Notice

This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of

the Department of Transportation in the interest of 

information exchange. The United States Government

assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. 
Table of Contents

Note From the Director..........................................................................................................iii

Making the Case for Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination......1

What Can Make This Happen?........................................................................................................1

About This Document.......................................................................................................................1

What Does Collaboration Mean to Transportation Operations?.......................................................2

The Practice of Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination............5

Overview..........................................................................................................................................5

Structure: The Table for Regional Operations Collaboration and Coordination................................6

Processes: Facilitating Collaboration...............................................................................................9

Products: Outputs to Chart the Course and Outcomes to Measure Progress.................................11

Resources: Linking Needs to Sources...........................................................................................15

Performance Improvement: Monitoring and Improving Regional Operations.................................17

Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination and 

the Regional ITS Architecture Development Process............................................................19

The Relevance of the Regional ITS Architecture............................................................................19

Defining the Regional ITS Architecture..........................................................................................19

Leveraging the Regional ITS Architecture Process........................................................................20

A Self-Assessment—Where Are You in Regional Collaboration and Coordination?...............22

Applications of Regional Operations Collaboration and Coordination Planning for 

Transportation Operations...................................................................................................24

TRANSCOM’s Regional Approach to Operations..........................................................................25

Southern California ITS Priority Corridor........................................................................................26

Maryland CHART...........................................................................................................................28

Capital Wireless Integrated Network (CapWIN).............................................................................29

Baltimore Regional Operations Coordination (B-ROC) Project......................................................31

Montgomery County ATIS..............................................................................................................32

Cross-Jurisdictional Signal Coordination in Phoenix......................................................................33

San Antonio’s Advanced Warning to Avoid Railroad Delays (AWARD) Project..............................34

San Antonio Medical Center Corridor Project.................................................................................35

Phoenix’s Roadway Closure and Restriction System (RCRS).......................................................37

Ventura County Fare Integration....................................................................................................38
Note From the Director

Office of Travel Management, Office of Operations, 

Federal Highway Administration

More than ever, the safe, reliable, and secure operation of our Nation’s transportation systems

depends on collaboration and coordination across traditional jurisdictional and organizational boundaries.

Nowhere is this more apparent than in our metropolitan regions where numerous jurisdictions, agencies,

and service providers are responsible for safely and efficiently operating various aspects of the transportation system. Many of these operations activities in a metropolitan region must cross agency and jurisdictional boundaries to be successful. They may include traffic incident management, emergency management, communications networks, traveler information services, response to weather events, and electronic

payment services. These regional operations activities depend on collaboration, coordination, and integration to be effective and truly benefit those that use or depend upon the regional transportation system. 

In this light, the Federal Highway Administration’s Office of Travel Management is pleased to 

present this primer on Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination. The idea

behind this document is based on the realization that for regional operations activities to be effective,

those managers directly responsible for operating the system on a day-to-day basis must collaborate and

coordinate continuously. They need to agree on a shared operations vision, a concept for how regional

activities should be operated over time, what measures to use to assess effectiveness, and how to make

improvements to achieve desired expectations in operating performance. 

The need for regional operations collaboration and coordination to achieve safe, reliable, and secure 

transportation was an important theme at the National Dialogue for Transportation Operations Summit,

held in Columbia, Maryland, in October 2001. The Summit brought together over 240 professionals 

representing academia, planning, engineering, safety, transit, bicycles and pedestrians, and freight, as well

as elected and appointed officials from local and regional governments. The summit was complemented

by a very successful working group sponsored by the Federal Highway Administration and the Federal

Transit Administration, on “Linking Planning and Operations.” This working group met three times over

a 15-month period with a charge to envision ways to make transportation planning and transportation

operations work better together to benefit transportation users. The participants represented professionals

in the transportation operations, transportation planning, and public safety communities from local,

regional, State, and Federal agencies.

This introductory document encourages and enables regional operations collaboration and coordination for transportation managers and public safety officials from cities, counties, and States within a metropolitan region. These managers and officials may include traffic operations engineers and managers,

transit operations managers, police officials, fire officials, emergency medical services officials, emergency response managers, and port authority (e.g., air and water) managers. The primer can help these

managers and officials understand what regional operations collaboration and coordination means, why it

is important, and how to get started. In many cases, this document will also help those local, State, or

regional agencies currently engaged in some aspects of regional operations collaboration and coordination

Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination - iii
iv - Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination

build on what they are already doing well and work toward addressing broader regional transportation

operations and public safety issues.

As envisioned in this document, regional operations collaboration and coordination is a deliberate,

continuous, and sustained activity that takes place when transportation agency managers and officials

responsible for day-to-day operations work together at a regional level to solve operational problems,

improve system performance, and communicate better with one another. The document provides 

guidance on the five key elements that are associated with successful regional operations collaboration

and coordination activity—structure, process, products, resources, and performance measures to gauge 

success. 

Finally, the development of this primer was guided by three important principles:

1. The value of regional operations collaboration and coordination results from having formalized and 

sustained activity between operators and service providers in metropolitan areas regarding regional 

operations policies and projects that cross agency and jurisdictional lines. 

2. Where regional operations collaboration and coordination takes place, institutionally, is not the 

question. What gets done is the important challenge. The focus is on improving operational performance for safe, reliable, and secure transportation systems across a region to better serve the customers. 

3. The regional operations collaboration and coordination activity must be closely linked to the metropolitan transportation planning and decision-making processes governed by Federal law. Stronger links

between operations and planning will result in meaningful programs and investments as well as

improved service to the customer across modes, agencies, and jurisdictions.

We believe that regional operations collaboration and coordination can be a beneficial activity, especially in any metropolitan region confronting the pressures of operating transportation systems in the face

of growth in demand, congestion, incidents and emergencies, weather, and customer service requirements.

We look forward to working with organizations, agencies, and interest groups to advance the ideas presented in this primer.

Jeffrey Lindley

Director

Office of Travel Management
onsider the Possibilities for Safe, Reliable, and

Secure Transportation . . .

During incidents and emergencies, transportation system

operators and public safety officials improve response

times and decision-making by effectively coordinating and

communicating with each other.

During a major highway reconstruction project, public

transit services and traffic operations successfully work

together to manage demand.

Under the spotlight of special events, public transit services, traffic operations, and public safety services move

goods and people and minimize negative effects on the

community by coordinating transportation operations and

travel demand management.

Freeway ramp meters work together with arterial signal

systems to balance demand throughout the regional 

network.

Traffic signals coordinated across multiple jurisdictions

manage mobility and demand to meet community needs. 

Road users hear reliable, timely, and relevant news about

weather conditions and traffic situations thanks to a

regional traveler information service that seamlessly

delivers information across jurisdictions, agencies, and

modes.

Customers move easily between travel modes and

across jurisdictions because of a multijurisdictional and

multi-agency electronic payment service strategy for transit, parking, and tolls.

Hazardous materials moving through an urban area are

electronically identified, monitored, tracked, and coordinated by regional traffic management and public safety

agencies to ensure safe, secure, and efficient intermodal

movement.

Real-time information about regional transportation system conditions and performance shared across agencies

and jurisdictions enables better management of

resources.

Regionally accepted system performance standards and

performance measures drive transportation resource

investment decisions.

What Can Make This Happen?

These outcomes can be made possible when agency

department heads or managers, responsible for day-today operations, work together to solve operational problems, improve system performance, and communicate

successfully with one another through deliberate collaboration and coordination. Regional operations collaboration and coordination builds key relationships among the

agencies and jurisdictions responsible for delivering

transportation and public safety services in a metropolitan region, including traffic operations engineers and

managers, transit operations managers, police officials,

fire officials, emergency medical services (EMS) officials, emergency managers, and port authority managers,

as well as private sector representatives such as port and

gateway operators and traffic reporting media. These

relationships lay the foundation for effective regional

transportation systems and services that cooperate in all

situations, under a range of conditions, and with other

related systems, for the good of the ultimate customers—

those who depend upon the regional transportation 

system.

Serving the public well and planning for performance excellence at the level of a regionwide system

requires more than just the installation of equipment and

completion of projects. This primer provides a reasonable framework to link the actions of the many transportation operators and service providers in a metropolitan region.

About This Document

This primer was written for transportation professionals and public safety officials from cities, counties,

and States who are responsible for day-to-day management and operations within a metropolitan region. It is

intended to help agencies and organizations, and the

operations people within them, understand the importance of regional collaboration and coordination, how it

happens, and how to get started. This document may also

be of interest to agencies such as metropolitan planning

organizations (MPOs) already involved in regional collaborative efforts by helping them build on previous 

success.

Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination - 1

Making the Case for Regional Transportation Operations

Collaboration and Coordination

C
2 - Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination

Following this brief overview of the meaning and

importance of regional collaboration and cooperation are

four main sections as follows:

● The Practice of Regional Transportation Operations

Collaboration and Coordination. This section provides a framework and associated steps for successfully moving from theory to practice. The framework consists of five elements—structure, process,

products, resources, and performance—that, when

taken together, help a region begin and/or evolve

toward continuous collaboration and coordination

regionwide.

● Transportation Operations Regional Collaboration

and Coordination and the ITS Architecture

Development Process. The process of developing a

regional ITS architecture can be the impetus for new

or more effective collaboration and coordination. In

the same way, regional operations collaboration and

coordination can provide a platform for initiating

ITS architecture development in a region that has

not begun the process. This section describes the

synergistic interplay of these two processes in

improving regional operations.

● A Self-Assessment—Where Are You in Regional

Collaboration and Coordination? Agencies can use

this self-assessment tool to determine if they are

starting from the beginning or building upon existing efforts to create and sustain effective collaboration and coordination within their regions.

● Applications of Regional Transportation Operations

Collaboration and Coordination. This section presents examples of how some regions are already benefiting from greater collaboration and better coordination. The examples show the positive effects of

this regional teamwork on transportation system 

performance.

What Does Collaboration Mean to

Transportation Operations?

Collaboration on regional operations policies and

projects by operators and service providers in metropolitan regions is essential for the following reasons:

1. Collaboration enables regional strategic development of projects and policies that have regional

effects on users, including activities such as incident

management, advanced traveler information services, public safety/EMS/security, special events, electronic payment services, and performance measures.

2. Collaboration among operators and service providers

helps answer questions like:

● How should our transportation system operate over

the next 5 years to ensure its safety, reliability, and

security? 

● How should the elements of our transportation system integrate and evolve over time?

● What stakeholders should be at the table sharing

information and making operations decisions?

Strategic Thinking—The Key to Regional

Transportation Operations Collaboration 

and Coordination

Domestic Security.

The events of September 11, 2001, focused

national attention on the need to respond to

attacks on our homeland, both real and

threatened, especially in densely populated

urban areas. The extraordinary response to this

crisis shown by regional transportation and

public safety agencies proved key in saving

lives and evacuating those in imminent danger.

This sobering experience reminds us of the

importance of regional planning for operations

in planning responses to such events. Since

September 11, many metropolitan areas have

developed or refined homeland security

initiatives that respond to a variety of threats,

including nuclear, biological, and chemical, and

that address first response, command and

control, communications, emergency

evacuation, consequence management, and

continuity of operations.

Example: In the aftermath of September 11,

New York City’s transportation system

continued to function well due to coordination

among not only the city’s agencies, but also

those of the region around it. An intricate

system of communication among more than

400 agencies in the region ensured, for

example, that road, bridge, and tunnel closures

were coordinated and drivers remained

informed, ultimately maintaining the flow of

roadway traffic throughout the region.
● Who is accountable for improved system performance and what measures should be used for determining that improvement?

System operators within a metropolitan region are

most likely to achieve measurable improvement in the

safety, efficiency, and quality of service that customers

experience in their day-to-day use of a regional transportation system when they work together to develop

strategies and tactics. The successful conception, development, implementation, and execution of these regional

strategies and tactics may be used to achieve a new level

of interjurisdictional/interagency functionality in the

transportation system. Collaboration should go beyond

solving a problem. Its purpose should be that of combining the knowledge, expertise, and information of many

agencies across jurisdictions to produce and operate an

efficient regional transportation system. 

Building on existing ad hoc relationships, agencies

and jurisdictions within the region can use a common

framework for setting expectations, managing resources,

sustaining relationships, and establishing responsibilities.

The action steps provided by this framework will be used

in developing the structures, processes, products,

resource plans, and performance measures necessary in 

a regional approach to collaboration, strategic thinking,

and information sharing. The combination of knowledge,

expertise, and information that results when agencies

successfully collaborate offers the following advantages:

● Well-developed relationships among key agencies

and jurisdictions, 

● A shared vision among operators and public safety

providers for regional transportation system 

performance, 

● A regional concept of operations,

● Information sharing on a regular basis, and

● Integration of regional systems and organizational

processes.

Strategic policies, programs, procedures, protocols,

and projects of regionwide scope and benefit, such as

traffic incident management programs or emergency

response/management plans, usually depend on integration and/or interoperability for optimum performance.

They therefore require regional collaboration and coordination. By concentrating on issues that cross agency and

jurisdictional boundaries, disparate operators and service

providers work together to improve the services they

provide. Whether the task is as broad as homeland security or as specific as electronic payment services, the

approach will prove integral to defining visions and goals

for ongoing, strategic regional transportation operations. 

Regional collaboration takes into account the activities of a diverse array of non-transportation entities (e.g.,

public safety officials, major employers, chambers of

commerce, convention and visitors’ bureaus, port authorities, and special interest groups) that routinely affect or

depend upon transportation. Whether it is an emergency

management plan or next year’s Mardi Gras that system

operators face, collaboration and coordination encourages

a regional perspective regarding transportation system

performance rather than focusing on narrower issues

involving single components of the system or a limited

set of stakeholders.

By collaborating to define a regional strategy and

performance standards and the evolution of the system,

operating agencies can better develop a seamless transportation system. Potential benefits of a regional operating strategy include a single form of payment for transit

that crosses many jurisdictions; regional traffic information provided to travelers in a uniform format; reduced

delay of traffic around construction projects; and coordinated highway incident response and related traffic 

management. 

Regional operations collaboration and coordination

is an ongoing, iterative effort. Collaboration often initially occurs due to a specific need or problem of regional

significance such as special event planning, major reconstruction, a natural disaster, or a hazardous material incident. Having addressed the problem, regions may recognize the value of regional collaboration for improving

performance (better working relationships and procedures, improved communications, reduced delays). With

the application of new technology and better 

Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination - 3

Regional operations collaboration and

coordination within a metropolitan region

helps to:

● Shape, develop, manage, and evolve

policies, programs, procedures, protocols,

and projects 

● Enable the elements of the transportation

system to work better and together for all

customers across modes, functions, and

jurisdictions
4 - Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination

Figure 1. Regional collaboration and cooperation evolves from a

focus on problem solving to a focus on integrated transportation

systems.

information-sharing procedures, collaboration and coordination can lead to an integrated regional transportation

system where agencies routinely work together to make

the region’s transportation system work better for all customers—travelers, employers, businesses, commuters,

public safety agencies and many others. Figure 1 shows

this progression from problem solving to performance

improvement, leading eventually to a focus on regional

transportation system integration. 

For example, following Hurricane Floyd, the North

Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), working with other regional transportation and public safety

organizations, developed plans for providing timely

information to travelers during emergency evacuations

by using variable message signs, highway advisory radio,

and other real-time communication media. Seeing the

value of this traveler information system, NCDOT

expanded this regionwide effort to use the same systems

to notify travelers about planned or ongoing reconstruction activities on several bridges that link the barrier

islands of North Carolina’s Outer Banks. The collaboration that began with an emergency evacuation not only

resulted in improved performance of the emergency

evacuation procedures, but also provided a forum and 

a precedent for expanding this regional teamwork to

include operations during reconstruction projects.
Overview

The five major elements shown in figure 2 form a

framework on which managers with day-to-day responsibilities for providing transportation and public safety

services can build sustained relationships and create

strategies to improve transportation system performance.

The intent of the framework is to help institutionalize

working together as a way of doing business among

transportation agencies, public safety officials, and other

public and private sector interests within a metropolitan

region. The framework is important because in most

regions, institutional barriers exist that make collaboration difficult. These barriers include resource constraints,

internal stovepipes in large agencies, and the often narrow jurisdictional perspective of governing boards. The

framework is intended to guide operators and service

providers in overcoming these institutional barriers. 

The framework creates structures through which

processes occur that result in products. It implies a commitment of resources needed to initiate and sustain

regional collaboration and coordination and for implementing agreed upon solutions and procedures. The collaborative spirit is motivated by a desire for measurable

improvement in regional transportation system 

performance. The five elements of the framework are

interactive and evolving. A brief description of each 

element follows. 

The regional structure that supports collaboration

and coordination within a region is the set of relationships, institutions, and policy arrangements that shape

the activity. It provides the “table” at which operators

and service providers sit with public safety and other key

transportation constituencies. This “regional table” may

range from an ad hoc loose confederation to a formal

entity with legal standing and well-defined responsibilities and authorities. It may be facilitated by or emerge

from existing entities or be newly formed.

Processes are the formal and informal activities performed in accordance with written or unwritten, but collaboratively developed and accepted, policies involving

multiple agencies and jurisdictions in a region. Processes

describe how the “regional table” works to achieve its

objectives. 

The products of collaboration and coordination are

the results of processes. They include a regional concept

of operations, baseline performance data, current performance information, and operating plans and procedures that inform regional entities (public and private

sector) about how the regional transportation system

must operate over time (including planned 

improvements). 

Resources govern what is available within the region

for sustaining and implementing the regional concept of

operations and other operations plans on an ongoing

basis, not just plans for special events, issue resolutions,

or the completion of specific projects. The resources

include staff, equipment, and dollars.

The performance element comprises how performance will be measured, and individual and collective

responsibilities for monitoring and improving regional

transportation system performance. Regional performance objectives, which are established collaboratively,

most commonly address public safety, mobility, security,

economic development, and environment.

This document includes a self-assessment tool in

which all of the elements are summarized, so that the

reader can shape collaboration and coordination operations in a regional context with a better understanding of

what already exists to build on and what is needed to

move forward. 

Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination - 5

The Practice of Regional Operations Collaboration and

Coordination

Figure 2. The framework for regional collaboration and

coordination is formed by five major elements.
6 - Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination

Structure: The Table for Regional

Operations Collaboration and

Coordination

Structure consists of the relationships that enable

regional collaboration, coordination, and related communication. It functions as the table (literally and figuratively) around which operators and service providers meet to

discuss regional needs and possibilities for improving

transportation system operations. Furthermore, it combines formal and informal arrangements through which

individuals, organizations, and jurisdictions engage to

develop regional solutions and strategies.

These mechanisms range from ad hoc/informal relationships to formal structures with legal standing. They

include personal relationships among leaders and staff

members of key operating agencies and neighboring

jurisdictions who recognize common problems and

opportunities and agree to work together to improve

regional transportation systems performance. These

structures may evolve into a broad-based regional partnership among public and private sector interests across

multiple jurisdictions. Several examples illustrate the

variety of structural approaches to regional collaboration

and coordination: 

● Ad hoc arrangements based on long-term relationships or immediate needs emerge during major

reconstruction projects or roadway incidents where

agencies agree to collaborate in the time during and

after the event, but no formal, long-term agreements

govern the collaboration.

● Formal, multiagency partnership agreements are

often used for single or recurring special events

(such as for political conventions or Independence

Day celebrations), and full-time staff are dedicated

to planning for operations prior to the event. Formal,

multiparty agreements may remain in place after the

event.

Legal entities, such as Houston’s TranStar,

Vancouver’s Translink, and the New York City region’s

TRANSCOM, were formed to improve management of

each region’s transportation system. These organizations

are managed by governing boards and work through

partnerships with regional agencies to continuously

address a range of operations issues.

To be effective, the regional operations collaboration

and coordination effort must be linked to the regional

transportation planning process. Often, what passes for

regional transportation operations collaboration is directed primarily or solely toward installing a project, solving

a problem, or preparing for a special event. For regional

collaboration and coordination to work, it must be part of

an ongoing, intentional, focused effort to improve system

performance by identifying needs and opportunities and

collaborating on strategies and solutions that lead to

strategic investments.

Action Steps for Regional Operations

Collaboration and Coordination—Structure

❑ Identify key constituencies (e.g.,

employers, shippers, developers,

communities) who support better

transportation systems performance. 

❑ Enlist regional champions/leaders who are

committed to working together (and

encouraging others to work with them) in

support of better system performance.

❑ Develop a vision for regional transportation

system performance that is shared by

operators, service providers, and planners.

❑ Establish operations as a regular item on

the regional planning agenda.
Who Participates?

At one level, the question of who participates refers

to institutions, agencies, and organizations that initiate,

facilitate, convene, and support regional collaboration

and coordination activities. Within a metropolitan area,

this will likely vary—it may be the State, the MPO, or

even a city or a county agency, depending on factors like

the scope of need, the range of responsibility, desired

outcomes, and availability of resources. 

At another level, that same question refers to the

collective representatives of collaborating agencies and

organizations (e.g., traffic, transit, police, fire, emergency

management). Together, they address problems and

opportunities of regional significance that demand

improved information sharing, effective communications,

integrated systems, and efficient use of resources. 

Nontraditional stakeholders also need a voice in

regional transportation operations. These stakeholders

can include chambers of commerce, boards of trade,

tourism and visitor agencies, the towing and recovery

industry, major shippers and carriers, and major employers (or groups). These stakeholders may serve on advisory boards, task forces, or other entities that provide input

to regional collaboration and coordination activities.

Participants must find value in the improvements to

regional transportation system operations and performance that result from their collaborations, or they are

unlikely to continue their efforts. The owners and operators of transportation system elements, in particular, must

perceive individual or collective value in working together in such an effort while simultaneously retaining control of the systems that they own, operate, or manage. 

Experience shows that little happens unless someone

or some group of people is committed to making it happen. The initiators of the kind of regional collaboration

needed may be elected officials or senior agency officials. Often, planning for a special event, incident management, or major disaster provides the initial incentive

for elected officials and agency leaders to champion

regional collaboration. Such champions then become catalysts for bringing others together around the benefits

realized through prior experience. They provide the

motivational spark to keep individuals, agencies, and private sector entities from falling back into functional and

jurisdictional stovepipes.

The Range of Organizational Approaches

Determining the most appropriate organizational

approach for regional collaboration and coordination

depends on the needs of the region, existing institutional

relationships and processes, and the vision of regional

transportation operating agencies and service providers.

The organizational structure will vary, but may begin as

an ad hoc arrangement among a few people or organizations and evolve to more formal arrangements. Table 1

illustrates this range of approaches.

Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination - 7

Cross-Jurisdictional Signal

Coordination in Phoenix

● The East Valley Task Force was formed by

transportation specialists from five different

Arizona jurisdictions to identify areas for

improvement and establish standards for

interagency/interjurisdictional coordination. 

● Regional traffic signal coordination was

achieved through careful planning and

increased coordination.

● Participants understand that the future of

their transportation system depends on

maintaining and updating coordination and

communication efforts. (For more, see

page 33.)
8 - Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination

Table 1. Range of organizational approaches.
Processes: Facilitating

Collaboration

Processes are formal and informal activities performed in accordance with written or unwritten policies

agreed to in a collaborative fashion, involving multiple

agencies and jurisdictions in a region (e.g., for information sharing, incident management, freeway management, emergency response).

The process aspect relates to the ways options are

created and decisions are made to improve system performance. An effective approach ensures that investment

decisions include full consideration of operations strategies along with capital improvements; operations activities are addressed from a multimodal corridor perspective; and operations thinking addresses other regional

economic, environmental, and mobility objectives. The

process for collaboration and coordination does not end

when a project is completed or installed.

Information/Data Sharing—Critical to the

Success of Collaboration

Information/data sharing is critical to effective

regional operations collaboration and coordination.

Information/data sharing is a collaborative effort to identify problems, coordinate activities, and make a case for

investment needs that includes anecdotal evidence, historical data, current conditions, and supporting analysis.

The shaded areas of figure 3 show aspects of information/data sharing on which regional collaboration 

primarily relies. The information needed to support collaboration is available only if stakeholders agree on ways

to capture, archive, and share real-time performance

data.

Regional collaboration and coordination relies on

information about current transportation system operations and their projected performance under various

potential scenarios. The strategic thinking associated

with regional collaboration requires data accumulated

over time that can be mined to discover relationships,

trends, and opportunities, and that can then be acted

upon. 

Analyses depend on meaningful performance data

and a reliable estimate of future requirements based on

historical trends and knowledge of future needs. These

analyses enable operators regionwide to evaluate options

for achieving agreed-upon performance levels. The information generated by the analysis is used in outreach and

education efforts to bring all stakeholders to a common

plan or concept of operations. The regional concept of

operations drives decision-making (e.g., roles and

responsibilities, multilateral operating agreements, standards, and protocols) among jurisdictions and agencies

that enables the operators to implement improved 

practices.

Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination - 9

Figure 3. Aspects of information/data sharing on which regional

collaboration primarily relies.
10 - Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination

Some specific examples of how metropolitan

regions are collecting, sharing, and using information 

to improve regional transportation operations include:

● The San Diego Association of Governments created

an integrated data collection and dissemination system to be shared by all transportation agencies in the

region to coordinate incident management and public safety activities. 

● CapWIN’s integrated wireless network allows transportation agencies to communicate directly with

each other as well as receive real-time and historical

information. (For more, see page 29.)

● TRANSCOM’s operations depend on real-time and

archived data shared among the involved agencies.

The Operations Information Center collects and disseminates real-time incident and construction information to members and affiliated agencies, 24 hours

a day, and maintains a database of construction projects. (For more, see page 25.)

● The Southern California ITS Priority Corridor network provides a resource for traveler information by

enabling the integration of traveler information from

several sources. It also enables contingency control

during emergencies by providing network links

among the four Caltrans traffic management centers

(TMCs), allowing one TMC to take control for

another if needed. (For more, see page 26.)

Range of Process Interactions

Regional collaboration and coordination helps move

regions along a spectrum from little to no information

sharing and collaboration, to ad hoc relationships built

around specific issues or events, to more formal 

collaborative relationships with mutually agreed-upon

objectives and strategies, and finally, in some instances,

to joint ownership and control of transportation facilities

and services. This spectrum, illustrated in table 2, shows

some of the ways that a region’s public and private sector entities may interact. 

Table 2. Range of process interactions.

Action Steps for Regional Operations

Collaboration and Coordination—Processes

❑ Make investments decisions based on the

best combinations of capital investments

and operations strategies (performancebased planning).

❑ Ensure that the solutions (project) selection

process and criteria provide a level playing

field for operational improvements and

investments. Tools are available to show

the benefits of operational improvements.

❑ Address operations activities (e.g., incident

management, traveler information) in

multimodal corridor planning.

❑ Use operations performance audits (e.g.,

corridor-wide) as a tool for guiding

investment choices.

❑ Leverage operations to achieve regional

goals (or meet other commonly sought

outcomes).
Products: Outputs to Chart the

Course and Outcomes to Measure

Progress

In the regional collaboration framework, products

encompass the use of data, information, plans, and outputs that result from structure and processes. These products inform regional entities (public and private sector)

about the operation of the regional transportation system

over time (including planned improvements). This aspect

also includes intermediate products such as studies, evaluations, and pilot tests that support regional collaboration

activities. Some products may be the result of information-sharing processes (e.g., traffic monitoring, travel

time data, volume counts) discussed in the previous 

section.

Shared Regional Vision and Strategy

Developing a strategy is fundamental to regional

collaboration, and strategy begins with vision. A shared

vision among operators and service providers expresses

how the region’s transportation system needs to operate.

Since this vision is the product of a collaborative

process, it lays the groundwork for a regional strategy

that includes goals and objectives for the region. 

The vision is the precursor to other regional products, including a regional concept of operations, regional

performance measures, and a variety of plans and procedures that involve regional operating agencies and service providers. The regional goals and objectives, which

flow from the regional vision, along with the appropriate

performance metrics, articulate the strategy—the what

and the how of achieving the overall objectives of the

regional community. 

Regional Concept of Operations

A regional concept of operations is a primary product of regional operations collaboration and coordination.

It is a regional strategy for achieving the shared vision of

operators and service providers. It defines regional

expectations (what is to be accomplished) over time,

processes (how it will be accomplished), and resources

(investments in time, money, staff, and equipment) for

better operations and system performance. It also

addresses how agencies and jurisdictions work together

to achieve better system performance and operations.

The regional concept of operations combines the range

of plans, processes, data, and analyses through which

performance expectations will be accomplished.

Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination - 11

Action Steps for Regional Operations

Collaboration and Coordination—Products

❑ Provide a current conditions baseline to

calibrate long-range planning.

❑ Develop a regional concept of operations

that sets performance expectations for

regional operators (priorities, projects,

improvements, processes, performance,

resources).

❑ Get buy-in for the regional operations

implementation agenda from public safety

providers and agencies that operate

elements of the transportation systems.

❑ Make the regional operations implementation agenda a necessary input into the

transportation improvement plan/long-range

plan (TIP/LRP).

❑ Use market research as the common link

between operations (customer feedback)

and planning (planning input).
12 - Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination

The regional concept of operations contains the

operators’ collective expectations for the following 

matters: 

● Regional Operations

- How do we want functions of mutual interest to

be managed and operated over the next 5-7 years? 

- How will we achieve integration and interoperability for optimum performance? 

- How will we develop strategic policies, programs,

procedures, protocols, standards, and/or projects that

have regional benefit and significance? 

- What are our performance expectations?

- How will better regional operations contribute to

regionally defined goals and vision?

● Regional Processes, Relationships, and Standards

of Performance

- How is information obtained, managed, and

shared?

- Does a regional intelligent transportations system

(ITS) architecture exist? If not, will one be required?

When and how?

- Is regional operations collaboration and coordination consistent with the process for developing the

regional ITS architecture?

- Are there regional performance standards?

- What policies, projects, architecture, standards,

protocols, and measures will achieve performance

expectations?

- How do agencies and systems work together when

necessary?

● Investments for Evolution, Adaptability, 

and Agility

- How do systems evolve over time and what

resources (staffing, equipment, funding) are needed

to sustain and meet performance expectations?

- How will we achieve a regional vision for operations in regard to resources, investments, priorities,

pathway, etc.?

- How does the system adapt to changes in external

circumstances that affect system performance or performance expectations (security, natural disasters,

special events)?

- How does the system respond to unanticipated

conditions or demands?

Performance Benefits of a Regional

Concept of Operations

● It addresses the 24-hours-a-day, 7-daysa-week operating needs of transportation

systems, taking into account welfare-towork and access to jobs, sporting and other

special events, the needs of shippers and

goods movement, periods of maintenance

and reconstruction, periods of adverse

weather, natural disasters, public safety,

incidents and emergencies, shopping,

recreation, and tourism.

● It facilitates the collaboration and

information sharing required across

agencies and jurisdictions to address

crosscutting issues such as incident

management and emergency response,

electronic toll and fare collection systems,

traveler information systems, commercial

vehicle operations, and traffic signal

systems.

● It creates faster, more coordinated

responses to incidents and emergencies.

● It allows for seamless, integrated transit

fare payments throughout a region—e.g., 

it allows the Metro Transit System running

from Virginia to Maryland to operate

seamlessly across jurisdictions.

● It facilitates the sharing of data and

information.

● It allows operating agencies to work toward

system integration and interoperability.

● It anticipates and manages demand under

a variety of conditions and events.
Examples of products that have emerged from

regional collaboration and coordination are:

● TRANSCOM’s concept of operations is important 

to governing how the member agencies, as well as

other agencies involved, interact with each other and

share information. TRANSCOM maintains planning

documents such as a multiyear strategic plan, an

annual business plan and budget, an information and

communication systems plan, and a technology programs development plan. (For more, see page 25.)

● The Southern California ITS Priority Corridor management concept of operations calls for decentralized information sharing and an open system architecture that supports technical information sharing

and the integration of different systems. This concept lies behind the strategy to “develop once,

deploy many times,” thus allowing for cost sharing

among the agencies. (For more, see page 26.)

● Maricopa Association of Governments (Phoenix,

AZ) developed a Regional Concept of Transportation Operations to provide the “big picture” of the

region’s desired state of transportation operations

and management and the institutional commitment

to get there. 

● Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) in

the San Francisco Bay Area’s Regional Concept of

Operation focuses on freeway management in this

multijurisdictional region where congestion and long

daily commute trips through multiple jurisdictions

are common and freeway expansion is unlikely.

Range of Products

The range of products that emerges from regional

collaboration and coordination activities mirrors the

range of processes discussed previously. As relationships

(structure) and processes become more formalized, the

resulting products are more formal in content and structure, have greater standing among the region’s operators

and service providers, and guide the decisions and

actions of regional stakeholders. Note in table 3 that, as

the products move from “less formal” to “more formal,”

the less formal products continue to be produced and

used by the region’s transportation stakeholders

(providers and users).

Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination - 13

Process Benefits of a Regional Concept

of Operations

● It develops, achieves consensus on, and

puts into practice the use of performance

measures to support a customer service

mission.

● It looks to the future for resources to

sustain and meet those performance

expectations.

Investment Benefits of a Regional

Concept of Operations

● It helps decision-makers understand what

resources will be needed to sustain and

evolve technologies so that operators and

planners can take advantage of their full

range of capabilities.

● It creates the vision for operating the

elements of the transportation system so

they work better and together. The vision

and the plan for achieving the vision are

critical to ensuring future funding to sustain

and improve the system.
14 - Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination

Table 3. Range of services.
Resources: Linking Needs to

Sources

Regional operations collaboration and coordination

relies on activities and relationships that can occur only

if individuals and organizations commit appropriate

funding, staff, and possibly equipment. Implicit in this

statement is the allocation, and possible sharing, of

resources that enables a region’s operators, service

providers, and other stakeholders to improve system performance. Operations must be viewed as a resource priority to participating organizations. This element of the

framework governs the availability of resources for

achieving a regional vision, implementing an agreedupon strategy, putting into practice a regional concept of

operations, and implementing operations plans on an

ongoing basis. Regardless of the organizational model

that evolves, the key to a sustained commitment of

resources lies in ensuring that all participants see the

benefits of their contributions, both to the system and to

their own agency or interest group (see the Action Steps

below).

Funding Sources

Regional collaboration depends on the availability

and commitment of resources to fund the concept of

operations1 and other agreed-upon actions. Most funding

for operations will come from individual agency budgets.

This may involve agreements to share key resources

(equipment and personnel) across jurisdictional boundaries or among operators or service providers; agreements on acquisition and procurement that ensure interoperability and standard protocols for communications

and data exchange; or potentially, the identification of

capital investments in operations-related infrastructure

(networks, operations centers, sensors) to be deployed 

on a regional basis or in conjunction with other capital

improvement projects. Funding for such projects requires

that operating agencies and service providers have a role

in the region’s capital planning process and that regional

planners share an operating vision. The allocation of capital resources to operations improvements must complement or augment capital investments in expanded 

capacity. 

Several examples illustrate the range of approaches

to funding regional operations collaboration and 

coordination:

● AZTech, which began as part of a Metropolitan

Model Deployment Initiative, has emerged as a

funded entity made up of 40 public and private

organizations that collaborate to coordinate regional

operations activities. (For more, see page 33.)

Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination - 15

1 See the “Products” section for a more detailed discussion of the regional

concept of operations.

Action Steps for Regional Operations

Collaboration and Coordination—Resources

❑ Ensure linkages to the overall regional

transportation planning process for needed

investment in operations.

❑ Use available funds to support convening

activity for operators and planners.

❑ Ensure that everyone at the regional

collaboration and coordination table

perceives a return on investment of time

and other resources.

❑ Make resources sufficiently available and

flexible to effectively fund regional planning

for operations activities and initiatives.
16 - Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination

● The Baltimore Regional Operations Coordination

(B-ROC) Project was initiated by the Metropolitan

Baltimore ITS Partnership to the Baltimore Regional

Transportation Board, the Baltimore region MPO. A

regional operations coordination committee, B-ROC

was formed to enhance mutual support and resource

sharing between operating agencies. (For more, see

page 31.)

● Agreements between Maryland’s Coordinated

Highways Action Response Team (CHART) agencies provide the resources necessary to manage the

transportation system effectively. For instance, the

Maryland State Highway Administration (MdSHA)

funds items necessary for the Maryland State Police

(MSP) in return for full-time MSP staff at the

Statewide Operations Center (SOC). CHART also

has agreements with the media to receive real-time

views of traffic incidents and delays from traffic helicopters owned by local stations in exchange for

allowing stations to patch into live closed-circuit 

television feeds from the SOC. (For more, see 

page 28.)

Dedicated Staff 

Effective collaboration and coordination among

regions depends on the availability of qualified staff and

related resources to do the work needed to support the

regional collaboration and coordination effort. This will

require purposeful job descriptions that translate into full

time equivalents (FTEs) dedicated to collaborative activities. Interagency or interregional positions may be needed to facilitate the collaboration among organizations or

jurisdictions. It is also necessary that those who work in

these positions perceive a return on investment of their

time dedicated to coordination and collaboration. 

Range of Resource Strategies

How regional collaborative processes are funded and

staffed reflects a region’s commitment to and vision for

the effort. Typically, when a few individuals or organizations see a need to solve a problem or improve performance (incident management or emergency evacuation) or

when agencies agree to work together on a project of

regional importance (ITS regional architecture or special

event planning), resources may then be applied in the

form of in-kind contributions from participating organizations or through program funds administered by a 

single agency on behalf of all participants. As the collaborative activities mature, participating entities (including

both public and private sectors) may choose to pool

resources and eventually align with, or form, entities that

assume responsibility on behalf of participating agencies

and jurisdictions. These entities should also establish

positions with authority, accountability, and responsibility for coordinated operations. Table 4 illustrates the

range of resource strategies.

Table 4. Range of resource strategies.
Performance Improvement:

Monitoring and Improving

Regional Operations

Performance improvement addresses regional performance objectives and how they will be measured,

including public safety, mobility, security, economic

development, and environment. There may also be some

intermediate performance objectives that address the success of regional cooperation. 

Performance measures are a key to assessing the

success of a region’s effort to collaborate and coordinate

and to identifying areas where improvement is needed or

possible. The first step related to performance improvement is finding a general consensus that performance

measures are needed if regional transportation system

performance is to improve. Given this consensus, performance measures relevant to system users must be

developed and accepted as meaningful methods of

assessing both the short-term and long-term operation of

the regional transportation system. Because regional

operations collaboration and coordination is a constantly

evolving process, the performance measures themselves

may change, resulting from changes in institutional relationships, technology applications, and policy and procedures. So that the region’s operators and service

providers understand whether regional goals are being

met, they should regularly report on and discuss whether

performance measures accurately reflect a successful

regional vision of transportation system operation as part

of the process of collaboration and coordination. 

Several regional operations entities have established

performance standards, and routinely monitor and report

how well the system is operating. Some examples are

given below:

● AZTech established standards for interagency coordination, giving the region a sense of expected levels

of performance. Smart Corridor components linked

to the AZTech server allow information sharing

among agencies and jurisdictions. Traffic signal controllers, surveillance equipment, and detection

devices were installed or upgraded to allow for the

collection of information. Information is shared

through workstations installed at traffic operations

centers (TOCs) in each jurisdiction. (For more, see

page 33.)

● Montgomery County, Maryland’s real-time and

archived data are shared, linked, and made accessible to local agencies and departments, and are delivered to system users through the Advanced Traffic

Information System (ATIS). (For more, see 

page 32.)

● To maintain efficient system performance, the San

Antonio Medical Center Corridor Project restricts

the use of the incident response traffic signal plans

and variable message signs to more severe incidents.

(For more, see page 35.)

Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination - 17

Action Steps for Regional Operations

Collaboration and Coordination—

Performance Improvement

❑ Agree on expected levels of performance

and the need for improvement.

❑ Develop and accept relevant regional

performance measures.

❑ Provide regular status reports on regional

transportation system operations

performance.

❑ Share, link, and provide system managers

and system users with access to real-time

and archived system performance data.
18 - Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination

The measures selected to assess operations performance depend upon the availability of accurate, meaningful system data. Performance data can range from highly

subjective user opinion surveys to detailed collection and

analysis of real-time system data. No single type of data

is adequate to judge end-to-end system performance.

Relying solely on user surveys to assess system performance, for example, yields little insight into specific ways

to improve system performance. Conversely, detailed

measurement of specific attributes of individual system

components (e.g., signal system reliability) may result in

a focus on inappropriate responses. Since no single metric is likely to be sufficiently robust to convey all measures of interest to the region’s operators, service

providers, and system users, multiple approaches to performance measurement are typically preferable over a

single metric. 

Range of Metrics and Measures of Performance

Performance improvement depends on reliable and

meaningful performance metrics (what parts of performance to track, e.g., delay) and related measures (how to

measure them, e.g., probing vehicles’ transit time).

Performance measurement and improvement are most

readily accomplished at the component level (e.g., operational availability, failure rates, units deployed, personnel

assigned). Component level performance measures may

not, however, be the most adequate indicators of transportation system performance. Functional performance

measures provide a better indication of how well specific

services are provided from the customers’ perspectives

(e.g., on-time arrival rates for transit vehicles, average

travel time between two points in a corridor). At the system level, performance measures (e.g., total average

delay/day, customer satisfaction surveys) should relate to

the region’s transportation system overall performance.

Table 5 illustrates the range of metrics and measures of

performance.

Table 5. Range of metrics and measures of performance.
The Relevance of the Regional ITS

Architecture

ntelligent transportation systems (ITS) enable better

operations and improves system performance. ITS 

utilizes information, communication, sensor, and control

technologies to achieve improved levels of performance

and safety on America’s highways. ITS provides seamless information services and communications networks

for transportation services and emergency services. ITS

may be electronics, communications, or information processing systems used individually or in combination to

improve the efficiency or safety of a surface transportation system.

Regional collaboration and coordination requires

sustained, long-term commitment to improving regional

transportation system performance through collaborative

planning and a regional approach to operations.

Institutional mechanisms are needed to develop and think

through how, where, and when the regional ITS architecture can be applied. The collaborative process provides

institutional mechanisms for using and maintaining

(Steps 5 and 6 of the ITS regional architecture process)

the regional ITS architecture effectively as part of an

overall regional operations strategy. In this sense, regional collaboration and coordination has the longer-term,

broader agenda that leverages the regional ITS architecture to improve transportation systems performance in

the region. 

Where collaboration among agencies and regions 

is absent or minimal but an architecture development

process is underway, the ITS architecture process can

jump-start regional collaboration by providing the forum

and the momentum for bringing together organizations

whose participation in the regional effort is critical. This

regional teamwork, which an existing ITS architecture

will only start, requires that operators and service

providers jointly develop a vision for regional operations

and a strategy for achieving the vision. Based on experience to date, leadership for developing the ITS architecture may come from either an operating agency (e.g.,

State DOT) or a regional planning body (e.g., the MPO). 

If, however, regional transportation operators (State

DOTs, public safety agencies, departments of public

works, transit authorities) want to work together and no

current regional ITS architecture development process

exists, the fundamentals and framework presented in this

document can serve as the starting point for initiating

regional collaboration. Initially, if collaboration and

coordination is to become the primary mechanism for

achieving institutional integration, operating agencies

will: gather and engage stakeholders; identify operational

needs and strategies; develop a regional concept of operations; and implement the necessary regional model and

interagency agreements. 

Regional collaboration may well bring with it the

perceived need for an ITS regional architecture, especially when regionwide electronic information sharing is

desired. If so, this collaboration can serve as a platform

for initiating the architecture development process.

Defining the Regional ITS

Architecture

The regional ITS architecture has been defined as “a

regional framework for ensuring institutional agreement

and technical integration for the implementation of ITS

projects in a particular region.”2 The regional ITS architecture serves to broaden the scope of operations. In the

past, transportation agencies focused on the implementation and operations of single technology components.

The ITS architecture moves this focus to the implementation and operations of a complete, regional system.

Therefore, the architecture process, which is being

applied in numerous major metropolitan areas across the

country, embodies the idea of regional collaboration and

coordination. Not only can it facilitate collaboration and

coordination, but it also offers unique opportunities for

synergy. The Regional ITS Architecture Development

Process Guidance Document3 outlines a systems engineering process for developing a regional ITS architecture that incorporate the following steps.

Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination - 19

I

2 “Regional ITS Architecture Development Process Workshop,” prepared

by National ITS Architecture Team, U.S. Department of Transportation,

Washington, DC, January 2002.

3

Regional ITS Architecture Guidance: “Developing, Using, and

Maintaining an ITS Architecture for your Region,” Publication No. FHWAOP-02-024, prepared by National ITS Architecture Team, U.S. Department

of Transportation, Washington, DC, October 12, 2001.

Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and

Coordination and the Regional ITS Architecture Development

Process
20 - Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination

Steps in the Development of a Regional ITS Architecture:

Step 1: Getting Started

● Identify Need

● Define Region

● Identify Stakeholders

● Identify Champions

Step 2: Gathering Data

● Inventory Systems

● Determine Needs and Services

● Develop Operational Concept

● Define Functional Requirements

Step 3: Defining Interfaces

● Identify Interconnects

● Define Information Flows

Step 4: Implementing the Architecture

● Define Project Sequencing

● Develop List of Agency Agreements

● Identify ITS Standards

Step 5: Using the Architecture

Step 6: Maintaining the Architecture

The regional ITS architecture development process

results in either a specific ITS project or a series of integrated, interoperable projects. The architecture, a living

construct that will facilitate collaboration, integration,

and interoperability, emphasizes systems and how systems are deployed. 

Leveraging the Regional ITS

Architecture Process

The regional ITS architecture development process

can serve as a key enabler in identifying constituencies,

establishing champions, and initiating the institutional

relationships that will sustain regional collaboration and

coordination. The process requires actions similar to

those required to develop other agreements and procedures to be implemented at the regional level. For example, the processes used to inventory systems, develop

operational concepts, and define functional requirements

can also be applied to traffic incident management, traveler information systems, advanced freeway management, and emergency evacuation.

The regional ITS architecture development process

results in specific standards and protocols for communications and information exchange. These standards and

protocols can serve as the foundation for broader agreements among regional partners that involve other

resources and processes. The concept of operations

developed during the architecture development process

may serve as a template for a more comprehensive

regional concept of operations that includes functional

areas and responsibilities well beyond those addressed 

in the regional ITS architecture.

Although the ITS architecture development process

does not address resources explicitly, the sequencing of

projects and activities needed for regional integration and

interoperability imply significant resource commitments.

The regional ITS architecture can help guide the

projects and electronic infrastructure needed to integrate

regional operations. Regional collaboration and coordination identifies ongoing staff, equipment, and other

resource needs for regional interoperability and 

integration. 

The regional ITS architecture development process

focuses primarily on performance measures related to

implementing technology-related projects associated

with the ITS architecture. Fortunately, many of the projects likely to emerge from the regional ITS architecture

development process will provide the infrastructure

needed to measure regional transportation system performance in a meaningful way. In fact, the ITS architecture development process can serve as the forum for

identifying performance measures that have widespread

support among the region’s operators and service

providers.

Table 6 illustrates how the process of developing the

Regional ITS Architecture can help leverage regional

operations collaboration and coordination and vice versa. 
Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination - 21

Table 6. Interactions of the ITS architecture development and regional operations collaboration and

coordination processes.

Regional

Collaboration

Framework

Element

Structure

Process

Products

Resources

Performance

Related Regional ITS

Architecture Development

Process Steps

Identifying needs, defining the 

region, identifying stakeholders, 

identifying champions

Inventorying systems, 

developing alternative 

operational concepts, defining 

functional requirements, 

identifying interconnects, 

defining information flows

Project sequencing, ITS 

standards, interagency 

agreements, concept of 

operations, defining information 

flows

Not addressed

Project implementation (tracking); 

identifying interconnects and 

defining information flows

How Regional Operations Collaboration

and Coordination Leverages the

Regional ITS Architecture

The regional ITS architecture development 

process initiates relationships and 

institutional mechanisms that are important 

to ongoing planning for operations.

The regional ITS architecture process can 

shape the institutional interactions that lead 

to regional operating models and 

interagency agreements in other areas of 

regional interest.

The regional ITS architecture may provide 

guidance documents to support a regional 

concept of operations and the development 

of regional policies, programs, protocols, 

procedures, plans, and projects.

The regional ITS architecture can help 

guide the projects and electronic 

infrastructure needed to integrate regional 

operations.

The regional ITS architecture helps set the 

target by providing the infrastructure 

needed to acquire performance data and 

improve systems performance.
22 - Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination

his document describes a strategic way of thinking

built around the sharing of precepts and action

steps by public partners responsible for day-to-day operations. By following these precepts and action steps, a

region can blend motivation, commitment, and strategy

to reach a vision shared by operators and service

providers of how the region’s transportation system

should perform under a variety of conditions. Regional

collaboration and coordination is not about determining

the best projects to solve a problem. It is about combining the knowledge, expertise, and information of many

agencies across jurisdictions to produce and operate an

efficient regional transportation system.

Table 7 includes questions for each of the five areas

of the framework for collaboration and coordination.

Together, they outline action steps that will enable planners, operators, and service providers to assess progress

in planning for operations and charting a course to better

transportation system performance regionwide. No

region is likely to answer every question affirmatively—

and perhaps some regions do not need to do so. What is

important is that the guidance suggested in these five

areas will prove useful to planners, operators, and service

providers in assessing where they are and determining

what they need to do next.

T

A Self-Assessment—Where Are You in Regional Collaboration

and Coordination?
Table 7. Action steps for regional operations collaboration and coordination—Self-Assessment.

Process

❑ Are investment decisions 

made based on the best combinations of capital investments and operations strategies (performance-based planning)?

❑ Do the solutions (project) 

selection process and criteria yield a level playing field for operational improvements and investments, and are tools available to show benefits of operational improvements?

❑ Does the region do 

corridor planning (multimodal), including operational elements (e.g., incident management)?

❑ Are operations 

performance audits (e.g., corridor) used as a tool for guiding investment choices?

❑ Does the region leverage 

operations to achieve regional goals (or meet other commonly sought outcomes)?

Product

❑ Does operations provide 

a current conditions baseline to calibrate long-range planning?

❑ Does a regional concept 

of operations set performance expectations for regional operators?

❑ Do public safety providers 

and agencies that operate the elements of the transportation systems acknowledge the regional operations implementations agenda?

❑ Has a regional operations 

action agenda been acknowledged as a necessary input into TIP/LRP?

❑ Does the region use 

market research as the common link between operations (customer feedback) and planning (planning input)?

Structure

❑ Are there linkages to key 

constituencies (e.g., employers, shippers, developers, communities) to build support for better system performance?

❑ Are there champions/

leaders in the region who are committed to working together (andencouraging others towork with them) to gain support for better system performance?

❑ Is there a vision shared

among operators, service providers and planners?

❑ Is operations a regular

item on the regional planning agenda?

Resource

❑ Are there linkages to 

the overall regional transportation planning process for needed investment in operations?

❑ Does the region use 

planning funds to support convening activities for operators and planners?

❑ Are resources sufficiently

available and flexible toprovide effective access tofunding for operations?

❑ Does everyone at the 

table see a return on investment of time and other resources?

Performance

❑ Is there a consensus on

the need for performance improvement?

❑ Have performance 

measures been developed?

❑ Is there an operations 

performance-based status report?

❑ Are real-time and 

archived data shared, linked, and made accessible to system managers and deliveredto system users?
24 - Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination

everal regions around the country are already practicing elements of framework for collaboration and

coordination described in this document. These regions

continue to realize improvements in various aspects of

their transportation system due to the long-term strategic

and collaborative efforts made by various agencies in the

region. The following case studies demonstrate how

these regions have applied the framework. Many of the

case studies detail Metropolitan Model Deployment

Initiatives related to ITS. These initiatives were the first

steps toward planning for operations, and as regions have

recognized the benefits from doing so, they have continued to expand their collaborative interagency, interjurisdictional efforts.

Each case study includes a summary of the application and a breakdown of how the effort follows some or

all of the action steps in the framework discussed in the

primer. While several of the studies do not follow each

element of the framework directly, they still serve to give

a concrete picture of what it means to plan regionally for

operations. 

The following case studies are presented:

● TRANSCOM’s Regional Approach to Operations

● Southern California ITS Priority Corridor

● Maryland CHART

● Capital Wireless Integrated Network (CapWIN)

● Baltimore Regional Operations Coordination 

(B-ROC) Project

● Montgomery County ATIS

● Cross-Jurisdictional Signal Coordination in Phoenix

● San Antonio’s Advanced Warning to Avoid Railroad

Delays (AWARD) Project

● San Antonio Medical Center Corridor Project

● Phoenix’s Roadway Closure and Restriction System

(RCRS)

● Ventura County Fare Integration

S

Applications of Regional Operations Collaboration and

Coordination Planning for Transportation Operations
TRANSCOM’s Regional Approach

to Operationsi

TRANSCOM was created in 1986 to facilitate

region-wide coordination of construction projects in New

York, New Jersey, and Connecticut. Since then, its role

has expanded to include the distribution of traffic and

incident information and the management of regional

ITS programs. The intent of TRANSCOM is to enable

the collaboration of multiple planning and operating

agencies to improve transportation throughout the threestate region. These agencies share traffic, incident management, and construction information through the use of

sophisticated software. The communication among the

agencies helped facilitate the management of the transportation system on September 11, 2001. TRANSCOM

has adhered to the principles of regional operations collaboration and coordination since it began, and continues

to evolve to improve one of the most complicated transportation systems in the Nation.

Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination - 25

i

“Organizing for Regional Transportation Operations: New York/New

Jersey/Connecticut TRANSCOM,” prepared for U.S. Department of

Transportation by Valerie Briggs and Keith Jasper, August 2001.

Structure

● TRANSCOM has linkages with 16 member

agencies, including major State and city

DOTs, toll authorities, transit authorities, and

State police, as well as more than 100 other

entities, including local governments, police,

fire, emergency services, and planning

organizations. All entities work together to

build support for better system performance.

● TRANSCOM was formed by the region’s

transportation leaders; its 16 member

agencies act as champions committed to

cooperation and support for better system

performance.

● Both planners and operators participate in

TRANSCOM’s activities, thereby creating a

shared vision for the region’s transportation

system.

● Operations is a regular item on the

TRANSCOM planning agenda for one of the

most complex and congested urban

transportation environments in the Nation.

Processes

● TRANSCOM was formed to provide a forum

to collectively address traffic, incident

management, and construction issues, and to

determine collaborative, multimodal

approaches to solving the region’s

transportation problems.

Products

● TRANSCOM’s concept of operations is

important to governing how member and

other involved agencies interact and share

information. All agencies involved

acknowledge the concept of operations 

and understand that the legitimacy of

TRANSCOM depends on their acceptance of TRANSCOM standards.

● TRANSCOM maintains planning documents

such as a multiyear strategic plan, an annual

business plan and budget, an information

and communication systems plan, and a

technology programs development plan.

Resources

● TRANSCOM leverages the resources of

multiple agencies to collect and disseminate

incident and event information.

● TRANSCOM’s agencies collaborate to bring

transportation funding into the region. 

● Agencies would not be willing to participate in

TRANSCOM if they did not see a return 

on investment of their time and resources.

Performance

● TRANSCOM acknowledges the need for

performance measures and expects to

develop them in the future.

● TRANSCOM’s operations depend on realtime and archived data shared among the

involved agencies. The Operations

Information Center collects and disseminates

real-time incident and construction

information to members and affiliated

agencies 24 hours a day, and maintains 

a database of construction projects.
26 - Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination

Southern California ITS Priority

Corridorii

Severe congestion and extreme air pollution have

plagued the Southern California region for many years.

No major additions are planned for the freeway network,

and no increases are expected in transit utilization, so

local transportation managers have been forced to turn to

technical- and operations-based solutions to the region’s

transportation problems. As one of the Nation’s four designated ITS Priority Corridors, the Southern California

region receives Federal funds for ITS strategic planning

and deployment. The ITS Priority Corridor Steering

Committee, a partnership of 16 public entities, was

formed to oversee the program, which allows:

● Multijurisdictional collaboration of multiple MPOs

and state and local transportation agencies;

● Stakeholder participation;

● Movement from a major planning to an operations

initiative;

● Integration of extensive ITS infrastructure, enabling

the sharing of data and control among traffic management centers; and

● Generation of value-added regional traveler 

information.

As a result of corridor-wide ITS strategic planning

and design carried out by the Priority Corridor Steering

Committee, an intermodal transportation management

and information system will be implemented that allows

for the integration of legacy and future transportation

management systems. This system will continuously

evolve to fit with future transportation management 

initiatives.

ii “Organizing for Regional Transportation Operations: Southern California

ITS Priority Corridor,” prepared for U.S. Department of Transportation by

Valerie Briggs and Keith Jasper, August 2001.

Structure

● Members of the Priority Corridor Steering

Committee include Caltrans, the California

Highway Patrol, six county transportation

authorities/commissions, two MPOs, one air

quality management district, and three

regional ITS strategic planning

subcommittees. Other participants include

FHWA, the Federal Transit Administration

(FTA), and local transportation agencies. 

● Because the Priority Corridor decisionmaking process was conducted outside the

bounds of traditional transportation funding

processes, the participants have had to work

hard to sustain political buy-in and acquire

champions for their programs. 

● Because the operators and planners involved

with the Steering Committee share a

common vision for the improvement of

Southern California’s transportation system

through integrated ITS systems, they have

agreed to expand the scope of the program

to include all modes and all roads from Los

Angeles to the Mexican border.

● The Priority Corridor has fostered new

relationships among planners and operators,

and promotes a common understanding of

each other’s missions that has resulted in the

movement of the regional initiative from major

planning to operations.

Processes

● Because it enables the integration of traveler

information from several sources, the Priority

Corridor network provides a resource for

traveler information. The network also links

the four Caltrans TMCs, thereby enabling

contingency control during emergencies so

that one TMC can take control for another if

needed. 

● The Priority Corridor Committee assesses the

value of ITS projects on a regional or

corridor-wide basis.
Southern California (continued)

Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination - 27

Products

● The corridor management concept of

operations calls for decentralized information

sharing and an open system architecture that

supports technical information sharing and

the integration of different systems. 

● The agencies that operate the transportation

systems in Southern California acknowledge

the concept of operations. The concept of

operations creates the strategy to “develop

once, deploy many times,” thereby allowing

for cost sharing among the agencies. 

Resources

● All groups involved in the Priority Corridor

see a return on investment of their time and

resources because they are now able to

access each other’s data, share the costs of

system upgrades and new technology

applications, and communicate better among

planners and operators.

● Funding has been made possible through

Federal grants, to continue through 2002.

Performance

● The integration of the various agencies’ ITS

infrastructures in the Priority Corridor enables

data to be shared, linked, and made

accessible to operators and planners

throughout the region.
28 - Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination

Maryland CHARTiii

Formed to manage increasing traffic to and from 

the Maryland shore, the Coordinated Highways Action

Response Team (CHART) built on its initial success and

is now a multijurisdictional and multidisciplinary program. The mission of CHART is to “improve real-time

operations of Maryland’s highway system through teamwork and technology.” CHART relies on a communications infrastructure, a closed-circuit television system for

traffic monitoring, and complex interfaces to existing

and new detection systems to support the 24/7 monitoring and control activities of its Statewide Operations

Center (SOC) and Traffic Operations Centers (TOCs).

CHART uses the information collected in these centers

to provide motorists with information through variable

message signs, traveler advisory radio transmitters, and

the highway advisory telephone system. CHART plans

eventually to add a media interface to the SOC to allow

the media access to high-quality, real-time traffic video.

CHART also takes part in the I-95 Corridor Coalition to

coordinate with other relevant agencies in case of regional incidents along the I-95 corridor.

iii CHART on the Web, www.chart.state.md.us

Structure

● Agencies such as the Maryland State

Highway Agency (MdSHA), Maryland State

Police (MSP), and the Maryland

Transportation Authority, along with other

Federal, State, and local agencies cooperate

to improve real-time operations of Maryland’s

highway system.

● The members of CHART are committed to

working together, as indicated by their

mission statement.

Processes

● The CHART program includes activities such

as traveler information, incident management,

traffic monitoring, and traffic management.

MdSHA cooperatively funds joint needs.

Products

● A concept of operations shapes interagency

cooperation in information sharing and

management of the Maryland highway

system.

Resources

● Agreements between the CHART agencies

provide the resources necessary to

effectively manage the transportation system.

For example, MdSHA funds necessary items

for MSP in return for full-time MSP staff at

SOC. Through agreements with the media,

CHART receives real-time views of traffic

incidents and delays from traffic helicopters

owned by local stations in exchange for

allowing the stations to patch into live closedcircuit television feeds from SOC.

● Agencies see a return on investment of their

time and resources.

Performance

● The CHART system hub is SOC, supported

by existing satellite TOCs, which provide

Statewide coverage allowing information

distribution based on geographical needs and

operations management from several

different locations. 

● CHART plans to integrate all radio

communications, local government

communications, and traffic signal systems

activities to improve their incident

management capabilities.
Capital Wireless Integrated

Network (CapWIN)iv

CapWIN, an integrated transportation and criminal

justice information wireless network, is a concept that is

being developed as a result of the need for improved

coordination and information sharing among public safety and transportation agencies and organizations in

Maryland, Virginia, and Washington, DC. Currently,

agencies in the DC region do not have the means to communicate directly with each other in a mobile environment. Whenever incidents occurred, responders rely on

their own communication centers as intermediaries in

passing messages to other responders. With CapWIN,

agencies will be able to communicate directly with each

other and can access information for use in planning and

implementing traffic control during major incidents. Law

enforcement and emergency medical services will also

use CapWIN to share critical information across counties

and regions and improve response to emergencies. 

The transportation-related benefits of CapWIN

include: 

● Reduced traffic delays;

● Increased customer satisfaction;

● Shared historical information among agencies;

● Improved resource allocation through real-time

information;

● Increased worker safety in construction zones;

● Improved response to natural and man-made 

disasters; 

● Increased transportation and public safety assistance

through increased information; and 

● Reduced duplication of expenditures on technology.

Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination - 29

iv CapWIN, www.capwinproject.com

Structure

● Incident management responders in the

Washington, D.C., region, such as law

enforcement, fire and rescue, EMS,

transportation agencies, motorist assistance

services, information service providers, and

the media are committed to working together

to improve communication among

themselves to improve coordinated response

to emergencies. 

● User groups play an active role in developing

the strategic plan and all other aspects of the

project. 

Processes

● As a result of CapWIN, improved voice and

data communications help in achieving the

regional goal of improving transportation and

law enforcement agencies’ traffic incident

response capabilities. 

● The Coordination Working Group provides a

forum for all interested parties to coordinate

their respective activities to minimize overlap

of initiatives and to pool resources.

Products

● With input from all agencies involved, a

strategic plan has been developed outlining

function needs, system requirements,

security requirements, information priorities,

implementation strategy, and a long-term

business plan that addresses ongoing

operations and maintenance. 

● Memorandums of understanding have been

developed with each participating agency for

the maintenance and long-term requirements

of the network. 
30 - Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination

Resources

● Involved public safety and transportation

agencies are interested in developing

partnerships that will allow them to share

limited resources in working toward the

common goal of improving safety for their

customers.

● CapWIN creates guidelines and standards 

in public safety and transportation

communication systems in order to protect

agencies from investing in costly

technologies that are actually useless

because they are incompatible with other

agencies’ systems.

● These improved systems are seen as a

return on investment of time and resources.

Performance

● The integrated wireless network allows

transportation agencies to communicate

directly with each other and thereby share

real-time and historical information in a way

useful to improving system performance.

● Data collected will be put in a meaningful,

relevant, and understandable form readily

accessible for use, regardless of location 

in national, State, or local databases.

CAPWIN (continued)
Baltimore Regional Operations

Coordination (B-ROC) Projectv

The initiation of the B-ROC Project resulted from 

a recommendation by the Metropolitan Baltimore ITS

Partnership to the Baltimore Regional Transportation

Board (BRTB), the MPO for the Baltimore region.

Formed as a regional operations coordination committee,

B-ROC first met in September 2000 to focus on enhancing traffic management operations through coordination

among jurisdictions, agencies, modes, and facility types.

The overall project has been divided into two phases.

The first phase involves developing a framework for the

enhanced coordination of regional transportation-related

operations. The second phase involves the implementation of projects. 

B-ROC addresses coordination issues such as:

● Incidents and congestion without boundaries;

● The need to resolve conflicting goals and missions

among operating agencies;

● The need to enhance mutual support and resource

sharing among agencies; and

● The need to decide lines of authority.

Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination - 31

Structure

● More than 20 jurisdictions and agencies

participate in B-ROC, with the goals of

enhancing operational coordination for traffic

incident management among jurisdictions,

agencies, modes, and facilities, and to

develop a regional framework for operations.

These agencies include police, fire, and

public works from several Maryland cities and

counties, as well as various Maryland

transportation agencies and other Federal,

State, and local organizations. 

Processes

● B-ROC strives to promote interagency

coordination across modes and jurisdictions

to facilitate better intermodal planning and

incident response.

Products

● The first phase of B-ROC comprised the

development of a framework for enhanced

coordination of regional transportation-related

operations.

● The project will define operations goals,

objectives and needs, functional

requirements for operations, an operations

framework, and an implementation plan that

includes a prioritized list of projects.

Resources

● B-ROC was formed to enhance mutual

support and resource sharing among

operating agencies.

v Presentation made to Linking Planning and Operations Working Group,

December 2001.
32 - Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination

Montgomery County ATISvi

Montgomery County created its Advanced Traffic

Information System (ATIS) program to manage its transportation system using advanced integrated technologies

for traffic surveillance, signal control, incident detection,

transit fleet management, and traveler information. As a

byproduct of this program, the traveler information system was implemented, targeted to the needs of county

residents and travelers. Information from the system is

disseminated by cable television, radio, variable message

signs, telephone, and the Internet. 

Montgomery County has practiced integrated traffic

and transit operations since 1996. Through an open

architecture design, local transportation agencies share

data, which is used for ATIS. The intermodal county data

collection system provides information on transit schedules, fares, and routes, in addition to traffic information.

The county is currently installing a fiber optics network

to integrate all public communications requirements, thus

providing cost-effective countywide connectivity and

integrating the many different systems of county agencies and departments.

vi “Traveler Information Systems, A Primer,” prepared by Federal Highway

Administration and Federal Transit Administration, U.S. Department of

Transportation, January 2000.

Structure

● Montgomery County ATIS was implemented

by the county government to manage

growing congestion. 

● Local transportation agencies and

departments share information through 

an open architecture system.

Processes

● Montgomery County leverages operations to

achieve congestion reduction in the region.

Resources

● Participants see a satisfactory return on

investment because data coordination and

integration allow agencies to provide better

information to system users. 

● Resources are sufficiently available and are

being used to improve the system through

the installation of a fiber optic network.

Performance

● Real-time and archived data are shared,

linked, and made accessible to local

agencies and departments, and delivered 

to system users through ATIS. 
Cross-Jurisdictional Signal

Coordination in Phoenixvii 

Part of the AZTech Metropolitan Model Deployment

Initiative (MMDI) effort was to coordinate traffic signals

across jurisdictions in the East Valley of Phoenix. That

signal integration helped form Smart Corridors that allow

smooth progressions across jurisdictions. 

In order to accomplish integration across jurisdictions, the East Valley Task Force (composed of transportation specialists from the five jurisdictions in

Phoenix) established standards for coordination and communication among agencies and jurisdictions. A communications infrastructure was implemented to allow information flow between jurisdictions, and a regional traffic

control and management plan was developed to aid 

integration. 

The project was considered a success due to the

many operational benefits achieved. These benefits

include increases in average travel speeds during peak

periods, decreases in number of stops, decreases in crash

risks, and reductions in fuel consumption. Furthermore,

interagency communication was substantially increased,

allowing for a multijurisdictional system with regional

goals. This coordination and cooperation is expected to

have a long-range positive impact on traffic operations 

in the East Valley.

Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination - 33

vii “Cross-Jurisdictional Signal Coordination in Phoenix and Seattle,”

Lessons Learned from the Metropolitan Model Deployment Initiative—

Removing Barriers to Seamless Travel on Arterial Streets, FHWA-OP-01-

035, U.S. Department of Transportation, March 2001.

Structure

● The East Valley Task Force was formed by

transportation specialists from the five

jurisdictions in Phoenix to identify areas for

improvement and establish standards for

interagency and interjurisdictional

coordination. 

● Regional traffic signal coordination was

achieved through careful planning and

increased coordination efforts.

Processes

● The Smart Corridor project, designed to improve

efficiency in the Phoenix region’s transportation

system and make commuting across

jurisdictions easier for travelers, is used as

leverage to achieve interagency communication

and coordination.

● Data collection, involving traffic counts,

turning-movement data, and global

positioning system satellite receivers, was

done before and after signal timing changes

to calculate travel time, delays, and vehicle

accelerations. The data showed that the

project had several operational benefits,

including increased travel speed and

decreased delays.

Products

● Before starting the project, the East Valley

Task Force established standards for

interagency coordination and developed a

regional traffic control and management plan

to aid in technical integration among

agencies. The plan included traffic signal

timing plans for the Smart Corridors and

coordination procedures for traffic

management between jurisdictions. 

Resources

● Each of eight regions involved in the project

share the development and operating costs. 

● Each region benefits from maximized

efficiency for travelers and increased

communication among agencies. The

communications infrastructure developed for

the project allows sharing of real-time traffic

operations information that is instrumental to

the initiation and achievement of regional

goals.

Performance

● Establishing standards for interagency

coordination provided expected levels of

regionwide performance.

● Smart Corridor components linked to the

AZTech server allow information sharing

among agencies and jurisdictions. Traffic

signal controllers, surveillance equipment,

and detection devices were installed or

upgraded to allow for the collection of

information, which can be shared through

workstations installed at TOCs in each

jurisdiction.
34 - Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination

San Antonio’s Advanced Warning

to Avoid Railroad Delays (AWARD)

Projectviii

The AWARD project was developed as part of San

Antonio’s MMDI to handle intermodal traffic problems

by providing advance information on train crossings to

operators at the Texas DOT TransGuide Control Center,

emergency service providers, and travelers. The system’s

purpose was to eliminate traffic backup on freeway

ramps and interruptions of freeway operations by passing

trains at at-grade highway-rail intersections. 

AWARD places acoustic and Doppler radar sensors

on poles in city or State rights-of-way along a railroad

track to detect the presence, speed, and length of trains

prior to their arrival at grade crossings close to freeway

exits. The sensors send data to the TransGuide Control

Center, where computers calculate train passing time and

duration. Using variable message signs, traveler information kiosks, web sites, and in-vehicle navigational units,

TransGuide operators alert motorists to potential delays

and alternative routes.

The system was considered a successful proof-ofconcept. In this case, however, train delays were found

insufficient to warrant system implementation. As traffic

increases in the San Antonio area, the system may one

day be needed, and the components will already be in

place.

viii “Advanced Warning for Railroad Delays in San Antonio,” Lessons

Learned from the Metropolitan Model Deployment Initiative—Providing

Enhanced Information to the Public, FHWA-OP-01-038, U.S. Department

of Transportation, March 2001.

Structure

● San Antonio expected the AWARD project 

to improve freeway system efficiency by

eliminating delays caused by at-grade

highway/rail intersections.

● Because railroads hesitated to participate in

the project, San Antonio modified it to focus

on traveler information and placed detectors

on city or State rights-of-way.

Processes

● Field interviews were used to determine the

effects of traveler information provided by

AWARD on traffic patterns at an AWARD

deployment location.

● The Queens University Synthetic Origin and

Destination Generator and INTEGRATION

modeling programs were also used to

determine AWARD’s impact.

Resources

● Resources were pooled with other MMDI

projects, thereby reducing some AWARD

fixed costs.

● Using MMDI program funds, Texas DOT

funded the operation and maintenance of

AWARD.
San Antonio Medical Center

Corridor Projectix

As another part of the MMDI, the San Antonio

Medical Center Corridor Project was designed to link the

region’s freeway and incident management system with a

newly developed and deployed arterial management system to reduce delays, improve safety, and enhance customer satisfaction. Through the use of freeway-based

video and loop detector stations, incidents are detected 

or confirmed. Real-time information is sent to the

TransGuide Freeway Operations Center, where incident

management plans are created, and the appropriate

actions taken. Incident information is also transmitted to

travelers through lane control signs and variable message

signs detailing incident type, expected delay, and alternative routes. In addition, the incident information is shared

with the City of San Antonio’s TMC, which can implement one of several predetermined incident-response signal plans to divert travelers from the impacted freeway 

to appropriate arterial roads.

While the system reduced incident-related delay, it

also presented significant institutional and operational

challenges. Those challenges, which concerned the integration of transportation agencies having diverse operating philosophies, budgets, priorities, and constituents,

were addressed as follows: 

● Local agencies were challenged to think regionally

and recognize travelers’ concerns for quick, safe,

and efficient movement through the entire transportation network. 

● A peer-to-peer, permissive operating philosophy was

adopted, in which management decisions are generated regionally but instituted locally. 

● The project offered unique incentives such as allowing the City of San Antonio to co-locate their

Medical Center Corridor arterial management center

within the Texas DOT TransGuide Center.

In addition, the operation of the system’s incident

response signal timings and the appropriate use of the

system’s variable message signs posed potentially thorny

problems. The signal timing plans were designed to

respond to severe delays on the freeway that caused high

diversion to the arterial roads. Use of the plans during

times of low diversion could actually increase delay.

Similarly, variable message signs could cause increased

delay if used during minor incidents that generated relatively little delay. The following steps were taken to

avoid trouble:

● Use of signal plans and variable message signs was

restricted to severe incidents.

● Use of video surveillance was restricted to arterial

operations personnel, who could monitor impacts of

signal timing changes in real time and turn plans on

and off as appropriate.

● San Antonio made a commitment to continually

update and broaden the breadth of the incident signal plans.

It is clear that, when solutions to institutional and

operational challenges are carefully planned and managed, significant benefits can be realized.

Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination - 35

ix “San Antonio’s Medical Center Corridor,” Lessons Learned from the

Metropolitan Model Deployment Initiative—Reducing Delay through

Integrated Freeway and Arterial Management, FHWA-OP-01-034, U.S.

Department of Transportation, March 2001.

Structure

● The Medical Center Corridor was developed

and is operated by Texas DOT, the City of

San Antonio, and the region’s EMS providers. 

● The corridor was designed so that incidents

could be identified, responded to, and

managed in a coordinated, seamless fashion.

It is envisioned that the corridor will provide

faster, safer, and more fuel-efficient travel. 

Processes

● System integration was planned to improve

the regional transportation system for

travelers by reducing delay, crash risk, and

fuel consumption.

● Using the INTEGRATION microsimulation

model, it was found that, when optimal

deployment is achieved, benefits could be

significant. Reductions were found in delay,

crash risk, and fuel consumption.

Furthermore, it was found that delay is more

substantially reduced through an integrated

system than through various components

acting in isolation.
36 - Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination

Products

● Incident response plans are formulated from

information received at the TransGuide

Freeway Operations Center. These plans are

used to dispatch appropriate responders. 

● Predetermined signal response plans can be

implemented as needed. San Antonio has

made a commitment to continuously update

and expand the plans’ scope to maintain

maximum efficiency on arterial roads.

Resources

● Costs were shared among agencies involved

in the Medical Center Corridor Project.

Freeway component installation costs were

kept low by conducting much of the

deployment during major highway

reconstruction. Arterial operations and

maintenance costs are kept low as well by

locating the operations center within the

existing TransGuide Operations Center, thus

taking advantage of centralized staffing and

maintenance plans. 

Performance

● To maintain efficient system performance,

use of incident response signal plans and

variable message signs was restricted to

more severe incidents. 

● Management decisions are created regionally

but implemented locally.

San Antonio (continued)
Phoenix’s Roadway Closure and

Restriction System (RCRS)x

RCRS was developed to provide integrated information about the status of maintenance activities, road construction, special events, traffic speeds, and incidents on

major highways and local roads in Phoenix. Initiated

under the Phoenix MMDI, the project’s goal was to provide information to allow travelers to plan more efficient

travel. The system is an expansion of the Highway

Closure and Restriction System (HCRS). 

RCRS required integration of local and regional systems. To achieve this integration, participating agencies

were provided with AZTech computer workstations with

which they can manually enter information about travel

conditions within their boundaries. The information is

provided to travelers through the AZTech Trailmaster

Web site, kiosks, and a toll-free phone number. 

The outcome of RCRS has been a more regional

approach to the reporting of traveler information.

Institutional barriers have been disbanded and interjurisdictional communication increased among Arizona DOT

districts and their local partners due to the high level of

communication required for system integration. As a

result of the careful planning and coordination among

jurisdictions, the system has been highly successful. 

Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination - 37

Structure

● By reaching out to AZTech municipal

partners, Arizona DOT championed the

inclusion of local traffic system information.

● The success of the system depended on

careful planning and coordination among 

the Phoenix jurisdictions. 

Processes

● Focus groups were formed to analyze the

positive and negative aspects of RCRS.

● Web-site usage statistics were studied to

determine the success of the system.

Products

● At no charge, Arizona has offered to license

to any other State transportation agency the

system software it used to fuse old HCRS

data with new RCRS data.

Resources

● Because RCRS was an upgrade of an

existing system, resource requirements were

significantly lower than those required for a

new system. 

● Local municipalities in the Phoenix region

can now share infrastructure, leading to

equipment cost-sharing.

● Costs are shared among an additional 15

AZTech MMDI projects, 8 planned additional

traffic operations centers, and 2 fire dispatch

centers.

Performance

● System performance data can easily be

obtained by studying the Web site and phone

system usage statistics. 

x “Phoenix’s Roadway Closure and Restriction System,” Lessons Learned

from the Metropolitan Model Deployment Initiative—Providing Enhanced

Information to the Public, FHWA-OP-01-36, U.S. Department of

Transportation, March 2001.
Ventura County Fare Integrationxi

Between January 1996 and October 1999, an automated, integrated transit-fare collection system was field

tested in Ventura County, California. The purpose of the

system was to create a seamless fare payment system

across transit agencies in the region. It was hoped that

the system would encourage, accommodate, manage, and

assess travel patterns of passengers among transit systems. In addition, the transit agencies involved hoped to

improve data collection and reporting processes. 

The payment card system was devised based on

smart card technologies and called the Smart Passport.

The Ventura County Transportation Commission

(VCTC) coordinated the project. The benefits that VCTC

hoped to achieve were:

● Regional payment system coordination;

● Seamless regional travel;

● The concept of “one account” or one payment

device for regional transportation; and

● Cost sharing among partners.

Due to problems with the system, the project did not

realize the expected benefits, but instead resulted in a list

of lessons learned to be applied to any future implementations of the system. The field test was considered to be

a positive step toward regional, multiagency 

coordination.

38 - Regional Transportation Operations Collaboration and Coordination

xi “Ventura County Fare Integration—A Case Study,” September 2001.

Prepared by Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit

Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, September 2001.

Structure

● Initial support came from eight transit

operators interested in an integrated fare

system, a seamless transit system, and

improved data collection and reporting

processes. These operators were already

cooperating to devise an integrated transit

system before the Smart Passport project.

● In coordinating the project, VCTC gained the

support of participating agencies and

operators by discussing the potential benefits

of the system.

Processes

● The project was closely monitored to

determine its benefits and needs for

improvement. Although the benefits could not

be quantified, lessons learned were compiled

for use in future integrated fare card systems.

The lessons learned will allow decisionmakers to better understand critical issues

and potential benefits before investing.

Products

● VCTC and the participating agencies signed

memorandums of understanding stating that

VCTC would act as lead agency and would

be solely responsible for contractual and

financial issues.

● Surveys were conducted to determine users’

opinions of the Smart Passport. 

● As a result of the project, a set of issues was

identified that transportation planners and

service providers need to examine before

planning or implementing a multiagency fare

collection system.

Resources

● The project was funded by Caltrans and

USDOT.

● As a result of the project, VCTC recognized

that staff resources must be commensurate

with the project’s scope. This means that

more managerial, technical, and

administrative staff would be needed for any

future implementation of the system.

Performance

● All agencies involved agreed that system

performance measurements should have

been established during the planning phase

of the project, and these measurements must

be applied regularly throughout the project to

monitor performance.
Federal Highway Administration

U.S. Department of Transportation

400 7th Street, S.W. (HOP)

Washington, DC 20590

Toll-Free "Help Line" 866-367-7487 

www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov

EDL Document No.: 13686

Publication No.: FHWA-OP-03-008