ability to reduce vehicle emissions and increase the 

capacity of roadways. Drivers have demonstrated an acceptance of ACC.

While both cars and sport utility vehicles (SUVs) benefit from electronic stability control 

systems, the reduction in the risk of single-vehicle crashes was significantly greater for 

SUVs (49 to 67 percent) than for cars (33 to 44 percent).531With respect to fatal single-vehicle 

crashes, however, the impacts were similar (59 percent reduction for SUVs and 53 percent 

reduction for cars).532

Electronic stability control reduces 

the risk of fatal single-vehicle crashes 

by 59 percent for suvs and 53 percent 

for cars.
INTELLIGENT vehicles | driver assistance 189

Table 19—Driver Assistance Benefits Summary Safety Mobility Efficiency Productivity 

Energy andEnvironmentCustomerSatisfaction

Navigation/Route Guidance ✚ ● ● ●

Driver Communication ●

Vision Enhancement

Object Detection

Adaptive Cruise Control ● ✚ ✚ ●

Intelligent Speed Control

Lane Keeping Assistance

Roll Stability Control ●

Drowsy Driver Warning Systems

Precision Docking

Coupling/Decoupling

On-Board Monitoring

● Substantial positive impacts ✚ Positive impacts

❍ Negligible impacts ✱ Mixed results

✖ Negative impacts blank Not enough data

Costs

On-board safety systems are offered as an option on some vehicles, but more often than 

not these systems are being packaged with comfort, convenience, and entertainment 

services. A consumer willing to pay for ACC, for example, may forgo the purchase if required 

to buy a more expensive package that includes unrelated and unwanted features such as 

climate-controlled front seats and a rear-view monitor. As a result, this bundling approach 

is deterring consumers from purchasing safety systems. Another side effect of bundling is 

the difficulty in determining the cost of each individual ITS technology.533
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

190 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Selected Highlights from the ITS Knowledge

Resources on Driver Assistance

Navigation/Route Guidance

In-vehicle navigation systems with GPS technology may reduce driver error, increase safety, 

and save time by improving driver decisions in unfamiliar areas. The systems may be linked 

to traveler information services to provided updated routing instructions that account for 

current traffic conditions.

Navigation/Route Guidance

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety In Orlando, Florida, a simulation study of navigation devices found 

that drivers using the devices reduced their crash risk by four percent as a result of improved wrong turn performance and the tendency of the system to select routes with improved (normally safer) 

facilities.534

Mobility Summary Finding: In-vehicle navigation/route guidance devices 

can reduce travel times by 4 to 10 percent under normal traffic conditions or recurring traffic congestion.535

Efficiency A simulation study of roadways in Orlando, Florida found that, 

assuming a market penetration of 30 percent, dynamic route guidance would allow the road network to handle a 10 percent increase 

in vehicle volumes.536

Customer

Satisfaction

In San Antonio, Texas, 60 percent of drivers of paratransit vehicles 

equipped with in-vehicle navigation devices reported that they 

saved time and felt safer than using paper maps.537

Costs

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

United States: Navigation units are available as optional or standard equipment on 

many vehicle models. Based on available market data, increased sales in both types 

of purchases are likely. Navigation units are often integrated with other top-selling, 

on-board electronics. Several after-market products are also available, with prices 

around $1,300 to $1,500 for equipment plus about $15 per month for subscription 

to a satellite service.538
INTELLIGENT vehicles | driver assistance 191

Driver Communication

Integrated driver communication systems enable drivers and dispatchers to coordinate 

re-routing decisions on-the-fly and can also save time and money, and improve productivity.

Driver Communication

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Productivity An advanced routing and decision-making software communications program for commercial vehicles helped dispatchers organize 

and route time-sensitive delivery orders. The system increased the 

number of deliveries per driver-hour by 24 percent.539

Driver Communication

Costs

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Michigan: The Flint Mass Transportation Authority (MTA) developed a plan to deploy 

ITS technologies to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of transit service in Genesee County. To provide communication between the driver and the dispatch center, 

the plan included the deployment of mobile data terminals on 250 vehicles. Costs are 

estimated at $4,000 per unit, or $1 million for the fleet. Operations and maintenance 

(O&M) costs are estimated at $100,000 per year.

540
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

192 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Vision Enhancement

In-vehicle vision enhancement improves visibility during night driving, inadequate lighting, 

fog, drifting snow, or other inclement weather conditions. These systems may also monitor 

vehicle blind spots to assist the driver in making safe lane changes.

Vision Enhancement

Costs

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

United States: Blind spot monitoring provides warnings to drivers that another vehicle is in one of the “blind” spots to the side and rear of the car. One such system available on the U.S. market utilizes digital camera-based sensors mounted on the exterior 

side mirrors and provides a visual warning when another vehicle is in the blind spot. 

This system is available as an option and is priced at approximately $500 per vehicle. 

Other mirror-mounted blind spot detection systems are in development, but will utilize 24 GHz radar. Production costs for these systems, installed on both side mirrors, 

are estimated at $400 to $500 per vehicle.

541

Adaptive Cruise Control

ACC systems maintain a driver-set speed without a lead vehicle or a specified following 

time if there is a lead vehicle and it is traveling slower than the set speed.

Adaptive Cruise Control

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety A field evaluation in Michigan tested ACC combined with forward 

collision warning to form an automotive collision avoidance system 

(ACAS). The study found that ACAS could reduce exposure to driving conflicts leading to rear-end crashes by 8 to 23 percent and estimated that the combined system could eliminate about 10 percent 

of all rear-end crashes.542 An earlier study of stand-alone ACC found 

that the technology was effective at reducing risky lane changes in 

response to slower traffic, but drivers of these vehicles took 0.3 seconds longer than manually-controlled vehicles to respond to lead 

vehicle brake lights.543

Efficiency In Michigan, an evaluation of ACC indicated that the technology 

would improve roadway capacity under conditions of high velocity and short time-headway settings (one second), and reduce 

road capacity if longer time-headway settings (two seconds) were 

used.544
INTELLIGENT vehicles | driver assistance 193

Adaptive Cruise Control

Benefits

Energy and

Environment

Driver response and vehicle dynamics were recorded for one ACC 

vehicle and two manually-operated vehicles in a single lane of 

freeway traffic. The ACC vehicle attempted to smooth traffic flow 

by minimizing the variance between acceleration and deceleration 

extremes. Simulation models based on collected field data estimated a fuel savings of 3.6 percent during scenarios with frequent 

acceleration and deceleration.545

Customer

Satisfaction

Survey data collected from tractor-trailer drivers with one to three 

years of experience driving with intelligent vehicle safety systems—

including radar-based collision warning systems (CWS), ACC systems, and advanced electronic braking systems—indicated that invehicle safety systems lowered their perceived workload by 14 to 21 

percent over a range of driving conditions (good conditions, heavy 

traffic, and low visibility).546

Costs

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

United States: The U.S. DOT sponsored an independent evaluation of a field operational test (FOT) of three advanced in-vehicle safety systems: CWS, ACC, and advanced 

braking systems. The three systems were in or nearing commercial production at the 

time of the FOT and were designed for use in commercial trucks. The cost of adding 

ACC to a vehicle already equipped with CWS was estimated at $300 per truck. ACC 

can be bundled with CWS as an integrated complementary package. Bundled packages of CWS and ACC cost approximately $2,300; the cost is approximately $6,300 if 

an advanced braking system is added.547

United States: ACC is now available on most high-end automobiles. The cost to the 

consumer was estimated at $3,000 per vehicle.548

Benefit-Cost Studies

United States: A 2007 societal benefit-cost analysis of the installation of a bundle of 

ACC, a CWS, and an advanced braking system on tractor-trailer commercial vehicles 

found the installation of the systems to be economically justified in two of six modeled scenarios (with benefit-to-cost ratios ranging from 1.1:1 to 1.3:1). None of the six 

evaluated scenarios for deployment of the technologies on all types of commercial 

vehicles yielded a benefit-to-cost ratio greater than 1:1.549
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

194 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Intelligent Speed Control

Intelligent speed control systems limit maximum vehicle speed via a signal from the infrastructure to an equipped vehicle.

Intelligent Speed Control

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Customer

Satisfaction

In the southern Swedish town of Eslov, 25 personal vehicles were 

equipped with governors (speed controllers) activated by wireless 

beacons at city points-of-entry to limit inner city vehicle speeds to 

50 km/h. The vast majority of participants preferred this adaptive 

speed control over other physical countermeasures such as speed 

humps, chicanes, or mini-roundabouts.550

Benefit-Cost Studies

Illinois: In the central area of Chicago, a feasibility study for proposed dedicated 

truck facilities indicated that driver assistance technologies including speed control, 

steering control, and fully automated driving would help to make the proposed network cost-effective by lowering construction costs, improving truck travel times, and 

increasing capacity on the proposed roadways.551

Roll Stability Control

Roll stability control systems take corrective action, such as throttle control or braking, 

when sensors detect that a vehicle is in a potential rollover situation.

Roll Stability Control

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety An analysis of the effectiveness of electronic stability control in 

reducing single-vehicle crashes in passenger cars and SUVs (using 

1997-2002 crash data from five states) suggested that single-vehicle 

crashes were reduced by 35 percent for passenger cars and by 67 

percent for SUVs.552
INTELLIGENT vehicles | driver assistance 195

Precision Docking

Precision docking systems automate precise positioning of vehicles, typically transit vehicles, at loading/unloading areas.

Precision Docking

Costs

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

Worldwide: Costs data were obtained from various bus rapid transit (BRT) projects 

either underway or planned and made available to transit professionals and policy 

makers in planning and decision making related to implementing different components of BRT systems. The data are representative of BRT development costs. Hardware integration for on-board precision docking systems costs approximately $50,000 

per vehicle. Optical/magnetic sensors cost approximately $4,000 per station.

553

Illinois: Precision docking technologies, used for easy boarding and alighting of transit passengers, were one of several technologies evaluated in a case study of transportation problems facing the central area of Chicago. The costs of the in-vehicle 

components were approximately $14,000 when only several hundred units would be 

produced. The costs dropped significantly to $2,700 when production levels would 

be closer to 10,000.554

Benefit-Cost Studies

Illinois: In the central area of Chicago, an economic feasibility assessment of precision docking technologies for cross-town routes found that deployment of the technologies would be economically justifiable if they provided reductions in dwell time 

of 2.5 seconds per stop.555
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

196 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

On-Board Monitoring

On-board monitoring applications track and report cargo condition, safety and security, 

and the mechanical condition of vehicles equipped with in-vehicle diagnostics. This information can be presented to the driver immediately, transmitted off-board, or stored. In the 

event of a crash or near-crash, in-vehicle event data recorders can record vehicle performance data and other input from video cameras or radar sensors to improve post-crash 

processing of data.

On-Board Monitoring

Costs

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

United States: Concierge services widely available through systems provided by 

ATX® and OnStar® assist motorists by connecting the vehicle to a remote operator 

who can then contact and dispatch emergency personnel to the scene of a crash. Typically, the hardware (estimated at $350 per unit) and the first year’s subscription costs 

are included in the retail price of the vehicle with subsequent subscriptions sold on 

an annual basis. The basic safety-related OnStar® service is $199 per year which also 

includes a remote diagnostics system that is linked to sensors monitoring the condition of the engine and electronic systems.556

Michigan: The Flint MTA developed a plan to deploy ITS technologies to improve 

effectiveness and efficiency of transit service in Genessee County. The plan includes 

on-board diagnostics for 100 vehicles to support more efficient maintenance operations and on-road trouble-shooting. The capital costs were estimated to be $200,000; 

the O&M costs were estimated to be $20,000 annually.557
INTELLIGENT vehicles | collision notification 197

Collision Notification Categories 

in the ITS Knowledge Resources

Mayday/Automated Collision Notification 

Advanced Automated Collision Notification

REPORTS FROM THE PRIVATE 

SECTOR INDICATE BASIC INVEHICLE SAFETY AND SECURITY 

PACKAGES NOW INCLUDE

ADVANCED SAFETY FEATURES Collision Notification SUCH AS ADVANCED ACN.

Vehicles

Collision notification systems detect and report the location and severity of incidents 

to agencies and services responsible for coordinating appropriate emergency response 

actions. These systems can be activated manually (Mayday) or automatically (automated 

collision notification or ACN), and typically establish wireless data and voice communications with call centers who then relay the information to emergency response services. 

Data transmitted include vehicle location and the description and nature of the emergency. More advanced ACN systems use in-vehicle crash sensors, global positioning system 

(GPS) technology, and wireless communications systems to automatically determine the 

severity, location, condition, and orientation of vehicles in a crash, and communicate 

this information to emergency responders. Advanced ACN data can assist responders 

in determining the type of equipment needed in an emergency (basic or advanced life 

support emergency medical services), mode of transport (air or ground), and the location 

of the nearest trauma center. 

Over a dozen commercial Mayday/ACN products are available. Many of these products 

are available as factory-installed options on high-end luxury cars; others are installed as 

after-market products. The typical Mayday/ACN product utilizes location technology, wireless communication, and a third-party response center to notify the closest public safety 

answering point (PSAP) for emergency response. 

The emergency management chapter also discusses automated collision notification 

systems. In addition, the traffic incident management chapter discusses enhanced 9-1-1 

service as a means of detecting incidents.

In addition to the ITS technologies profiled in this chapter, the Next Generation 9-1-1 

(NG9-1-1) initiative, a major ITS initiative currently being conducted by U.S. DOT, will 

improve emergency communication, which would, in turn, improve notification of traffic 

incidents. The Next Generation 9-1-1 initiative will establish the foundation for public 

emergency services in this wireless environment and enable an enhanced 9-1-1 system to 

be compatible with any communications device. The goal of the NG9-1-1 initiative is to 

enable the transmission of voice, data, or video from different types of communication 

devices to PSAPs and on to emergency responder networks. For more information, visit 

the ITS JPO’s Web site: www.its.dot.gov/ng911. 

Findings

Benefits

The U.S. DOT tested the feasibility of a Mayday system designed to deliver telematics-based 

emergency calls to a PSAP as if they were conventional telephone calls to 9-1-1. While initial 

acceptance testing indicated that the system was a viable concept, researchers indicated 

that the cost of implementing and operating such a nationwide system would be disproportionately high considering the small representation of telematics-initiated 9-1-1 calls.558

Currently, telematics service providers continue to use emergency advisory personnel to 

receive Mayday calls and manually interface with 9-1-1 call takers. 
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

198 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

As shown in table 20, evaluations to date have documented strong customer satisfaction 

with ACN systems. These benefits include a heightened sense of safety, as reported by 

travelers testing an early deployment of the systems in Washington.559 An evaluation of 

advanced ACN documented improved notification times for crashes reported by the ACN 

system, demonstrating a significant safety benefit that can be achieved using either type 

of ACN system.560

Table 20—Collision Notification Benefits Summary Safety Mobility Efficiency Productivity 

Energy andEnvironmentCustomerSatisfaction

Mayday/Automated Collision

Notification ● ●

Advanced Automated Collision 

Notification ●

● Substantial positive impacts ✚ Positive impacts

❍ Negligible impacts ✱ Mixed results

✖ Negative impacts blank Not enough data

Costs

The Mayday Plus project was a six-month field operational test conducted in 1999 and 2000 

that evaluated an automated crash location and collision severity notification system. The 

project report included the cost data for several Mayday commercial off-the-shelf products. At the time, car manufacturers installed some of these products as factory-installed 

options, while others were installed after market. The cost range for after-market products 

was from $400 to $1,895. Monthly service fees ranged from $10 to $27 depending on the 

level of service offered. At the time the report was written, the Mayday market was rapidly 

changing with an increase in the number of commercial products becoming available.561 In 

a recent study of private sector deployment of ITS, the costs of telecommunications- and 

location-based services designed to assist motorists were estimated at $350 per unit. The 

first year’s subscription was included in the retail price of the vehicle with subsequent 

subscriptions sold on an annual basis. One basic safety and security subscription package 

cost $199 per year with other packages costing $399 and $799 per year. The basic safety 

and security package included advanced safety features such as advanced ACN. Telematics 

services appear to be on the decline as several automakers in former agreements to offer 

such services have discontinued the service due to lack of consumer interest.562

Other ITS Knowledge Resource 

Categories Related to Collision 

Notification

Refer to other chapters in this document.

Traffic Incident Management

Surveillance and Detection—Wireless

Enhanced 911

Emergency Management

Emergency Medical Services—Advanced

Automated Collision Notification

based on a recent study of private 

sector deployment of its, the cost

of telecommunications- and

location-based services designed to 

assist motorists was estimated at

$350 per unit.
INTELLIGENT vehicles | Collision avoidance 199

Selected Highlights from the ITS Knowledge Resources 

on Collision Notification

Mayday/Automated Collision Notification

The typical Mayday/ACN product utilizes location technology, wireless communication, and 

a third-party response center to notify the closest PSAP for emergency response.

Mayday/Automatic Collision Notification

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Customer

Satisfaction

Several surveys of motor carriers asked them to indicate which, 

if any, technologies they planned to install in some or all of 

their fleet vehicles in the future. The most commonly selected 

technologies were Mayday/ACN systems (26 percent), remote 

diagnostic systems (23 percent), and rollover stability systems 

(23 percent).563

Costs

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

United States: Concierge services widely available through systems provided by 

ATX® and OnStar® assist motorists by connecting the vehicle to a remote operator 

who can then contact and dispatch emergency personnel to the scene of a crash. 

Typically, the hardware (estimated at $350 per unit) and the first year’s subscription 

are included in the retail price of the vehicle with subsequent subscriptions sold on 

an annual basis. The basic safety-related OnStar® service is $199 per year with other 

packages costing $399 to $799 per year.

564
1-866-367-7487

Operations/its HelpLine

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

ITS Application Overview

200 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

Advanced Automated Collision Notification

Advanced ACN systems use in-vehicle crash sensors, GPS technology, and wireless communications systems to supply public/private call centers with crash location information, and 

in some cases, the number of injured passengers and the nature of their injuries.

Advanced Automated Collision Notification

Benefits

ITS Goals Selected Findings

Safety Between July 1997 and August 2000, the impacts of advanced 

ACN on incident notification were tracked for vehicles with 

and without ACN systems in urban and suburban areas of Erie 

County, New York. Based on a limited number of crash events, 

the average notification time for vehicles equipped with ACN 

was less than 1 minute with some notification times as long as 

2 minutes, and the average notification time for vehicles without 

ACN was about 3 minutes with some notification times as long 

as 9, 12, 30, and 46 minutes.565

Costs

Sample Costs of ITS Deployments

United States: An ACN system that detects not only airbag deployment, but also 

determines the severity of a crash, direction of impact, multiple impacts, and rollover 

(if equipped with the appropriate sensors) is available in a basic safety and security 

subscription service package for $199 per year, as of 2003.566
338 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

501 Evaluation of U.S. Commercial Motor Carrier Industry Challenges and Opportunities: Final Report, ICF Consulting, Fairfax, VA. 31 March 2003.

502 Electronic Intermodal Supply Chain Manifest Field Operational Test Evaluation Final Report, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, EDL No. 

13769. December 2002. Benefits ID: 2003-00254

503 Shon, Zhengyi, Jinn-Tsai Wong, and Teng-Wei Wang. “Measuring the Cost Savings of Applying Electronic Supply Chain Manifest in 

Air Cargo,” Paper Presented at the 85th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 22–26 January 2006. 

Benefits ID: 2008-00566

504 Electronic Supply Chain Manifest Benefit Calculations—Revised 2005, U.S. DOT Federal Aviation Administration and Federal Highway Administration. December 2005.

505 Sources that support these findings:

Electronic Supply Chain Manifest Benefit Calculations—Revised 2005, U.S. DOT Federal Aviation Administration and Federal Highway Administration. December 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00567

The Freight Technology Story: Intelligent Freight Technologies and Their Benefits, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWAHOP-05-030, EDL No. 14118. June 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00568

506 Electronic Supply Chain Manifest Benefit Calculations—Revised 2005, U.S. DOT Federal Aviation Administration and Federal Highway Administration. December 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00567

507 Hazardous Material Transportation Safety and Security Field Operational Test: Final Report—Deployment Team, U.S. DOT Federal Motor Carrier 

Safety Administration. 31 August 2004. Costs ID: 2006-00100

508 Electronic Supply Chain Manifest Benefit Calculations—Revised 2005, U.S. DOT Federal Aviation Administration and Federal Highway Administration. December 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00569

509 Washington State—British Columbia: International Mobility and Trade Corridor (IMTC), U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, EDL No. 

13952. October 2003. Lesson ID: 2006-00211

510 Hazardous Material Transportation Safety and Security Field Operational Test: Final Report—Deployment Team, U.S. DOT Federal Motor Carrier 

Safety Administration. 31 August 2004. Costs ID: 2006-00100

511 Electronic Intermodal Supply Chain Manifest Field Operational Test Evaluation Final Report, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, EDL No. 

13769. December 2002. Lesson ID: 2006-00202

512 Sources that support these findings:

Electronic Supply Chain Manifest Benefit Calculations—Revised 2005, U.S. DOT Federal Aviation Administration and Federal Highway Administration. December 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00567

Sedor, Joanne and Michael Onder. “A High-Tech Route for Freight Efficiency,” Public Roads, Vol. 69, No. 6. May/June 2006.

513 Freight Information Real-Time System for Transport (FIRST): Evaluation Final Report, U.S. DOT, EDL No. 13951. October 2003. Benefits ID: 

2004-00275

514 The Freight Technology Story: Intelligent Freight Technologies and Their Benefits, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWAHOP-05-030, EDL No. 14118. June 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00568

515 Shladover, Steven E., et al. Assessment of the Applicability of Cooperative Vehicle-Highway Automation Systems to Bus Transit and Intermodal Freight: 

Case Study Feasibility Analyses in the Metropolitan Chicago Region, University of California PATH Program, Report No. UCB-ITS-PRR-2004-26. 

Berkeley, CA. 19 August 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00461

516 Final Evaluation Report: Ambassador Bridge Border Crossing System (ABBCS) Field Operational Test, Prepared by Booz Allen Hamilton for the 

ABBCS FOT Partners, EDL No. 13072. Detroit, MI. May 2000. Benefits ID: 2000-00129

517 Maze, T. and C. Monsere. “Analysis of a Multi-State Corridor Deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems for Commercial Vehicle Operations,” Paper Presented at the 6th World Congress Conference on ITS. Toronto, Canada. 8–12 January 1999. Benefits ID: 

2007-00448

518 Sources that support these findings:

Carnell, Robert C. and Nancy J. McMillan. “Conditional Analysis of Safety Benefits of a Collision Warning System and Adaptive Cruise 

Control in Commercial Trucks,” Paper Presented at the 86th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 

21–25 January 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00570
endnotes 339

Ference, Jack. “The Integrated Vehicle-Based Safety Systems Initiative,” Paper Presented at the 13th World Congress Conference on ITS. 

London, U.K. 8–12 October 2006.

Kanianthra, Joseph N. and Allen A. Mertig. Opportunities for Collision Countermeasures Using Intelligent Technologies, U.S. DOT National Highway 

Traffic Safety Administration. 1997. Benefits ID: 2007-00496

519 Sources that support these findings:

Evaluation of the Volvo Intelligent Vehicle Initiative Field Operational Test Version 1.3: Final Report, U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-JPO-07-016, EDL No. 

14352. 5 January 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00571

Shladover, Steven E., et al. Assessment of the Applicability of Cooperative Vehicle-Highway Automation Systems to Bus Transit and Intermodal Freight: 

Case Study Feasibility Analyses in the Metropolitan Chicago Region, University of California, PATH Program, Report No. UCB-ITS-PRR-2004-26. 

Berkeley, CA. 19 August 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00459

520 Integrated Vehicle Based Safety Systems: A Major ITS Initiative, U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-JPO-05-019, EDL No. 14084. August 2005. Benefits 

ID: 2008-00572

521 Kittelson and Associates, et al. TCRP Report 118: Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide, Transportation Research Board, Transit Cooperative 

Research Program. Washington, DC. 2007. Costs ID: 2008-00148

522 Private Sector Deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems: Current Status and Trends, U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-JPO-06-028, EDL No. 

14266. February 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00175

523 Alkim, Bootsma, and Hoogendoorn. “Dutch Field Operational Test Experience with the Assisted Driver,” Paper Presented at the 14th 

World Congress Conference on ITS. Beijing, China. 9–13 October 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00574

524 “Electronic Devices in Transportation,” Promote Chauffeur, Hahn and FT3/AB Daimler Chrysler, Report No. Brief-7/20/1999-1. 20 July 1999. 

Benefits ID: 2000-00008

525 Private Sector Deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems: Current Status and Trends, U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-JPO-06-028, EDL No. 

14266. February 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00175

526 Evaluation of the Freightliner Intelligent Vehicle Initiative Field Operational Test Final Report, U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-OP-03-179, EDL No. 13871. 

September 2003. Benefits ID: 2008-00575

527 Evaluation of an Automotive Rear-End Collision Avoidance System, U.S. DOT, Report No. DOT HS 810 569, EDL No. 14303. April 2006. Benefits 

ID: 2008-00576

528 Evaluation of the Volvo Intelligent Vehicle Initiative Field Operational Test Version 1.3: Final Report, U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-JPO-07-016, EDL No. 

14352. 5 January 2007. Costs ID: 2008-00176

529 Evaluation of the Volvo Intelligent Vehicle Initiative Field Operational Test Version 1.3: Final Report, U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-JPO-07-016, EDL No. 

14352. 5 January 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00571

530 Evaluation of an Automotive Rear-End Collision Avoidance System, U.S. DOT, Report No. DOT HS 810 569, EDL No. 14303. April 2006. Lesson 

ID: 2007-00328

531 Sources that support these findings:

Farmer, C. Effect of Electronic Stability Control on Automobile Crash Risk, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. Arlington, VA. 2004. Benefits 

ID: 2008-00577

Ohono and Shimura. Results From the Survey on Effectiveness of Electronic Stability Control (ESC), National Agency for Automotive Safety and 

Victims’ Aid. 18 February 2005. Benefits ID: 2008-00578

Preliminary Results Analyzing the Effectiveness of Electronic Stability Control (ESC) Systems, U.S. DOT National Highway Traffic Safety Agency, 

Report No. DOT HS 809 790. September 2004. Benefits ID: 2008-00579

“Update on Electronic Stability Control,” Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, Status Report, Vol. 41, No. 5. 13 June 2006. Benefits ID: 

2008-00580

532 “Update on Electronic Stability Control,” Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, Status Report, Vol. 41, No. 5. 13 June 2006. Benefits ID: 

2008-00580

533 Private Sector Deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems: Current Status and Trends, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-JPO-06-028, EDL No. 14266. February 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00175
340 Its benefits, costs, deployment, and lessions learned | 2008 update

534 TravTek Evaluation Modeling Study, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-RD-95-090, EDL No. 4403. January 1996. 

Benefits ID: 2000-00053

535 Sources that support these findings:

ADVANCE Project: Formal Evaluation of the Targeted Deployment (Vol. II, Appendix J), U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, EDL No. 3324. 

July 1996. Benefits ID: 2000-00093

Metropolitan Model Deployment Initiative: San Antonio Evaluation Report—Final Draft, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-OP-00-017, EDL No. 12883. May 2000. Benefits ID: 2007-00374

“Telematics Applications Programme, 4th Framework Programme,” RTD&D 1994–1998, Web site URL www.cordis.lu/telematics/tap_

transport/research/10.html. Last Accessed 29 October 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00389

536 TravTek Evaluation Modeling Study, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-RD-95-090, EDL No. 4403. January 1996. 

Benefits ID: 2000-00078

537 Metropolitan Model Deployment Initiative: San Antonio Evaluation Report (Final Draft). U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-OP-00-017, EDL No. 12883. May 2000. Benefits ID: 2007-00374

538 Private Sector Deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems: Current Status and Trends, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-JPO-06-028, EDL No. 14266. February 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00175

539 Doyle, Elly, et al. Final Report: Commercial Fleet Management Project, George Mason University, Transportation Policy Program. Fairfax, VA. 

January 1998. Benefits ID: 2000-00007

540 ITS Implementation Plan, Prepared by the IBI Group for the Flint Mass Transportation Authority. Flint, IL. June 2005. Costs ID: 

2008-00151

541 Private Sector Deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems: Current Status and Trends, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-JPO-06-028, EDL No. 14266. February 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00175

542 Evaluation of an Automotive Rear-End Collision Avoidance System, U.S. DOT National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Report, Report No. 

DOT HS 810 569, EDL No. 14303. April 2006. Benefits ID: 2008-00576

543 Evaluation of Intelligent Cruise Control System: Volume I—Study Results, U.S. DOT, Report No. DOT-VNTSC-NHTSA-98-3, EDL No. 11843. October 1999. Benefits ID: 2007-00481

544 Evaluation of Intelligent Cruise Control System: Volume I—Study Results, U.S. DOT, Report No. DOT-VNTSC-NHTSA-98-3, EDL No. 11843. October 1999. Benefits ID: 2001-00207

545 Bose, A. and P. Ioannou. “Evaluation of the Environmental Effects of Intelligent Cruise Control (ICC) Vehicles,” Paper Presented at the 

80th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 7–11 January 2001. Benefits ID: 2001-00202

546 Phase II Driver Survey Report: Volvo Intelligent Vehicle Initiative Field Operational Test—Final Report, U.S. DOT, EDL No. 14122. 28 October 2004. 

Benefits ID: 2008-00583

547 Evaluation of the Volvo Intelligent Vehicle Initiative Field Operational Test Version 1.3—Final Report, U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-JPO-07-016, EDL 

No. 14352. 5 January 2007. Costs ID: 2008-00176

548 Private Sector Deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems: Current Status and Trends, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-JPO-06-028, EDL No. 14266. February 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00175

549 Evaluation of the Volvo Intelligent Vehicle Initiative Field Operational Test Version 1.3—Final Report, U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-JPO-07-016, EDL 

No. 14352. 5 January 2007. Benefits ID: 2008-00581

550 Almqvist, Sverker. “Speed Adaptation: A Field Trial of Driver Acceptance, Behavior, and Safety,” Paper Presented at the 5th World 

Congress Conference on ITS. Seoul, Korea. 12–16 October 1998. Benefits ID: 2000-00157

551 Shladover, et al. Assessment of the Applicability of Cooperative Vehicle—Highway Automation Systems to Bus Transit and Intermodal Freight: Case Study 

Feasibility Analyses in the Metropolitan Chicago Region. University of California, PATH Program, Report No. UCB-ITS-PRR-2004-26. Berkeley, 

CA. 19 August 2004. Benefits ID: 2006-00299

552 Preliminary Results Analyzing the Effectiveness of Electronic Stability Control (ESC) Systems, U.S. DOT National Highway Traffic Safety Agency, 

Report No. DOT HS 809 790. September 2004. Benefits ID: 2008-00579
endnotes 341

553 Kittelson and Associates, et al. TCRP Report 118: Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide, Transit Cooperative Research Program, Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 2007. Costs ID: 2008-00148

554 Shladover, et al. Assessment of the Applicability of Cooperative Vehicle—Highway Automation Systems to Bus Transit and Intermodal Freight: Case Study 

Feasibility Analyses in the Metropolitan Chicago Region. University of California, PATH Program, Report No. UCB-ITS-PRR-2004-26. Berkeley, 

CA. 19 August 2004. Costs ID: 2008-00177

555 Shladover, et al. Assessment of the Applicability of Cooperative Vehicle—Highway Automation Systems to Bus Transit and Intermodal Freight: Case Study 

Feasibility Analyses in the Metropolitan Chicago Region. University of California, PATH Program, Report No. UCB-ITS-PRR-2004-26. Berkeley, 

CA. 19 August 2004. Benefits ID: 2007-00460

556 Private Sector Deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems: Current Status and Trends, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-JPO-06-028, EDL No. 14266. February 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00175

557 ITS Implementation Plan, Prepared by the IBI Group for the Flint Mass Transportation Authority. Flint, IL. June 2005. Costs ID: 

2008-00151

558 Evaluation of the Mayday/9–1–1 Field Operational Test: Final Evaluation Report, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWAJPO-06-049, EDL No. 14297. 19 July 2006.

559 Haselkorn, M., et al. Evaluation of PuSHMe Mayday System. Prepared by the Washington State Transportation Center (TRAC) for the Washington State Transportation Commission. September 1997. Benefits ID: 2000-00027

560 Automated Collision Notification (ACN) Field Operational Test (FOT) Evaluation Report, U.S. DOT National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration, Report No. DOT-HS-809-304, EDL No. 13830. February 2001. Benefits ID: 2003-00252

561 To, Hau, and Omar Choudhry. Mayday Plus Operational Test: Evaluation Report, Prepared by Castle Rock Consultants for the Minnesota 

DOT. St. Paul, MN. April 2000. Costs ID: 2004-00064

562 Private Sector Deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems: Current Status and Trends, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-JPO-06-028, EDL No. 14266. February 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00175

563 Dick, Virginia, Daniel Murray, and Amy Houser. “A Synthesis of Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Technology Surveys: What Have We 

Learned?,” Paper Presented at the 85th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC. 22–26 January 2006. 

Benefits ID: 2008-00582

564 Private Sector Deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems: Current Status and Trends, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-JPO-06-028, EDL No. 14266. February 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00175

565 Automated Collision Notification (ACN) Field Operational Test (FOT) Evaluation Report, U.S. DOT National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 

Report No. DOT-HS-809-304, EDL No. 13830. February 2001. Benefits ID: 2003-00252

566 Private Sector Deployment of Intelligent Transportation Systems: Current Status and Trends, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-JPO-06-028, EDL No. 14266. February 2006. Costs ID: 2008-00175

567 Getting More by Working Together—Opportunities for Linking Planning and Operations, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. 

FHWA-HOP-05-016, EDL No. 14071. 2004. Lesson ID: 2005-00037

568 Regional Traffic Incident Management Programs: Implementation Guide, U.S. DOT, Report No. FHWA-OP-01-002/FTA-TRI-11-00-03, EDL No. 

13149. May 2001. Lesson ID: 2006-00178

569 Rural Transit ITS Best Practices, U.S. DOT Federal Highway Administration, Report No. FHWA-OP-03-077, EDL No. 13784. March 2003.

Lesson ID: 2007-00349

570 Walton, Jennifer. Maintenance and Operations Plan for Intelligent Transportation Systems in Kentucky, University of Kentucky. Lexington, KY. June 

2004. Lesson ID: 2007-00308.

571 Walton, Jennifer. Maintenance and Operations Plan for Intelligent Transportation Systems in Kentucky, University of Kentucky. Lexington, KY. June 

2004. Lesson ID: 2007-00308.

572 Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS)—Operational Support Contracts—Implementation Plan—Final Report, U.S. DOT Federal Highway 

Administration, Report No. FHWA-NJ-2005-010. 31 January 2005. Lesson ID: 2007-00359.

573 Walton, Jennifer. Maintenance and Operations Plan for Intelligent Transportation Systems in Kentucky, University of Kentucky. Lexington, KY. June 

2004. Lesson ID: 2007-00308.