Poor traffic signal timing accounts for an estimated 10 percent of all traffic delay 

– about 300 million vehicle-hours – on major roadways alone.1 Americans agree that 

this is a problem: one U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) survey found that 47 

percent of people believe delays caused by congestion are the top community concern.2

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

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

element of this strategy is to reduce congestion by promoting operational and technical 

improvements that will enable existing roadways to operate more efficiently.3

Traffic Signal Control

Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) applications for traffic signals – 

including communications systems, adaptive control systems, traffic 

responsive, real-time data collection and analysis, and maintenance 

management systems – enable signal control systems to operate with greater efficiency. 

Sharing traffic signal and operations data with other systems will improve overall 

transportation system performance in freeway management, incident and special event 

management, and maintenance/failure response times. Some examples of the benefits 

of using ITS applications for traffic signal control include:

Updated traffic signal control equipment used in conjunction with signal timing 

optimization can reduce congestion. The Texas Traffic Light Synchronization 

program reduced delays by 23 percent by updating traffic signal control equipment 

and optimizing signal timing.4

Coordinated signal systems improve operational efficiency. A project in Syracuse that 

connected intersections to a communications network produced reductions in travel 

time of up to 34 percent.5 An added benefit to connected intersections is a simplified 

signal timing process and automated monitoring of equipment failures.

Adaptive signal systems improve the responsiveness of signal timing in rapidly 

changing traffic conditions. Various adaptive signal systems have demonstrated 

network performance enhancement from 5 percent to over 30 percent.6,7 ITS 

communication and sensor networks are the enabling technologies that allow 

adaptive signal control to be deployed.

Incorporating ITS into the planning, design, and operation of traffic signal control 

systems will provide motorists with recognizable improvements in travel time, lower 

vehicle operating costs, and reduced vehicle emissions.

•

•

•

continued on page 2

BenefitS

Traffic Signal Timing: Moving State-of-thePractice Closer to State-of-the-Art

There are more than 330,000 traffic signals in the United States, and, according to U.S. 

Department of Transportation estimates, as many as 75 percent could be made to operate 

Intelligent Transportation Systems 

forTraffic Signal 

Control

U.S. Department of Transportation

Deployment Benefits 

and

Lessons Learned

BENEFITS

Traffic Signal Timing: Moving State-of-thePractice Closer to State-of-the-Art . . . . . 1

L.A.’s Adaptive Traffic Control System 

Reduces Delays and Stops . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

ACS-Lite Now Available . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

COSTS

Funding Is Out There – Ask for It! . . . . . . . 2

Sample Signal System Project Costs . . . . . 3

DEPLOYMENT

U.S. Traffic Signals Get a Don 2005 Report Card . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

The Benefits of an “A” Grade . . . . . . . . . . . 3

LESSONS LEARNED

Traffic Signal Control – 

Lessons from Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Peers, Mentors, and Low-Cost Classes 

Can Supplement Operator Training . . . . . 4
TRAFFIC SIGNAL CONTROL



L.A.’s Adaptive Traffic Control System Reduces Delays and Stops

Benefits

more efficiently by adjusting their timing 

plans, coordinating adjacent signals, or 

updating equipment.8 In fact, optimizing 

signal timing is considered a low-cost approach to reducing congestion, costing from 

$2,500 to $3,100 per signal per update.9

ITS technology enables the process of 

traffic signal timing to be performed more 

efficiently by enhancing data collection 

and system monitoring capabilities and, in 

some applications, automating the process 

entirely. ITS tools such as automated traffic 

data collection, centrally controlled or 

monitored traffic signal systems, closed 

loop signal systems, interconnected traffic 

signals, and traffic adaptive signal control 

help make the traffic signal timing process 

efficient and cost effective. 

Several municipalities have worked to 

synchronize, optimize, or otherwise upgrade 

their traffic signal systems in recent years. 

Below are a few examples of the benefits 

some have realized:

• The Traffic Light Synchronization 

program in Texas shows a benefit-cost 

ratio of 62:1, with reductions of 24.6 

percent in delay, 9.1 percent in fuel 

consumption, and 14.2 percent in stops.10

• The Fuel Efficient Traffic Signal 

Management program in California 

showed a benefit-cost ratio of 17:1, 

with reductions of 14 percent in delay, 

8 percent in fuel consumption, 13 percent 

in stops, and 8 percent in travel time.11

• Improvements to an 11-intersection 

arterial in St. Augustine, Florida, 

showed reductions of 36 percent in 

arterial delay, 49 percent in arterial 

stops, and 10 percent in travel time, 

resulting in an annual fuel savings of 

26,000 gallons and a cost savings 

of $1.1 million.12

Although communications networks 

allow almost instantaneous notification of 

equipment failure, without which some 

failures may go unnoticed for months, 

there must be staff available to respond. 

A general rule of thumb for operations and 

maintenance of traffic signals is 1 traffic 

engineer for every 75 to 100 signals and 

1 signal technician for every 40 to 50 

signals;14 however, a network containing 

numerous intersections with multiple 

lanes and phases will likely need more 

staff than a central business district with 

many two-phase intersections. Retiming 

should be performed every 2-to-3 years 

at a minimum – more often in areas of 

rapid change or where new signals are 

being added.15

Traffic Signal Timing continued from page 1

“The payback in terms of 

capacity and public acceptance 

is significant. It’s the one 

investment we can make in 

the near term that will make 

a difference in people’s lives 

every day.”13

— Seattle Mayor, Paul Schell. 

The city of Los Angeles 

has topped the Texas 

Transportation Institute’s annual list of 

the most congested 

cities in the country 

since well before the 

turn of the century. It’s no wonder that 

the Los Angeles Department of Transportation developed its own Adaptive Traffic 

Control System (ATCS) to adjust traffic 

signal timing in response to real-time 

traffic demands.16

The purpose of the L.A. system is to control 

all three critical components of traffic signal 

timing – cycle length, phase split, and offset 

– on a cycle-by-cycle basis. Extensive detector data collected in the signal network is 

continuously analyzed and evaluated, and 

the most appropriate signal timing for the 

existing condition is then implemented 

within one signal cycle. Any long-term 

traffic pattern changes and short-term variations in traffic conditions are automatically 

accommodated by ATCS. The result is fewer 

stops, fewer delays, and greater intersection 

operational capacities. 

In a study to determine the benefits of 

L.A.’s ATCS over the Urban Traffic Control 

System that had been in operation as the 

city’s central traffic control system, ATCS 

was shown to reduce travel time by 12.7 

percent, reduce average stops by 31 percent, 

and decrease average delays by 21.4 percent. 

Improvements in delay were more significant during the evening peak hours than 

at other times, but travel time and average 

stops were improved for all time periods.17

CostS

Funding Is Out There – Ask for It!

Get the word out: Federal funds can be 

used for arterial management programs, 

including operations and maintenance of 

traffic signal control systems. In addition 

to project costs, operating costs are also 

eligible for Federal reimbursement from 

National Highway System and Surface 

Transportation Program funding. This aid 

is distributed to project sponsors in the 

following ways: 

1. Transportation Improvement Program 

(TIP) and State Transportation 

Improvement Program (STIP). Program 

funds are typically available for capital 

improvement projects requiring new or 

continued on page 3

For these and other benefits, visit: www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov

ACS-Lite Now Available

ACS-Lite is a scaled-down version of 

the Federal Highway Administration’s 

(FHWA) Adaptive Control Software 

(ACS).18 It is designed to monitor and 

evaluate traffic conditions and provide 

refinements to signal timing on a cycleby-cycle basis. ACS Lite is intended to be 

a low-cost solution that adjusts traffic signal timing for real-time traffic conditions 

in small-to medium-sized communities. 

It was designed specifically for the closed 

loop arterial traffic signal system, which is 

representative of 90 percent of the traffic 

signal systems in the United States. 

For more information on this resource, contact 

Raj Ghaman, FHWA, raj.ghaman@dot.gov. 
TRAFFIC SIGNAL CONTROL



DEPLOYMENT

U.S. Traffic Signals Get a D- on 2005 Report Card

reconstructed infrastructure. The 

installation of traffic signal systems 

and traffic control centers will usually 

be funded under these programs. These 

funds are programmed into the State’s 

Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP).

2. Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality 

(CMAQ) Improvement Program funds. 

For projects located in air quality nonattainment and maintenance areas, 

CMAQ funds may be used for operating costs for a 3-year period as long as 

those systems measurably demonstrate 

reductions in traffic delays. Typical eligible operating costs include labor costs, 

administrative costs, costs of utilities and 

rent, and other costs associated with the 

continuous operation of the system, such 

as costs for system maintenance.

3. U.S. Department of Transportation 

(DOT)/Federal Highway Administration 

(FHWA) Division Offices. These offices 

provide oversight and technical assistance per stewardship agreements with 

the State DOT for Federal-aid-funded 

projects.

The project sponsor must communicate 

the need for the project with either the 

State DOT or metropolitan planning 

organization (MPO) to determine whether 

the program fits into the local LRTP and 

whether the current TIP can be amended, 

if necessary, to include the project. If not, 

the project sponsor must work with the 

MPO or local State DOT representative 

to make sure the project makes it into 

the next TIP update cycle. The planning 

partners’ responsibility is to help qualifying 

projects obtain funding from either Federal 

or other sources.

Where to Start

The first step is to call the local MPO 

planning office. 

For localities that are not in an MPO 

area, the first step is to call the State DOT 

planning office to find out where they are in 

the LRTP and the TIP development process. 

For more information on Federal aid, 

call the State FHWA Division Office. 

Remember: the key to obtaining aid 

is reaching out to regional partners 

to locate local funding sources and 

working with them to ensure successful 

project delivery.

America’s traffic signals 

rate only a D-, according 

to the findings of the 

2005 National Traffic 

Signal Report Card, a 

report published by the 

National Transportation 

Operations Coalition (NTOC).22 NTOC 

attributes the Nation’s low scores on its 

report card to inadequate resources, 

particularly among smaller cities. 

So, How Do We Get an A?23

• Devote resources. To achieve an “A” 

on traffic signal performance, more 

sustained resources must be devoted to 

signals and the professionals who design, 

operate and maintain them.

• Make wise investments. Investment 

must be made in current signal 

hardware, timing updates, and 

maintenance resources. 

• Provide training. Well-trained traffic 

signal technicians and engineers are 

needed to properly operate and 

maintain traffic signals and to preserve 

the investment in the hardware and 

timing updates. 

Funding is Out There continued from page 2

For these and other sample costs, visit: www.itscosts.its.dot.gov

The Benefits of an “A” Grade

The following are just a few of the benefits 

that can be realized from an “A” grade:

• Reductions in travel time up to 25 

percent. If you commute 2 hours per 

day to and from work, you would save 

50 hours per year because of improved 

traffic signal operations.24

• Reductions in fuel consumption of up to 

10 percent, resulting in a savings of 17 

billion gallons of motor fuel per year.25

• Reductions in harmful emissions 

(carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, 

volatile organic compounds) by up to 

22 percent.26

Sample Signal System Project Costs

Location Treatment Cost

Syracuse, NY19 Installed a computerized traffic signal system and optimization of signal timing 

for 145 intersections. $8,316,307

Salt Lake Valley, UT20

Implemented an advanced transportation management system to allow 

the Utah Department of Transportation Traffic Operations Center (TOC)

to monitor and manage freeway and arterial traffic flow in the Salt Lake Valley.

More than 600 of the 900 signals in the Salt Lake Valley are connected to the TOC.

Signal Control System: $2,205,000

Arlington County, VA21

Brought 65 intersections (expandable to 235) under an adaptive signal 

control system. The cost included software, hardware, roadside equipment, cabling, 

traffic mobilization and maintenance, installation, training, maintenance and test 

equipment, and system documentation.

$2.43 million total, including: 

Field equipment and installation: $1.76 million

Office equipment and installation: $208,000

Training: $28,800

Maintenance: $48,200

Traffic control and mobilization: $237,400

Software: $149,000
TRAFFIC SIGNAL CONTROL



There’s More Online!

ITS Applications Overview:

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

FHWA Office of Operations 

Arterial Management Program: 

www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/

arterial_mgmt/index.htm

National Traffic Signal Report Card: 

www.ite.org/reportcard

The online version of this document 

contains a full list of sources: 

www.its.dot.gov/jpodocs/repts_te/14321.htm

lessons learned

Traffic Signal Control – Lessons from Experience

lessons learned

Peers, Mentors, and Low-Cost Classes Can Supplement Operator Training 

Computerized traffic signal systems can be 

extremely useful in managing street traffic, 

but advancements in control technology, 

signal optimization programs and other 

traffic engineering tools are sophisticated, 

and, for these systems to operate at their 

full potential, signal engineering staff need 

training. Although there is often a constant 

pressure to minimize spending at departments of transportation, low-cost options 

do exist and can be used to assist staff in 

performing their maintenance and operations duties. These options may include: 

• Regional mentoring programs, wherein 

less experienced engineers are paired with 

those with greater experience to guide 

them and offer professional advice.31

• Peer-to-peer programs between 

agencies, which can be very beneficial 

in matching individuals seeking specific 

knowledge of a system with those who 

have both implemented and maintained 

such a system.32

There are also a number of supplemental 

training options available for minimal 

cost from universities, transportation 

associations, and the Federal 

government, including: 

• The Institute of Transportation 

Engineers: www.ite.org/education/

clearinghouse 

• The National Highway Institute: 

www.nhi.fhwa.dot.gov

• The ITS Professional Capacity 

Building Program: 

www.pcb.its.dot.gov/Calendar.asp

• The Consortium on ITS Training 

and Education, based at the 

University of Maryland: 

www.citeconsortium.org/

curriculum.html 

FHWA-JPO-07-004 • January 2007 • EDL# 14321

The following are 

lessons learned on 

how to plan, design, 

operate, and maintain 

traffic signal control 

systems and are taken 

from both evaluation 

research and the ITS Lessons Learned 

Knowledge Resource. 

Funding

• Craft a program of sustainable funding 

for ITS Systems deployed in signal 

operations.27 Funding for ITS deployments must consider the requirements 

for ongoing traffic operations and 

maintenance; it is directly proportional 

to the type, complexity, and quantity 

of technologies deployed. Any successful program must specifically define 

its objectives; establish the methods 

and processes to meet the objectives; 

provide resources, time, personnel, and 

equipment to meet the objectives; and 

have specific quantifiable performance 

measures in place to make certain the 

objectives are met. Without a sustainable 

funding source, additional benefits from 

ITS deployment will be hard to sustain 

throughout the life cycle of the program. 

Federal resources can be used to provide 

a significant portion of funding to sustain 

this program.

Leadership and Partnerships

• Implement a communication structure 

across jurisdictions that facilitates the 

flow of traffic data and allows agencies to 

coordinate traffic signal timing.28 In the 

Scottsdale/Tempe area, the boundary 

for coordination previously existed at a 

jurisdictional separation. By moving this 

coordination boundary to a functional 

boundary defined by a roadway – an area 

at which traffic signal coordination is less 

of an issue – drivers are able to make a 

seamless commute from one jurisdiction 

to the next. For the Phoenix area, 

regional traffic signal coordination has 

been achieved through careful planning, 

increased coordination efforts, and 

a well developed cross-jurisdictional 

communication infrastructure. 

Requirements and Design

• Focus on solving existing transportation 

problems when considering ITS and introduce technologies as part of the solution.29

The purpose of Delaware’s Statewide 

Integrated Transportation Management 

System Integration project, now called 

DelTrac, is to solve transportation problems by ensuring that only the most 

appropriate and needed technology 

solutions are deployed. For example, 

much of the traffic in Delaware is 

carried on signalized highways, and 

controlling signal timing is a key factor 

in maintaining throughput on those 

highways; therefore, a long-term 

objective for DelTrac is establishing 

an adaptive signal control system. 

Operations and Maintenance

• Retain properly trained staff to deploy, 

operate, and maintain systems.30 Without 

the proper knowledge, agencies can find 

themselves in a quagmire of software, 

hardware, maintenance, and communications problems. A 2002 synthesis of best 

practices reveals the tremendous need 

to hire knowledgeable employees and to 

keep them current in the ever-advancing 

technologies that influence the design, 

deployment, and operation of traffic signal systems. Without proper staffing and 

training, agencies will be hard pressed to 

exploit the additional capabilities gained 

through a successful ITS deployment. 

Synthesis interviewees stressed the need 

to have agency staff attend technical 

professional conferences, meetings, and 

seminars through which professional 

networks can be established and new 

information is readily available. 

For these and other lessons, visit:

www.itslessons.its.dot.gov. 


forTraffic Signal

Control

Intelligent Transportation Systems 

Source Information

Page. 1. Introduction

1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, “Temporary Losses of Highway Capacity 

 and Impacts on Performance: Phase 2,” Oakridge National Laboratory Report No. ORNL/TM-2004/209, 

 Oak Ridge, TN: November 2004.

2. Federal Highway Administration, Managing Our Congested Streets and Highways, Washington, DC: 2001. 

 Report: www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/jpodocs/repts_te/13443.html

3. U.S. Department of Transportation, National Strategy to Reduce Congestion on America’s Transportation 

 Network, Washington, DC: May 2006. Report: isddc.dot.gov/OLPFiles/OST/012988.pdf

Page 1. Traffic Signal Control

4. Federal Highway Administration, Traffic Control Systems Handbook, Washington, DC: October 2005, p. 3-93. 

 ITS Benefits Database Entry: www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

 74754268229175D98525726000678C76

5. New York State Department of Transportation, Syracuse Signal Interconnect Project: Before and After Analysis 

 Final Report, Syracuse, NY: September 2003. ITS Benefits Database Entry: 

 www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/A9953A0DFDDA7B4885256E9B0052FB24

6. Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center, “Adaptive Control Software,”

 Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center Report No. HRTS-04-037, Washington, DC: December 2003.

 Document: ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/adaptivecontrol

7. Abdel-Rahim, A., et al., “The Impact of SCATS on Travel Time and Delay,” paper presented at 

 the 8th ITS America Annual Meeting, Detroit Michigan, May 4-7, 1998. ITS Benefits Database Entry: 

 www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/AF5E7F6989F1A500852569610051E2E6

Pages 1-2. Traffic Signal Timing: Moving State-of-the-Practice Closer to State-of-the-Art

8. Paulson, S. L., “Managing Traffic Flow Through Signal Timing,” Public Roads, January/February 2002. 

 Article: www.tfhrc.gov/pubrds/janfeb02/timing.htm

9. The estimate of $2,500 to $3,100 is based on information from the following resources: 

Document Referenced Location Cost to Retime 

Each Signal

National Transportation Operations Coalition, The National Traffic Signal 

Report Card: Technical Report, Washington, DC: 2005. 

ITS Costs Database Entry: www.itscosts.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

215F723DB93D293C8525725F00786FD8

Report: www.ite.org/reportcard/NTS_TechReport.pdf

Nationwide $3,000 
TRAFFIC SIGNAL CONTROL



Document Referenced Location Cost to Retime 

Each Signal

Fee Estimate – Millennia Mall Retiming and Scope and Schedule – 

Millennia Mall Retiming (Bid submitted to the City of Orlando, FL 

in October 2005 by TEI Engineering.) ITS Costs Database Entry: www.itscosts.its.

dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/965159F6165B89CD8525725F00775FDA

Report: orlapp1.ci.orlando.fl.us/asv/paperlessagenda.nsf/

6acecff5f30ecb0d85256bd0005abae0/

2e9835a4a025b7448525709800515d3b?OpenDocument

Orlando, FL $3,100

Heminger, S., Regional Signal Timing Program – 2005 Cycle Program Performance

(Memorandum to the California Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s 

Operations Committee), Oakland, CA: October 2006.

ITS Costs Database Entry: www.itscosts.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

714A1417F0A45AF18525725F00757ABD

California $2,400

Sunkari. S., “Benefits of Retiming Traffic Signals: A Reference for Practitioners and 

Decision Makers About the Benefits of Traffic Signal Retiming,” presentation to the 

Institute of Transportation Engineers 2005 Annual Meeting and Exhibit, Melbourne, 

Australia, August 7-10, 2005. ITS Costs Database Entry: www.itscosts.its.dot.gov/

its/benecost.nsf/0/48627BF35CF506958525725F00799456

Unspecified $2,000-$2,500

Sunkari, S., “The Benefits of Retiming Traffic Signals,” ITE Journal, April 2004.

ITS Costs Database Entry: www.itscosts.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

5551ECB16B1BC9698525725F007A75D0

Washington, 

DC $3,500 

Conversation with Mr. Jerry Luor, Traffic Engineering Supervisor, 

Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG), October 2006.

ITS Costs Database Entry: www.itscosts.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

F81461CF059C24AD8525725F007B0947

Denver, CO

$1,800-$2,000 

– includes 

consultant time 

and DRCOG 

staff review 

time

NOTE: While a range of $2,500 to $3,100 is reasonable, costs could be slightly more or less. 

For more information, see ITS Costs Database Entry: www.itscosts.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

28A2F8923ACE84468525725F00 7B88EE

10. Sunkari. S., “Benefits of Retiming Traffic Signals: A Reference for Practitioners and Decision Makers About 

 the Benefits of Traffic Signal Retiming,” presentation to the Institute of Transportation Engineers 

 2005 Annual Meeting and Exhibit, Melbourne, Australia, August 7-10, 2005; also, Sunkari, S.,

 “The Benefits of Retiming Traffic Signals,” ITE Journal, April 2004. ITS Benefits Database Entry: 

 www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/03BDC39B85A6A78C8525725F00605A8A

11. Skabardonis, A., “ITS Benefits: The Case of Traffic Signal Control Systems,” presentation to the 80th Annual 

 Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, January 7-11, 2001. 

 ITS Benefits Database Entry: www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/ID/

 42419C3E5993E9CD852569EA0071D556

12. Sunkari. S., “Benefits of Retiming Traffic Signals: A Reference for Practitioners and Decision Makers About 

 the Benefits of Traffic Signal Retiming,” presentation to the Institute of Transportation Engineers 

 2005 Annual Meeting and Exhibit, Melbourne, Australia, August 7-10, 2005; also, Sunkari, S., “The Benefits 

 of Retiming Traffic Signals,” ITE Journal, April 2004. ITS Benefits Database Entry: 

 www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/03BDC39B85A6A78C8525725F00605A8A
TRAFFIC SIGNAL CONTROL



13. Federal Highway Administration, It’s About Time, Traffic Signal Management: Cost-Effective Street 

 Capacity and Safety, Washington, DC: 2001. Video: ops.fhwa.dot.gov/arterial_mgmt/outreach.htm

14. Giblin, J. M. and W. H. Kraft, Traffic Control System Operations: Installation, Management, and Maintenance, 

 Washington, DC: 2000.

15. Paulson, S. L., “Managing Traffic Flow Through Signal Timing,” Public Roads, January/February 2002. 

 Article: www.tfhrc.gov/pubrds/janfeb02/timing.htm

Page 2. L.A.’s Adaptive Traffic Control System Reduces Delays and Stops

16. City of Los Angeles Department of Transportation, Preliminary Evaluation Study of 

 Adaptive Traffic Control System, Los Angeles, CA: July 2001, p. 4. ITS Benefits Database Entry: 

 www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/CA4E16B4E7167BCF8525725F0073EBF3

17. Ibid., p. 7. 

Page 2. ACS-Lite Now Available

18. For more information about ACS-Lite, contact Raj Ghaman, Travel Management Team Leader in 

 FHWA’s Office of Operations Research & Development, 202-493-3270, raj.ghaman@dot.gov. 

 Or, visit the FHWA Resource Center, www.fhwa.dot.gov/resourcecenter/teams/operations/index.cfm

Page 3. Sample Signal System Project Costs

19. New York State Department of Transportation, Syracuse Signal Interconnect Project: Before and 

 After Analysis Final Report, Syracuse, NY: September 2003. ITS Costs Database Entry: 

 www.itscosts.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/99E321B790FCF2E885256EA60047BA96

20. Perrin, Joseph, et al., Advanced Transportation Management System Elemental Cost Benefit 

 Assessment, Washington, DC: March 2004. ITS Costs Database Entry: 

 www.itscosts.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/C5BE195577308C4985256F4300524F10

21. Correspondence with Daniel Worke, Arlington County Department of 

 Public Works and contractor estimate, February 2001, ITS Costs Database Entry: 

 www.itscosts.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/FEC349982924B5CB85256DB100458917

Page 3. U.S. Traffic Signals Get D- on 2005 Report Card

22. National Transportation Operations Coalition, The National Traffic Signal Report Card: Technical Report, 

 Washington, DC: 2005, p. 4. Report: www.ite.org/reportcard/NTS_TechReport.pdf

23. Ibid., p. 18

Page 3. The Benefits of an “A” Grade

24. National Transportation Operations Coalition, The National Traffic Signal Report Card: Technical Report, 

 Washington, DC: 2005, p. 17. Report: www.ite.org/reportcard/NTS_TechReport.pdf

25. Ibid.

26. Ibid.
TRAFFIC SIGNAL CONTROL



Page 4. Traffic Signal Control – Lessons from Experience

	 Funding

27. U.S. Department of Transportation, Assessment of Wisconsin Department of Transportation 

 Traffic Signal Operations Program, Washington, DC: March 2006. 

 ITS Lessons Learned Knowledge Resource Entry: www.itslessons.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/

 Lesson?OpenForm&A13441BE68B6040E8525725E006AC05A

 (Lesson learned point of contact: Cheryl Lowrance, Mitretek Systems, 202-863-2986, 

 cheryl.lowrance@mitretek.org)

	 Leadership and Partnerships

28. Federal Highway Administration, Cross-Jurisdictional Signal Coordination in Phoenix and Seattle: 

 Lessons Learned from the Metropolitan Model Deployment Initiative, Washington, DC: 2001. 

 ITS Lessons Learned Knowledge Resource Entry: 

 www.itslessons.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/Lesson?OpenForm&D8D1EDDDFABCC5EB8525707E0061C530

 (Lesson learned point of contact: Mark Carter, SAIC, 202-366-2196, mark.r.carter@saic.com). 

 Report: www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/jpodocs/repts_te/13222.html

	 Requirements and Design

29. Federal Highway Administration, An Evaluation of Delaware’s DelTrac Program - Building an Integrated 

 Transportation Management System, Washington, DC: May 2004. 

 ITS Lesson Learned Knowledge Resource Entry: www.itslessons.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/

 Lesson?OpenForm&644E336BB1BC39F78525707E0061C483

 (Lesson learned point of contact: Bobby Haas, SAIC, 865-481-2982, haasr@saic.com). 

 Report: www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/jpodocs/repts_te/14019.html

	 Operations and Maintenance

30. Federal Highway Administration, Successful Traffic Signal System Procurement Techniques, Washington, DC: 

 January 2002. ITS Lessons Learned Knowledge Resource: 

 www.itslessons.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/Lesson?OpenForm&78E81A40197E84A4852570A60055F16B

 (Lesson learned point of contact: Erin Ehlinger, ICx Transportation Group, Inc., 

 425-941-4560, erin.ehlinger@icxt.com). 

Page 4. Peers, Mentors, and Low-Cost Classes Can Supplement Operator Training

31. Olson, Paul R., “Operating Signals IS Important!” Presentation to the Denver Regional 

 Council of Governments’ Traffic Signal System Improvement Program annual meeting, August 2006.

32. Ibid.