WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT

INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION

SYSTEMS? 

December 2000
We would like to express appreciation to the following individuals who were

instrumental in development of the following sections of this document:

Chapter 1: Professor Joseph M. Sussman, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Chapter 2: Vincent Pearce, Booz•Allen & Hamilton

Chapter 3: Brandy Hicks and Mark Carter, SAIC

Chapter 4: Jane E. Lappin, EG&G Technical Services/John A. Volpe National

Transportation Systems Center

Chapter 5: Robert F. Casey, John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center

Chapter 6: John E. Orban, PH.D., Battelle

Chapter 7: Michael McGurrin, Mitretek Systems

Chapter 8: Allan J. DeBlasio, John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center

Chapter 9: Professor Joseph M. Sussman, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

acknowledgements

i
Chapter 1: What have we learned about ITS? A synthesis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Chapter 2: What have we learned about freeway, incident,

and emergency management and electronic toll collection? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Chapter 3: What have we learned about ITS? Arterial management . . . . . . 45

Chapter 4: What have we learned about advanced traveler 

information systems and customer satisfaction? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

Chapter 5: What have we learned about advanced public 

transportation systems? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

Chapter 6: What have we learned about ITS for commercial 

vehicle operations? Status, challenges, and benefits of CVISN level 1 

deployment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107

Chapter 7: What have we learned about cross-cutting 

technical and programmatic issues?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127

Chapter 8: What have we learned about cross-cutting

institutional issues?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149

Chapter 9: What have we learned about ITS? Final comments . . . . . . . . . . 171

Appendix: Charts and Tables. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177

table ofcontents

iii
chapter 1

WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED

ABOUT ITS? A SYNTHESIS
CHAPTER 1: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ITS? A SYNTHESIS 3

INTRODUCTION

I

ntelligent transportation systems (ITS) apply well-established technologies

in communications, control, electronics, and computer hardware and 

software to improve surface transportation system performance.

This simple definition underlies what has been a substantial change in surface 

transportation in the United States and around the world. Development of ITS was

motivated by the increased difficulty—social, political, and economic—of expanding

transportation capacity through conventional infrastructure-building. ITS represents

an effort to harness the capabilities of advanced technologies to improve transportation on many levels. ITS is intended to reduce congestion, enhance safety, mitigate

the environmental impacts of transportation systems, enhance energy performance,

and improve productivity. Now, with the National ITS Program more than a decade

old in the United States, it certainly is timely, appropriate, and necessary to ask

these questions:

Have we succeeded in deploying ITS? Has that deployment had a 

positive effect on surface transportation? What have we learned 

from these ITS deployments that can guide us in the future?

In short, this study is concerned with what we have learned about ITS. But ITS is

composed of many technologies and applications, some of which, it will be seen, are

more successful than others. So, in a disaggregate manner, this study examines

which ITS technologies and applications have been successful, which have not, and

for which more information is needed to make a judgment. Of further interest are

the characteristics that distinguish successful from unsuccessful applications in the

ITS world. If they can be identified, then we can more effectively plan the future of

the National ITS Program, building on that knowledge.

The National ITS Program is large and broad. Even in an evaluation as ambitious as

this study, limits had to be set on which parts of ITS to include. The areas included

within the scope of this study are as follows:

■ Freeway, Incident, and Emergency Management, and Electronic Toll Collection

(ETC)

■ Arterial Management

■ Traveler Information Systems

■ Advanced Public Transportation Systems

■ Commercial Vehicle Operations (CVO)

■ Cross-Cutting Technical Issues

■ Cross-Cutting Institutional Issues

While these areas represent a significant portion of ITS, some important areas were

beyond the scope of this study. These include the Intelligent Vehicle Initiative

(IVI), which is currently in the field testing stage. Also, a number of in-vehicle

technologies and fleet management applications in commercial vehicles—outside

the purview and control of the public sector—were not included. Highway-rail ITS

applications had insufficient information for this report to comment on.
At the outset, it is important to establish a definition of what we mean by success.

While many possible definitions exist, success in this study is tied to effectiveness—

that is, whether an ITS application addresses major societal goals, such as enhanced

safety and improved quality of life—and to deployment of each particular ITS 

technology or application. Implicit in this metric for success is the study team’s

belief in the test of the marketplace and the ITS community’s ability to select those

technologies and applications it sees as cost-effective and beneficial. While one

could argue that other success metrics should be used, the study team’s judgment 

was that ITS, now in its second decade of development, testing, and deployment in

the United States, should be judged by its success in an increasingly sophisticated

marketplace.

The ITS Joint Program Office (JPO) of the Federal Highway Administration

(FHWA) of the U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) funds the 

development of several databases that were used to judge various ITS technologies

and applications. Those include the following:

■ Metropolitan ITS Deployment Tracking Database, maintained by the Oak Ridge

National Laboratory.

■ Commercial Vehicle Information Systems Network (CVISN) Deployment

Tracking Database, maintained by the John A. Volpe National Transportation

Systems Center (Volpe Center).

■ 1998 Survey of Transit Agencies conducted by the Volpe Center.

■ ITS Cost Database, maintained by Mitretek Systems.

Deployment levels for various technologies were defined as follows:

Deployed in fewer than 10 percent of possible sites = limited deployment

Deployed in between 10 percent and 30 percent of possible sites = moderate

deployment

Deployed in more than 30 percent of possible sites = widespread deployment1

Deployment levels are based on the actual presence of particular technologies, not

future plans to deploy, even if funding for the deployment has already been secured.

If a metropolitan area or agency responded that they use some technology (e.g., a

kiosk) at one location, then that metro area was included in the “count” for kiosks.

But simply identifying an ITS technology or application as unsuccessful (i.e., not

adequately deployed) is not a sufficient base for understanding how to subsequently

advance in that area. The study, therefore, included the reason for the lack of 

success, choosing among three fundamental causes for a technology or application

not being deployed:

1. The technology simply did not function effectively in a real-world environment. 

2. While the technology or application worked in a technical sense, it was too costly, meaning (a) it was simply too expensive to deploy compared with the potential

4 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

1 Specifically the “possible sites” on which these deployment levels are based are 78 of the largest

metropolitan areas for Chapters 2, 3, 4 and 7; 525 transit agencies surveyed by the John A. Volpe

National Transportation Systems Center for Chapter 5; and the 50 states plus the District of Columbia

for Chapter 6.
CHAPTER 1: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ITS? A SYNTHESIS

benefits that accrued from its deployment; or (b) the absolute costs of acquisition,

operations, and maintenance were considered too large by the deploying organization; or (c) the technology used was not suitable for a particular application.

3. Institutional barriers prevented the effective deployment of the technology or

application.

Any of these reasons for lack of success could potentially be overcome in the future.

Technologies can be enhanced, prices of various technologies can and do fall, often

dramatically. And institutional barriers, while often tenacious, can be overcome with

careful work over the long-term. Further, a particular technology or application may

not have had time to develop a “following” in the marketplace, given development

and deployment cycles.

Therefore, each technology was characterized as one of the following:

■ Successful.

■ Unsuccessful.

■ Holds Promise.

■ Jury Still Out.

Deployment level does not necessarily relate directly to success. For example, a

technology that is only moderately deployed could be considered successful because

it serves as an appropriate technological solution, though only for a small segment of

the market. 

While cost was considered in these analyses, detailed benefit/cost studies were not

undertaken.

In short, what this study aims to do for the technologies described above is to 

identify why some succeeded and others failed, how some cannot yet be judged, 

and what the underlying reasons are in each case.

THE PROCESS

To answer these questions, the ITS JPO initiated the “What Have We Learned

About ITS?” project. This project drew from experienced experts in the ITS field

and the considerable literature developed in this area. 

The first major project event took place on December 10, 1999, with a series of 

presentations in Washington, DC, delivered by various industry experts from 

Booz-Allen & Hamilton, the Volpe Center, Battelle, SAIC, Mitretek Systems, 

the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and the Intelligent Transportation Society 

of America (ITS America) Benefits, Evaluation, and Costs (BEC) Committee.

Experts from these organizations shared information intended to answer the 

following questions about the ITS technologies and applications listed earlier:

■ What ITS technology applications have been successful and why?

■ What ITS technology applications have not been successful and why?

■ For what ITS technologies is “the jury still out”?

5
■ What institutional issues arose in ITS deployments and how were they overcome?

■ What does the future hold?

■ What next steps are needed?

Results of the meeting were captured in detailed minutes and in a “strawman” 

summary of findings.

The December 10, 1999, event produced valuable initial results; however, it was 

primarily internal to U.S. DOT, with participants mainly from consulting and

research organizations drawing upon their experiences and previous work. There

was no opportunity for commentary by the broader ITS community at that time, but

meeting planners recognized the importance of eliciting this input—specifically, to

seek the opinion of people in the ITS field with responsibilities for deployment of

ITS technologies and applications, as well as other industry experts.

To that end, in April 2000, in conjunction with the Institute of Transportation

Engineers (ITE) 2000 International Conference in Irvine, California, these initial

results were presented to a broader community to validate or debunk them, and to

document a national consensus, if one existed, of what we have learned. Breakout

sessions addressed each of the seven ITS areas previously noted. Each breakout was

90 minutes long, with 30-45 minutes devoted to a presentation by the consultants

on what we have learned about a particular area of ITS, and then 45-60 minutes

devoted to active discussion of those results. The individual workshops were 

facilitated by the following experts:

■ John Corbin, Wisconsin Department of Transportation (DOT)

■ Lyle Berg, City of Bloomington, Minnesota

■ Catherine Bradshaw, University of Washington

6 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

Discussion Topic Facilitator Technical Presenter Notetaker

Freeway & Incident 

Management

John Corbin, Wisconsin

Department of Transportation

Vincent Pearce, Booz-Allen &

Hamilton, Inc.

Ruth Duncan, Battelle

Arterial Management Lyle Berg, City of

Bloomington, Minnesota

Mark Carter, SAIC Brandy Hicks, SAIC

Advanced Traveler 

Information Systems

Catherine Bradshaw,

University of Washington

Jane Lappin, John A. Volpe

National Transportation

Systems Center

Cynthia Maloney, John A.

Volpe National Transportation Systems Center

Advanced Public 

Transit Systems

Ginger Gherardi, Ventura

County Transportation

Commission

Robert Casey, John A. Volpe

National Transportation

Systems Center

Gary Ritter, John A. Volpe

National Transportation

Systems Center

Commercial Vehicle 

Operations

Gary Nishite, California

Department of Motor Vehicles

John Kinateder, Battelle Ruth Duncan, Battelle

Table 1-1. ITS Roundtable Discussions at the ITE 2000 International Conference
CHAPTER 1: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ITS? A SYNTHESIS

■ Ginger Gherardi, Ventura County Transportation Commission

■ Gary Nishite, California Department of Motor Vehicles

■ James Wright, Minnesota DOT

■ Matthew Edelman, Transportation Operations Coordinating Committee

(TRANSCOMSM)

The purpose of these workshops was to get reaction to earlier findings from 

additional informed professionals. The workshop process gave study teams a good

deal of additional information—some supportive and some counter to previous 

findings. Also, in two of the areas—commercial vehicle operations and transit 

management—additional presentation venues were sought because of feelings that

the ITE constituency might not totally represent informed opinion in those areas.

These additional venues included the CVISN Project Managers Meeting, April 25,

2000, Tampa, Florida; the Great Lakes and Southeast Regional [CVISN]

Mainstreaming Meeting, May 10-11, 2000, West Palm Beach, Florida; and the

American Public Transportation Association Bus Operations Committee Meeting,

May 7, 2000, Houston, Texas.

Consultants representing the seven areas then each produced an approximately 

20-page white paper on what had been learned about each of the seven areas, 

integrating the workshop results. Those papers were reviewed by Professor Joseph

Sussman of MIT, who also served as “master facilitator” at the ITE conference.

Other reviewers included JPO staff, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), and various

public sector stakeholders. Professor Sussman produced this synthesis paper, which

was reviewed by JPO, JPL, and the authors of the seven area papers. The synthesis is

intended to capture overarching conclusions on what we have learned about ITS.

The seven papers and this synthesis paper collectively represent a current report card

on ITS deployment, the barriers it is encountering, and some views of the future. 

To briefly preview the overall results of the study, while widespread deployment of

many technologies and applications has occurred, a number lag behind for various

reasons. It is fair to say that ITS has captured the “low hanging fruit” and that the

clearly cost-effective technologies and applications have been deployed. Readers of

the “glass is half-full” persuasion will be encouraged by this deployment. On the

other hand, ITS deployments clearly suffer from a lack of overall integration, which

some would argue prevents ITS from achieving its full impact. A more holistic

approach to deployment will be necessary to achieve an integrated environment,

often difficult because of institutional barriers.

7

Discussion Topic Facilitator Technical Presenter Notetaker

Cross-Cutting Technical 

Issues

James Wright, Minnesota

Department of Transportation

Michael McGurrin, Mitretrek

Systems, Inc.

James Bunch, Mitretrek

Systems, Inc.

Cross-Cutting Institutional 

Issues

Matt Edelman, TRANSCOMSM Allan DeBlasio, John A. Volpe

National Transportation

Systems Center

David Jackson, John A. Volpe 

National Transportation

Systems Center
The following is a brief discussion of what we have learned about ITS in each of the

seven areas, continuing with overarching themes that cut across all of them. 

SEVEN ITS AREAS

This section briefly summarizes some of the key concepts in the seven ITS areas

studied in this program. As noted, the individual papers that comprise the following

chapters describe each of the seven areas and include an executive summary, so no

attempt will be made here to fully summarize those chapters. Rather, this section

will touch upon major ideas as they support overarching project findings. No 

comparative or blanket assessments will be made of the seven areas.

Freeway, Incident, and Emergency Management, and Electronic Toll

Collection (Chapter 2)

Author: Vincent Pearce, Booz-Allen & Hamilton

Chapter 2 is necessarily broad in its focus, as it includes a number of different, albeit

related, technologies. Various technologies, including transportation management

centers, ramp metering, dynamic message signs, roadside infrastructure, and dynamic

lane and speed control, form the basis of these applications.

ETC is one of the fundamental and earliest deployed ITS technologies. It is also the

most common example of the electronic linkage between vehicle and infrastructure

that characterizes ITS. Freeways (i.e., limited access highways) represent a major

and early ITS application area. Incident management on those facilities is of 

primary importance in reducing nonrecurrent congestion. Emergency management

predates ITS as a concept, but is enhanced by the addition of ITS technologies. 

While a number of systems have seen widespread deployment, much more can be

accomplished. Institutional issues preventing truly integrated services are a major

barrier. An important technical advance would be to upgrade such systems to be

predictive (in the sense of predicting when congestion will occur in the future as a

function of current traffic patterns and expectations about the future) as opposed to

the responsive systems currently in place.

The author emphasizes the need to institutionalize operations budgets for these

kinds of systems, along with the need to attract high-quality technical staff for

deployment and operations support.

Arterial Management (Chapter 3)

Authors: Brandy Hicks and Mark Carter, SAIC

Arterials are high-capacity roadways controlled by traffic signals, with access via

cross-streets and often abutting driveways. Arterial management predates ITS, 

with early deployments going back to the 1960s; it is a useful ITS application, with

current deployment. 

However, adaptive control strategies, which make real-time adjustments to traffic

signals based on sensing conditions (e.g., queues), for arterials are not in widespread

use. While some argue that such control strategies have potential for substantial

8 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?
CHAPTER 1: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ITS? A SYNTHESIS

benefits, only a handful are deployed nationally, of which four are federally funded

field operational tests. The reasons for this deployment lag include cost issues as

well as concerns that algorithms for adaptive traffic control simply do not perform

well. In particular, when traffic volumes are heavy, the state-of-the-art algorithms

appear to break down (although vendors claim otherwise). Also, system complexity

drives the need for additional training. 

Widespread deployment has not yet occurred for traveler information systems for

arterials, even though studies suggest safety and delay reduction benefits. Hope is

that with the addition of cellular phones, or cellular phone geolocation for traffic

probes, and implementation of a national three-digit traveler information number

(511), more deployment will occur.

Integration of various traffic management technologies with arterial management

was viewed as an important next step. Integration of arterial management with

emergency vehicle management, transit management, and freeway management

would all be important and useful advances.

Traveler Information Systems (Chapter 4)

Author: Jane Lappin, EG&G Technical Services/John A.Volpe National

Transportation Systems Center

Traveler information is one of the core concepts of ITS. This paper highlights what

consumers value in traveler information. Among the valued items are high-quality

information, easy and timely accessibility to that information, a high-quality user

interface, and low prices, preferably free. Consumer demand for traveler information

is a function of: 

■ The amount of congestion on the regional transportation network.

■ The overall characteristics of that network.

■ What is provided on the supply side in terms of information quality and user 

interface.

■ Characteristics of individual trips.

■ Driver and transit user characteristics. 

Examples abound of various kinds of traveler information systems, with extensive

deployment of various kinds of systems. While people value high-quality traveler

information in the conceptual sense, they are not necessarily willing to pay for it.

After all, free information—although often of lower quality—is universal (e.g., 

radio helicopter reports). So, whether traveler information systems can be a viable

stand-alone commercial enterprise is likewise unclear. More likely, transportation

information will be offered as part of some other package of information services.

This study concludes that the Internet is likely to be a major basis of traveler 

information delivery in the future.

The analysis of traveler information systems brings home the fact that ITS operates

within the environment of people’s expectations for information: timeliness and

quality of information are on a continually increasing slope in many non-ITS appli9
cations, with people’s expectations heightened by the Internet and related concepts.

Traveler information providers, whether public or private sector, need to be conscious

of operating in the context of these changed expectations.

Further, the effective integration of traveler information with network management,

or transportation management systems, of which freeway and arterial management

are examples, is currently virtually nonexistent. Both network management and

traveler information systems would benefit by more substantial integration, as would

the ultimate customers—travelers and freight carriers—of these systems.

Advanced Public Transportation Systems (Chapter 5)

Robert Casey, John A.Volpe National Transportation Systems Center

That transit has difficulty attracting market share is a well-established fact. Reasons

include the following: 

■ Land-use patterns incompatible with transit use. 

■ Lack of high-quality service, with travel times too long and unreliable.

■ Lack of comfort.

■ Security concerns.

■ Incompatibility with the way people currently travel (for example, transit is often

not suited for trip-chaining). 

The hypothesis is that ITS transit technologies—including automatic vehicle 

location, passenger information systems, traffic signal priority, and electronic fare

payment—can help ameliorate these difficulties, improving transit productivity and

quality of service and real-time information for transit users.

Using ITS to upgrade transit clearly has potential. However, deployment has, for

the most part, been modest, stymied by a number of constraints: 

■ Lack of funding to purchase ITS equipment. 

■ Difficulties in integrating ITS technologies into conventional transit operations. 

■ Lack of human resources needed to support and deploy such technologies.

Optimistically, there will be a steady but slow increase in the use of ITS technologies

for transit management, as people with ITS expertise join transit agencies. But

training is needed, and inertia must be overcome in deploying these technologies in

a chronically capital-poor industry.

Integrating transit services with other ITS services is potentially a major intermodal

benefit of ITS transit deployments; it is hoped that this integration, including 

highway and transit, multiprovider services, and intermodal transfers, will be feasible

in the near-term.

Still the question remains, “How can we use ITS to fundamentally change transit

operations and services?” The transit industry needs a boost, and can be vital in 

providing transportation services, especially in urban areas, and in supporting 

environmentally related programs. Can ITS be the mechanism by which the 

industry reinvents itself? The jury is certainly still out on that question. 

10 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?
CHAPTER 1: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ITS? A SYNTHESIS

Commercial Vehicle Operations (Chapter 6)

Author: John Orban, Battelle

This paper is limited to the public sector side of CVO systems, as states fulfill their

obligation to ensure safety and enforce other regulations related to truck operations

on their highways. These systems fall under the CVISN rubric and deal with roadway operations, including safety information exchange and electronic screening, as

well as back-office applications like electronic credentialing. 

While CVISN is experiencing some deployment successes, much remains to be

done. Participation by carriers is voluntary in most programs, and requiring use of

transponders by truckers may be difficult. Certainly these facts make universal

deployment challenging. Also important as a barrier to deployment is consistency

among states, particularly contiguous ones. Recognizing trucking as a regional or

even national business, the interface between the trucking industry and the various

states needs to be consistent for widespread deployment to occur. While each state

has its own requirements for such systems, driven by its operating environment,

states must work toward providing interstate interoperability. Expanded publicpublic partnerships are needed among states and between the Federal Government

and states.

Some public and private sector tensions occur in the CVISN program as well. 

A good example is how truckers like the technologies that support weigh station

bypass, whereby they are not required to stop at a weigh station if they have been

previously checked. In such systems, the information is passed down the line 

from an adjoining station or even another state. At the same time, truckers are 

concerned about equity in tax collection and the privacy of their origin-destination

data, because of competitive issues. Ironically, the same underlying CVISN system

drives both applications. Public-private partnerships need to be developed in this

application for public and private benefits to be effectively captured. 

It is important to note that this study does not include fleet management—

mechanisms by which private fleet operators can use ITS technologies to enhance

the productivity of their fleets. 

Cross-Cutting Technical and Programmatic Issues (Chapter 7)

Michael McGurrin, Mitretek Systems

Advanced technology is at the heart of ITS, so it is helpful to consider technical

issues that affect ITS functions and applications. Technical issues include how one

deals with rapidly changing technologies and how this aspect relates to the need for

standards. Rapid obsolescence is a problem. 

All in all, the author concludes that technology issues are not a substantial barrier 

to ITS deployment. Most technologies perform; the question is, are they priced

within the budget of deploying organizations, and are those prices consistent with

the benefits that can be achieved? 

11
Two core technologies are those used for surveillance and communication:

1. Surveillance technologies have experienced some successes in cellular phone use

for incident reports and in video use for incident verification, but the jury is still

out on cellular phone geolocation for traffic probes. The lack of traffic flow 

sensors in many areas and on some roadway types continues to inhibit the growth

of traveler information and improved transportation management systems.

2. Communications technologies have experienced some success with the Internet

for pre-trip traveler information and credentials administration in CVO.

Emerging technologies include wireless Internet and automated information

exchange. The growth rate of these technologies is high. In particular, the 

numbers of Americans having access to the Internet is growing rapidly, 

portending increased use of ITS applications.2

Cross-Cutting Institutional Issues (Chapter 8)

Allan J. DeBlasio, John A.Volpe National Transportation Systems Center

Institutional issues are the key barrier to ITS deployment. This study identified the

most important of the institutional issues, as well as approaches to dealing with

them. The ten most prominent issues are as follows:

■ Awareness and perception of ITS.

■ Long-range operations and management.

■ Regional deployment.

■ Human resources.

■ Partnering.

■ Ownership and use of resources.

■ Procurement.

■ Intellectual property.

■ Privacy.

■ Liability.

Awareness and public and political appreciation of ITS as a system that can help

deal with real and meaningful issues (e.g., safety, quality of life) are central to

deployment success. Building a regional perspective to deployment using publicpublic and public-private partnerships is important. Recognizing that one must 

plan for sustained funding for operations in the long term is critical. Dealing with

procurement questions is an important institutional concern, and public sector 

agencies are not accustomed to procuring high-technology components where 

intellectual property is at issue.

Fundamentally, ITS deployment requires cultural change in transportation 

deployment organizations that have traditionally focused on providing conventional

infrastructure. No silver bullet exists for achieving this cultural change; rather, it is a

continuing, ongoing, arduous process, and one that must be undertaken if ITS is to

be successfully deployed.

12 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

2 For an excellent treatment of public sector Internet use, see “A Survey of Government on Internet:

The Next Revolution,” The Economist (June 14, 2000).
CHAPTER 1: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ITS? A SYNTHESIS

CONCLUSIONS

This section summarizes overarching conclusions derived from the seven project

areas, which comprise the chapters that follow. A useful typology for assessing ITS 

is to analyze it along the three major dimensions commonly used to characterize

transportation issues: technology, system, and institutions (Sussman 2000):

Technology includes infrastructure, vehicles, and hardware and software that provide

transportation functionality. 

Systems are one step removed from the immediacy of technology and deal with how

holistic sets of components perform. An example is transportation networks.

Institutions refer to organizations and interorganizational relationships that provide

the basis for developing and deploying transportation programs.

TECHNOLOGY

Four technologies are central to most ITS applications:

Sensing—typically the position and velocity of vehicles on the infrastructure.

Communicating—from vehicle to vehicle, between vehicle and infrastructure, and

between infrastructure and centralized transportation operations and management

centers.

Computing—processing of the large amounts of data collected and communicated

during transportation operations.

Algorithms—typically computerized methods for dynamically operating 

transportation systems.

One overarching conclusion of this study is that the quality of technology is not a

major barrier to the deployment of ITS. Off-the-shelf technology exists, in most

cases, to support ITS functionality. 

An area where important questions about technology quality still remain is 

algorithms. For example, questions have been raised about the efficacy of software

to perform adaptive traffic signal control. Also, the quality of collected information

may be a technical issue in some applications.

That is not to say that issues do not remain on the technology side. In some cases,

technology may simply be considered too costly for deployment, operations, and

maintenance, particularly by public agencies that see ITS costs as not commensurate

with the benefits to be gained by their deployment. Or, the technology may be too

complex to be operated by current agency staff. Also, in some cases, technology 

falters because it is not easy to use, either by operators or transportation customers.

Nonintuitive kiosks and displays for operators that are less than enlightening are two

examples of the need to focus more on user interface in providing ITS technologies.

13
SYSTEMS

The overarching need at the ITS systems level is integration of ITS components.

While exceptions can certainly be found, many ITS deployments are stand-alone

applications (e.g., ETC). It is not hard to understand why. It is often cost-effective

in the short run to deploy an individual application without worrying about all the

interfaces and platforms required for an integrated system. In their zeal to make ITS

operational, people often have opted for stand-alone applications—not necessarily

an unreasonable approach for the first generation of ITS deployment. 

However, for ITS to take the next steps forward, it will be important both for 

efficiency and effectiveness reasons to think in terms of system integration. For

example, the integration of services for arterials, freeways, and public transit should

be on the agenda for the next generation of ITS deployments. Further integration 

of services, such as incident management, emergency management, traveler information, and intermodal services, must be accomplished. 

While this integration certainly adds complexity, it is also expected to provide

economies of scale in system deployment and improvements in overall system 

effectiveness, resulting in better service for freight and traveling customers.

Another aspect of system integration is interoperability—ensuring that ITS 

components can function together. Possibly the best example of this function is

interoperability of hardware and software in vehicles and on the infrastructure 

(e.g., ETC devices). The electronic linkage of vehicles and infrastructure must be

designed using system architecture principles and open standards to achieve interoperability. It is quite reasonable for the public to ask whether their transponders

will work with ETC systems across the country or even regionally. Unfortunately,

the answer most often is no. And while it is important to make this technology

operate properly on a broad geographic scale, it should also work for public 

transportation and parking applications.

Systems that need to work at a national scale, such as CVO, must provide interoperability among components. No doubt, institutional barriers to interoperability

exist (e.g., different perspectives among political jurisdictions). But also without

doubt, these barriers inhibit widespread deployment, which is ultimately in the best

interest of those political jurisdictions.3

Another important example of needed integration is between advanced 

transportation management systems (ATMS) and advanced traveler information 

systems (ATIS). The former provides for operations of networks, the latter for 

traveler information, pre-trip and in-vehicle, to individual transportation customers.

For the most part, these two technologies, while conceptually interlinked, have

developed independently. 

Currently, there are limited evaluative data on the technical, institutional, and 

societal issues related to integrating ATMS and ATIS, whereby ATMS, which 

14 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

3 John Orban’s paper (Chapter 6), “What Have We Learned About ITS for Commercial Vehicle

Operations? Status, Challenges, and Benefits of CVISN Level 1 Deployment,” contrasts technical

interoperability, operations interoperability, and business model interoperability in the context of CVO

and CVISN.
CHAPTER 1: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ITS? A SYNTHESIS

collect and process a variety of network status data and estimates of future demand

patterns, provides travelers (via ATIS services) with dynamic route guidance. This

integration, together with ATMS-derived effective operating strategies for the network—which account for customer response to ATIS-provided advice—can lead to

better network performance and better individual routes.

Again, it is not surprising that these technologies developed independently in the

first ITS generation, but in future generations, integration of these technologies and

applications will be important. This integration is a complex and somewhat

uncharted enterprise. But it should certainly be on the ITS agenda if full benefits of

ATMS and ATIS deployment are to be realized. 

Institutions

The final example in the previous section suggests another kind of integration 

that will be important for the future of ITS, namely institutional integration. 

The integration of public and private sector perspectives on ITS, as well as the 

integration of various levels of public sector organizations, are central to advancing

the ITS agenda. 

Indeed, an important result of this study is that the major barriers to ITS deployment

are institutional in nature. This conclusion should come as no surprise to observers 

of the ITS scene; the very definition of ITS speaks of applying “well-established 

technologies,” so technological breakthroughs are not needed for ITS deployment.

But looking at transportation from an intermodal, systemic point of view requires 

a shift in institutional focus that is not easy to achieve. Dealing with intra- and 

interjurisdictional questions, budgetary frameworks, and regional-level perspectives 

on transportation systems; shifting institutional foci to operations rather than 

construction and maintenance; and training, retaining, and compensating qualified

staff are all institutional barriers to widespread deployment of ITS technologies. 

Thinking through how to overcome various institutional barriers to ITS is the single

most important activity we can undertake to enhance ITS deployment and develop

successful implementations. 

A Focus on Operations

Recent years have brought an increasing emphasis on transportation operations, as

opposed to construction and maintenance of infrastructure, as a primary focus.

Indeed, the entire ITE 2000 International Conference, at which workshops supporting this study took place, was itself focused on operations as a critical factor in the

future of the transportation field.

ITS is at the heart of this initiative, dealing as it does with technology-enhanced

operations of complex transportation systems. The ITS community has argued that

this focus on operations through advanced technology is the cost-effective way to 

go, given the extraordinary social, political, and economic costs of conventional

infrastructure, particularly in urban areas. Through ITS, it is argued, one can avoid

the high up-front costs of conventional infrastructure by investing more modestly 

in electronic infrastructure, then focusing attention on effectively operating that

infrastructure and the transportation network at large.

15
While ITS can provide less expensive solutions, they are not free. There are upfront infrastructure costs (see section following on “Mainstreaming”) and additional

spending on operating and maintaining hardware and software. Training staff to

support operations requires resources. Spending for ITS is of a different nature than

spending for conventional infrastructure, with less up front and more in the out

years. Therefore, planning for operations requires a long-term perspective by 

transportation agencies and the political sector. 

For that reason, it is important to institutionalize operations within transportation

agencies. Stable budgets need to be provided for operations and cannot be the 

subject of year-to-year fluctuation and negotiation, which is how maintenance has

traditionally been, if system effectiveness and efficiency are to be maintained.

Human resources needs must be considered as well (see section on “Human

Resources”).

To justify ITS capital costs as well as continuing costs, it is helpful to consider life

cycle costing in the evaluation of such programs. The costs and benefits that accrue

over the long term are the important metric for such projects. But organizations

need to recognize that a lack of follow-through will cause those out-year benefits to

disappear as unmaintained ITS infrastructure deteriorates and algorithms for traffic

management are not recalibrated.

Mainstreaming

The term “mainstreaming” is used in different ways in the ITS setting.4 Some argue

that mainstreaming means integrating ITS components into conventional projects.

Good examples are the Central Artery/Ted Williams Tunnel project in Boston,

which includes important ITS elements, as well as conventional infrastructure.

Another is the Woodrow Wilson Bridge on I-95, connecting Maryland and 

Virginia, currently undergoing a major redesign, which includes both conventional

infrastructure and ITS technologies and applications. This approach has the 

advantage of serving as an opportunity for ITS deployment within construction or

major reconstruction activities. Typically the ITS component is a modest fraction 

of total project cost. 

Even so, ITS technologies and applications can sometimes come under close 

political scrutiny well beyond their financial impact on the project. For example, 

on the Woodrow Wilson Bridge, the decommitting of various ITS elements is being

considered (The Washington Post, June 29, 2000, page A-155

). 

Another definition of ITS mainstreaming suggests that ITS projects not be protected

by special funds sealed for ITS applications, but that ITS should compete for funding

with all other transportation projects. The advantage of this method is that ITS

would compete for a much larger pool of money; the disadvantage is that ITS, in the

current environment, might not compete particularly successfully for that larger

16 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

4 CVO has a specialized definition of “mainstreaming,” implying multistate agency cooperation, but this

is not a general use of the term.

5 John Collins, President of ITS America, suggested that decommitting ITS technologies from the

Woodrow Wilson Bridge “would be like constructing a house and deciding to save money by not buying

lightbulbs.”
CHAPTER 1: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ITS? A SYNTHESIS

pool. Those charged with spending public monies for transportation infrastructure

have traditionally spent all, or virtually all, their money on conventional projects.

Convincing these decision-makers that monies are better spent on ITS applications

may be difficult.

This issue is clearly linked to human resource development. Professionals cannot be

expected to select ITS unless they are knowledgeable about it, so education of the

professional cadre is an essential precondition for success of mainstreaming—by

either definition. Of course, the National ITS Program must also be prepared to

demonstrate that the benefits of ITS deployments are consistent with the costs

incurred. 

Protected ITS funds—funds that can be spent only on ITS applications—may 

possibly be a good transition strategy as professional education continues and ITS

benefits become clearer; but in the longer run, there are advantages to ITS being 

mainstreamed.

Human Resources

An important barrier to success in the deployment of new technologies and 

applications embodied in ITS is a lack of people to support such systems. The ITS

environment requires skilled specialists representing new technologies. It also needs

broad generalists with policy and management skills who can integrate advanced

thinking about transportation services based on new technologies (Sussman 1995).

The ITS community has recognized these needs, and various organizations have

established substantial programs for human resource development. FHWA’s

Professional Capacity Building program is a premier example, but hardly the only

one. Universities, including the University of Michigan and the Virginia

Polytechnic Institute, have developed programs, as has CITE (Consortium for

Intelligent Transportation Education), housed at the University of Maryland. These

programs, along with graduate transportation programs undergoing substantial ITSrelated changes around the country, can provide a steady stream of talented and

newly skilled people for the industry.

However, we must emphasize that institutional changes in transportation 

organizations are needed if these people are to be used effectively and retained, as

people with high-technology skills can often demand much higher salaries than 

are provided by public sector transportation organizations. Cultural change along

with appropriate rewards for operations staff, for example, will be necessary in organizations where the culture strongly favors conventional infrastructure construction

and maintenance.

The need for political champions for ITS has long been understood in the ITS 

community. Here, though, we emphasize the need at all levels of implementing

organizations for people with the ability to effectively deploy ITS.

The political realities may require public sector organizations to “contract in” staff 

to perform some of the high-technology functions inherent in ITS, as opposed to

permanently hiring such individuals. Also, “contracting out”—having private sector

17
organizations handle various ITS functions on behalf of the public sector—is 

another option. In the short run, these options may both form useful strategies. 

In the long run, developing technical and policy skills directly in the public agency

has important advantages for strategic ITS decision-making. 

The Positioning of ITS

Almost from its earliest days, ITS has unfortunately been subject to overexpectations and over-selling. Advocates have often resorted to “hype” to promote

the benefits of ITS technologies and applications and have minimized the difficulties

in system integration during deployment. Often ITS has been seen by the public

and politicians as a solution looking for a problem. Overtly pushing ITS can be

counterproductive. Rather, ITS needs to be put to work in solving problems that

the public and agencies feel truly exist.

Safety and quality of life are the two most critical areas that ITS can address.

Characterizing ITS benefits along those dimensions when talking to the public or

potential deploying agencies is a good strategy.

The media can also help to get the story out about ITS. Indeed, the most recent

ITS America annual meeting in Boston in May 2000 had media relations as a major

focus (Sussman 2000, spring).

Operator vs. Customer Perspective

Information is at the heart of ITS. The provision of information to operators to

help them optimize vehicle flows on complex systems is one component. The flow

of information to customers (drivers, transit users, etc.) so they can make effective

choices about mode, route choice, etc., is another component. 

There is a great deal of overlap in these two information sets, and yet sharing 

information between operators and customers is often problematic. Operators are

usually public sector organizations. From their perspective, the needs of individual

travelers should be subordinate to the need to make the overall network perform

effectively. On the other hand, private sector information providers often create and

deliver more tailored information focusing on the needs of particular travelers rather

than overall system optimization. 

It is not surprising that the agendas of the public sector agencies operating the 

infrastructure and those of the information-provider, private sector companies differ.

And it is not unhealthy that they do. Nonetheless, it seems clear that the ultimate

customer—the traveler—would benefit from a more effective integration of these

two perspectives. This issue is both a technical and an institutional one, and is an

important example of the need for service integration. 

18 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?
CHAPTER 1: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ITS? A SYNTHESIS

Regional Opportunities

A recurring theme in many of the papers in this document is the regional 

opportunity inherent in ITS. From a technological and functional point of view,

ITS provides, for the first time, an opportunity to manage transportation at the scale

of the metropolitan-based region. Along with state or even multistate geographic

areas, metropolitan-based regions—the basic geographic unit for economic competition and growth (Porter 1998) and for environmental issues—can now be effectively

managed from a transport point of view through ITS.

While a few regions have made progress, ITS technologies generally have not been

translated into a regionally scaled capability. The institutional barriers are, of

course, immense, but the prize from a regional viability perspective is immense as

well. Thinking through the organizational changes that will allow subregional units

some autonomy, but at the same time allow system management at the regional

scale, is an ITS issue of the first order (Hardy 1996). Indeed, this approach could

lead to new paradigms for strategic planning on a regional scale, supported by the

information and organizational infrastructure developed in the context of ITS. 

The strategic vision for ITS is as the integrator of transportation, communications,

and intermodalism on a regional scale (Sussman 1999 and 2000 spring). Multistate

regions with traffic coordination over very large geographic areas, as in the mountain

states, is an important ITS application. Further, “corridors” such as I-95, monitored

by the I-95 Corridor Coalition and stretching from Maine to Virginia, represent an

ITS opportunity as well.

Surface Transportation as a Market

Surface transportation needs to be thought of as a market with customers with 

ever-rising and individual expectations. Modern markets provide choices. People

demand choices in level of service and often are willing to pay for superior service

quality; surface transportation customers will increasingly demand this service differentiation as well. While a market framework is not without controversy in publicly

provided services, surface transportation operators can no longer think in terms of

“one size fits all.”

High-occupancy toll (HOT) lanes, where people driving a single-occupancy vehicle

are permitted to use a high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane if they pay a toll, are an

early example of this market concept in highway transportation. HOT lanes are

enabled by ITS technologies. Other market opportunities building on ITS will

doubtless emerge as well. Using ITS as a mechanism for thinking through how 

surface transportation should operate relative to markets, philosophically and conceptually, is an important line of endeavor. 

Many other important and useful approaches to ITS implementation are contained

within the chapters that follow, which analyze in more depth the seven ITS areas

under study.

19
REFERENCES

Hardy, C., “Are We All Federalists Now?,” Beyond Certainty: The Changing Worlds of

Organizations (Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 1996).

Porter, M., On Competition (Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 1998).

Sussman, J. M., “Educating the ‘New Transportation Professional,’” ITS Quarterly

(Washington, DC: Summer 1995).

Sussman, J. M., Introduction to Transportation Systems (Boston and London: Artech

House, 2000).

Sussman, J. M., “It Happened in Boston,” “Thoughts on ITS” Column, ITS

Quarterly (Washington, DC: Spring 2000).

Sussman, J. M., “ITS Deployment and the ‘Competitive Region,’” “Thoughts on

ITS” Column, ITS Quarterly (Washington, DC: Spring 1996).

20 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?
chapter 2

WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED

ABOUT FREEWAY, INCIDENT,

AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

AND ELECTRONIC TOLL

COLLECTION?
CHAPTER 2: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT FREEWAY, INCIDENT, AND EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT AND ELECTRONIC TOLL COLLECTION?

23

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The intelligent infrastructure is often the most visible manifestation of intelligent

transportation systems (ITS) along the roads, with freeway and incident management

often among the first ITS elements implemented in a region or metropolitan area.

They can significantly contribute to improving travel conditions by addressing delay

caused by both recurring and nonrecurring congestion. Electronic toll collection

(ETC) systems similarly aid in reducing congestion on toll roads. In a complementary

way, emergency management systems can greatly aid in locating incidents and

responding to them in the most rapid and effective manner possible.

Each of the ITS technologies discussed in this paper shows potential benefits; 

however, only a few of the technologies have reached widespread deployment.

Reasons for the limited deployment vary for each technology, but include cost, 

institutional barriers, uncertainty of benefits, and technological incompatibilities.

The following list summarizes the deployment levels of the ITS technologies 

presented for incident management, freeway management, emergency management,

and electronic toll collection.

Widespread: Deployed in more than 30 percent of the largest 78 metropolitan

areas.

Moderate: Deployed in 10 percent to 30 percent of the largest 78 metropolitan

areas.

Limited: Deployed in less than 10 percent of the largest 78 metropolitan areas.

Incident management systems have proven to be highly successful, and are now

found in many major urban areas around the United States. These programs are

undergoing and benefiting from significant technological change, particularly that

related to the advent of cellular geolocation. Incident management’s greatest challenge

has been in institutional integration (i.e., in integrating incident management into

the mainstream transportation planning and programming processes and in integrating

incident management programs across jurisdictional boundaries).

Table 2-1 summarizes the current deployment status for various approaches 

commonly used in incident management.

Table 2-1. Incident Management Summary Table

Technology* Deployment Level Limiting Factors Comments

Widespread

Deployment

Service patrols Cost, staffing Successful

Limited Deployment† Cost, institutional

issues

Common communication frequencies Successful

Automated incident detection algorithms Medium Deployment† Technical performance Mixed

Widespread

Deployment

Availability, institutional issuesCellular communication for incident detection Jury is still out
24 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

* Cross-cutting technologies, such as telecommunications, are addressed in Chapter 7,“What Have We

Learned About Cross-Cutting Technical and Programmatic Issues?”

† Quantitative deployment tracking data not available. Deployment level determined by expert judgment.

Freeway management is becoming similarly common, and shares many resources

with incident management. Freeway management systems are undergoing 

significant technological change, and often must accommodate such change in 

addition to increasing geographic coverage and incorporating additional agencies

into the transportation management centers (TMCs), providing their operational

foundations. Ramp metering, a major and highly effective component of freeway

management, continues to be subject to negative local political pressure, and

requires a careful balancing between arterial and freeway flows. Variable speed 

limits and dynamic lane controls continue to show promise, but are not yet widely

deployed in the United States. Portable traffic management systems for use in work

zones have proven quite successful. Deployment is now limited, but these systems

are expected to become common in the future. Traditional procurement and 

contracting practices have created challenges in implementing the complex types 

of systems required.

Table 2-2 illustrates the current deployment status for different freeway management

technologies: 

Technology* Deployment Level Limiting Factors Comments

Limited Deployment† Being replaced by 

cell phone use

Motorist callboxes Successful

Widespread

Deployment

CCTV (ground, airborne, high magnification) Cost Successful

Cellular geolocation (old generation) Operational Testing† Accuracy Unsuccessful

Operational Testing† Availability, institutional issuesCellular geolocation (emerging generation) Jury is still out

Table 2-1. Continued

Regional incident management programs Limited Deployment† Institutional issues Holds promise
CHAPTER 2: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT FREEWAY, INCIDENT, AND EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT AND ELECTRONIC TOLL COLLECTION?

25

Table 2-2. Freeway Management Summary Table

Technology/System* Deployment Level Limiting Factors Comments

Widespread

Deployment‡ Implementation cost,staffing

Transportation management centers Successful

(may incorporate multiple technologies)†

Limited Deployment‡ Implementation cost,

staffing

Portable transportation management centers Successful

(may incorporate multiple technologies)

Road closure and restriction systems Limited Deployment‡ Institutional issues Successful

(may incorporate multiple technologies)

Widespread

Deployment

Cost, maintenance Mixed—depends

upon technology

Vehicle detection systems 

(may incorporate multiple technologies)

Vehicles as probes Limited Deployment Cost, integration Jury is still out

(may incorporate multiple technologies)

Medium Deployment Politics, user appearanceRamp metering Successful

(includes multiple technologies)

Widespread

Deployment

Cost, changing 

technology

Mixed—due to 

operations quality

Dynamic message signs

(includes multiple technologies)

Medium Deployment Staffing Mixed—due to 

operations quality

Highway advisory radio

(includes multiple technologies)

Medium Deployment Not in MUTCD for

mainlanes§

Successful—

especially on bridges

and in tunnels

Dynamic lane control

Downhill speed warning and rollover warning Limited Deployment‡ Cost Successful

systems

Technical Testing‡ Not in MUTCD; may

require local legislation

to be enforceable

Dynamic speed control/variable speed limit Holds promise 

* Cross-cutting technologies, such as telecommunications and pavement sensors, are addressed in Chapter

7,“What Have We Learned About Cross-Cutting Technical and Programmatic Issues?”

† A transportation management center may control several of the systems listed further down the table,

and will possibly utilize additional technologies, such as video display systems, local area networks, flow

monitoring algorithms, geographic information systems, graphic user interfaces, and database management systems.

‡ Quantitative deployment tracking data not available. Deployment level determined by expert judgment.

§ Mainlanes are freeway lanes that are not tunnels or bridges.

Mayday systems for emergency notification have become quite popular with

motorists, although they are still primarily marketed to owners of premium vehicles.

Often such systems are combined with supplementary services like driving directions,

provided by a commercial call center. Use of computer aided dispatch (CAD) by

emergency responders is quite common, although supplementing such systems with
26 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

vehicle location provided by automatic vehicle location systems has gone slowly

because of institutional barriers.

Table 2-3 illustrates the current deployment status for different emergency 

management technologies.

Table 2-3. Emergency Management Summary Table

Technology Deployment Level Limiting Factors Comments

Widespread

Deployment

GPS/Differential GPS on emergency Cost Successful

management fleets

Widespread

Deployment*

Mayday systems Cost, vehicle choice Successful

Widespread

Deployment*

Mayday processing centers/customer service Cost Successful

centers

Widespread

Deployment*

Public safety answering points Cost, staffing Successful

CDPD communication Limited Deployment* Availability Jury is still out

Widespread

Deployment

Onboard display Cost, user acceptance Successful

Widespread

Deployment

Institutional issues,

lack of standards

Preemption infra-red signal system Successful

Widespread

Deployment

Computer-aided dispatch Cost, support staffing Successful

Widespread

Deployment

Automatic vehicle location Cost Successful

Limited Deployment* Institutional issues,

integration cost

Networked systems among agencies Holds promise

* Quantitative deployment tracking data not available. Deployment level determined by expert judgment.

Electronic toll collection has repeatedly been shown to have positive impacts on

both the toll facility’s financial performance and on traffic flow. Although standards

have been slow to develop due to competitive pressure, both standards and interoperability are advancing. Marketing to potential users has proven to be at least 

as important as selecting the right system/technology in achieving overall system

success. Advanced technologies, such as smart cards for use across applications, are

showing increased adoption.

Table 2-4 illustrates the present levels of deployment of ETC technology.
CHAPTER 2: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT FREEWAY, INCIDENT, AND EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT AND ELECTRONIC TOLL COLLECTION?

27

Table 2-4. Electronic Toll Collection Summary Table

Technology Deployment Level Limiting Factors Comments

Widespread

Deployment

Dedicated short-range communication Need for standard Successful

Limited Deployment Commercial and user

acceptance; need for

standard

Smart cards Successful

Widespread

Deployment

Transponders Privacy Successful

Widespread

Deployment

Antennas Technical performance Successful

License plate recognition Limited Deployment* Technical performance Jury is still out

* Quantitative deployment tracking data not available. Deployment level determined by expert judgment.

To be sustainable, processes for implementing and operating ITS-based programs

need to be “mainstreamed,” that is, they must be configured to fit within and benefit

from the planning and programming processes through which other ongoing programs

operate. Mainstreaming also implies broadening acceptance of and building support

for ITS-based programs within many functions and at multiple levels of the 

participating agencies. It also means ensuring that ITS supports the core missions

and goals of these agencies. For such support to be solid, the benefits of the 

programs must be clearly demonstrated, documented, and communicated broadly.

Ongoing assessment of system performance is a growing trend.

Most ITS-based programs yield the greatest benefit if deployed on a regional basis;

thus, they often cross jurisdictional boundaries. In incident management, for 

example, many agencies are also involved, even within a single jurisdiction. Success

in this environment requires involvement by each stakeholder, achievement of 

consensus, and thorough understanding of roles and responsibilities by all participants.

This approach requires recognizing and addressing the differences between stakeholders, as big differences may characterize what each can afford, staff, or justify.

Partnerships between the public and private sectors require a clear understanding of

the motivations and capabilities of each side, and of how to best leverage what each

partner brings to the bargaining table.

Integration, both technically and institutionally, can yield benefits, but it is a 

complex undertaking that will eventually need to address linkages across systems,

modes, and functions. Although standards and increased interoperability will 

significantly ease such integration, the standards development process itself is 

consensus-driven and requires an extended period to accomplish its goals.

The approaches to operations are also changing. Public agencies, traditionally seen

as responsible for operating systems that support the public roadways, may experience

great difficulty in hiring and retaining technical expertise, also in great demand from
28 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

the private sector. Thus, trends toward contract operation and maintenance and

system privatization are emerging.

ITS project types from which this assessment was prepared range from technology

demonstrations to full-scale implementations. They represent hundreds of millions

of dollars of investment. Though not every lesson learned is universally applicable,

many are relevant across project types. Some technical lessons, such as early problems

with geolocation using cellular phones, have been overcome by technological

advancement. The greatest impediments to ITS continue to be institutional, but

they, too, will begin to diminish as new models of interagency and public-private

partnerships are developed. Lessons from operations and management are just now

becoming evident.

INCIDENT MANAGEMENT

Incident management provides an organized and functioning system for quickly

identifying and clearing crashes, disabled vehicles, debris, and other nonrecurring

flow impediments from area freeways and major arterials. Roadways are cleared and

flow restored as rapidly as possible, minimizing frustration and delay to travelers

while also meeting requirements and responsibilities of the involved agencies. Some

jurisdictions and agencies responsible for operations and enforcement have worked

together to develop a policy and operations agreement that defines specific incident

management responsibilities. Such an agreement includes detection, verification,

response, clearance, scene management, and traffic management and operations 

(ITS Deployment Tracking Database 2000). 

Incident management programs can greatly benefit local travel conditions.

Maryland’s Coordinated Highways Action Response Team (CHART) program 

has documented a decrease of 2 million vehicle hours per year associated with 

nonrecurrent delay. Atlanta’s NaviGAtor system, implemented in preparation for

the 1996 summer Olympic Games, was estimated to have saved the state more than

$44.6 million in 1997, its first year of operation. Pittsburgh’s service patrol alone

nearly reduced by half its response time to incidents, and is credited with a reduction

of 547,000 hours of delay per year, valued at $6.5 million (ITS Benefits Database

2000).

Among these technologies, the most successful include service patrols and closed 

circuit television (CCTV). Service patrols, such as Illinois’ Minutemen, Indiana’s

Hoosier Helpers, or Georgia’s Highway Emergency Response Operators (HERO) 

program, have consistently generated high benefit/cost ratios for their sponsoring

agencies, along with extremely positive public perception, documented through

many letters received from motorists who have benefited from their assistance. Most

of these programs are seen as both responsive and preventive incident management

measures, as the situations they clear from shoulder lanes prevent “rubbernecking”

delays. The Minuteman program pioneered the use of special service patrol vehicles

able to move not only passenger but also commercial vehicles from traveled lanes.

More recently, they have begun acquiring vehicles that allow “capture” and removal
CHAPTER 2: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT FREEWAY, INCIDENT, AND EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT AND ELECTRONIC TOLL COLLECTION?

29

of disabled vehicles from traveled lanes without the service patrol attendant needing

to exit the vehicle—a major step forward in protecting agency employees.

CCTV is widely recognized as the key component that not only allows detailed

determination of incident location, but also dispatch of the correct set of response

resources, and possibly even the provision of important preparatory information to

responders. Although intended primarily for use in managing incidents and freeway

flow, CCTV has also proven to be of great value in observing and resolving basic

flow problems on both freeways and adjacent arterials. An example of serious efforts

being made to address citizen concerns about potential violation of privacy through

CCTV systems is the development of a set of privacy principles by the Intelligent

Transportation Society of America (ITS America). (The principles are currently 

in draft form, but are expected to be finalized and approved by the close of 2000.)

CCTV images of traffic conditions have proven to be highly popular both with 

television traffic reporters and traveler information websites.

The broad acceptance of cellular telephones affects two incident management 

elements: (1) motorist access to cellular phones will likely reduce the need for

motorist callboxes except in areas where cellular coverage is unreliable; and (2) 

as cellular phones, accessed through the emerging cellular geolocation technology,

rapidly become the mainstay of incident location, they will replace the use of 

stationary vehicle detectors and incident detection algorithms. The latter have

never been highly effective because of the need to balance false positive readings

and slow incident detection.

Regionalization of incident management programs and implementation of common

voice communications frequencies among incident responders is likely to increase

over time, but, to become widespread, will require participating agencies to overcome many institutional and jurisdictional barriers. The U.S. Department of

Transportation (U.S. DOT) has undertaken extensive effort to bring about this

result, including sponsoring national workshops, training, and distribution of a 

broad variety of informative materials.

Incident Management Lessons Learned

Successful incident management programs must have a regional perspective. A 

good example is Maryland’s CHART program, which addresses incidents and 

congestion both regionally and statewide. Such an approach assures the most effective coordination of response and mitigation of nonrecurring congestion, regardless

of incident location. Such programs should have a strategy based on stakeholder

consensus, which contains formal agreements on respective roles and responsibilities,

so that each participant has realistic expectations of other participants and a full

understanding of its own obligations. One model for such a formal program is

Milwaukee’s Traffic Incident Management Enhancement (TIME) program.

Comprehensive operating agreements are needed to achieve full, intermodal, 

interjurisdictional benefits. Finding the best way to work as a team has been 

challenging, but sharing information can have benefits well beyond those intended.

Such was particularly the case in Atlanta during the 1996 Summer Olympic Games,

where the responsible agencies overcame many institutional barriers to work 
30 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

together and successfully manage the tremendous travel demand created by the

Games (U.S. DOT, Atlanta Navigator Study, Nov. 1998).

Law enforcement and other emergency services will likely realize measurable 

benefits from participation in a highly coordinated and formalized regional incident

management program. In particular, the right types of partnerships can leverage

individual investments, but participants must demonstrate and share benefits with

decision-makers on a regular basis. One example of such a partnership is in

Milwaukee, where the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (DOT) provided

vehicles and the county sheriff provided personnel for a mutually desired freeway

service patrol. Outreach to involved agencies and potential partners is key to 

ensuring program success (U.S. DOT, Regional Traffic Guide, 2000).

Incident management programs face difficulty in sustaining operations because they

depend on scarce operations funding, which typically must be reallocated annually,

and because they are susceptible to loss of the program champion. Sustainability is

much more likely once the program is mainstreamed (i.e., it is part of the normal

transportation planning and resource allocation process) (U.S. DOT, Regional

Traffic Guide, 2000).

Incident management has been improved through extensive ITS infrastructure. But

procurement and contracting issues have complicated acquiring and implementing

this intelligent infrastructure. Problems occur when conventional procurement

processes, which emphasize only price and offer little flexibility once the contract is

signed, are used to obtain systems and software. Examples of such problems and

potential solutions can be found in U.S. DOT’s guides to innovative ITS procurement and procuring ITS software (U.S. DOT, FHWA Federal Aid ITS, Aug. 1997).

Nonintrusive detectors using technologies such as video image processors, radar, 

and passive acoustic sensing can provide excellent data when compared to the 

traditional inductive loop vehicle detector, while offering potential for portability,

decreased damage during winter road maintenance, and avoidance of damage during

road repair. This result was demonstrated in Detroit, Phoenix, and elsewhere.

Incident management software can significantly increase the speed, thoroughness,

and consistency of responses to incidents, and can facilitate sharing of incident

information across agency and jurisdictional boundaries. Incident detection 

algorithms, however, continue to suffer from the need to balance false positive 

readings with detection sensitivity. Efforts to use more advanced software 

techniques, such as artificial intelligence, expert systems, and neural networks, 

have yet to yield major gains in addressing this problem.

Diversionary routing was confirmed in Minneapolis-St. Paul as an effective way to

manage traffic congestion produced by an incident, as long as the capacity of the

diversion routes is adequate and the traffic flow is controlled by dynamic signal 

timing adjustments to maintain service levels. Success also requires adequate time

for system integration and testing (U.S. DOT, Incident Management, Sept. 1998).
CHAPTER 2: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT FREEWAY, INCIDENT, AND EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT AND ELECTRONIC TOLL COLLECTION?

31

Hazardous Material Incident Response

An estimated 700,000 hazardous material (HAZMAT) shipments occur each day 

in the United States. The vast majority are packaged properly, meet other stringent

requirements, and arrive at their destination safely. The National Academy of

Sciences, in its 1993 report, Hazardous Materials Shipment Information for

Emergency Response, estimated that between 10,000 and 20,000 motor carrier 

incidents and approximately 1,000 to 1,500 rail incidents that occur annually

involve or threaten release of hazardous materials and necessitate dispatch of 

emergency response professionals. To provide an appropriate level of safety for 

the public in the event of an incident, emergency response personnel need timely,

accurate information about the contents of HAZMAT shipments. HAZMAT 

incident response systems improve the accuracy and availability of HAZMAT 

information provided to emergency response personnel (U.S. DOT, Hazardous

Material Response, Sept. 1998).

The use of HAZMAT incident management systems appears to have the potential

to reduce the time required to positively identify the hazardous material involved in

the incident and to select the appropriate response. Simulations at two rail yards

and a truck yard yielded 33 to 41 percent reductions in time required to identify

HAZMAT cargoes and select a correct response to the incident situation.

Participants in two HAZMAT system field operational tests indicated that this 

time savings could have several positive impacts. During the tests, users found both

systems to be more effective than current systems in determining optimal emergency

response and cleanup strategy. Primary implications are that less hazardous material

will be leaked, and cleanup procedures can begin sooner. Participants also anticipated a reduction in resources expended to deal with the incident (e.g., by eliminating

unnecessary equipment deployment) (U.S. DOT, Hazardous Material Response,

Sept. 1998).

Implementation of HAZMAT incident management systems has continued to grow

slowly, often supported by general advancement in constituent technologies and

overall progress of commercial vehicle administrative ITS programs. Results to date

are preliminary, based mainly on simulation and operational tests. Thus, there is

limited experience in measuring actual costs and benefits, and in determining the

full set of operational issues. In general, slow institutional change has been the main

culprit, not faults in the technology.

HAZMAT Incident Response Lessons Learned

HAZMAT incident management systems decrease the time needed to identify 

the cargo and respond, increasing effectiveness of the response. First responders 

estimated a 34 percent reduction in time to recognize and identify a hazardous cargo.

Operation Respond indicated similar results in Atlanta, Georgia, and in Tonawanda

and Buffalo, New York. However, a study of the HAZMAT incident management

field operational tests concluded that there must be broad, nearly universal 

enrollment of carriers for implementing agencies to realize full benefits of such 

systems. Obtaining participation of smaller or less sophisticated motor carriers is

more difficult, as they are both more financially constrained and realize less total
32 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

benefit from enrollment. Cost was not an obstacle to agencies’ interest in participating in the Operation Respond system test, the initial software and training costs

totaling less than $700 for the first year and $350 for succeeding years (U.S. DOT,

Hazardous Material Response, Sept. 1998).

To date, response from agencies using the systems has been positive. The systems are

perceived to be more effective, accessible, and accurate than the paper-focused

processes agencies were using. User agencies in the Transit Xpress (TXS) field operational

test found the TXS system would be better at maintaining safety and efficiency, 

tracking HAZMAT loads, accurately reflecting mixed loads, and helping to ensure

that motor carriers comply with HAZMAT regulatory requirements. Users also report

that they would add the tested systems to their operations (but would not dispose of

current systems), and felt that the record-keeping ability of these systems would be an

improvement (U.S. DOT, Hazardous Material Response, Sept. 1998).

Where is Incident Management Headed?

Incident management programs are moving more toward formalization, regionalization, and interagency coordination. While no growth was detected from 1998 to

1999 in the number of metropolitan areas with service patrols on freeways, dramatic

growth was seen in service patrols on arterials. Metropolitan areas report decreased

installation of loop detectors and increased use of nonintrusive detectors such as

radar and video imaging detectors (ITS Deployment Tracking Database 2000).

Incident Management Issues

A number of issues must still be resolved in the field of incident management.

Effective, long-term relationships among all key players need to be created and 

sustained, which often involves several agencies working jointly at multiple 

organizational levels. The challenge of establishing and continuing communications

should not be underestimated, though notable successes are being achieved. The

proliferation of new technologies, such as cellular 911, mayday systems, and cellular

geolocation, may eliminate the need for conventional detection. Similarly, given

the heavy cellular phone market penetration and wide E-911 accessibility, motorist

aid call boxes and dedicated cellular incident reporting numbers may no longer be

justified.

FREEWAY MANAGEMENT

Freeway management allows transportation operations personnel to monitor traffic

conditions on the freeway system, identify recurring and nonrecurring flow impediments,

implement appropriate traffic control and management strategies (e.g., ramp 

metering and lane control), and provide critical information to travelers through

infrastructure-based dissemination methods (e.g., dynamic message signs [DMS] and

highway advisory radio [HAR]) and in-vehicle information systems (ITS

Deployment Tracking Database 2000).

Freeway management often includes a freeway management center (or multiple 

centers where regional responsibility for the freeway system is shared by more than
CHAPTER 2: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT FREEWAY, INCIDENT, AND EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT AND ELECTRONIC TOLL COLLECTION?

33

one operating entity) and links to other ITS components in the metropolitan area.

Examples of such centers are found in Atlanta, Houston, Seattle, MinneapolisSt. Paul, and elsewhere (U.S. DOT, TMC Cross-Cutting Study, Oct. 1999). From

these centers, personnel electronically monitor traffic conditions; activate response

strategies; and initiate coordination with intra-agency and interagency resources,

including emergency response and incident management providers. The growing

presence and sophistication of freeway management centers has generated development of U.S. DOT concept of operations and human factors guides and a multistate

pooled funds study of emerging management center issues.

Freeway management is a potent tool for combating recurrent congestion. The first

26-mile segment of San Antonio’s TransGuide freeway management system is credited

with reducing accidents by 15 percent and emergency response time by up to 

20 percent. Studies of the INFORM freeway management system on Long Island in

New York indicate that freeway speeds increased 13 percent, despite an increase of 

5 percent in vehicle miles traveled during the evening peak period. Ramp metering,

a major freeway management tool, was documented as increasing throughput by 

30 percent in the Minneapolis-St. Paul metro area, with peak hour speeds increasing

by 60 percent. Variable speed limits, a less common technique in the United States,

were documented as decreasing traffic accidents by 28 percent during an initial 18

months of operation in the United Kingdom (ITS Benefits Database 2000).

TMCs have become a mainstay of coordinated freeway management in urban areas.

California has eight and Texas has six urban TMCs. California also has five rural

centers. These centers consistently employ freeway management systems using 

geographic information systems (GIS), graphic user interfaces, local area networks,

and database management systems to control ramp meters, DMS, and HAR.

Dynamic lane control is most common in tunnels and on bridges. Although not

currently an accepted technique in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices

(MUTCD), dynamic lane control has also proven successful over freeway mainlanes

in San Antonio and Fort Worth, Texas. Dynamic speed control lacks enforceability

in most state legal codes, and is therefore less common in the United States (its 

primary test having been in Washington State’s Snoqualmie Pass); however, it is

considerably more common in Europe.

Ramp metering continues to face political challenges (MN DOT, “RFP for Ramp

Metering,” June 2000) stemming from the complexity of balancing the interests of

local (arterial) travelers and through (freeway) traffic, but has been widely proven to

have significant benefits when implemented correctly and operated effectively (ITS

Benefits Database 2000). Metering rates and algorithms, however, require judgments balancing the priorities of arterial flow against those of freeway flow. These

judgments also have safety and infrastructure implications, such as assuring adequate

storage capacity and coordinating availability of such storage with release of freewaybound vehicles at signalized approaches. The Minnesota Legislature’s decision to

require the Minnesota DOT to evaluate the Twin Cities’ ramp metering program 

by briefly turning off the metering exemplifies the extent of concern by high-level

decision-makers.
34 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

Portable TMCs were formally studied and proven highly successful in Minnesota’s

Smart Work Zone field operational test and were later commercialized by that test’s

private sector partner (U.S. DOT, MN Smart Work Zone Study, June 1998).

Almost all work zones now, at minimum, incorporate portable DMS, with increasing

use of portable HAR.

Freeway management systems have traditionally relied on stationary detection

devices, most commonly the inductive loop vehicle detector. The advent of 

electronic toll transponders and now of cellular geolocation increase the likelihood

of stationary detectors being supplemented or replaced by vehicles serving as traffic

probes—reducing the cost of implementation and maintenance and providing much

broader coverage, including arterials. Vehicle probe data have been a mainstay in

the Houston TranStar freeway management program for several years and were a

successful component of San Antonio’s TransGuide Metropolitan Model

Deployment Initiative.

Road closure and restriction systems, such as the Highway Closure and Restriction

System used by Arizona DOT, have proven to be quite popular with motorists and

traveler information providers. These systems aggregate information on lane 

closures and make it widely available over a broad area and an extended time scale.

Further integration of such systems is likely, allowing travelers to become aware of

expected construction delays, regardless of jurisdictional boundaries.

Two vehicle operation warning technologies—downhill speed warning and rollover

warning—have proven to be quite successful. These technologies are typically most

applicable to commercial vehicle operation. Both typically use some form of radar

to detect vehicle speed and likelihood of rollover through basic computer modeling

of vehicle center of gravity. Because commercial vehicle incidents may occur in

remote areas, may cause prolonged delay, often block multiple lanes, and can be

among the most difficult to clear, the payback from these relatively inexpensive and

simple applications can be significant. Results from the rollover prevention systems

at the junctions of I-95 and I-495 (the Capital Beltway) in Washington, DC, have

been impressive since their initial installation.

En route traveler information provided through DMS and HAR continues to be 

one of freeway management’s most potent tools. HAR has experienced less than

universal adoption, owing in part to early negative experiences caused by poor

broadcast quality and delayed messages. Increasingly, flashing beacons are used to

attract motorists’ attention to HAR when critical messages are present.

Freeway Management Lessons Learned

The up-front effort needed for ITS program operation and technology selection 

is much greater than for traditional transportation infrastructure projects. This 

circumstance was particularly true in early freeway management implementations

such as in Atlanta. Incorporating the experience and knowledge from other 

implementations increases likelihood of success. 
CHAPTER 2: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT FREEWAY, INCIDENT, AND EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT AND ELECTRONIC TOLL COLLECTION?

35

Unfortunately, most early freeway management systems were implemented with 

little consideration for how they would operate. A U.S. DOT study found that

essentially none of the early generation TMCs had prepared a concept of operations

while planning or design was under way (U.S. DOT, TMC Implementation Guide,

Dec. 1999). Because decisions made in the design/construction phase, such as

degree of automation provided to operators and physical proximity of cooperating

agencies, have a significant impact on operations and management, only now are

operations-related design/construction lessons being fully captured.

Selecting an optimal mix of field devices, such as DMS, CCTV, HAR, and service

patrols, requires careful consideration of budget, integration, and operations/management requirements. The system must be flexible as additional agencies/functions

come into the TMC and are linked to its systems. For example, although the Texas

DOT championed San Antonio’s TransGuide transportation management program,

local law enforcement, transit, and arterial traffic operations agencies also became

interested in joining the program. In a comparable example, several years after 

the Houston TranStar transportation management program became operational,

additional local agencies are joining in. Obtaining training and documentation

along with the system is critical to the effectiveness of freeway management systems.

Agency staffing policies are often not sufficiently flexible to create the needed 

positions. Such has been the experience at the California DOT (Caltrans), where

an extensive study was undertaken in 1999 of TMC staffing needs.

One finding from the Atlanta experience was that systems engineering management

plans are critical to proper integration. Most agencies lack the processes and

resources necessary for configuration management, an element of a systems 

engineering approach. The Georgia DOT is only now undertaking implementation

of a formal configuration management program, at considerable cost, over an

extended period. A significant component of this cost is the investment in 

documenting the installed intelligent infrastructure equipment, information which

could have been captured at the time of installation at considerably less expense.

Atlanta also found that prototyping of key software systems and tools early and often

throughout system design and development is critical to software development 

success. Traditional funding processes that facilitate initial capital investment but

may complicate upgrades and system replacements create an attitude that promotes

adoption of the latest technologies, encouraging changes to the system late in the

implementation process (U.S. DOT, Atlanta Navigator Study, Nov. 1998).

The Minnesota Smart Work Zone project successfully addressed safety in work 

zones and their congestion impact. For example, it implemented a portable freeway

management program that monitored congestion and provided traveler information

on a localized basis. The freeway management system moved along the freeway with

the construction crews. The Minnesota DOT felt that the system resulted in both

increased safety and improved flow of traffic through the work zone (U.S. DOT, MN

Smart Work Zone Study, June 1998).
36 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

Where is Freeway Management Headed?

Trends in freeway management include increased automation supporting all aspects

of operator activity, greater integration of functions within the system and between

freeway management centers, preventive action in addition to responsive action,

and increased dependence on traveler information. For example, preventive 

freeway management is being demonstrated in an operational test on I-93 in Boston.

Metropolitan areas report no increase in implementation of ramp metering, but

show increased interest in active lane control. There is also evidence of increasing

contractor operation/management of freeway management systems, such as for Long

Island’s INFORM system, Northern Virginia’s Smart Travel system, and Michigan

DOT’s system in Detroit (U.S. DOT, TMC Cross-Cutting Study, Oct. 1999).

Freeway management systems will increasingly rely upon standards for communications between centers and between the center and its field equipment, using 

elements of the National Transportation Communications for ITS Protocol

(NTCIP). Having identified a set of “critical” standards, U.S. DOT has had six

standards development organizations at work for several years developing and 

balloting a broad range of ITS standards. U.S. DOT has also initiated a standards

testing program whose objective is to document and share the experiences of early

users of the emerging standards.

Freeway Management Issues

Even with increased contracting for freeway management services, the extent to

which freeway management should be privatized is still being debated. Meanwhile,

there is continuing concern that public sector agencies have difficulty hiring and

retaining the key technical specialists needed to operate and maintain their freeway

management systems. Also unresolved is whether centralized or decentralized 

systems are superior and which type will come to dominate the field. The density 

of intelligent transportation infrastructure needed for effective operation has yet to

be answered, but is the subject of upcoming U.S. DOT studies.

Privacy continues to be an issue in freeway management. Initial privacy concerns

stemmed from the ability of agencies to observe citizens through CCTV systems

implemented to monitor traffic flow and incidents, or the mistaken perception 

that the purpose of these systems was to determine speeds of individual vehicles.

Similar concerns arose in those areas where vehicles with electronic toll tags were

monitored as traffic probes. In that case, measures were implemented to mask the

identity of the vehicle owner from the traffic management agency and achieve

anonymous probes. More recently, the ability of agencies and private sector firms to

track cell phones in vehicles, allowing them to be used as “wireless data probes,” has

again raised privacy concerns. In most cases, agencies have implemented outreach

programs to explain the safeguards against privacy violations and the procedures

used to ensure they are working. 
CHAPTER 2: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT FREEWAY, INCIDENT, AND EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT AND ELECTRONIC TOLL COLLECTION?

37

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

The purpose of emergency management services is to improve the response time 

of emergency services providers, thereby saving lives and reducing property damage.

To reduce response time, it is necessary to reduce both the time it takes to notify

providers and the time it takes for them to arrive at the scene. Emergency notification can be accomplished through cellular telephones, call boxes, and mayday

devices (ITS Deployment Tracking Database 2000).

Emergency management systems can have important effects, both on accident 

survival and on motorist peace of mind. Of drivers testing the Puget Sound Help

Me (PuSHMe) mayday system, 95 percent stated that they felt more secure 

operating a vehicle with the system installed.

Mayday systems have proven to be a significant commercial success for vehicle 

manufacturers, including General Motors’ (GMs’) OnStarTM system and the

Ford/Lincoln RESCU system, as well as the American Automobile Association’s

more recent RESPONSE commercial mayday venture. Vehicle manufacturerinstalled systems continue to be most common in more expensive vehicle models

and in rental vehicles, and are often combined with well-liked, value-added services

such as providing travel directions and yellow pages.

In the July 5, 2000, LA Times, GM states that its OnStarTM system has grown to a

subscriber base of 250,000 in the United States and Canada since its introduction in

1996. The system logs 12,000 to 15,000 calls a day, about 5 percent of which

involve emergencies. OnStarTM is available on 29 models of GM vehicles, and will

become available on Honda’s 2001 Acura models. GM predicts that the system will

be available on 1 million vehicles by the end of 2000, and on 4 million by 2003 (LA

Times, July 5, 2000).

On August 1, 2000, Ford and Qualcomm announced the creation of an alliance

called Wingcast to compete directly with OnStar.TM The service will be available,

starting with about 1 million vehicles in the 2002 model year. Nissan is also 

incorporating Wingcast into its Infiniti 2002 models, with Nissan brand cars to 

follow. Ford officials expect Wingcast to charge users between $9 and $29 per

month. Price and level of service will vary by the Ford brand that sells it. OnStarTM

charges its users $17 to $33 per month (USA Today, August 1, 2000).

In responding to events detected through mayday and other techniques, most 

emergency response agencies now use CAD systems to effectively manage their fleet

resources. Agencies increasingly supplement this information by tracking vehicles

with automated vehicle location (AVL) devices (USA Today, August 1, 2000).

Integration of CAD data across jurisdictional boundaries is being facilitated by

development of common location description standards, but will require resolution

of institutional issues. Increased AVL implementation will require reducing system

cost and successfully addressing organized labor’s general dislike of such systems.
38 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

The Albuquerque Ambulance Company in New Mexico uses a map-based CAD 

system that allows the dispatcher to send ambulances to the exact location of an

emergency, along with guidance on how to get there. Following installation of the

system, the company’s efficiency increased by 10 to 15 percent (ITS Benefits

Database 2000).

Emergency Management Lessons Learned

The various emergency management systems implemented in field operational tests

attained adequate positional accuracy in finding victims’ vehicles. In the PuSHMe

field operational test, the mean distance error was about 37 meters and the median

distance error was about 31 meters from the actual vehicle location. The global

positioning system (GPS) experienced difficulties in enclosed spaces or “urban

canyons” (in between buildings), but was accurate with vehicles in forested or 

open terrain. With PuSHMe, the GPS-based systems experienced difficulties in

accurately determining locations in enclosed spaces like parking garages. One 

vendor’s product experienced a 37 percent failure rate and the other vendor’s had a

29 percent failure rate in updating locations in between buildings. With elimination

of “selective availability,” announced in May 2000, and increasing presence of 

differential GPS, obtaining acceptable positional accuracy typically is not a difficult

challenge to overcome.

Cellular communication has limitations in areas of marginal or poor cellular 

coverage. In Colorado’s Mayday field operational test—in areas of marginal to 

nonexistent cellular coverage—the analog cellular system was unreliable in 

transmitting data (U.S. DOT, Emergency Notification Response, Sept. 1998). Since

this test, not only has there been a dramatic increase in the size and density of 

cellular coverage, but digital cellular systems have made significant inroads on the

initially analog-dominated marketplace.

The computer system and mapping database used by emergency call-takers must

show and update the map quickly, displaying a wide range of geographic and 

political attributes in the area surrounding the location of the incident. In both the

Colorado Mayday and PuSHMe field operational tests, the map display system and

the map database used in the system were problematic. More specifically, in

Colorado Mayday, the speed of the computer used for the map display system was

adequate for the test but would likely be too slow under real world conditions of

multiple, simultaneous mayday calls. The display system needed enhancement to

automatically display streets in the vicinity of the incident. The display system also

needed the capability to display more than one incident at a time. The map databases

and display should have included all roads, road labels, geographic landmarks, and

bodies of water, as well as city, county, state, and dispatch region boundaries (U.S.

DOT, Emergency Notification Response, Sept. 1998).

Operators of vehicles with the mayday systems found them easy to use and felt more

secure with the system available. Using one of the two systems tested in the

PuSHMe operational test, 100 percent of users found the device easy to use. The

auto redial feature was unanimously viewed as user-friendly. With respect to security

and safety, 95.7 percent of users would feel more secure in their vehicle were the 
CHAPTER 2: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT FREEWAY, INCIDENT, AND EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT AND ELECTRONIC TOLL COLLECTION?

39

system permanently available to them and other members of the family. In situations

requiring police, medical, or roadside assistance, 95.6 percent of users thought the

system would likely help authorities deliver assistance. In the area of reliability and

consistency, 91 percent of respondents reported that only rarely or occasionally were

they disconnected when speaking with the response center operator, and 100 percent

reported that they were almost always or frequently automatically reconnected (U.S.

DOT, Emergency Notification Response, Sept. 1998).

Tests validated the efficacy of using private service centers to screen calls. The

PuSHMe operational test helped partners better understand the role of a private

response center (PRC) in the deployment of an in-vehicle emergency response 

system. Private partners felt that a PRC would be a necessary component of any

early deployment scenario and pointed to existing PRCs such as those serving the

Ford Lincoln RESCU system. Public partners were less concerned, seeing the PRC

as a viable and likely scenario but not the only one. Public partners are generally

concerned, however, about the potential overload they experience from 911 calls

made by motorists observing incidents.

Emergency Management—Computer Aided Dispatch

CAD systems, GIS, and AVL support real-time, traffic-sensitive route guidance for

emergency vehicles and promote more efficient use of vehicle and personnel

resources. Even though the technology is proven, it is still crucial to train dispatchers

before they will embrace it. Packaged AVL systems are widely available, but the

absence of standardized map locations remains an obstacle. Technology will enable

public safety and traffic agencies to share data, but the agencies need to be aware of

one another’s resources, and must coordinate plans to address the public’s privacy

concerns. While integration among systems is feasible, it remains technologically

challenging. Integration is time-consuming, costly, difficult to manage, and does 

not always produce easily quantifiable benefits, because CAD systems are typically

proprietary, and no interface standards have been defined.

Emergency Management—Mayday

Mayday systems identify incidents through sensor data such as airbag deployment.

They support increasingly accurate location data through improved cellular 

coverage, GPS formulas, and 10-second history of location prior to impact.

Communication coverage and availability of crash data are expanding. Integration

with E-911 will continue to develop as E-911 expands, but will lag for cellular 911

callers until auto-location of cellular 911 calls begins to become available. Interface

requirements should be built to specific agency requirements.

Where is Emergency Management headed?

The capabilities of emergency response systems will continue to expand as more data

on seatbelt use, airbag deployment, and other vehicle functions become available.

In addition, cellular coverage will expand and become more accurate. E-911 calls

will become integrated with and begin receiving information from data-rich Mayday

cellular calls.
40 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

On July 19, 2000, U.S. Transportation Secretary Rodney Slater kicked off the

National Mayday Readiness Initiative (NMRI). NMRI is a public-private partnership aimed at creating effective, efficient integration between Mayday service

providers and the Nation’s public emergency responders and incident managers.

NMRI brings together all of the key stakeholders to discuss and work toward 

resolving issues. The initiative is co-sponsored by U.S. DOT and the ComCARE

Alliance, with support by a grant from the General Motors Corporation. In a press

release announcing NMRI, U.S. DOT said that it expected more than 11 million

mayday units to be on the road by 2004 (U.S. DOT, press release, July 2000).

Emergency Management Issues

The primary issues with mayday systems relate to the ability to get location data

from all cell phones. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has

approved two technologies—network-based and GPS-based, leaving the decision 

on which technology to use for regional cellular geolocation to local authorities. 

A network-based solution, where location is determined according to triangulation

by the cell phone network itself, may require access to information available only

from the local carrier, complicating the ability of a privatized mayday center to

obtain the information it needs. For GPS-based regions, the Mayday center will

receive positional information directly from the calling phone.

The issues with CAD/AVL are both technical and institutional. Reconciling map

location referencing problems will make the systems more robust, but it is unclear

who will be responsible for carrying out this action. Expanding available resources

depends on multiple agencies pooling their needs and funds.

ELECTRONIC TOLL COLLECTION

Electronic toll collection provides for automated collection of toll revenue through

the application of in-vehicle, roadside, and communication technologies to process

toll payment transactions (ITS Deployment Tracking Database 2000). Participating

patrons (vehicles) are identified by the use of roadside hardware and software and 

an identifier or “tag.” In areas with more than a single toll collection authority,

compatible tag technologies enhance convenience to the patron and promote

“seamless” transaction processing.

ETC systems can provide a number of major benefits. On the Tappan Zee Bridge in

New York City, manual toll lanes were documented as having a capacity of 400 to

450 vehicles per hour, while those with ETC systems handled 1,000 vehicles per

hour. Florida’s Turnpike Authority calculated a 2.03:1 benefit/cost ratio if only 10

percent of the vehicles at a sample toll plaza used ETC, rising to well over 3:1 as the

number of ETC-equipped vehicles increased (ITS Benefits Database 2000).

The technologies necessary for successful ETC emerged and matured rapidly,

although the industry successfully resisted standardization for many years. Early

problems with data errors were overcome, and ETC has repeatedly been shown to 

be both highly economical and widely popular, particularly with commuters. Major

U.S. DOT efforts are improving standardization and interoperability. Further 
CHAPTER 2: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT FREEWAY, INCIDENT, AND EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT AND ELECTRONIC TOLL COLLECTION?

41

success in this area is likely to result as smart cards are accepted for more than just

transportation-related purposes, such as in Los Angeles where McDonaldsTM is

accepting them.

Electronic Toll Collection Lessons Learned

Poorly designed and poorly implemented ETC systems can be quite costly and can

negatively impact traffic and the environment. Lee County reported that with tens

of thousands of transactions per day, the problems created from a small percentage of

incorrect transactions are significant (Burris 1998). Verifying the system’s accuracy

before making a selection was critical to the success of many early ETC programs.

Having a detailed marketing plan was key to the acceptance and rapid growth in 

use of Virginia’s FasToll system (Harris and Choudhry 1998). Such outreach must

identify and address the diverse audiences who may become enrolled in the program,

speaking to the individual needs and motivations of each. In some cases, the 

majority of patrons are not regular commuters, as in Lee County, Florida (Burris

1998). Therefore, marketing campaigns targeted to the commuting population 

will miss a significant portion of potential ETC customers.

Public-private partnerships involving industry, financiers, and other private sector

partners can reduce or eliminate the price of transponders as an impediment to

widespread deployment, although most cases of such partnerships have been outside

the United States. The availability of automatic positive balances and exclusive

lanes at toll booths are attractive to drivers and draw more ETC users (Harris and

Choudhry 1998). The practice of confidential encryption should be promoted to

reassure users who have confidentiality concerns, as the E-ZPass program has done

(Ascher 1999).

Several toll facilities use license plate recognition technology to identify toll evaders.

This technology continues to face challenges in achieving rapid startup, high 

productivity, and high accuracy owing, in many cases, to the wide variety of license

plate placements, formats, and color schemes in the United States. In other 

applications, agencies still rely on staff to interpret the images captured 

photographically for enforcement purposes.

Electronic Payment Systems Lessons Learned

Existing proprietary revenue collection systems are limited in their ability to support

an “open” architecture; therefore, a technology standard is needed to ensure compatibility. Electronic payment systems can reduce revenue collection and maintenance

costs, increase security, allow for increased throughput, and provide more detailed

customer information. One study indicated that ETC reduced the cost of staffing

toll booths by 43.1 percent, money handling by 9.6 percent, and roadway maintenance

by 14.4 percent (Philip and Schramm 1997). The case study for the ETC system at

the Carquinez bridge suggests that, overall, the ETC project would realize most of its

objectives, although expansion of the system beyond its initial pilot phase has 

experienced significant delays. The project would provide a higher level of service

quality to toll patrons, improve quantity and quality of data collection, increase 

traffic flow on ETC toll lanes, and reduce vehicle emissions and fuel consumption.
42 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

ETC systems also provide an opportunity to partner with other agencies and integrate with other ITS technologies (ITS Deployment Tracking Database 2000).

Earlier generation payment systems, such as bar code tags, have not completely 

disappeared and are still in use at some locations. Bar codes, however, were subject

to degradation by dirt and grime, and were highly sensitive to correct placement on

the vehicle.

Where is ETC Headed?

The future for ETC is regional, coordinated multi-use systems, especially as regional

and national standards are developed. The potential for smart cards shared with

other agencies and the private sector is real and must be pursued. Similarly, 

agreements between multiple agencies to pool or share “back office” toll processing

activities hold potential for cost savings and increased automation. In such 

situations, multiple toll facilities using a common toll collection system, such as 

the E-ZPass system in the northeastern United States, can implement common 

processing facilities for processing transactions.

As usage expands, agencies will have to explore ways to increase conversion of 

lanes and create faster ETC lanes. Rapid payback supports system upgrading and

replacement. Incorporation of vehicle identification technology into the vehicle

during the manufacturing process may eliminate the need for add-on devices, should

this technology become standard in the future.

Electronic Toll/Payment Issues

It will be important to determine the proper mix of ETC and manual lanes to allow

for optimal road use and traffic flow. One key issue is the need for regional 

architecture standardization, but first the boundaries that constitute a “region” 

must be determined. The industry is debating the merits of discounting tolls for

ETC users to encourage use, or charging them for the convenience of ETC.

CONCLUSION

Significant progress has been achieved in implementing freeway, incident, and 

emergency management and ETC systems, with many benefits realized from these

investments. Some components, such as mayday systems, are being deployed at

accelerated rates. Others, such as use of vehicles carrying cellular phones as wireless

data probes, are only emerging, but show promise. Integration of technologies within each type of system and between the systems themselves is increasingly recognized

as key to achieving full benefit from intelligent infrastructure, but is also known to

present both technical and institutional challenges. As implementation expands, as

new locations begin implementation, and as systems are updated or replaced, lessons

and experiences like those documented in this paper will continue to have value in

increasing the likelihood of rapid, successful, and cost-effective deployment, and in

planning for generations of technologies yet to come (Pearce 1999). 
CHAPTER 2: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT FREEWAY, INCIDENT, AND EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT AND ELECTRONIC TOLL COLLECTION?

43

REFERENCES

Ascher, M., “E-ZPASS–Putting ITS In the Hands of the People,” Proceedings of the

6th World Congress on Intelligent Transport Systems (Toronto, Ontario, Canada: ITS

World Congress, November 1999).

Burris, M., The LeeWay Electronic Toll Collection System, Florida (Tallahassee, FL:

Leeway Authority, February 1998).

Harris, M. and O. Choudhry, “FasToll: Virginia’s Electronic Toll Collection User

Survey Response Summary,” Proceedings of the 1998 ITS America Annual Meeting

(Washington, DC: ITS America, May 1998).

ITS Benefits and Costs Database Web Page, Mitretek Systems,

http://www.mitretek.org/its/benecost.nsf (Washington, DC: U.S. DOT, 2000).

Los Angeles Times, “Your Wheels” (Los Angeles, CA: LA Times Corporation, July 5,

2000).

Metropolitan ITS Deployment Tracking Database Web Page, Oak Ridge National

Laboratory, http://itsdeployment.ed.ornl.gov (Washington, DC: U.S. DOT, 2000).

Minnesota Department of Transportation, Request for Proposals for Evaluation of

Ramp Metering (St. Paul, MN: Minnesota Department of Transportation, June 2000).

Pearce, V.: untitled presentation, Proceedings of the 6th World Congress on Intelligent

Transport Systems (Toronto, Ontario, Canada: ITS World Congress, November

1999).

Philip, D. and W. Schramm, “Cashless Tolls Mean Money Saved,” Traffic Technology

International (Dorking, Surray, UL: UK and International Press, 1997).

USA Today, “Ford Plans Challenge to GM OnStar” (Washington, DC: USA Today,

August, 2000).

U.S. DOT, 1996 Atlanta Navigator Case Study (Washington, DC: U.S. DOT,

November 1998), EDL No. 9685.

U.S. DOT, Emergency Notification and Response ITS Field Operational Test CrossCutting Study (Washington, DC: U.S. DOT, September 1998), EDL No. 6326.

U.S. DOT, FHWA Federal Aid ITS Procurement Regulations and Contracting Options

(Washington, DC: U.S. DOT, August 1997), EDL No. 3029.

U.S. DOT, Hazardous Material Incident Response ITS Field Operational Test CrossCutting Study (Washington, DC: U.S. DOT, September 1998), EDL No. 6327.

U.S. DOT, Incident Management: Detection, Verification, and Traffic Management: ITS

Field Operational Test Cross-Cutting Study (Washington, DC: U.S. DOT, September

1998), EDL No. 6328.

U.S. DOT, Minnesota Smart Work Zone Case Study (Washington, DC: U.S. DOT,

June 1998).
44 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

U.S. DOT press release, U.S. Transportation Secretary Slater Announces Public-Private

Partnership to Improve Emergency Response and Save Lives (Washington, DC: U.S.

DOT, July 19, 2000).

U.S. DOT, Regional Traffic Incident Management Programs Implementation Guide draft

(Washington, DC: U.S. DOT, 2000), EDL No. 13149

U.S. DOT, Transportation Management Center Concepts of Operation – A Cross

Cutting Study (Washington, DC: U.S. DOT, October 1999), EDL No. 10923.

U.S. DOT, Transportation Management Center Concepts of Operation Implementation

Guide (Washington, DC: U.S. DOT, December 1999), EDL No. 11494.
chapter 3

WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED

ABOUT ITS? ARTERIAL

MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 3: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ITS? ARTERIAL MANAGEMENT 47

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This paper presents what has been learned in four principal areas of arterial

management: (1) adaptive control strategies (ACS), (2) advanced traveler

information systems (ATIS), (3) automated enforcement, and (4) integration.

The levels of deployment, benefits, deployment challenges, and future steps are

presented for each category.

ACS signifies traffic signal control systems that optimize timing plans in real time,

based on current traffic conditions and demand. They have been shown to reduce

delay and improve efficiency at intersections. Although the technology has been

available for 20 years, ACS is not widely deployed in the United States. The systems are considered expensive and complicated, and U.S. traffic engineers do not

seem convinced of the associated benefits. ACS seems to have potential for widespread use in the United States, but deployment has not yet reached that point.

ATIS for arterials provides information on arterial conditions (e.g., travel speeds,

travel time, incidents) to motorists through such media as websites, radio, television,

or personal devices. While surveys from the Metropolitan Model Deployment

Initiative (MMDI) show that the public wants information on arterial conditions,

only 67 out of 361 agencies (18 percent) in the largest 78 metropolitan areas reported

providing this service. This limited dissemination is in part due to the lack of 

surveillance on arterial streets. Another challenge is the absence of a commonly

understood method of describing conditions on arterial streets. For example, delays

caused by traffic signals complicate travel time computations. The advent of new

technologies, such as cell phones as probes, increases the likelihood that arterial

information will make its way into traveler information systems.

Automated enforcement is a tool that can be used to encourage compliance with

traffic laws and promote safety. This type of enforcement uses camera technology to

photograph license plates of drivers who break traffic laws. Automated enforcement

on arterial streets primarily involves red light running (RLR) and speed enforcement.

Legislation has been passed or is being considered in 22 states to allow automated

RLR enforcement. Deployment of systems is considered to be moderate.

Intersections with RLR enforcement have seen a reduction in violations as high as

50 percent and a reduction in crashes as high as 70 percent. Deployment of automated speed enforcement is not as widespread as RLR enforcement. Privacy and

fairness issues associated with automated enforcement make it somewhat controversial.

Some automated speed enforcement programs have come under scrutiny by the 

public and motorist associations because they are perceived as being unfair, and the

systems have been discontinued in some communities. However, the future for automated RLR enforcement appears strong as more cities implement this technology.

Integration of arterial management is broken down into three areas: integration across

jurisdictions, integration with transit and emergency operations, and integration with

freeway management. Integration across jurisdictions occurs in 54 percent of agencies

in the largest 78 metropolitan areas. This type of integration consists of coordinating

traffic signal timing plans and implementing similar cycle lengths across jurisdictional

boundaries. Coordination across boundaries can improve efficiency and reduce delay. 
48 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

Integration with transit and emergency operations takes the form of traffic signal

controls that allow transit vehicle priority and emergency vehicle signal preemption.

More than half the agencies in the largest 78 metropolitan areas have traffic signal

technologies that allow for preemption by emergency vehicles, while only 12 percent

allow some sort of priority for transit vehicles. 

An integrated arterial freeway corridor is one that shares arterial travel times, speeds,

and conditions with freeway management to adjust variable message signs (VMS),

highway advisory radios (HARs), and freeway ramp meters. Freeway travel times,

speeds, and conditions are shared with arterial management and used to optimize

traffic signal timings. Nearly 20 percent of arterial and freeway management agencies

report sharing information on traffic conditions with each other; however, it is

unclear how this information is used or passed on to travelers. The number of truly

integrated freeway arterial corridors appears to be limited.

Presently, only two arterial management intelligent transportation systems (ITS)

technologies meet the deployment level requirements to be called “widespread.”

They are integration of time-of-day/fixed-time signal control across jurisdictions, and

signal preemption for emergency vehicles.

Each of the arterial management ITS technologies discussed in this paper shows the

potential for benefits; however, only a few of the technologies have reached widespread deployment.1 Reasons for the limited deployments vary, but include cost,

institutional barriers, uncertainty of benefits, and technological incompatibilities.

Table 3-1 summarizes the deployment levels of the ITS technologies presented for

arterial management.

Table 3-1. Arterial Management Summary Table

Technology Deployment Level Limiting Factors Comments

Adaptive control strategies Limited Deployment Cost, technology, perceived

lack of benefits

Jury is still out—has shown

benefits in some cases, cost

still a prohibitive factor, some

doubt among practitioners

on its effectiveness

Arterial information for ATIS Moderate Deployment Limited deployment of 

appropriate surveillance,

difficulty in accurately

describing arterial congestion

Holds promise—new 

surveillance technology 

likely to increase the quality

and quantity of arterial 

information

Automated red light 

running enforcement

Moderate Deployment* Controversial, some concerns

about privacy, legality

Successful—but must be

deployed with sensitivity 

and education

Automated speed 

enforcement on arterial 

streets

Limited Deployment* Controversial, some concerns

about privacy, legality

Jury is still out—public

acceptance lacking, very 

controversial

1 The three different deployment levels are defined as follows: Deployed in fewer than 10 percent of

the largest 78 metropolitan areas = Limited Deployment; Deployed in between 10 percent and 30 percent of the largest 78 metropolitan areas = Moderate Deployment; Deployed in more than 30 percent

of the largest 78 metropolitan areas = Widespread Deployment
CHAPTER 3: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ITS? ARTERIAL MANAGEMENT 49

*Quantitative deployment tracking data not available. Deployment level determined by expert judgment.

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this paper is to address what has been learned regarding arterial management, to identify trends in deployment levels of arterial management technologies, and

to speculate on the future of arterial management. This paper addresses four principal

areas of arterial management: adaptive control strategies, advanced traveler information

systems for arterials, automated enforcement, and integration of arterial management.

Deployment levels of the various technologies primarily issue from the U.S.

Department of Transportation’s (U.S. DOT’s) 1999 Metropolitan ITS Deployment

Tracking Database (ITS Deployment Tracking Database 1999). Other deployment

information was derived from a literature and website search. Opinions on the challenges and future of the technologies were gathered at the Institute of Transportation

Engineers (ITE) 2000 International Conference, held in Irvine, California, in April

2000. More than 40 transportation professionals attended an ITE roundtable discussion on arterial management covering each of the four areas delineated in this paper.

ADAPTIVE CONTROL STRATEGIES

What are Adaptive Control Strategies?

Adaptive control strategies use algorithms that perform real-time optimization of

traffic signals based on the current traffic conditions, demand, and system capacity.

ACS includes software that adjusts a signal’s split, offset, phase length, and phase

Technology Deployment Level Limiting Factors Comments

Integration of time-of-day 

and fixed-time signal 

control across jurisdictions

Widespread Deployment Institutional issues still exist 

in many areas

Successful—encouraged 

by spread of closed-loop 

signal systems and improved

communications

Integration of real-time or 

adaptive control strategies 

across jurisdictions 

(including special events)

Limited Deployment Limited deployment of

Adaptive Control Strategies,

numerous institutional 

barriers

Holds promise—

technology is becoming 

more available, institutional

barriers falling

Integration with emergency 

(signal preemption)

Widespread Deployment None Successful

Integration with transit 

(signal priority)

See Chapter 5,“What Have 

We Learned About Advanced

Public Transportation

Systems?”

See Chapter 5,“What Have 

We Learned About Advanced

Public Transportation

Systems?”

See Chapter 5,“What Have 

We Learned About 

Advanced Public

Transportation Systems?”

Integration with freeway 

(integrated management)

Limited Deployment Institutional issues exist, lack 

of standards between systems

preventing integration

Holds promise—benefits

have been realized from 

integrated freeway arterial

corridors

Table 3-1. Continued
50 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

sequence to minimize delay and to reduce the number of stops. The systems require

extensive surveillance, usually in the form of pavement loop detectors, and a communications infrastructure that allows for communication with the central and/or

local controllers. ACS differs from other more traditional traffic-responsive systems

in that new timing plans can be generated for every cycle, based on real-time 

information. Theoretically, ACS allows an infinite number of timing plans.

The traditional ACS technologies are Australia’s SCATS (Sydney Coordinated

Adaptive Traffic System) and the United Kingdom’s SCOOT (Split, Cycle, Offset

Optimization Technique) systems. Los Angeles developed and uses a system called

ATSC (Automated Traffic Surveillance and Control) program. New adaptive control algorithms are being developed and tested in the United States under the ACS

umbrella. OPAC (Optimized Policies for Adaptive Control) and RHODES (RealTime Hierarchical Optimized Distributed Effective System) algorithms are deployed

in field operational tests sponsored by the Federal Highway Administration

(FHWA). Both algorithms are for use on arterial streets, with OPAC designed for

over-saturated conditions and RHODES designed for under-saturated conditions.

Another new adaptive system, RTACL (Real-Time Traffic Adaptive Control Logic),

will be tested on a grid network in Chicago in late 2000. The RTACL algorithm is

designed for a network of streets.

The jury is still out on whether ACS works well. Benefits have been demonstrated

in several areas where traditional adaptive control technologies (e.g., SCOOT,

SCATS) have been deployed. However, some argue that the systems are no better

than good fixed-time/time-of-day plans. This observation may be true, especially in

areas where traffic is predictable or there is little traffic growth. Other issues with

adaptive control include detector maintenance and communications problems.

Currently, little information exists on the benefits of newer adaptive control strategies like OPAC, RHODES, and RTACL, and the conclusions about ACS in this

paper are taken mostly from experiences with SCOOT and SCATS.

Levels of Deployment

The ITS deployment tracking database currently reports eight ACS deployments 

in the United States. In addition to these eight, a literature search revealed the 

existence of two other sites: Broward County, Florida, and Newark/Wilmington,

Delaware. One of the first and largest ACS deployments is in Oakland County,

Michigan, as part of the FAST-TRAC project. The system became operational in

1992, and more than 350 intersections are now under SCATS control. Also, the

ATSC system in Los Angeles includes 1,170 intersections and 4,509 detectors for

signal timing optimization as of 1994 (Mitretek Systems 1999). Table 3 shows the

deployment cities and levels of utilization. In addition to these deployed systems,

there are currently field operation tests of OPAC and RHODES on Route 18 in

New Jersey and in Tucson, Arizona, respectively. These two systems are not listed in

Table 3-2, as they are field operational tests.
CHAPTER 3: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ITS? ARTERIAL MANAGEMENT 51

Table 3-2. Locations of Adaptive Control Strategies Deployments

City/County System Numberof Intersections

Los Angeles, CA ATSC 1170

Oakland County, MI SCATS 350+

Hennepin County, MN SCATS 71

Arlington, VA SCOOT 65

Minneapolis, MN SCOOT 60

Anaheim, CA SCOOT 20

Durham, NC SCATS unknown

What are the benefits of ACS?

ACS has several advantages over traditional fixed-time/time-of-day plans. With

ACS, timing plans are generated in real time and can more efficiently accommodate

fluctuations in traffic demand. Ideally, ACS works best in areas with high levels of

nonrecurring congestion, such as incidents and special events, and in areas with 

fluctuating traffic demand. Although ACS has been shown to provide benefits, it is

difficult to give a generalized overview of the benefits for any of the systems, as each

technology works differently, and each deployment site is unique and customized to

that particular deployment. The extent of benefits depends on several factors,

including number and spacing of intersections, size of study area, demand patterns,

study base case, and type of adaptive control used. 

Three functional areas have shown improvement, or potential for improvement, due

to ACS over fixed-time plans. They are delay reduction, safety, and operations and

maintenance.

Delay Reduction

In responding to demand variations in real time, ACS adjusts the timing plan to

minimize delay and number of stops, a basic goal of an ACS system. Each system

performs this optimization in a similar fashion. Delay reductions were reported from

five of the deployments. The benefits ranged from 19 to 42 percent. The range in

delay may be attributed to differing definitions of delay (e.g., time stopped at an

intersection or corridor travel time over a free-flow travel time) and the base case

study condition.

The largest delay reduction was experienced in Broward County, Florida, where a

SCATS test system was installed at five intersections. A Florida Department of

Transportation (DOT) evaluation showed that SCATS reduced delay by up to 42

percent and travel time by up to 20 percent (TransCore 2000). Before-and-after

studies of the Oakland County, Michigan, SCATS deployment showed significant
52 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

delay improvements. Corridor travel time was reduced from 7 percent to 32 percent

over optimized fixed-time signal control. The average travel time reduction for traffic

during peak periods was 8 percent (average speed increased from 25 mph to 27 mph)

(Abdel-Rahim et al. 1998). A preliminary study of the SCOOT installation in 56

intersections in Minneapolis shows a 19 percent reduction in delay during special

events. Table 3-3 provides more delay reduction information.

Table 3-3. ACS Travel Time and Delay Benefits Realized in the United States 

*The system in Broward County was installed as a demonstration and has since been turned off due to lack

of funds.

Safety 

A reduction in number of stops leads to reduced chance of rear-end collisions. 

ACS has the ability to reduce the number of stops through a corridor by improving 

coordination. When compared to fully optimized fixed-time systems, SCATS has

been shown to reduce stops by up to 40 percent (TransCore 2000). Following 

implementation of a SCATS system in Broward County, Florida, the number of 

stops decreased by 28 percent (TransCore 2000). Floating car studies in Oakland

County, Michigan, showed a 33 percent reduction of stops, and the ATSC system in

Los Angeles reduced stops by an estimated 41 percent (Mitretek Systems 1999). 

Operations and Maintenance 

High-growth areas benefit from adaptive control’s ability to continually generate 

timing plans. While there are no guidelines specifying the optimal length of time

between traffic signal optimization, the ITS deployment tracking database shows that

only 27 percent of agencies in the 78 largest metropolitan areas re-time their signals

each year, as shown in Table 3-4. Slightly fewer than a third report re-timing their

signals on an as-needed basis. However, practitioners participating in the roundtable

discussion held at the ITE 2000 International Conference reported that re-timing

most likely occurs when funding and staff resources are available. In fact, ITE 

estimates that nearly 75 percent of all signals in the United States need to be 

re-timed (Meyer 1997). In areas of high growth, signal timing plans quickly become

out-of-date. The ability of ACS to respond in real time addresses the shortcomings

of signal timing in responding to changes in demand.

Location System Benefits Realized

SCATS

SCATS

Delay reduced by up to 42%, travel time reduced by up to 20%

Delay reduced by 6.6% to 32%, with an average of 7.8%

Broward County, FL*

Oakland County, MI

Newark, DE area SCATS Travel time reduced by up to 25%

Los Angeles, CA ATSC Delay reduced by 44%, travel time reduced by 13%

Minneapolis, MN SCOOT Delay reduced by up to 19% during special events
CHAPTER 3: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ITS? ARTERIAL MANAGEMENT 53

Table 3-4. Signal Re-Timing Schedule

Source: Metropolitan ITS Deployment Tracking Database, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (1999).

ACS may reduce operational and maintenance costs associated with signal 

re-timing. The Minnesota DOT reported that technicians were pleased with the

ease of operations of the SCOOT system in Minneapolis. Technicians found the 

system easy to operate, requiring a minimum amount of maintenance once installed 

(Remer 2000). 

What are the deployment challenges to ACS?

ACS has limited deployment in the United States. Several factors have limited its

use, including cost, system complexity, and uncertainty in the benefits of adaptive

systems.

Current adaptive control system benefits do not appear to be proven to traffic 

engineers. Several participants in the ITE roundtable discussion mentioned they are

not convinced or even aware of ACS benefits. ACS is particularly sensitive to

installation. For example, a limited SCOOT installation in Anaheim, California,

produced little improvement and, in some cases, actually increased delay. During

peak traffic periods, the system experienced delays that were 10 percent greater than

baseline conditions. However, during nonpeak periods, the delay was decreased by 5

percent. According to a U.S. Department of Transportation-sponsored evaluation of

the system, the reason for sub-optimal performance was most likely in placement of

the detectors.

Also, the benefits of ACS depend on the base case condition. In areas characterized

by fluctuations in traffic demand and low growth, ACS offers few benefits over wellmaintained fixed-time/time-of-day signals. The consensus of engineers in the ITE

roundtable discussion was that the benefits of traditional ACS over well-maintained

fixed-time plans are unproven (although, as was demonstrated previously, such wellmaintained fixed-time plans are the exception, not the rule).

Participants also expressed concern about the complexity of adaptive control 

systems. Additional training is normally required to operate such systems, which are

not considered user-friendly. Different terminology causes problems for U.S. traffic

engineers. In the Hennepin County, Minnesota, deployment, system operators

found the SCATS system difficult to learn, even though extensive training was 

provided. Operators had difficulty working with the complex user interface. 

In a similar fashion, ACS systems are highly dependent on the communications 

network, as well as the traffic detectors. If problems arise with communications, the

system does not work efficiently, as occurred in Hennepin County, Minnesota, where

As Needed 1 year or less 2 years 3-5 years 5+ years

# of agencies 62 53 21 41 18

% of agencies 31.8% 27.2% 10.8% 21% 9.2%
54 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

the communications system was unreliable, and arterial traffic signals experienced

ongoing communications failures (Booz-Allen & Hamilton 1999).

Finally, cost appears to be a major obstacle to widespread ACS deployment, even 

for those who appear convinced of its benefits. This concern extends to both the

capital and the operations and maintenance costs of ACS. For example, one of the

biggest selling points offered by ACS proponents is that over the long term, the 

systems are more cost-effective than traditional signal timing approaches. They

argue that the operations and maintenance costs associated with ACS are much

lower than those associated with signal re-timing. However, as Table 3-5 illustrates,

the equation is not that simple, for while signal re-timing costs decrease, other costs 

such as loop maintenance increase.

Table 3-5. Operations and Maintenance Costs for SCOOT Compared to

Standard Traffic Control Devices

Equipment/Task Costs of SCOOT vs. Standard

Controllers Same

Detectors Increases

Loop siting, validation, and fine tuning No O&M costs (one-time cost)

Signal plans/updates Decreases

Central equipment and communications Same as any computer system

Source: Reissnecker, A.,“Equipment Requirements for Adaptive Traffic Control,” TRB Workshop (January 9,

2000).

Furthermore, even if the operations and maintenance costs were lower, practitioners

have expressed concern about the large capital costs associated with ACS. While

these costs vary widely depending on the size of deployment, they can (as Table 3-6

indicates) be quite significant. Even some of the practitioners who feel the benefits

of ACS justify and outweigh these costs have difficulty in securing the large amounts

of capital funding necessary to deploy ACS. Many municipal budgets are not 

structured to support such large, one-time costs for their arterial network.
CHAPTER 3: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ITS? ARTERIAL MANAGEMENT 55

Table 3-6. Estimated Costs of ACS Components

* per intersection

† requires regional hardware and software 

What does the future hold for ACS?

According to the ITS deployment tracking database, only five other sites expect to

use an adaptive control system by the year 2005—a rather dismal outlook for ACS.

However, most participants in the ITE roundtable discussion believed ACS had the

potential to provide significant benefits. These benefits have not yet been convincing

or made well-known. Participants agreed that a database of ACS benefits may be

helpful in choosing between a traditional traffic signal system and adaptive control.

Furthermore, despite the rather low level of domestic deployment, ACS has enjoyed

relatively widespread use outside the United States. For example, SCOOT has been

deployed at more than 100 sites worldwide, while SCATS has been deployed in nine

countries. While the reasons for this discrepancy are not fully understood, it has

been suggested that off-shore development of these systems may be the factor limiting

their adoption here. To illustrate, some practitioners have argued that these 

traditional, foreign-designed systems are insensitive to a number of unique, yet critical,

aspects of U.S. signal control, such as pedestrian clearance times. 

Finally, this issue may be addressed in part by the adaptive control systems now being

developed in the United States. These systems, which are currently being field tested,

include RHODES, OPAC, and RTACL, and may show significant benefits and be

easier to use than traditional systems. Because cost is one of the main prohibitive

factors, the Federal Highway Administration is also considering such solutions as a

scaled-down, lower cost ACS that could also be used in small and medium-sized

cities and would not require total replacement of current traffic control devices. 

System

Central

Hardware 

($)

Central

Software 

($)

Local

Controllers*

($)

Detectors*

SCATS† 30,000 40, 000 - 70,000 4,000 - 6,000 5,000 - 7,000

SCOOT 30,000 unknown unknown 5,000 - 7,000

OPAC 20,000 - 50,000 100,000 - 200,000 4,000 - 6,000 unknown

RHODES 50,000 500 unknown unknown

ATCS 40,000 - 50,000 1,000 + license 8,000 - 10,000 5,000 -10,000
56 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

ADVANCED TRAVELER INFORMATION SYSTEMS (ATIS)

FOR ARTERIALS

What is ATIS for arterials?

ATIS for arterials is used to collect and/or disseminate information on roadway 

conditions to travelers so they can make more informed decisions. 

In addition to traditional radio and television broadcasts, arterial information is 

disseminated primarily through three ITS media: VMS, websites, and HAR. In

addition, U.S. DOT recently announced the creation of a national three-digit traveler information number (511). Both static and dynamic information is provided

over these media. Static information includes lane closures and construction, while

dynamic information includes real-time travel times and congestion. 

Levels of deployment

According to the ITS deployment tracking database, 67 of 361 agencies (nearly 19

percent) report providing some type of arterial information to travelers, with few

providing real-time or dynamic information such as travel speeds. This moderate

deployment level and lack of real-time data stem from a combination of limited 

surveillance on arterial roadways and from difficulties in conveying meaningful arterial travel conditions. For example, spot speeds collected through loop detectors are

fairly common and useful on freeway facilities. However, even if such detectors were

present on an arterial network (which they rarely are), the resulting spot speeds may

be misleading, given the confounding influence of traffic signals.

The most widely used ITS method to provide arterial travel information is the

Internet, with 28 agencies operating websites. Table 3-7 depicts the deployment levels

of other common technologies for providing arterial information. Information 

provided includes data on arterial speeds, incidents, road closures, and queue lengths.

Table 3-7. Arterial ATIS Deployment Levels

Technology*

1999 Level of Deployment 

(Number of Sites)

Dedicated cable TV 5.0% (18)

Telephone system 5.8% (21)

Internet websites 7.8% (28)

Pagers/personal data assistants 2.8% (10)

Interactive TV 0.3% (1)

Kiosks 3.0% (11)

E-mail or other direct PC communication 4.4% (16)
CHAPTER 3: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ITS? ARTERIAL MANAGEMENT 57

* Broadcast media is the primary method currently used to disseminate arterial information. Television

and radio broadcast arterial information in virtually every major metropolitan area. However, these 

traditional media are not considered ITS.

Source: Reissnecker, A.,“Equipment Requirements for Adaptive Traffic Control,” TRB Workshop 

(January 9, 2000).

What are the benefits of ATIS for arterials? 

ATIS that provides information on arterial roadway conditions offers benefits in 

customer satisfaction and improved efficiency. In addition to freeway information, 

travelers seem to want information on arterial roadways so they can make more

informed decisions. More than half (57 percent) of respondents in a survey of website users in Seattle suggested adding arterials to traveler information. Similar results

were found from surveys in Phoenix and San Antonio during MMDI evaluations.

Providing information on arterial conditions may also lead to slight reductions in

delay. Results from the Seattle MMDI evaluation show that adding arterial information can bring about a 3.4 percent reduction in delay, up from 1.5 percent, and lead

to significant reductions in variability (Jensen et al. 2000).

What are the deployment challenges?

Providing accurate and reliable traveler information continues to be a deployment

challenge for ATIS. In most cases, the infrastructure does not exist for arterial data

collection. Traveler information systems often have to rely on data collected to

serve other needs, such as data from traffic management functions. Agencies are still

seeking the best method of surveillance to collect arterial information. ITE roundtable participants agreed that the biggest impediment to providing ATIS with arterial

information is providing accurate and reliable travel times. 

Another issue concerning arterial ATIS is that currently no common method exists

to describe arterial conditions. Users do not always understand the performance

metrics used by traffic engineers (e.g., intersection level of service, saturation) for

arterial roadways. In addition, as previously mentioned, traditional measures like

spot speeds may be misleading on facilities dominated by traffic signal control.

Technology*

1999 Level of Deployment 

(Number of Sites)

In-vehicle navigation systems 0.3% (1)

Cell phone/voice 1.1% (4)

Cell phone/data 0.6% (2)

Facsimile 5.0% (18)

Other 1.9% (7)

Table 3-7. Continued
58 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

What does the future hold?

Although the current situation does not lend itself to adequate data collection

methods, the future does seem hopeful with the emergence of new technologies. 

As part of the MMDI, San Antonio, Texas, used automated vehicle identification

tags and readers to determine travel times/speeds on arterial streets. The system was

found to be technically sound; however, the tags never reached a sufficient level of

market penetration to consistently measure travel times/speeds throughout all times

of the day. Nevertheless, this method can be successful for collecting data on arterials

if the appropriate level of market penetration is reached. 

In another example, Farmer’s Branch, Texas, took advantage of the large number of

toll tags in the area (more than 200,000) by putting three toll tag readers along a

key arterial in the area to measure travel time. This system detects when incidents

occur, measures the effectiveness of attempts to improve travel time, and tracks travel

time as a performance measure over months and years. The information is provided

to travelers through signs in the roadway median (Davis 2000).

There is also research being conducted on using cell phones in vehicles as traffic

probes; however, privacy issues may accompany this new technology. ITE roundtable

participants seemed encouraged by the new technologies becoming available to collect

arterial information. Although the provision of arterial information is not yet 

considered a success, it does hold promise because of new surveillance technology.

AUTOMATED ENFORCEMENT

What is automated enforcement?

Automated enforcement uses camera technology to photograph the license plates 

of traffic law violators. The most prominent form of automated enforcement is red

light running enforcement. The purpose of RLR enforcement is to reduce the number

of violations and ultimately lead to safer intersections. More than 22 percent of all

urban crashes in the United States are caused by noncompliance with intersection

controls—which amounts to more than 1.8 million crashes annually (FHWA Web

Page). Automated RLR enforcement is a tool that can be used to encourage 

compliance and prevent crashes.

Levels of deployment 

Automated enforcement is not tracked in U.S. DOT’s Metropolitan ITS

Deployment Tracking Database. Deployment levels were obtained through websites

on the subject. Automated RLR enforcement is being used in approximately 40

communities in the United States. Currently, nine states have passed legislation

allowing automated RLR enforcement, while 10 additional states are considering

such legislation (Insurance Institute for Highway Safety Web Page). There are 14

automated speed enforcement programs (involving either freeways or arterial

streets), mostly in the western United States. 

One of the reasons for the relatively widespread use of automated enforcement technologies is the active involvement of industry and vendors. The private sector has
CHAPTER 3: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ITS? ARTERIAL MANAGEMENT 59

frequently offered to defray many associated deployment costs in return for receiving

a percentage of revenues gained from the ticketing process. While this model has

facilitated rapid rise of this technology, it must be employed carefully to ensure that

deployments are safety-driven and not motivated by profits.

What are the benefits of automated enforcement?

Automated RLR enforcement can yield benefits in reduced crashes, reduced violations, and increased intersection efficiency. Table 3-8 shows the benefits at several

deployment sites. Additionally, revenues from traffic fines may help defray some of

the capital and/or operating costs. However, issues of public perception and acceptance dictate that cost savings not be a prime motivator for system deployment. 

In addition, if the systems perform their function properly, they should ultimately

increase compliance and thus lead to decreased ticket revenue.

The benefits of automated speed enforcement are not as well documented and,

therefore, red light enforcement benefits alone are presented.

Table 3-8. Benefits of Automated Red Light Enforcement at Various Sites 

Source: FHWA Web Page.

What are the deployment challenges? 

Concerns have been raised that automated enforcement violates a person’s privacy.

While legal opinions do not support this claim, the perception still exits. Also, as

stated above, the public may perceive the systems as revenue generators for the

police or for the system vendors. In many cases, the vendor pays for system installation and, in turn, generates revenue from violations. Educating the public about the

benefits of the systems may dispel these concerns. Participants in the ITE roundtable

Minnesota Citations reduced by 29% for all vehicles

Citations reduced by 63% for trucks

unknown

Scottsdale, AZ Violations reduced by 20% Collisions reduced by 55%

New York, NY Violations reduced by 34% Angle crashes reduced by 60-70%

Some increase in rear-end crashes

Oxnard, CA Violations reduced by 42% at sites

Violations reduced by 22% city wide

Collisions reduced by 24%

Site Impact on Violations 

and Citations

Impact on Crashes

Howard County, MD (2 sites) Warnings reduced by 21-25% 

Citations reduced by 42-50% 

Collisions reduced by 40%

Fairfax, VA (9 sites) Citations reduced by 44% unknown

San Francisco, CA Citations reduced by 42% Injury crashes reduced by 24%
60 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

agreed that automated enforcement should be encouraged, but that safety aspects

need to be demonstrated to the public to gain acceptance.

What does the future hold?

Automated RLR enforcement is moderately deployed at this time; however, it

appears to have a strong future. The media have given the systems significant 

attention, while the number of states considering legislation is increasing rapidly.

The Federal role in supporting development of these systems may be limited to 

public education on the systems and the dangers of red light running.

Automated speed enforcement does not share the same level of public support.

Seven out of 10 deployment tests of automated speed enforcement have been 

discontinued from lack of support (Public Technology, Inc. 1999). 

INTEGRATION OF ARTERIAL TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT

SYSTEMS (ATMS)

What does the integration of ATMS involve?

There are three types of ATMS integration: (1) integration across jurisdictions, (2)

integration with transit and emergency operations, and (3) integration with freeway

management. Integration across jurisdictions includes the coordination of traffic 

signals among different agencies and, in some cases, the sharing of signal control. 

Arterial management integration with emergency operations usually takes the form

of traffic signal preemption. Preemption provides an automatic green light to 

emergency vehicles despite traffic conditions and current signal phase. This exception

allows the emergency vehicle to move safely and more efficiently through the

intersection. 

Priority for transit vehicles is similar to preemption, except that the green phase is

not automatically implemented. Rather, the green time is either extended or

reduced to more efficiently move the transit vehicle. 

An integrated arterial freeway corridor is one that shares information and/or control

between adjacent freeway and arterial management systems. At a low level, this

integration may involve a freeway management agency providing information on

freeway incidents to neighboring arterial systems. With more complex systems, arterial

travel times, speeds, and conditions may be shared with freeway management to

adjust VMS, HAR, and freeway ramp meters. Conversely, freeway travel times,

speeds, and conditions may be shared with arterial management and used to optimize

traffic signal timings and inform arterial travelers. Such integration may also use

incident response timing plans to respond to traffic diverted from the freeway to 

the arterial.

Where have arterial ATMS been integrated?

Interjurisdictional coordination

Of the 78 largest metropolitan areas, 54 percent report coordinating fixed timing

plans across jurisdictions, and 62 percent report planning to do so before 2005.
CHAPTER 3: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ITS? ARTERIAL MANAGEMENT 61

Integration with transit and emergency operations

More than half the agencies accounted for in the ITS deployment tracking database

offer some preemption measures for emergency vehicles (see Table 3-9). Priority for

transit is used less frequently than preemption for emergency vehicles, owing largely

to concerns over disruption to surrounding traffic. (See Chapter 5, “What Have We

Learned About Advanced Public Transportation Systems?” for more detailed information on priority for transit vehicles).

Table 3-9. Extent of Emergency Preemption Deployment 

State DOT County Agency City Agency

Number of agencies by type (percentage)

100% to 25% 9 (17%) 26 (26%) 53 (29%)

1% to 24% 25 (47%) 38 (36%) 81 (45%)

0% 19 (36%) 41 (38%) 48 (26%)

Total (340 agencies) 53 (100%) 105 (100%) 182 (100%)

Percent of signals that allow for

preemption for emergency vehicles

Integration with freeway management

According to the ITS deployment tracking database for 1999, 74 (out of 361) arterial

management agencies, or 20 percent, provide arterial travel times, speeds, and 

conditions to freeway management agencies. Conversely, 20 (out of 106) freeway

management agencies, or 19 percent, provide information on freeway conditions to

arterial management agencies. It is unknown how each agency uses the information.

Actual integration of arterial and freeway management—where agencies actively use

information from freeway management to better manage arterial roadways—is

expected to be much lower than these percentages. For example, fewer than a half

dozen integrated freeway/arterial diversion systems use both freeway and arterial 

incident response plans to incidents, and share real-time incident and travel time

conditions with each other and the public.

What are the benefits of integration?

Interjurisdictional coordination

Coordination across jurisdictions can yield delay reductions by providing a seamless

travel corridor. Interconnecting previously uncoordinated signals and providing

newly optimized timing plans and a central master control system can reduce travel

time by 10 to 20 percent (Meyer 1997). For example, the metropolitan planning

organization in Denver acted as an organizer in getting area jurisdictions to work

together to coordinate signals. Travel time reductions on the Denver arterial 

corridors ranged from 7 to 22 percent (Meyer 1997).
62 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

Integration with transit and emergency operations

Delays at traffic signals usually represent 10 to 20 percent of overall bus trip times

(Gordon et al. 1996). Priority for transit vehicles can reduce delay caused by stopping for red lights. (See Chapter 5, “What Have We Learned About Advanced

Public Transportation Systems?” for more benefit information). Emergency vehicles

experience benefits from traffic signal preemption, with travel time reductions of

around 20 percent (Mitretek Systems 1999). 

Integration with freeway management

Integrating arterial, freeway, and incident management in San Antonio, Texas, 

led to travel time reductions of 20 percent during major incidents. The Integrated

Corridor Traffic Management (ICTM) project in Hennepin County, Minnesota,

experienced benefits from the interjurisdictional relationships formed. Under

ICTM, agencies were encouraged to look at the corridor as a whole rather than as

separate jurisdictions. For example, before the implementation of ICTM, traffic 

signals and ramp meters were operated by a variety of nonintegrated systems within

separate jurisdictions. ICTM used SCATS to integrate the metered ramps and 

arterial traffic signals (Booz-Allen & Hamilton 1999). 

The Coordinated Highways Action Response Team (CHART) program in Maryland

is another example of integration between freeway and arterial management.

Surveillance on freeway exit ramps and along the arterial are used to adjust and

refine traffic signal timing, especially critical when incidents occur on the freeway

and traffic is diverted to the arterial roadways. Adjustments can be made to the 

traffic signals to accommodate the additional traffic diverted from the freeway (MD

DOT undated). 

What are some of the challenges of integration?

According to participants of the ITE roundtable discussion, lack of multijurisdictional

organization and support continues to be the major impediment to integration.

Jurisdictions often may not have the same goals. Furthermore, they may not see the

need or opportunity for integrated management. There are also technical issues 

concerning the compatibility of different systems and technologies. 

What does the future hold?

Decision-makers need to become better educated about the benefits of integrated

systems and interjurisdictional coordination. This goal may be accomplished by 

further studying the benefits of integration. ITE roundtable participants called on

vendors to help integrate different technologies by opening their architectures and

allowing agencies to work together without having to purchase new systems.

CONCLUSION

Each of the technologies discussed in this paper shows the potential for benefits;

however, only a few have reached widespread deployment. Reasons for the limited

deployments vary, but include cost, institutional barriers, uncertainty of benefits, and

technological incompatibilities. 
.

CHAPTER 3: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ITS? ARTERIAL MANAGEMENT 63

REFERENCES

Abdel-Rahim, A. and W. Taylor, Analysis of Corridor Delay Under SCATS Control

(East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University, April 1998).

Booz-Allen & Hamilton, Integrated Corridor Traffic Management Final Evaluation

Report (St. Paul, MN: Minnesota DOT, December 1999), EDL No. 12863

Davis, D. I., “Travel Time Monitoring on Arterial Streets,” ITS Cooperative

Deployment Network (ICDN) Web Page http://www.nawgits.com/icdn/fb/index.htm

(Austin, TX: Institute of Transportation Engineers, April 6, 2000).

Federal Highway Administration Web Page http://www.fhwa.dot.gov.

Gordon, et al., Traffic Control Systems Handbook, FHWA-SA-95-032 (Washington,

DC: Federal Highway Administration, February 1996), pp. 3-68.

Insurance Institute for Highway Safety Web Page http://www.highwaysafety.org.

Jensen, M. et al., Metropolitan Model Deployment Initiative Seattle Evaluation Report

(Washington, DC: U.S. DOT, May 2000), EDL No. 13071

Maryland Department of Transportation, CHARTing your Course (Hanover, MD:

Maryland State Highway Administration, undated).

Metropolitan ITS Deployment Tracking Database Web Page, Oak Ridge National

Laboratory http://itsdeployment.ed.ornl.gov (Washington, DC: U.S. DOT, 1999).

Meyer, Toolbox for Alleviating Traffic Congestion and Enhancing Mobility (Washington,

DC: Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1997), pp. 11, 74.

Mitretek Systems, Intelligent Transportation Systems Benefits: 1999 Update, FHWAOP-99-012 (Washington, DC: Federal Highway Administration, May 1999), EDL

No. 8323.

Public Technology, Inc., Is Photo Enforcement for You? A White Paper for Public

Officials (Washington, DC: Public Technology, Inc., 1999).

Reissnecker, A., “Equipment Requirements for Adaptive Traffic Control,”

Proceedings of the TRB Workshop on Adaptive Traffic Signal Control Systems

(Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board, January 9, 2000).

Remer, M., Minnesota DOT, AUSCI Project Contact, Telephone interview, March

2000.

TransCore internal report, SCATS Summary and Benefits (unknown location:

TransCore, 2000).

Turner, S. et al., Automated Enforcement in Transportation (Washington, DC: Institute

of Transportation Engineers, December 1999), p. 5.
George

Washington

Pkwy

Clara Barton

 Pkwy

New York

New Hampshire Ave

Georgia Ave

Connecticut Ave

Massachusetts Ave

355 95

185

650

chapter 4

WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED

ABOUT ADVANCED TRAVELER

INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION?
CHAPTER 4: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ADVANCED TRAVELER INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION?

67

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This paper synthesizes customer satisfaction findings from advanced traveler 

information systems (ATIS) research and evaluations dating from 1996.1 Recent

project evaluations from the Metropolitan Model Deployment Initiative (MMDI) 

in Seattle, San Antonio, and Phoenix are featured more prominently because these

deployments provided a natural use setting and thus a more reliable context for

assessing customer satisfaction. 

For purposes of this paper, ATIS is defined in two ways: (1) real-time network 

information, whether traffic or transit; and (2) traveler information, such as route

guidance or destination information, provided on advanced technologies, such as

mobile phones enabled by wireless application protocol (WAP), personal digital

assistants (PDAs), the Internet, and in-vehicle computers. This paper’s focus is 

on public sector ATIS services, although one section does address ATIS business

models, with selected private services included in that discussion. Content is constrained by the availability of ATIS customer satisfaction evaluations, placing certain

ATIS applications beyond the scope of this paper, along with the ability to provide a

general overview of the state of the art or practice of ATIS products and services.

Evaluation findings suggest that customer demand for ATIS traffic services is based

on four factors: (1) the regional traffic context, (2) the quality of the ATIS services,

(3) the individual trip characteristics, and (4) the characteristics of the traveler.

The regional traffic context includes attributes of the region, such as highway-roadway network and capacity, levels of traffic congestion, and future highway-roadway

expansion plans. Information quality determines whether, how frequently, and with

what level of confidence travelers consult traveler information. The trip purpose, the

time and length of the trip, and the particular route or route choices available to the

individual traveler all significantly affect whether individuals consult traffic information. The fourth factor includes user values and attitude characteristics, which are

important determinants of use patterns, behavioral responses, and valuation of ATIS. 

Conditions predicting high demand for ATIS transit services are not as well studied, but

appear to be related to the complexity and variability of the transit network, the age of

the transit rider population, and the level of technological sophistication of riders.

Drivers report that they consult ATIS to assess traffic congestion on their routes,

decide among alternate routes, estimate trip duration, and time their trip departures.

They regularly change their trips or their trip expectations based on traffic congestion information. ATIS customers identify four primary benefits of the service: 

saved time, avoided congestion, reduced stress, and avoided unsafe conditions. 

1 In 1996, a report was prepared by Dr. Christine Johnson for Charles River Associates and John A.

Volpe Transportation Systems Center summarizing all ATIS user acceptance evaluation and research

performed to that point. User Acceptance of ATIS Products and Services: A briefing book on the current 

status of JPO research (March 1996) summarized findings from the U.S. DOT-sponsored field operational

tests and traveler decision and behavior research performed in the 1960s. Findings from this study

formed the research and evaluation framework pursued through the ITS User Acceptance Research 

program and the Metropolitan Model Deployment Initiative customer satisfaction evaluation. This

paper builds on findings of the earlier study.
68 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

All travelers agree that ATIS services must provide accurate, timely, reliable 

information, and be safe and convenient to use. Drivers with experience using 

ATIS provide a more detailed and informed set of customer requirements. They

seek the following:

■ Camera views that portray road conditions.

■ Detailed information on incidents.

■ Direct measures of speed for each highway segment.

■ Travel time between user-selected origins and destinations.

■ Coverage of all major freeways and arterials.

■ En route access to good traffic information. 

ATIS transit customers want services that provide real-time information both 

pre-trip and en route, a good quality user interface, and convenient access to

detailed system information. Customers cite the following benefits of transit ATIS:

reduced stress, improved satisfaction with the decision to take transit, and greater

control over time and travel decisions. 

Kiosks and WinCE mobile computers, deployed and evaluated as part of the MMDI,

did not prove to be popular ATIS venues for traffic or transit information. For

kiosks, the problems included poor placement in relation to the trip decision, 

unreliable performance, and a challenging user interface. Traffic and transit information on mobile hand-held computers received little notice from travelers. This

circumstance may have been related to low market penetration of the WindowsCE

devices and insufficient promotion of the new traveler information services.

Drivers who watched traffic reports on cable television community access channels

in Seattle and Tempe, Arizona, found the television broadcasts to be more useful

than traffic reports on the radio. However, overall response to the surveys was weak,

suggesting low viewership. A partial explanation may be the lack of program advertising, as most respondents reported learning about the broadcast when “channel

surfing.”

In-vehicle navigation systems have yet to reach their predicted level of market 

penetration. Currently, they are available in rental cars and as an option in luxury

cars; however, the number of auto manufacturers with the navigation system option

is expected to double in model year 2001. Developers insist that the product will

not achieve full market potential until real-time traffic is integrated into the routing

algorithm. 

The business model for delivery of and payment for ATIS traffic services is still in

flux. ATIS companies face multiple challenges. Traffic data must be collected by

individual agreement with each state and every transportation authority across the

country. The data are variable in scope and quality, and there is no established 

consumer market. In-vehicle personal computers (PCs) and navigation devices, an

important venue for sale of traffic information services, have been slow to market.

The geocode used by one major traffic information supplier to identify the location

of traffic is inconsistent with the geocode embedded in another major manufacturer’s
CHAPTER 4: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ADVANCED TRAVELER INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION?

69

map database and navigation software. Venture capitalists are hesitant to invest in

companies whose product depends on government resources or cooperation. Not

surprisingly, none of the private sector ATIS businesses dealing in traffic information

services in the United States have made a profit on that service. 

If current operational tests prove that mobile phones can be used as traffic probes, 

businesses may be able to contract with one primary source for standardized traffic

data, and mobile phone traffic data will reduce or remove ATIS businesses’ dependence

on public sector data sources, improving their ability to attract private investment.

Current market trends suggest that an increasing proportion of all employed

Americans will carry some form of mobile telecommunications device. This 

circumstance creates a good business opportunity for information service providers.

Assuming that ATIS companies can address the issues currently confronting them,

ATIS services will be included in mobile information subscription packages. Recent

Federal Communications Commission (FCC) enactment of a national three-digit

traveler information number (511) should further accelerate customer use of ATIS.

Automotive companies are developing integrated in-vehicle information systems,

which will connect all aspects of the auto’s maintenance and operating systems with

Internet access, entertainment and productivity programs, and mobile two-way voice

and data exchange. Consumer interest in the in-vehicle system is expected to be

high. Taken as a whole, these trends suggest that more consumers will be exposed to

telematic services and have the opportunity to use an ATIS service. Customer satisfaction with ATIS and long-term use will depend on the quality of the information.

This summary identifies many ATIS deployment issues that merit further investigation. The hypothesis developed to explain consumer response to ATIS is drawn

from a very small and idiosyncratic sample of regions. An issue made prominent by

its absence is customer satisfaction with ATIS transit information, and its ability to

influence mode choice. Such data are critical to transit authorities’ ATIS investment

decisions. Finally, several promising ATIS applications suffer from lack of publicity.

Now that ATIS benefits are sufficiently well documented, it may be useful to “field

test” an advertising campaign for its ability to attract new ATIS consumers.

The following table summarizes deployment levels and relative levels of success for

selected ATIS services. The data are drawn from the Metropolitan Intelligent

Transportation Systems (ITS) Deployment Tracking Database.2 Comments also

draw from work prepared for the February 2000 workshop addressing the ATIS data

gap.3 The Intelligent Transportation Society of America (ITS America) and the

U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) jointly sponsored the workshop,

held in Scottsdale, Arizona. For purposes of this paper, “success” when applied to an

ATIS service means that the service is well subscribed by the consumers it was

designed to serve.

2 The three different deployment levels are defined as follows: Deployed in fewer than 10 percent of

the largest 78 metropolitan areas = Limited Deployment; Deployed in between 10 percent and 30 percent of the largest 78 metropolitan areas = Moderate Deployment; Deployed in more than 30 percent

of the largest 78 metropolitan areas = Widespread Deployment

3 Specifically, Features of Traffic and Transit Internet Sites, Jonah Soolman and Sari Radin, and Advanced

Traveler Information Service: Private Sector Perceptions and Public Sector Activities, Sari Radin, Basav Sen,

and Jane Lappin, John A. Volpe Transportation Systems Center, Cambridge, MA.
70 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

Table 4-1. ATIS Summary Table

ATIS Service Deployment Level Limiting Factors Comments

Real-time traffic information

on the internet

Widespread Deployment While deployment is widespread, customer satisfaction

with the services seems related to local traffic conditions

and website information

quality

Mixed—the characteristics 

of the websites vary,

depending on the availability

and quality of the user 

interface and underlying 

traffic data.

Real-time transit status 

information on the Internet

Limited Deployment Transit authorities have 

limited funds for ATIS investments and little data that

establish a relationship

between ridership and ATIS

Holds promise—where the

service is available, reports

suggest that there is high 

customer satisfaction with 

the service

Static transit system 

information on the Internet

Widespread Deployment Successful

Real-time traffic information

on cable television

Limited Deployment Limited by information 

quality and production costs,

although one service provider

has developed a way to 

automate production

Successful—as evaluated in 

a highly congested metropolitan area where consumers

value the easy, low-tech 

access to traffic information

Real-time transit status 

information at terminals and

major bus stops

Limited Deployment Cost Successful—where 

evaluated in greater Seattle

In-vehicle navigation 

systems (no traffic 

information)

Limited Deployment* Purchase cost Holds Promise—as prices

fall, more drivers will 

purchase the systems

In-vehicle dynamic route 

guidance (navigation with 

real-time traffic information)

No commercial deployment;

the San Antonio MMDI

installed prototype systems 

in public agency vehicles*

Irregular coverage and data

quality, combined with conflicting industry geocode

standards, have kept this

product from the market

Holds Promise—

manufacturers are poised 

to provide this service once

issues are resolved

Fee-based traffic and transit 

information services on 

palm-type computers

Unknown Deployment Service providers make this

service available through

their websites, actual subscription levels are unknown

Jury is still out—requires

larger numbers of subscribers becoming 

acclimated to mobile 

information services

Dynamic message signs Widespread Deployment Positive driver response is a

function of sign placement,

content, and accuracy

Successful—drivers really

appreciate accurate en-route

information

* Quantitative deployment tracking data not available. Deployment level determined by expert judgment.
CHAPTER 4: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ADVANCED TRAVELER INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION?

71

INTRODUCTION

In 1996, an ATIS user acceptance research and evaluation retrospective was 

prepared that summarized findings from the traveler behavior literature of the 1960s

and from the U.S. DOT-sponsored ITS field operational tests. This paper picks up

from there, synthesizing findings from ATIS user-response research and customer 

satisfaction evaluations dating from 1996, including several field operational tests.

Recent project evaluations are featured more prominently because they offered ATIS

services to the general public for regular use, thus providing a more natural and more

reliable context for assessing customer satisfaction. 

This paper draws primarily from the following sources:

■ MMDI customer satisfaction evaluations of the Puget Sound traffic conditions

website.

■ TrafficTV in Seattle.

■ Metro Online transit website in Seattle.

■ TransitWatch® real-time bus departure times at two transit centers in Seattle.

■ TrafficCheck traffic television in Tempe, Arizona.

■ Focus groups with drivers along highway segments equipped with dynamic 

message signs in San Antonio.

■ Observations of customer use of the Trailmaster travel conditions website in

Phoenix.

■ Transguide travel conditions website in San Antonio. 

Only two ATIS transit services were deployed within the MMDI evaluation time

frame. Similarly, there were fewer ATIS transit field operational tests than traffic

tests. As a result, this paper addresses more ATIS traffic services than transit or 

multimodal services.

Note: In most instances where the term “ATIS” is used, it refers to a traffic or 

transit information service providing consumers with access to real-time network

conditions.

EXTERNAL CONTEXT INFLUENCES ATIS CUSTOMER

RESPONSE

Findings from the MMDI evaluation and other research suggest that customer

demand for ATIS traffic services stems from four factors: 

■ Regional traffic context.

■ Quality of the ATIS services.

■ Individual trip characteristics.

■ Characteristics of the traveler. 

Regional traffic context includes attributes of the region, such as highway-roadway

network and capacity, levels of traffic congestion, and future highway-roadway

expansion plans. Prime ATIS markets appear to be highly congested regions with
72 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

limited build-out options, constrained alternate route possibilities,4 and frequent

unpredictable traffic events (e.g., weather, crashes, overturned truck). 

Quality of ATIS services is at least as important as the level of network congestion.

Information quality determines whether, how frequently, and with what level of confidence the traveler consults traveler information. Quality also determines whether

the information will meet customer needs with respect to personal benefit and value.

Trip purpose, time of trip in relation to peak congestion periods, trip length, and 

particular route or route choices available to the traveler all have a significant effect

on whether he or she consults traffic information. To a limited extent, the availability

and convenience of alternative mode choices for a given trip affects ATIS use.

Departure time flexibility, or lack thereof, is another determinant in the choice to

consult traffic information.

The fourth factor considers the values and attitudinal characteristics of the user, or

potential user, of ATIS products and services. These characteristics are important

determinants of user awareness, use patterns, behavioral responses, and valuation 

of ATIS. For example, user attitudes toward timeliness affect response as do user

preferences, such as a desire to be in touch at all times, or to ask a person for 

assistance rather than use a computer.

Fewer opportunities have existed to assess transit customer response to ATIS 

services. Conditions that suggest high demand for ATIS transit services appear to be

related to the complexity and variability of the transit network, the age of the transit

rider population, and the level of technological sophistication of the riders. Younger

riders expect transit information to be as easily accessed as that provided by any 

market-based service. Their expectations are probably conditioned by the current

service economy and by information available on the Internet. Technologically

sophisticated riders are aware of many of the tools available for tracking cars and

buses, and can easily imagine the personal benefits of real-time transit status 

information, in addition to the other services that advanced media can provide.

ATIS CUSTOMERS 5

Almost all ATIS customers are employed commuters, with the greatest use of ATIS

occurring during peak commuting hours. More ATIS traffic customers are male, but

among ATIS transit customers, use rate by gender is about even. Based on the

MMDI survey trends, primary demographic factors are the ATIS customers’ mode of

4 The hypothesis that a constrained set of alternative routes is a positive factor for ATIS acceptance is

based on a comparison of the three evaluated MMDI sites: San Antonio, Phoenix, and Seattle. Drivers

seem most concerned about knowing traffic conditions in networks where they have limited alternative

route options and thus must plan ahead for route diversion. Where the network offers many possible

alternate routes, drivers seem more sanguine about diverting after they have encountered the congestion, without need of advance information for trip planning.

5 For more details on the segmentation of the ATIS consumer market, see “Who are the likely users of

ATIS? Evidence from the Seattle region”, S.R. Mehndiratta, M.A. Kemp, J.E. Lappin, and E.

Nierenberg, paper number 001103, presented at the 79th meeting of the Transportation Research

Board, Washington, DC, January 2000. Also see “A Profile of the Emerging ATIS Consumer: Evidence

from the Metropolitan Model Deployment Initiative Sites” by S.R. Mehndiratta, et. al. (Winter 2000),

ITS Quarterly.
CHAPTER 4: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ADVANCED TRAVELER INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION?

73

transport, commute trip characteristics, level of education, age, and comfort with

advanced technology. 

ATIS market segmentation based on attitudes and values related to the need for

control, the value of time, personal travel preferences, and use of advanced 

technologies successfully identifies much of the current ATIS customer market, 

differentiating ATIS customers from others with similar demographic characteristics.

To help characterize and identify these segments, they were labeled as controlseekers, webheads, or pre-trip information seekers.

Control-seekers dominate the ATIS customer market. In addition to high technology

and gadget use, this segment is also defined by high use levels of portable devices like

laptops and cellular phones. These customers consult ATIS to save time, to use

their time efficiently, to stay on schedule, and to stay informed. Control-seekers use

information more intensively than the general population.

Webheads comprise the second largest group of ATIS customers. This group is the

most technologically savvy in the sample. Its members are marked by high computer

and Internet use, both at home and at work. However, their interest appears linked

to the Internet medium and may not migrate to mobile platforms as Web-based

information becomes mobile.

Individuals in the low-tech, pre-trip information seekers market segment have a 

low acceptance and comfort level with the Internet and Web-based information.

Consistent with this characterization, individuals belonging to this segment comprised

much larger shares of the Transit Watch, TrafficTV, and TrafficCheck user 

populations—all three information services delivered on television or by means of 

a television-style monitor. This group is older, includes slightly more males than the

sample, and is generally somewhat less comfortable with technology. For example,

members of this segment prefer to ask a person for information rather than rely on 

a computer. Nevertheless, this customer segment represents a large portion of the

current ATIS customer pool and can be expected to continue to demand high quality

information services on low-tech media in the future.

WHY DRIVERS CONSULT ATIS AND HOW THEY USE IT

Drivers consult ATIS to reduce trip uncertainty. They want to lessen the impact 

of traffic congestion delay and aggravation, and increase their control over time.

Washington Department of Transportation (DOT) traffic website customers consulted

the site for five reasons, representative of those offered by most ATIS users. They

are listed here in order of importance:6

■ To assess traffic congestion on their routes.

■ To judge the effects of incidents on their trips.

■ To decide among alternate routes.

■ To estimate their trip duration.

6 From May 11 through June 8, 1999, a banner on the Wisconsin DOT traffic website invited users to

respond to an on-line survey to help improve the website. A total of 608 users completed the questionnaire.
74 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

■ To time their trip departures.

Drivers using ATIS report that they regularly change their trip or their trip 

expectations based on traffic congestion information. For instance, they:

■ Change time of departure. 

■ Change part or all of their route of travel, potentially lengthening trip mileage or

duration.

■ Adjust their expectations, listen to an audiotaped book, bring an extra compact

disc, make phone calls, reschedule appointments, and/or make alternative

arrangements.

They reported four primary personal benefits from their use of the Wisconsin DOT

traffic website (in order of importance): 

■ Saved time.

■ Avoided congestion.

■ Reduced stress.

■ Avoided unsafe conditions. 

These use patterns, behavioral responses, and benefits are similar among all drivers

surveyed as part of the MMDI ATIS evaluations. In the following section, critical

features identified by ATIS customers refer back to decisions the information 

supports and the benefits it provides.

CRITICAL FEATURES OF AN ATIS TRAFFIC SERVICE

The National ITS Program fielded qualitative market research in 1996 on various

traffic information concepts with drivers in congested regions (Charles River

Associates 1997).7 While the opinions of these drivers were based on their 

experience with radio broadcast traffic information, their traffic information 

concerns have proven to be true of all drivers surveyed since. Survey respondents

were (and are) concerned with: 

■ Accuracy.

■ Timeliness.

■ Reliability.

■ Cost (capital and operating).

■ Degree of decision guidance and personalization.

■ Convenience (ease of access and speed).

■ Safety (of operation).

Surveys of drivers with long-term personal experience using ATIS through the Web,

by telephone, on a prototype in-vehicle device, or on cable television provide a

more detailed and informed set of customer requirements. These requirements,

which help to define ATIS service quality, are discussed below.

7 Twelve focus groups (two in each location) were fielded in New York City, Washington, D.C., Boston,

Philadelphia, Los Angeles, and Orange County, California.
CHAPTER 4: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ADVANCED TRAVELER INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION?

75

Camera Views 

All respondents value the video camera views displayed on websites and cable 

television.8 Video camera views provide drivers with the opportunity to exercise

their own judgment of the road’s conditions. For every service that provided video 

camera views, survey respondents asked for a time stamp, a clear description of the

camera’s location, and its direction. Some website respondents observed that camera

images were slow to load on their computers, and others commented that on some

sites the cameras were frequently out of order. These service problems lessened 

consumers’ interest in using traffic websites. Respondents also asked for clearer

images, especially during inclement weather.

Information on incidents

Drivers want detailed and up-to-date information on incidents. They use this 

information in combination with their own experience of the road network to 

estimate the intensity and duration of incident-related traffic congestion. They want

to know exactly where the incident occurred, at what time, and the type of incident.

They also want to know the impact of the incident on traffic speeds, both on the

road where the incident occurred and on adjacent area roads. For services that provide

color-coded congestion maps, such as the Wisconsin DOT, some drivers wanted to

see icons indicating that an incident had occurred, and to be able to click on that

icon for further details. Others found icons distracting, but wanted to be able to

move their cursor over the map, observe whether there were incidents underlying

congestion, and then click for details.

Direct measures of speed for each highway segment, and travel time

between user-selected origins and destinations

When selecting among alternate routes, most drivers want to know which route will

get them to their destination most quickly. This preference suggests that the service

provide either time of travel between two points or direct measures of speed for each

highway segment. While many respondents wanted both, more frequent users of 

the Wisconsin DOT website rated direct measures of speed as more important.

Graphically represented traffic speed and volume were also very important service

features to TrafficTV viewers.

Dynamic route guidance

Are drivers more interested in receiving dynamic route guidance, or do they prefer

advisories of traffic delays that allow them to exercise judgment in selecting an 

alternate route? There are several answers to this question (Schofer, Koppelman,

and Charlton 1997). First, in general, women are somewhat more likely to accept

dynamic route guidance, while men prefer delay advisories. It appears that most

drivers believe they can select better alternate routes for their local areas than any

service could provide. Others prefer to set a delay threshold and receive dynamic

route guidance for any traffic event that exceeds their threshold, particularly true for

8 One service provider remarked that when her company added camera views to their website, usage of

the site doubled. 
76 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

drivers in unfamiliar areas. Finally, drivers become more accepting of dynamic route

guidance if, through use, they find that it gives good advice.

Coverage 

Survey respondents want ATIS coverage of all major freeways and arterials in their

region, along with information on high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes and express

lanes in the region. However, this preference may be a function of the regional

road network where the surveys were fielded and the types of services evaluated.

Specifically, in greater Seattle, most of the traffic congestion is on the freeways and

major arterials. Further, the services cover primarily freeways, so potential customers

are drivers who would find that information useful, not drivers who commute 

primarily on local streets. In contrast, drivers in suburban Chicago wanted more

information on local streets. The sensible conclusion from these data is to provide

traffic information according to local driving patterns, and to prioritize coverage by

market demand, providing it first on roads with the most congestion.

Timing of information updates 

While the surveys did not explore the exact timing required for traffic condition

updates, drivers in Seattle felt that traffic conditions in their region were sufficiently

dynamic to justify frequent updates, particularly along heavily congested roads, 

during peak traffic hours, and along critical segments such as the bridges. In

Phoenix, website users complained that camera images, in particular, were not

updated frequently enough. Generally, all ATIS customers want to know when 

the service was last updated, and will use the interval to estimate current traffic 

conditions. 

Mobile ATIS

Drivers want reliable, accurate, relevant traffic information while driving. For many

trips, pre-trip traffic information is outdated by the time the driver reaches a potential

route diversion decision. This situation is where the greatest demand for ATIS 

currently exists, more so than pre-trip. Drivers recognize the safety challenge of

delivering information to them, and most respondents expressed safety concerns

about mobile phone use when driving. Nevertheless, drivers want to be able to press

an ATIS button when approaching congestion or a route choice and quickly know

which route would be least congested. 

Local weather conditions

Weather affects traffic conditions. In Seattle and San Francisco, where microclimates

create different weather conditions in neighboring cities, drivers want to know what

to expect. In Boston and Minneapolis, severe weather conditions have a profound

impact on traffic. Heavy rains affect driving conditions in San Antonio, and dust

storms stop traffic in Phoenix. Nearly all drivers surveyed want appropriate, relevant

weather conditions included with their traffic information. Bad weather is another

form of incident, and drivers want to know when the weather affects road conditions,

but do not value the information if there is nothing significant to report.
CHAPTER 4: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ADVANCED TRAVELER INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION?

77

User interface and operating characteristics

User comments on interface and operating characteristics are a function of the 

platform used to convey the information. Website users are particularly aware of 

the multidimensional information opportunities presented by the Web, and are 

especially sensitive to the problem of computer and Internet speed. Currently, 

most Web users access the Internet at work and thus have fairly fast connections 

to websites. But lack of quick access to the Internet is one reason more commuters 

do not check the traffic website in the morning. Slow downloading of images also

frustrates Web users, whose expectations for computing speed may outstrip the 

capabilities of the website’s servers, especially if the site’s capacity is overburdened at

rush hour or during inclement weather. Dedicated users will stay with a Web service

that is occasionally slow, but marginal users may not. 

Both Web users and television (TV) viewers require clear and uncluttered visual

presentation of information. Traffic congestion maps that use green, amber, and red

to suggest traffic speeds are ranked higher for ease and speed of comprehension.

Graphics must be large enough to see easily on television screens of different sizes

and resolutions. Most television viewers want the screen image to be supplemented

by an audio voiceover description of traffic conditions and suggestions for alternate

routes when freeways are congested.

Because phone service users are frequently phoning from the road, they require fast

and easy access to information. New voice recognition software that would let

callers tell the service which road segment or region to describe would be a great

improvement over push-button information trees, particularly for drivers.

Advertising, which appears on some telephone ATIS services just before the traffic

information is provided, interferes with the speed of information delivery and 

irritates customers.

ADDITIONAL SUGGESTIONS FROM ADVANCED

ATIS TRAFFIC SERVICE USERS

The quality and popularity of the Washington State DOT traffic website in Seattle

created an opportunity to survey a small number of especially advanced ATIS users

who made much more intensive use of the site than average customers. These users 

provided expert suggestions for website improvements likely to be predictive of the

improvements that average customers will seek in the near future. Further, these

suggestions may represent the type of improvements that help customers differentiate

between a service they can access free of charge and services that offer added value

sufficient to merit a fee.

Ramps

Seattle meters its freeway ramps, and during peak hours some ramps have far greater

backups than others do. Advanced users would like to choose among possible 

on-ramps for the shortest possible queue.
78 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

Trends 

Advanced users have discovered that one can predict trends based on a time-series

sample of current traffic conditions. They accomplish this result by repeated 

checking of conditions over a period of 15 or 30 minutes. They suggest that it

would be useful for the service to state whether conditions are currently getting

worse, or whether they are improving.

Predictive information

Predictive information refers to both near-term traffic predictions based on current

conditions, and forecast conditions, based on what can be expected on average for

certain times of the day, days of week, or weather conditions.

Because traffic conditions are dynamic, a route that looked clear at time of departure

may be severely congested 10 or 20 minutes into the trip. Advanced users recommend that ATIS use current information in combination with historic data to 

provide customers with near-term predictive information on their route conditions.

Drivers can then make en route choices using “current” information instead of 

information that was current at the time they started out.

Archived traffic information can forecast traffic conditions, enabling customers 

to plan ahead. For example, upon approaching the Labor Day weekend,

MetroCommute of Greater New York advised its customers to plan on departing 

the city at 5 p.m. Friday for the best travel times to vacation areas. And, in a 

retrospective analysis, a 5 p.m. departure from the city provided drivers with the 

best trip time of the day.

Windows of opportunity

Advanced users have observed the existence of periods of relatively uncongested

travel that appear in the midst of traffic congestion, even during peak hours. They

would like to see these windows of opportunity identified by the ATIS service.

Flash major events on the map

Major events are like incidents in their impact on traffic congestion. Advanced

ATIS users would like to be reminded of an impending event through a visual cue

on the traffic map, with details provided by cursor or double click. Users in Seattle

suggested, for example, a flashing King Dome icon on evenings when there is an

event at that venue.

Parking information

Many cities have insufficient downtown parking to accommodate peak demand.

Advanced users would like to know which lots have availability and which are full,

to avoid driving around in congestion, searching for a space. Some respondents 

suggested they would switch modes when parking lots were full. This service would

be more valuable to customers if it were coupled with an advanced parking 

reservation and payment system.
CHAPTER 4: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ADVANCED TRAVELER INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION?

79

CRITICAL FEATURES OF AN ATIS TRANSIT SERVICE

Transit customers seek to lower the trip time uncertainty they commonly experience

with transit. They want information that increases their control over time and 

travel decisions.

Evaluation findings indicate that ATIS transit customers want services that provide

real-time information both pre-trip and en route, good quality user interface, and

convenient access to detailed system information. Customers cite the following 

benefits of transit ATIS:

■ Reduced stress.

■ Improved satisfaction with the decision to take transit.

■ Greater control over time and travel decisions.

Because one of the two major transit ATIS evaluations—MMDI—was Web-based,

many of the user suggestions below refer to website enhancements.

Real-time transit information on Web, by phone, at bus stops, and on

monitors at malls and office parks near major transit centers 

Transit riders would like more and better information on location and arrival/departure time of their bus, and on any connecting bus their trip may require. They

would like convenient access to the information through a variety of media and at

bus stops. Some respondents suggested an abbreviated key sequence for mobile

phone users that would connect directly to an automated bus status line, similar to

mobile phone services offered for traffic information. Other respondents felt that it

would be useful to have real-time bus information provided on monitors in nearby

shopping malls and office buildings.

More sophisticated and detailed Web interfaces

Transit riders who are Internet users would like to see transit websites that fully

exploit the potential of the Web to use multiple information dimensions. Survey

respondents complained about two-dimensional sites whose pages function like pages

in a book and do not take full advantage of the medium’s capabilities.

Point-to-point itineraries (Web)

Riders would like to be able to enter origin and destination, whether by point-andclick on a map, or through addresses or landmarks, and receive a detailed, printable

transit trip itinerary, including travel time, relevant fares, and schedules.

Point-to-point itineraries for multi-modal trips (Web)

Similar to the request above for transit trips, riders would also like to receive trip

itineraries that incorporate other modes of travel. 

Recommended trip times and routes for fastest travel (Web)

Some transit riders expressed a desire to be able to enter their origin and destination

and be told which times of day and which bus routes would get them to their 

destination in the least amount of time.
80 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

Detailed maps of routes, with stops, and transfer locations (Web)

In Seattle, focus group participants described the difficulty of being able to interpret

from a route map or schedule where the bus stopped, and, in particular, where to go

for the transfer bus. They would like access to more detailed street maps showing

exactly where each bus stops.

Secure on-line bus pass purchases (Web) 

Customers would like a secure way to purchase transit passes on-line, rather than

travel to a transit center to purchase passes in person. 

WHICH ATIS SERVICES AND VENUES HAVE NOT

WORKED AND WHY

Unsuccessful ATIS traffic applications9

Traffic kiosks

Kiosks and WinCE mobile computers, as deployed and evaluated for the MMDI, did

not prove to be popular ATIS venues for traffic information. For kiosks, the problems included poor placement in relation to the trip decision, unreliable performance, and a challenging user interface. Customer interest in traffic information on

kiosks seems to improve where the kiosk offers additional services and information.

Two other consumer information venues were abandoned in 1995 following earlier

market deployments: faxed traffic reports and single-purpose in-vehicle traffic 

information devices. The lack of consumer response to faxed traffic reports can 

likely be attributed to a variety of factors, including new product inertia, low-quality

information, and insufficient marketing. Single-purpose in-vehicle traffic information

devices, regardless of platform, suffered from poor-quality information relative to

cost, premature marketing, and consumer resistance to single-purpose electronic

devices.

The jury is still out: Current ATIS traffic applications 

Cable television (as deployed and evaluated)

Traffic information was broadcast on cable community access channels as part of the

MMDI in Seattle and Phoenix. Response to the surveys was not strong, which may

be a function of low viewership. Most respondents reported learning about the

broadcast when channel surfing. Commercial television ratings do not include such

stations, so there is no way to know actual viewing levels. Traffic information on

television will likely develop into a more valuable venue for travelers, especially for

the morning commute trip, as marketing improves viewer awareness of the broadcast

and user interface quality is improved.

Survey respondents who were viewers found the service more useful than traffic

information on the radio. For those people who are traffic information consumers,

as with many respondents in Seattle, TV fills a “low-engagement” niche: very little

9 These applications were unsuccessful as evaluated in the context of the MMDI; they may be successful

in other settings or in the future.
CHAPTER 4: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ADVANCED TRAVELER INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION?

81

effort is required to turn on the television and absorb the message. In contrast, 

the Internet is frequently a “high-engagement” medium because of the time and 

attention required to boot a computer, connect to the Internet, open the website,

and find the needed information. The value of the service is linked to the quality 

of information, including coverage and presentation. More viewers watch in the

morning than in afternoon, and there appear to be more viewers in the more 

congested region of Seattle as opposed to Tempe, Arizona, which has far lower 

congestion levels.

Traffic information on WinCE mobile computers

Traffic information on mobile hand-held computers was available as part of the

MMDI in Seattle and Phoenix, but received little notice from travelers, probably

because of low market penetration of the WindowsCE devices and insufficient 

marketing and promotion of the new traffic information services. This venue for

traffic information should be reconsidered with better market conditions and should

become a more popular venue as wireless communications improve.

In-vehicle navigation devices (as observed)

In-vehicle navigation systems are available primarily in rental cars and as an option

in luxury cars, including those made by Range Rover, BMW, Porsche, and Jaguar.

The number of car manufacturers with the navigation system option is expected to

double from the 2000 to the 2001 model year. A low level of customer demand

beyond these markets stems from high price/value ratios for most drivers. Some

demand exists for units in the aftermarket, but manufacturers find current sales 

levels disappointing. Developers insist that the product will not achieve market

potential until real-time traffic is integrated into the routing algorithm. Ultimately,

navigation and route guidance will be part of broader functioning in-vehicle 

information systems.

The jury is still out: ATIS transit applications10

Kiosks

As with traffic information, kiosk-based transit services (as deployed and evaluated)

suffered from frustrating user interface, unreliable performance, and no marketing.

Examples may exist of transit information kiosks located in pedestrian areas, 

convenient to the transit system entrance, that provide riders with useful information;

however, few evaluations have been made of kiosks as ATIS venues. Therefore,

transit kiosks should not be abandoned as an information platform based on 

evaluation findings to-date. 

WinCE mobile hand-held computers

Mobile hand-held computers as platforms for transit information (as deployed and

evaluated) suffered from low market penetration of devices and insufficient marketing and promotion of services. Once mobile two-way computers and telephones

become more functional and more common, the platform should provide those riders

who own them a convenient method for accessing real-time transit information.

10 These transit applications were unsuccessful as evaluated during the MMDI evaluation period, 

1997-1998; they may be successful in another context or at another time.
82 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

ATIS BUSINESS MODELS: A WORK IN PROGRESS

Business models for delivery of and payment for ATIS services are still in flux.

Currently, ATIS is one component of the much larger information services business.

The telematics business considers ATIS traffic information (but generally not transit

information) as one of several mobility services included with navigation, concierge

services, personal safety, and security. Understanding has evolved over the past

decade of how ATIS would be sold, in response to several factors, including changes

in the underlying technology, our understanding of the customer, and, in the case of

the Internet, the basic business proposition. 

Currently, approximately a dozen private companies are seeking to “package” traffic

information and sell it at a profit to consumers. Some of the companies are closer 

to the raw traffic information data and make their business by creating a standardized

traffic information product to sell to information service packagers and retailers,

such as I3, OnStar,TM and ATX. A subset of traffic information companies supplements public sector traffic data with proprietary data obtained with cameras, private

probes, and aircraft. Approximately a half dozen companies are also working to 

sell ATIS directly to consumers, primarily through the Internet. The Web-based

companies have a two-part approach: (1) making general traffic information 

available free on their websites, usually combined with advertisements; and (2) 

providing customers interested in more tailored traffic information subscription 

services with personalized traffic alerts delivered at the times and on the media 

of their choosing. Also on the retail side of the business are manufacturers of invehicle information systems and navigation devices, as well as on-line navigation

services like MapQuest, Telcontar, and Rand McNally, which seek to offer their 

customers the added dimension of real-time traffic route guidance.

ATIS companies face multiple challenges:

■ The underlying “product”—real-time traffic information—cannot be manufactured

in a controlled environment; instead, it must be collected by individual agreement

with each state and transportation authority, or in some cases with private 

companies, across the country. 

■ The data are variable in scope and quality and are provided in nonstandardized

formats. This condition creates an obstacle for information wholesalers and

telematics service companies who require that their consumer services be uniform

in quality and available nationwide.

■ No established consumer market exists for real-time traffic information other than

radio broadcast reports. 

While the tools used to measure and record traffic data have remained relatively 

stable until now, the media used to communicate with consumers has changed 

dramatically over the past five years, perhaps improving market opportunities for

ATIS, but almost certainly diverting companies’ product development resources.

Telematics platforms, such as in-vehicle PCs and navigation devices—an important

venue for sale of traffic information services—have been slower than expected to
CHAPTER 4: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ADVANCED TRAVELER INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION?

83

market, and much slower to reach middle market prices needed for more popular

customer acceptance.

The geocode used by one major traffic information supplier to identify the location

of traffic is inconsistent with the geocode embedded in another major manufacturer’s

map database and navigation software. This problem is currently being addressed in

an ITS America telematics industry forum.

An uncertain profit horizon has constrained private investment in ATIS businesses.

Competition for venture capital is fierce, and the best ranked opportunities have

established consumer demand, a standardized product, and no dealings with government agencies. Because government is not motivated by the same market logic as

business, venture capitalists are hesitant to invest in companies whose product

depends in any measure on government resources or cooperation. 

Thus far, the bulk of funds invested in the development and dissemination of ATIS

have come from the public sector, and none of the private sector ATIS companies

dealing in traffic information services have made a profit on that service in the

United States. 

Proof through current operational tests that mobile phones can function as traffic

probes will significantly affect the ATIS business model. First, it creates the opportunity for a national, standardized source for traffic information. This circumstance

will provide businesses with the possibility of contracting with only one source for

traffic data, rather than the myriad sources tapped now. It may solve the problem of

variable service quality. If successful, it will reduce ATIS operating costs, although

some of the cost will shift to purchasing data. And, of particular importance to the

growth and development of this business niche, mobile phone traffic data will reduce

or remove ATIS businesses’ dependence on public sector data sources and improve

its ability to attract venture capital and other private investments.

WHAT THE FUTURE MAY HOLD

The Internet has had the effect of increasing consumers’ expectations of information

availability, quality, and responsiveness. This effect is readily seen among ATIS website customers, who are encouraged by sites that continually improve functionality

and features, and are likely to stop consulting websites that do not. Each month,

additional households invest in Internet connections. As a consequence, it is likely

that all types of services will establish websites to communicate with customers. To

attract and retain Internet customers, ATIS sites must improve in line with the

medium as a whole and with customers’ expectations.

Several new venues for ATIS traffic and transit services are emerging on the market:

mobile hand-held computers, Internet phones, and in-vehicle information systems.

All three will rely on the evolution of the WAP currently under development and

endorsed by the telematics industry. It will enable mobile, direct two-way wireless

access to the Internet, which will simplify the current wireless information delivery

path to customers and enable faster personalized Internet access. The market 

penetration of these devices is expected to be significant.
84 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

On July 21, 2000, the FCC assigned a national three-digit traveler information 

number, 511, to give callers quick access to traffic and transportation information.

Advocacy for a uniform, national three-digit access code came from both public and

private sectors, with the expectation that one uniform, national access number

would improve customer service and reduce operating and marketing costs. U.S.

DOT has made $5 million available to states for conversion to 511. ATIS service

providers anticipate that 511 will help to increase customer awareness and use of

ATIS services nationwide.

Integrated in-vehicle information systems are envisioned to connect all aspects of

the automobile’s maintenance and operating systems with Internet access, entertainment and productivity programs, and mobile two-way voice and data exchange. 

In addition to WAP, two recent industry protocols enable this service: the ITS Data

Bus (IDB) will provide plug-and-play standards for in-vehicle telematics applications, while the Automotive Multimedia Interface Consortium (AMIC) will provide

corresponding vehicle electronics interfacing applications with the automobile 

operating system. Consumer interest in the in-vehicle system is expected to be high.

The widespread practice of driving while using mobile telephones and other wireless

communications devices has created new highway safety hazards. Research findings

from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration suggest that “as use of 

in-vehicle wireless communications technology increases there will be an associated

increase in crashes if little changes” (U.S. DOT, Investigation of Safety Implications,

Nov. 1997). Further research is required to establish standards for safe use of invehicle communications devices, including mobile phones, PDAs, and 

in-vehicle computers. 

Conversely, mobile phone users have helped to improve incident management and

emergency response times by phoning police immediately following traffic accidents

and other highway incidents. Increased use of in-vehicle telematics devices that

automatically notify police in the event of an airbag deployment may further

improve incident management and emergency response times.

NEXT STEPS

A set of working hypotheses was developed from the MMDI customer satisfaction

evaluation findings that may explain why some regions have stronger ATIS 

customer response than others. The hypotheses describe external conditions for

high-demand ATIS markets, ATIS customer characteristics, valued ATIS service

features, and traveler behavior in the presence of traffic and transit information.

While it is possible that these findings can be generalized to other regions with 

similar conditions and services, no data support the assertion. Additional ATIS 

customer satisfaction and traveler behavior research in regions with different 

network conditions and ATIS services would enrich our understanding of how to

accelerate the deployment of ATIS consumer services.
CHAPTER 4: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ADVANCED TRAVELER INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION?

85

More data are available to describe customer response to ATIS traffic information

than customer response to ATIS transit information, partly because of the limited

number of ATIS transit services available for evaluation. Further, while the potential size of the traffic information market is quite large and national in scope, the

corresponding market for transit information is much smaller. Private sector firms

with interest in the ATIS consumer services market may neglect transit information

services for lack of market size and lack of consumer response data. In the absence

of reliable data describing the impact of ATIS on ridership levels, public transit

authorities—faced with competing needs and limited funds—neglect ATIS investments. More customer evaluation data may help to accelerate deployment of ATIS

for transit customers and enable a more thorough evaluation of the influence of

information on ridership levels, retention, and mode choice.

Finally, many ATIS program managers and several evaluation findings have observed

that ATIS services are not well-known among potential customers. Very few, if any,

ATIS deployments have been sufficiently well capitalized to afford an advertising

campaign. The subsequent lack of awareness among potential ATIS customers has

slowed ATIS deployment, as it is difficult for potential investors to distinguish

between lack of interest and lack of awareness among travelers. ATIS services

require advertising if they are to attract customers and achieve success, whether

measured as constituent service or as profits.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This paper synthesizes the work of many evaluators, some of whom are referenced 

by footnote and others who are not. Of particular importance is the individual and

collective work of the MMDI Customer Satisfaction Evaluation Team, including 

Dr. Chris Cluett, Battelle; Lisa D’Ambrosio, John A. Volpe National Transportation

Systems Center; Michael A. Kemp and Shomik R. Mehndiratta, Charles River

Associates; Linda J. LaScola, LaScola Qualitative Research; and Dr. Paul Jovanis,

Pennsylvania State University. The opinions expressed in this paper are those of the

author and do not represent those of U.S. DOT.

REFERENCES

Charles River Associates Inc., User Acceptance of ATIS Products and Services: 

A Report of Qualitative Research (Washington, DC: U.S. DOT, 1997). EDL No.

6023.

Schofer, J.L., F.S. Koppelman, and W.A. Charlton, “Perspectives on Driver

Preferences for Dynamic Route Guidance Systems,” Transportation Research Record

1588 (Washington, DC: TRB National Research Council, 1997), pp. 26-31.

U.S. DOT, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, An Investigation of the

Safety Implications of Wireless Communications in Vehicles, DOT HS 808-635

(Washington, DC: U.S. DOT, November 1997).
chapter 5

WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED

ABOUT ADVANCED PUBLIC

TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?
CHAPTER 5: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ADVANCED PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS? 89

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This paper discusses advanced public transportation systems (APTS) technologies,

assesses the extent of their deployment, and judges their degree of success. While it

covers APTS technologies in use by bus and demand-response service operations,

rail and ferryboat services are beyond its scope. 

The primary source of deployment-level information is a 1998 survey by the John A.

Volpe National Transportation Systems Center (Volpe Center) that encompassed

525 transit agencies operating fixed-route bus and/or demand-response services

(Casey 1999). This data source differs from that used in other chapters of this 

report (78 metropolitan areas as opposed to transit agencies) and, consequently,

deployment levels for a technology here could differ from those determined in other

chapters for the same technology. Using the selected deployment level standards

outlined in Chapter 1,1 APTS technologies have reached the deployment levels

shown in Table 5-1. 

Table 5-1. APTS Summary Table

Technology Deployment Level Limiting Factors Comments

Automatic vehicle location Moderate Deployment Cost, fleet size, service 

type, staff technological 

competence

Successful—use continues 

to grow, new systems 

principally use GPS technology but usually augmented by dead reckoning

Operations software Widespread Deployment N/A Successful

Fully-automated 

dispatching for demand 

response

Research & Development* Still in research and development stageJury is still out

Mobile data terminals Moderate Deployment* Most frequently deployed

with automatic vehicle 

location systems

Successful—reduces radio

frequency requirements

Silent alarm/covert 

microphone

Moderate Deployment* Most frequently deployed

with automatic vehicle 

location systems

Successful—improves 

security of transit operations

Surveillance cameras Limited Deployment* Cost Holds promise—enhances

on-board security. Deters

vandalism

Automated passenger 

counters

Limited Deployment Cost Holds promise—provides

better data for operations,

scheduling, planning, and

recruiting at lower cost

1

The three different deployment levels used in this paper are defined as follows: Deployed in fewer than

10 percent of the 525 transit agencies surveyed = Limited Deployment; Deployed in between 10 percent and 30 percent of the 525 transit agencies surveyed = Moderate Deployment; Deployed in more

than 30 percent of the 525 transit agencies surveyed = Widespread Deployment.
90 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

*Quantitative deployment tracking data not available. Deployment level determined by expert judgment.

All the above technologies have been proven to work and are in full operation at

varying numbers of transit agencies. Agencies have reported benefits resulting from

implementation of each of these technologies. Although some benefits have been

quantified, most of those reported herein are claims or statements from deploying

agencies. In spite of the lack of quantified benefits, transit agencies that have

deployed or will soon deploy APTS technologies have concluded that potential 

benefits of the added functions and services that these technologies provide outweigh the capital and operating expenses. Several transit agencies have stated that 

a principal reason for installing APTS technologies is to help them provide better

service for customers and safer service for both customers and vehicle operators.

Despite measured benefits and other benefits realized but not measured, many agencies are not considering APTS technologies. Possible reasons include cost (although

some less sophisticated, low-cost APTS systems are available),2 a lack of awareness

of benefits, small fleet size, type of service provided, resistance to change, and

absence of personnel knowledgeable about APTS. Nevertheless, a comparison of

results from the most recent Volpe Center survey and a previous survey (Casey and

Labell 1996) revealed that APTS technology deployments increased substantially

between 1995 and 1998. Deployments are expected to continue to increase faster

for those making up the more basic elements of APTS deployments (e.g., automatic

vehicle location [AVL], operations software, mobile data terminals, silent alarms,

and covert microphones). Also, greater use of AVL data is expected in the areas of

real-time service adjustments, scheduling changes, route planning, and customer

information. 

Technology Deployment Level Limiting Factors Comments

Vehicle diagnostics Limited Deployment Cost, lack of data on benefits Jury is still out

Traffic signal priority Limited Deployment Institutional issues, concerns

about impacts on traffic flows

Holds promise—reduces

transit trip times. May 

reduce required fleet size

Electronic fare payment Limited Deployment Cost Holds promise—increases

customer convenience

En-route and in-vehicle 

passenger information

Limited Deployment Cost, lack of evidence of ridership increasesJury is still out

Pre-trip passenger 

information

Widespread Deployment N/A Successful—improves 

customer satisfaction

Table 5-1. Continued

2 Some less sophisticated, low-cost APTS systems are available for purchase, as evidenced by the figures

in the lower end of cost ranges contained in the technology discussions. However, these systems will

not provide the functionality many transit agencies desire.
CHAPTER 5: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ADVANCED PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS? 91

INTRODUCTION

The Federal Transit Administration created the Advanced Public Transportation

Systems program as its part of the U.S. Department of Transportation’s (U.S. DOT’s)

National Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Program. The APTS program

was established to encourage use of current and emerging technologies in the fields

of electronics, information processing, information displays, computers, and control

systems to improve the quality and usefulness of public transportation services.

Effectively integrated and deployed, APTS technologies can enhance safety, 

transportation mobility, operational efficiency, and environmental protection.

The objective of this paper is to assess which APTS technologies have been successful,

which ones have not been successful (and why), where success is unclear, and what

can be expected in the future. The following APTS technologies are discussed: 

■ Automatic vehicle location.

■ Operations software.

■ Mobile data terminals.

■ Silent alarms/covert microphones/surveillance cameras.

■ Automatic passenger counters.

■ Automated passenger information.

■ Vehicle diagnostics.

■ Traffic signal priority.

■ Electronic fare payment.

Although not a “technology” itself, integration is also discussed, as it is a major 

factor in the successful implementation of APTS and is usually the most difficult

implementation issue. 

The technologies discussed herein have all been installed by at least some transit

agencies and are in full operation at those sites. Deployment information, except 

for data on Internet websites, was collected during the fall of 1998 and was published

by the John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center. In the Volpe Center

survey, 525 transit agencies operating fixed-route bus and/or demand-response 

services were interviewed to determine their level of APTS technology deployment.

This database differs from that used in Chapters 2, 3, 4, and 6, which used data 

from the 78 largest metropolitan areas rather than from individual transit agencies.

Consequently, the deployment levels identified here may be different from the

deployment levels for the same technology reported in other chapters.

The benefits discussed in this paper are primarily findings from other APTS research

and evaluation activities, and consist mainly of claims or statements from deploying

agencies. Useful input was also received from attendees at the transit management

roundtable session at the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) 2000

International Conference, held in Irvine, California, in April 2000.

Capital cost information, obtained in the Volpe Center study, was not included in

the published report. (Collection of cost data was not a major objective for the 
92 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

survey, but agencies did provide some acquisition cost information.) Other cost data

for certain APTS hardware and software components can be found in the ITS Joint

Program Office (JPO) database compiled by Mitretek Systems from a number of

studies and plans.3 Additionally, the requirement in the Transportation Equity Act

for the 21st Century (TEA-21) that all recipients of ITS deployment program funds

report cost information should provide much more cost data in the future.

Agencies surveyed in the Volpe Center deployment study were unable to provide

any real useful information on the cost of operating APTS technologies. Although

operating cost is an important consideration, most agencies deploying transit APTS

did not have reduced operating costs as an objective. In fact, many agencies will

experience an increase in operating costs stemming from additional dispatching and

information technology staffing requirements and equipment maintenance expenditures. Potential operational cost savings will result from deployment of some APTS

technologies, however, which can reduce other operational expenses, as illustrated 

in the discussions of individual technologies. As several transit agencies have stated,

a principal reason for installing APTS technologies is to help them provide better

service for customers and safer service for customers and vehicle operators. The 

ability to automate the provision of transit information to potential customers has

also been a consideration for some agencies.

APTS TECHNOLOGIES

The following sub-sections describe the various APTS technologies, their benefits,

their level of deployment, and their costs (where available). 

Automatic Vehicle Location

AVL is a computer-based tracking system. For transit, the actual real-time position

of each transit vehicle is calculated and relayed to a control center. The three 

principal methods of determining vehicle position are as follows: using signals from

signposts, dead-reckoning, and using signals from global positioning system (GPS)

satellites. 

In the signpost system, a series of radio beacons or signposts are placed along the

routes. A short-range communication device on the vehicle receives the identification signal transmitted by the signpost. Because location of each signpost is known,

vehicle location is determined at the time of passing. The distance traveled since

passing a signpost, as measured by the vehicle odometer, is used to estimate the 

vehicle position along its route at any given time. However, this method is limited

because signposts are placed at fixed locations. Thus, changes in routes could

require the installation of additional signposts. Additionally, the system is incapable

of tracking vehicles that stray off route.

Dead-reckoning is a method of determining vehicle position by measuring distance

traveled from a known location (through odometer readings) and direction of travel

(through compass headings). Because this method of position determination is less

3 These data can be accessed through the ITS Benefits and Costs Database at

http://www.mitretek.org/its/benecost.nsf.
CHAPTER 5: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ADVANCED PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS? 93

precise than the others, dead-reckoning is usually supplemented by GPS or a few

strategically placed signposts to recalculate position at certain intervals. 

GPS technology uses signals transmitted from a network of satellites orbiting the

earth and received by a GPS antenna placed on the roof of each vehicle. A GPS

receiver, connected to the antenna, calculates position by measuring the antenna’s

distance (the travel time of radio signals) from at least three satellites. However,

there are inaccuracies in the signal due to reflections by the atmosphere or from tall

buildings. To correct for these errors, a measured GPS signal offset is used to adjust

the calculated position. As a result of this differential correction, many GPS

receivers can calculate position to within a few meters. GPS is the method of

choice for most new AVL systems.

The two most common methods of transmitting location data to dispatch are

through polling and exception reporting by means of wireless communications.

Under polling, the computer at dispatch polls each vehicle in turn, asking for its

location. Once all the vehicles have been polled, the computer starts again with 

the first vehicle and repeats the cycle. With exception reporting, each vehicle

reports its location to dispatch only at specified intervals or when it is running off

schedule beyond selected tolerances. Exception reporting makes more efficient use

of available radio channels, which are often scarce commodities. Many agencies use

a combination of polling and exception reporting. 

AVL is the basic building block for other transit APTS applications that depend 

on knowing vehicle location. AVL provides the location data needed for operations

software, silent alarms, automatic passenger counters, real-time passenger information, in-vehicle signs and annunciators, and traffic signal priority, based on schedule

adherence. AVL provides transit agencies with much more and better data than

they could previously afford to collect manually. Vehicle location data are used by

many transit agency personnel, including dispatchers, vehicle operators, schedulers,

planners, maintenance staff, customer information staff, and street supervisors. 

A major benefit of AVL is the dispatcher’s ability to quickly send response personnel 

to the precise location of an incident or emergency. AVL-equipped buses can also

act as probes for monitoring traffic flow on freeways and arterials. Another major

benefit reported by transit agencies was improved schedule adherence: 

■ Milwaukee County Transit System, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, reported an increase

of 4.4 percent, from 90 to 94 percent.

■ Kansas City Area Transit Authority, Kansas City, Missouri, reported a 12.5 

percent increase, from 80 to 90 percent.

■ Regional Transportation District, Denver, Colorado, reported an increase of

between 12 and 21 percent on various routes.

Despite the benefits AVL systems can provide, they had achieved only moderate

deployment status in 1998, with just 61 agencies (12 percent) having fully operational systems. 

Although the cost of an AVL antenna and receiver is relatively modest, agencies

reporting AVL costs in the Volpe Center study typically included all APTS 
94 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

technologies implemented in conjunction with AVL: software, dispatch center

equipment, mobile data terminals, silent alarms, covert microphones, new or upgraded

communications, and possibly automatic passenger counters. Reported costs for

AVL systems ranged from $1,200 to $23,000 per vehicle, with a median cost of

about $8,000. Three groupings of costs were evident. One group of six systems fell

between $1,220 and $2,500 per vehicle. Another grouping of seven systems fell

within the $6,500-$9,600 cost range. Six systems in the third group ranged in cost

from $11,000 to $18,000. Finally, there was a single outlier cost of $23,000 per 

vehicle. Some systems include AVL for both fixed route and demand-response 

services. The wide range of costs can be attributed to the differences in the number

and functionality of the APTS applications specified, the variation in the number of

vehicles to be equipped, and the amount of customized software required. Agency

staff costs for system development and training are typically not included in cost 

calculations. 

Operations Software

Operations software is used to develop and display information for a variety of transit

decision-making activities. Software is a key element of APTS installations, and a

geographic information system (GIS) is a major software component.4 AVL system

software can combine vehicle location data with map data and display them on 

dispatchers’ computer monitors, together with attributes easily customized by each

transit agency (e.g., vehicle status, vehicle operator, schedule adherence, and 

incident information). 

Software programs can assist transit agencies in performing a number of functions.

Software programs currently support bus dispatchers in making real-time service

adjustments (when service begins to deteriorate5

) and in directing response to 

vehicle incidents and emergencies. Software programs prioritize calls from vehicle

operators for response by the dispatchers and automatically record and print reports

of AVL and various other information desired by the agency. Software can provide

data to coordinate the intra- or intermodal transfer of passengers from one vehicle to

another where services intersect—either through dispatcher involvement or direct

vehicle-to-vehicle contact. Software programs can calculate whether traffic signal

priority should be requested based on schedule adherence and, in more advanced

concepts, on the bus load factor (if real-time information is available from an automatic passenger counter). Programs can assemble and analyze data from different

sources to provide assistance to the following:

■ To schedulers in adjusting schedules.

■ To planners in adding or reducing service.

■ To maintenance staff in programming preventive maintenance or identifying

vehicles with potential maintenance problems.

4 GIS is a special type of computerized database management system in which databases are related to

one another based on a common set of locational coordinates.

5 A research initiative undertaken by the John A. Volpe Center and the Massachusetts Institute of

Technology will develop software to automate the service adjustment process when the system recognizes that service is deteriorating.
CHAPTER 5: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ADVANCED PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS? 95

■ To customer information staff for answering information requests or providing trip

itineraries.

■ To street supervisors for monitoring service.

■ To administrative staff for generating reports.

■ To operations staff to play back vehicle runs for checking operator performance or

customer complaints. 

Software is also used in the scheduling, dispatching, recordkeeping, and billing for

demand-response services. The Winston-Salem Transit Authority, Winston-Salem,

North Carolina, reduced operating cost by 8.5 percent per vehicle mile with computer

assisted dispatching (CAD) software. Blacksburg Transit’s CAD software helped the

agency increase passenger-carrying productivity from 0.8 to 2.0 passengers per vehicle

hour. Higher-end systems able to receive trip requests by touch-tone phone, schedule

trips, and transmit vehicle schedules to operators without manual intervention offer

even greater potential for enhanced efficiency. 

A total of 170 transit agencies, or 32 percent, have used software to assist certain

tasks, helping operations software attain widespread deployment. However, despite

potential benefits, few agencies with AVL systems exploit the software’s full 

capabilities. As yet, most agencies are not using software to analyze schedules, plan

service changes, coordinate transfers, or provide real-time information to customers.

Much greater use could be made of some software applications that offer significant

benefits. 

The cost of operations software is seldom separated from the overall cost of an AVL

system. However, the contract price for the 1,335-vehicle AVL system for the

Regional Transportation District in Denver, Colorado, listed operations software at

approximately $1.4 million (Weatherford and Castle Rock Consultants 2000).

More software cost data are available for demand-response services. The cost of

demand-response software reported by close to 50 agencies in the Volpe Center

study generally ranged from $15,000 to $120,000, with exceptions being three agencies

placing it at less than $10,000 and seven agencies at $300,000 or more. The median

value was $50,000. As with AVL cost figures, demand-response software cost rises as

the level of sophistication and the number of functions desired increases. 

Mobile Data Terminals

A mobile data terminal (MDT) is an in-vehicle device with a small screen to display

messages and time, plus a series of buttons to send preset messages to the dispatch

center. Where installed, MDTs are the primary communications means between

operators and dispatchers. In AVL-equipped vehicles, the MDT-type device is usually

augmented by computational capability that calculates vehicle location, compares

location and time to the schedule, and determines the vehicle’s schedule adherence,

which can be displayed on the screen. This combination is commonly called an 

in-vehicle logic unit. For purposes of this discussion, the term “mobile data terminal”

represents both devices.

The ability to send preset messages with the push of a button makes it easy for 

operators to report certain occurrences to the dispatch center. Examples include
96 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

mechanical problems, vehicle stuck, fare dispute, lift not working, relief not arrived,

etc. The “request to talk” and the “priority request to talk” buttons are the means 

by which the operators notify the dispatchers that they wish to talk via radio.

Dispatchers contact operators either by radio or through messages sent to their

MDTs. Voice or MDT messages can be directed to an individual bus, specific groups

of buses, or the entire fleet.

Use of MDTs has reduced voice radio traffic by as much as 70 percent for the Ann

Arbor Transportation Authority, Michigan, and the Rochester-Genesee Regional

Transportation Authority, New York. This voice traffic reduction may reduce the

number of voice channels an agency requires. A reduction in voice traffic can be an

important result, where available radio frequencies are scarce and highly sought-after

by other agencies—the case in many locations.

MDTs are also used to coordinate vehicle-to-vehicle transfers of passengers on 

intersecting routes. MDTs allow vehicle operators to coordinate the transfers directly,

without dispatcher involvement. Connection coordination can be an important

customer satisfaction consideration, as missed connections—especially on long 

headway routes—can discourage future patronage by affected riders.

MDTs are also useful in providing routing instructions and messages to demandresponse vehicles. MDTs can provide an electronic manifest of customer pick-ups

and drop-offs. Use of MDTs can also facilitate additions or deletions to the vehicle’s

otherwise predetermined route. MDTs are particularly useful for those agencies 

dispatching in real time. 

The number of transit agencies employing MDTs is unknown, as the Volpe Center

study did not track this technology. Virtually every AVL system would be expected

to include MDTs; in fact, there would likely be more MDT systems than AVL 

systems, because MDTs are deployed in demand-response systems that do not have

AVL. Therefore, MDTs are presumed to have achieved the moderate deployment

level. 

Although not specifically covered in the Volpe Center study, one agency quoted 

a price for MDTs as part of its software procurement. Pierce Transit, Tacoma,

Washington, paid $330,000 for MDTs for their 92 demand-response vehicles, or

slightly under $3,600 per unit, including software.

Silent Alarm/Covert Microphone/Surveillance Cameras

Silent alarms, covert microphones, and surveillance cameras installed in vehicles

enhance the safety and feeling of security of operators and passengers. The silent

alarm system consists of a button placed in a concealed location near the driver.

When pushed, it activates an alarm in the dispatch office. With most AVL systems,

the vehicle from which the alarm was sounded is more frequently tracked than with

the normal polling interval, and the dispatcher has the ability to open a secret

microphone on the vehicle to try and ascertain the problem. What the dispatcher

hears through the microphone is useful in helping to decide the type of assistance to

send to the vehicle. The AVL system provides vehicle location so response personnel

can proceed to its exact position. 
CHAPTER 5: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ADVANCED PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS? 97

Surveillance cameras have also been placed on some vehicles. These cameras can

capture a picture of individuals who cause incidents and may discourage criminal

activity. The pictures have also been used to check the validity of personal injury

claims made by persons alleging to have been injured on the vehicles. The images

may be stored on the vehicle for later download, or relayed to dispatch in near real

time.

Measurements of safety or security improvements from AVL system implementations

have been scarce. However, Denver’s Regional Transportation District reported a 33

percent drop in operator and passenger assaults after AVL, silent alarm, and covert

microphone system installation. 

The Volpe Center study did not track deployment of silent alarms, covert microphones, and surveillance cameras. Nevertheless, it is presumed that two of the three

devices have achieved moderate deployment, as virtually every AVL system includes

a silent alarm and most have a covert microphone. Silent alarm systems could even

outnumber AVL systems, as they can be installed without an AVL system. In such

instances, if the operator is unable to tell the dispatcher his or her position, 

the dispatcher must use judgment to ascertain the vehicle’s location. To date, only 

a few surveillance camera systems have been installed, cost probably being the 

limiting factor. 

The Volpe Center study did not solicit any cost figures for these technologies.

Automatic Passenger Counters

Automatic passenger counters (APCs) are devices that automatically collect data 

on passenger boardings and alightings. APCs have three basic components: (1) 

a method of counting each passenger boarding and disembarking, and a method of

distinguishing between the two; (2) a technology able to determine vehicle location

when boarding and disembarking occur; and (3) a data management system capable

of transmitting the data in real time or storing the data for later transfer and use.

Counters are usually treadle mats placed on the steps or infrared beams projected

horizontally or vertically at each doorway. 

APCs provide much more ridership data than agencies previously collected at a

lower cost. Further, a few agencies have stated that APC data are more accurate

than those collected manually. Ridership data may be used in several ways, including

for National Transit Database reporting, route analysis and planning, adjustments to

schedules, and new passenger shelter positioning. These data could also be used to

monitor load factors in real time for possible insertion of additional vehicles when

circumstances warrant. The Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, Georgia,

reported $1.5 million in operational savings through adjustments to schedules using

AVL and APC data. 

APCs are not included with all AVL systems. Twenty-four agencies (5 percent) with

existing APC systems were recorded in the Volpe Center study. The most likely 

reason for limited deployment of APCs in the past has been cost. Some older APC

installations cost between $5,500 and $6,250 per vehicle (Alameda Contra Costa

Transit District, Oakland, California; Central Ohio Transit Authority, Columbus,
98 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

Ohio; and Bi-State Development Agency, St. Louis, Missouri). As the cost per unit

appears to be decreasing, based on recent cost figures ($2,500 at San Joaquin

Regional Transit District, Stockton, California; $1,600 at Ventura Intercity Service

Transit, Ventura, California; $1,200 at Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation

District, Portland, Oregon), APCs should become more prevalent. The decrease in

cost for these agencies likely stems from the inclusion of APCs as part of a package

of APTS technologies rather than stand-alone systems. It is also possible that the

sale of more units and advances in component technology have helped to decrease

unit cost. 

Automated Passenger Information

There are several types of passenger information and methods of delivery.

Information can be provided to customers and potential customers before they 

begin their trip, while they are en route but not on board a transit vehicle, or after

they are on board a transit vehicle. Overall, automated information is widely

deployed. However, when separated by the individual types of information, only 

pre-trip information systems have been widely deployed, while en route and in-vehicle

information systems achieved only limited deployment. Probable reasons for lack 

of greater deployment of en route and in-vehicle information systems are that 

they are nonessential, extra-cost items, with no solid evidence of their increasing

transit ridership. 

Pre-trip information can consist of routes, maps, schedules, fares, fare media, and

park-and-ride lot locations. Information can include real-time vehicle arrivals and

full trip planning itineraries. Devices used to obtain pre-trip information include the

telephone, the Internet, pagers, personal digital assistants, and cable television (TV).

Depending on their location, kiosks could also provide pre-trip information.

Automated pre-trip information is consistent and more accurate than that relayed 

by information operators. Accurate information, especially real-time information,

reduces the anxiety of transit use and is particularly important for longer headway

routes. Real-time vehicle arrival information allows passengers to time their arrival

at stops, thereby reducing their wait time and exposure to weather and criminal 

elements. Not all agencies that could give real-time information to passengers are

planning to provide it, for fear the information will not be accurate and passengers

will miss their buses.

Automating the information provision process, particularly with voice response

units, has reduced the telephone wait time of customers wanting information (from

85 seconds to 27 seconds at New Jersey Transit) and increased the call handling

capability and productivity of transit information centers (a 21 percent increase in

San Diego County). Fewer customer information staff may be needed, as the

Rochester-Genesee Regional Transportation Authority has reported. 

Telephone and the Internet are the most generally available and frequently used

methods of obtaining pre-trip information for most people. A separate study by the

Volpe Center of transit agency websites,6 which most transit agencies have, reviewed

the websites of 613 transit agencies operating bus or demand-response services.

6 Results of the Volpe Center Internet website search can be found at http://transitweb.volpe.dot.gov.
CHAPTER 5: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ADVANCED PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS? 99

Ninety-four percent, or 578, provided pre-trip passenger information (i.e., at least

route maps or schedule/fare information). Twenty-five, or 4 percent, of sites allow

customers to obtain origin-to-destination trip itineraries, although not always on-line.

Access by hand-held devices and TV are used to a much lesser degree, as there is

low market penetration of hand-held devices, and the number of locations displaying

transit information on TV is quite small.

Eight agencies with strictly automated telephone information provided cost data in

the Volpe Center deployment survey. Six quoted acquisition and installation costs

between $32,000 and $126,000, the mid-range being between $75,000 and

$100,000. The two other agencies quoted costs of $400,000 and $1 million. Three

agencies provided cost data for both telephone and Internet information. These cost

figures were $23,000, $28,000 and $132,000. The cost to set up an Internet website

was quoted as $1,000 and $4,000 by two agencies. No cost data were provided for

other pre-trip delivery methods. 

En route information such as vehicle arrival times (scheduled or predicted) can be

provided by electronic signs, monitors, and kiosks. Signs and monitors are usually

placed in passenger shelters or at transfer centers. Kiosks are usually placed at major

activity centers served by transit. 

The principal benefit of en route devices is the elimination of vehicle arrival 

uncertainty, which makes the passenger more comfortable using transit and may

increase ridership. One liability has been travelers’ perception of kiosks as 

frustratingly slow or frequently out of service. 

The Volpe Center study found 21 agencies, or 4 percent, providing en route transit

information. Even where en route devices were deployed, typically only a small

number were actually installed in any service area because of their cost to purchase,

maintain, and operate. 

The only en route cost data provided were for kiosks. Three agencies quoted costs 

of $5,000, $6,250, and $15,000 per kiosk.

In-vehicle information is provided by electronic signs and automated voice

announcements (annunciators) of stops and transfer opportunities. Electronic 

signs are usually placed at one or two high-visibility locations inside the vehicle.

Signs and annunciators relieve the operator of having to announce stops, as required

by the Americans with Disabilities Act. These devices provide passengers with 

better information, as not all operators announce stops, and even those who do may

be difficult to hear. Additionally, signs help hearing-impaired passengers and allow

operators to drive more safely by concentrating on driving without having to make

announcements.

The Volpe Center study found that 14 agencies, or 3 percent, provide in-vehicle

transit information. This limited deployment probably stems from signs and 

annunciators being extra-cost, nonessential items.

No cost data were provided to the Volpe Center on in-vehicle signs and annunciators. 
100 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

Vehicle Diagnostics

Vehicle diagnostics provide information to the dispatch center and the maintenance

department of the transit agency about the condition of certain vehicle components.

This information is acquired through sensors connected to the components to be

monitored. Items frequently monitored include engine temperature, oil pressure,

brakes, and tire pressure. Diagnostic information can be relayed to the dispatch 

center and/or the maintenance department in real time, which allows a vehicle to

be taken out of service immediately if the problem is severe, or stored on the vehicle

for later retrieval.

Diagnostic information warns of impending component failures when readings begin

to exceed normal operating ranges. Attention to problems identified before failures

occur should improve service reliability by reducing the number of vehicle breakdowns and resulting service delays. Early detection can also prevent potentially 

serious situations or costly repairs or replacements. 

Deployment of diagnostic systems is limited (12 agencies, or 2 percent). One 

possible reason is the lack of quantitative data on savings from advanced failure

warning or reductions in on-road breakdowns. 

The Volpe Center study did not solicit cost data for vehicle diagnostic systems.

Traffic Signal Priority

Traffic signal priority allows transit vehicles to progress along their routes with less

delay at signalized intersections equipped with specialized receivers and controllers.

A transit vehicle approaching a signalized intersection transmits a signal to the 

traffic signal controller. Depending on the traffic signal phase at the time the signal

from the vehicle is received, the controller grants an extension of the green phase

until the vehicle passes, or until advancement of the next green phase. The signal

from the vehicle to the traffic signal controller can be sent manually or automatically

if the vehicle is AVL-equipped. Similarly, transit vehicle priority can be employed

at signals that meter the flow of traffic at freeway ramp entrances. Another method

of transit priority is to provide an exclusive transit lane at the intersection and give

that lane an advance green phase so that transit vehicles can start ahead of traffic.

No information was uncovered on signal preemption for transit, which would 

immediately turn the traffic signal to green upon a transit vehicle’s approach.

Signal priority produces faster, more reliable transit service and reduced operational

cost. Six agencies (Kitsap Transit, Bremerton, Washington; Pierce Transit, Tacoma,

Washington; Annapolis Transit, Anne Arundel County, Maryland; Phoenix Transit,

Arizona; Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, Georgia; and Los Angeles

County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, California) have reported reduced

travel times ranging from 4.2 percent to 19 percent from operation or tests of signal

priority. (Other agencies benefiting from signal priority have not reported travel

time changes.) If enough running time is saved, reduction in the number of vehicles

needed to operate service may even be possible. However, resistance is often

encountered from traffic departments of the cities and counties that control local

streets, as granting priority for transit may degrade traffic flow. Granting transit
CHAPTER 5: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ADVANCED PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS? 101

vehicles priority would have a greater impact on streets with progressive signal 

timing. Requesting priority only when transit vehicles are behind schedule by a 

certain degree or when carrying a sufficient number of riders can mitigate negative

impacts. Another mitigating technique, as implemented by Montgomery County,

Maryland, is to optimize travel for all individuals—private vehicle occupants and

transit riders.

Sixteen transit agencies, or 3 percent, reported having priority for their vehicles at

traffic signals. Several test installations, which showed significant benefits for transit

operations, were never made permanent after the test period. 

The cost of providing transit agencies with priority at traffic signals is normally a

shared cost between the agency operating the traffic signal system and the transit

agency. Two agencies reported on-board equipment costs: Pace Suburban Bus,

Arlington, Illinois ($200-$250 per bus), and Ben Franklin Transit, Richland,

Washington ($1,000 per bus). The Chicago Transit Authority cited an installation

cost of $125,000 for five signalized intersections. 

Electronic Fare Payment

Electronic fare payment (EFP) systems for transit are of two types—those that use

magnetic stripe cards and those that use smart cards. Fareboxes that count and 

display the value of coins or tokens deposited are not considered APTS technology.

Magnetic stripe cards require a contact between the card’s stripe and a device that

validates the card for the trip taken (i.e., a monthly pass) or a read-write device that

can deduct the fare from the value stored on the card and restore the remaining 

balance. A smart card that contains a microprocessor may interface with the reader

by direct contact or by radio frequency. A smart card can have both contact and

contactless interfaces. Smart cards have greater security, higher reliability, and 

higher resistance to fraud than magnetic stripe cards, but are more costly. A major

convenience of a contactless card is that it need not be removed from a wallet or

purse as long as it passes close to the reader. 

Both types of cards offer additional convenience for the rider, as there is no need for

exact change or frequent standing in line to purchase tokens or tickets. Transit

agencies can benefit from the reduction in the labor-intensive manual handling of

cash, tickets, or tokens and the reduced chance of fraud or theft, which has saved

millions of dollars for New York City Transit, for example. However, payment by

cash on transit systems can probably never be totally eliminated. 

Increased revenues result from reduced fare evasion, interest on the money between

the time a card is purchased and the time it is used up, and, possibly, from increased

ridership. Smart card systems provide added benefits of security for lost or stolen

cards (if they are registered with the agency), discounts for frequent transit use,

greater flexibility in fare products, and reduced paper transfers and equipment 

maintenance (owing to fewer fare collection equipment moving parts). Smart cards

permit collection of more detailed ridership data for use in route planning and travel

time studies. They also allow development of seamless regional, multi-agency, 

multi-application systems, including parking and retail. Contactless cards also result

in faster throughput. 
102 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

Excluding monthly magnetic stripe, pass-only systems, the Volpe Center study 

found 23 operational magnetic stripe (4 percent) and seven operational smart card

(1 percent) fare collection systems. A probable reason for the limited EFP deployment is that replacing an existing fare collection system can be expensive. Capital

costs for seven of the agencies providing EFP cost data ranged from $8,500 to

$10,200 per vehicle. The other five agencies paid between $2,500 and $6,000 per

vehicle. The median cost was slightly over $8,500 per vehicle. Some systems 

incorporate both magnetic stripe and smart cards. 

Integration

The difficulty of getting systems to work together continues to be a major obstacle to

successful APTS installation. The more APTS elements an agency implements, the

more difficult the integration task becomes. The integration problem has been the

cause of many delays, while recent transit APTS systems have been implemented

more rapidly. Both the equipment and software have become more “off the shelf.”

Nevertheless, these improvements do not guarantee that implementations will 

proceed smoothly, on budget, or on schedule.

A principal integration problem involves software. For early systems, the software

had to be newly developed—an arduous task. As experience is gained with more

systems, the basic software has become more standardized and transferable.

Nevertheless, because transit agencies do not all want the same features or 

capabilities, a certain degree of customization is necessary at each location. 

The less customization specified by a transit agency, the easier and quicker the

installation will be. Also, developing input data for the software can be a 

considerable undertaking. 

Although integration of APTS with other ITS services and modes has been limited

to date, some notable examples of multimodal integration do exist. Houston

TranStar’s transportation management center (TMC) is staffed by City of Houston,

Harris County, Houston Metro, and state personnel who cooperate on all aspects of

transportation management. The New York City Metropolitan Transit Authority is

implementing an AVL, which will provide real-time vehicle location and arrival

information to TRANSCOMSM (Transportation Operations Coordinating

Committee), where it will be widely available through the iTravel information 

network. The Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority receives live pictures

of traffic conditions from the TMC’s video cameras over a fiber optic cable and can

choose which cameras to view, as well as point the cameras in the desired direction.

In other locations, integration mainly takes the form of highway and transit agencies

sharing traffic and incident information via telephone. 

CONCLUSIONS

Using deployment criteria described in the Introduction, data from the Volpe Center

reports place APTS technologies at the following levels, as depicted in Table 5-2:
CHAPTER 5: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ADVANCED PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS? 103

Table 5.2. Deployment Levels for APTS Technologies

Widespread Moderate Limited

Deployment Level

Automatic Passenger Counters ✜

Automatic Vehicle Location ✜

Electronic Fare Payment ✜

En Route Passenger Information ✜

In-Vehicle Passenger Information ✜

Mobile Data Terminals* ✜

Operations Software ✜

Pre-Trip Passenger Information ✜

Silent Alarms/Covert Microphones* ✜

Surveillance Cameras* ✜

Traffic Signal Priority ✜

Vehicle Diagnostics ✜

* Quantitative deployment tracking data not available. Deployment level determined by expert

judgment.

APTS Technologies

Only operations software and pre-trip automated passenger information have reached

the widespread deployment level. Given the number of agencies in the process of

implementing or programming AVL systems (100 additional agencies), this technology

will reach widespread deployment in a few years. Because mobile data terminals,

silent alarms, and covert microphones are typically deployed with AVL systems, these

technologies are also expected to reach widespread deployment status. Automated

passenger counters (40 additional agencies), traffic signal priority for transit (40 additional agencies), and electronic fare payment (68 additional agencies) should attain

moderate deployment status. Increases in deployment of vehicle diagnostic systems

(31 additional agencies), surveillance camera, and en route and in-vehicle passenger

information systems will likely not be sufficient to move these technologies out of

the limited deployment category. 

All APTS technologies appear to work and to provide benefits to the implementing

agencies, as well as directly or indirectly to their customers. Agencies implementing

APTS have expressly determined that the benefits outweigh the costs. A comparison
104 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

of data from the two Volpe Center deployment studies shows that individual APTS

technology deployments increased by a minimum of 44 percent and a maximum of

160 percent over the three-year interval. 

While this paper did not cover rail or ferryboat operations, technologies such as

AVL operations software, surveillance cameras, automated passenger information,

vehicle diagnostics, traffic signal priority, and electronic fare payment would apply

equally as well to heavy and/or light rail systems, and, in some instances, to ferryboats.

From the customer perspective, APTS deployments can lead to measurable improvements in transit service and ease of use. However, whether these improvements

appreciably change public perception and resistance to using transit is yet to be seen.

There are many reasons why people do not ride transit, such as incompatible landuse patterns, free or inexpensive parking, lack of comfort and privacy, affordability of

driving, and unsuitability for trip-chaining and carrying packages, which cannot be

overcome by APTS applications. 

From the transit agency perspective, APTS technologies offer a wide array of benefits.

Some of the benefits have been measured, while many more have been realized 

but not measured. Nevertheless, many agencies still are not considering APTS 

technologies. For some agencies, certain APTS technologies may not be appropriate

because of the small size of their operations or the type of services they provide.

Other agencies may not be considering APTS technologies because of cost, lack of

awareness of benefits, resistance to change, or absence of personnel knowledgeable

about APTS. Also, APTS technologies have the reputation of being difficult to

implement, although recent installations have been quicker and less troublesome.

For the most part, technologies are proprietary from vendor to vendor and can be

difficult to operate and maintain for transit agency personnel with little advanced

technology experience. Many agencies are still uncertain as to how APTS can be

used to fundamentally change transit operations and services for the better. 

To overcome these deployment obstacles, agencies need to be more informed about

the relative benefits and costs of APTS technologies, which requires that continued

evaluations be conducted to quantify and publicize these benefits and costs. It is

imperative that transit agencies be made aware of what works and how to implement

these technologies. As such, education and training of transit agency personnel on

APTS technologies is critically important. The APTS Mobile Showcase, a 48-foot

expandable trailer that traverses the country functioning as a research laboratory,

standards testing facility, and briefing room on wheels, is a step in this direction.

THE FUTURE

It is anticipated that:

■ APTS deployments will continue to increase and AVL, silent alarm, covert

microphone, and automated passenger information technologies will likely reach

widespread deployment levels.
CHAPTER 5: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ADVANCED PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS? 105

■ Implementation periods will be shorter as more experience is gained and the software becomes more standardized. 

■ More APTS technologies will be included in installations as more benefit and

cost data from applications of these technologies are documented and publicized. 

■ Removal of selective availability (a degradation of signals from the orbiting global

positioning satellites), announced in May 2000, has increased the accuracy of

vehicle location GPS to the extent that the need for differential correction of the

GPS location calculations may no longer be necessary.

■ New software will be developed that will result in AVL data being used to a much

greater extent in making on-street service corrections (in some cases automating

this process), adjusting schedules, planning route changes, and providing 

customer information.

■ Transit operations will increasingly be integrated with TMCs for sharing 

information on traffic conditions and incidents and, to a lesser extent, for providing

traffic signal priority for transit vehicles. 

■ The cost of APTS implementations will continue to be a major impediment,

although not the only impediment, to greater deployment.

REFERENCES

Casey, R., Advanced Public Transportation Systems Deployment in the United States

(Cambridge, MA: John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, January

1999), EDL No. 8165.

Casey, R. and Labell, L., Advanced Public Transportation Systems Deployment in the

United States (Cambridge, MA: John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems

Center, August 1996), EDL No. 5126.

Weatherford, M., Castle Rock Consultants, Assessment of the Denver Regional

Transportation District’s Automatic Vehicle Location System (Cambridge, MA: 

John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, August 2000).
chapter 6

WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED

ABOUT ITS FOR COMMERCIAL

VEHICLE OPERATIONS? STATUS,

CHALLENGES, AND BENEFITS

OF CVISN LEVEL 1 DEPLOYMENT
CHAPTER 6: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ITS FOR COMMERCIAL VEHICLE OPERATIONS? 109

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Intelligent transportation systems (ITS) offer significant benefits to state motor 

carrier agencies, the motor carrier industry, and the traveling public. New and

emerging technologies, information systems, and communications networks provide

the framework for states, the Federal Government, and private stakeholders to 

electronically collect and exchange motor carrier safety and interstate registration

and tax payment information. Use of these technologies supports initiatives by state

and Federal agencies, in partnership with the motor carrier industry, to improve

highway safety, simplify government administrative credentialing operations,

enhance productivity, and reduce delays for safe and legal carriers. 

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) established goals to

reduce commercial vehicle fatalities 50 percent by 2010, with a baseline of 5,374

fatalities in 1998, and to reduce the number of persons injured in commercial vehicle

crashes 20 percent by 2008, with a baseline of 127,000 injuries in 1998. An overriding

objective of the ITS technologies designed for roadside operations is to reduce the

number of crashes involving large trucks and the resulting personal injury and 

property damage. Using ITS technologies, enforcement personnel have access to

up-to-date safety and credential information for motor carriers as well as for 

individual vehicles. This access can improve highway safety by allowing state and

federal enforcement officials to concentrate their resources on high-risk carriers 

and vehicles. 

Three main ITS technology areas designed for commercial vehicle operations

(CVO) applications are safety information exchange, electronic screening, and 

electronic credentialing. Since 1991, the U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S.

DOT) has sponsored numerous field demonstrations of new technologies. 

The Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Networks (CVISN) Model

Deployment Initiative (MDI) is one such test involving a handful of states. 

The goal of the CVISN program is to assist states in achieving an initial, “ambitious

but achievable” level of deployment in the three technology areas discussed below.

According to FMCSA, 38 states have indicated they are planning to achieve this

initial level of deployment, called Level 1 (see Table 6-2 below and Richeson 1999),

by September 30, 2003, depending on the availability of federal ITS deployment

funds and state resources.

Safety Information Exchange Technologies 

Safety information exchange technologies make more up-to-date motor carrier safety

information available to enforcement officers at the roadside. The use of motor carrier

and vehicle-specific safety performance data by state agencies conducting roadside

inspections has grown significantly in recent years. As of December 1999, 84 percent

of states were using Aspen, a software system that facilitates recording and processing

of inspection data and provides historical information on the safety performance of

motor carriers. Other advanced systems for exchanging safety information at the

roadside are also being developed.
110 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

Electronic Screening Systems 

Electronic screening systems allow certain commercial vehicles (e.g., those with

good safety and legal status) to bypass roadside inspection and weigh stations. Such

systems are technically feasible and offer tangible, time-saving benefits. Dedicated

Short-Range Communications (DSRC) technologies provide reliable communication

between moving vehicles and roadside enforcement operations. Much growth in

electronic screening has occurred since the emergence of three programs: HELP

(Heavy Vehicle Electronic License Plate) PrePass, NORPASS (North American

Pre-clearance and Safety System), and Oregon’s Green Light. Currently nearly half

the states in the United States and nearly 7,000 motor carrier fleets are participating

in such electronic screening programs.

The benefits of electronic screening, which are widely acknowledged, vary by carrier

type and operating practice. Early field operational tests estimated an average time

savings to participating motor carriers of between 1.5 and 4.5 minutes per bypass.

States benefit from electronic screening in reduced inspection queues, which reduce

the need and costs to build bigger weigh stations. Electronic screening also helps

states focus more of their inspection resources on high-risk carriers. Most in the

CVO industry agree that interoperability, or the ability for a vehicle to operate with

the same equipment and under similar rules as it travels from state to state, is critical

to the success of electronic screening at the roadside.

Electronic Credentialing Systems 

Electronic credentialing systems provide for electronic administration of interstate

registration, fuel tax payment, and other credentials. Preliminary estimates from 

systems deployed in Kentucky suggest that states and motor carriers using them 

can save up to 75 percent of the current costs for credentials administration. The

integration of legacy credentialing systems with new applications requires careful

planning. Sound technical leadership from state personnel familiar with the business

application is also important. Two issues that concern the future direction of 

electronic credentialing are (1) determining data communications standards and

protocols and (2) determining which software system (specialized computer programs

or Web applications) motor carriers most prefer and accept. In cooperation with

states and other stakeholders, FMCSA has taken a survey to evaluate its policy for 

electronic credentialing to determine needed changes. Results from this survey are

expected in early 2001. 

The Future 

Some advanced roadside technologies, such as weigh-in-motion equipment and

Aspen software, are already widely deployed. However, the type and amount of 

safety information for use during roadside inspections, or for selecting vehicles for

inspection, is likely to change dramatically as faster and less costly wireless 

communication technologies become available. Systems such as SAFER (Safety and

Fitness Electronic Record) data mailbox will permit greater use of vehicle-specific

safety data (e.g., prior inspection results) during vehicle inspections. Thus, continued

development and refinement of systems such as Aspen and CVIEW (Commercial

Vehicle Information Exchange Window) are needed.
CHAPTER 6: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ITS FOR COMMERCIAL VEHICLE OPERATIONS? 111

The growth in electronic screening is also expected to continue. However, carrier

enrollment is heavily dependent on solving interoperability issues among the states.

Furthermore, as states determine the type of bypass criteria to use, they must 

communicate these criteria to the carriers and, to the degree possible, establish some

level of uniformity within key corridors.

Recent deployment successes, along with the desire to reduce credentialing costs,

will help promote further deployment of electronic credentialing. It now appears

that multiple solutions, including personal computer- (PC) and Web-based systems, 

as well as current “paper” systems, will be needed to satisfy the various needs of a

diverse industry.

Table 6-1 presents the deployment status of the CVISN technologies that are part of

Level 1 deployment, and identifies limiting factors for systems that are not widely

deployed. Deployment levels, determined from surveys of states (Radin 2000, PTI

2000), are divided into three categories: Limited (less than 10 percent of states),

Moderate (between 10 and 30 percent of states), and Widespread (more than 30

percent of states). 

Table 6-1. CVISN Summary Table

Technology Deployment Level Limiting Factors Comments

Laptop computers with 

Aspen or equivalent

Widespread Deployment N/A Successful

Wireless connection to 

SAFER at roadside

Moderate Deployment Technical challenges with 

communications among 

systems

Holds promise—for 

identifying frequent 

violators of safety laws

CVIEW or equivalent Limited Deployment Connections to legacy state

system

Jury is still out—being 

tested in three or four states

One or more sites equipped 

with DSRC

Widespread Deployment 

(no. of states); Limited

Deployment (no. of carriers)

Interoperability Holds promise—

deployment trend is positive

End-to-end IRP & IFTA 

processing

Limited Deployment Challenges and costs of connecting legacy systemsHolds promise—potential 

for significant cost savings 

to states and carriers

Connection to IRP & IFTA 

clearinghouses

Limited Deployment Institutional issues Jury is still out—cost 

savings can only be realized

with widespread deployment

Safety Information Exchange

Electronic Screening

Electronic Credentialing
112 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

Most of the major CVISN technologies have achieved some degree of success. Thus

far, the most successful component, demonstrated by widespread deployment, is the

use of laptop computers for safety information exchange. Wireless connection to

SAFER, electronic screening with DSRC, and end-to-end electronic processing of

international registration plan (IRP) credentials have been successfully deployed in

some states and will likely enjoy widespread deployment as technical and institutional

issues become resolved. The use of license plate readers for automated vehicle 

identification has not been successful because of low reliability. Most states are relying

on voluntary participation of motor carriers in electronic screening programs, which

use more reliable DSRC for vehicle identification and communication with the driver.

The other components—CVIEW and participation in clearinghouses—show promise,

but technical and institutional issues still need to be resolved.

One of the key lessons learned over the past few years is that collaboration among

states in cooperation with the Federal Government is key to success. Through the

ITS/CVO Mainstreaming program and other state organizations, states have been

working together to identify and solve technology problems. The ITS/CVO

Mainstreaming program is an FMCSA initiative designed to foster and support ITS

deployment and to communicate ITS program information to all stakeholders (U.S.

DOT 2000).

Many of the issues presented in this paper were identified and discussed extensively

in forums with state officials, who are key stakeholders in future CVISN deployment. Their views on what works and what needs improvement must be considered

when charting the future direction of this technology deployment.

INTRODUCTION

ITS is significantly changing the way Federal and state motor carrier agencies 

conduct business with the motor carrier industry. New technologies are helping to

streamline credentialing operations, reduce delays for safe carriers, and improve

highway safety by focusing enforcement resources on high-risk carriers. ITS

designed for commercial vehicle operations includes the following:

■ Safety information exchange technologies to facilitate the collection, distribution,

and retrieval of motor carrier safety information at the roadside. These data help

enforcement staff focus scarce resources on high-risk carriers and drivers, which,

in turn, helps to reduce the number of crashes involving commercial vehicles.

■ Electronic screening systems, which allow commercial vehicles that maintain

good safety and legal status to bypass roadside inspection and weigh stations. 

This technology saves time and money for participating carriers and allows states

to devote more resources toward removing unsafe and noncompliant carriers.

■ Electronic credentialing systems for electronic submission, processing, approval,

invoicing, payment, and issuance of credentials; electronic tax filing and auditing;

and participation in clearinghouses for electronic accounting and distribution of

registration fee payments among states.
CHAPTER 6: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ITS FOR COMMERCIAL VEHICLE OPERATIONS? 113

Other ITS topics of current interest in the area of CVO include fleet and freight

management systems, which are private sector ITS/CVO initiatives, and electronic

commerce (e-commerce), which promises to have a great effect on CVO in the years

ahead. However, the focus of this paper is on roadside and credentialing systems,

deployed by the public sector.

Since 1991, U.S. DOT has sponsored numerous field operational tests to demonstrate new technologies and encourage their deployment. At the same time, it

developed some of the key technology components, such as the SAFER database,

containing current motor carrier safety data, and the Aspen software that allows

state enforcement officers to access the data from computers at roadside. Aspen is a

data management software system for collecting and disseminating information on

commercial vehicles and drivers. It is interconnected with the SafetyNet and Motor

Carrier Management Information System (MCMIS) services, and acts as a front-end

interface or umbrella for several functions, including an inspection selection system

(ISS), past inspection queries (PIQs), and software for conducting and reporting on

individual vehicle inspections.

CVIEW is a related application that provides an interface between state legacy 

systems and SAFER. CVIEW is a state-owned and state-operated version of the

SAFER system. It provides a state with a single point of access to its intrastate 

safety and credential information and provides SAFER with information about the

interstate carriers, vehicles, and drivers based in the state (SAFER 1998).

In 1996, U.S. DOT sponsored the CVISN Model Deployment Initiative involving

two “prototype” states—Maryland and Virginia—and eight “pilot” states: California,

Colorado, Connecticut, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Oregon, and Washington.

FMCSA developed a three-step strategy of planning, design, and deployment for

states embarking on CVISN deployment. In the planning step, a state attends two

ITS/CVO training courses and develops an ITS/CVO business plan. For design, 

a state attends a third training course and participates in a series of three CVISN

deployment workshops to complete a CVISN program plan and top-level system

design. Once the plan is accepted by FMCSA, a state can proceed with deployment, based upon the availability of Federal and state resources. The goal of the

CVISN initiative is to have each state achieve an “ambitious but achievable” level

of deployment, called Level 1, in each of the three technology areas shown in

Table 6-2. To achieve Level 1 deployment, states must:

■ Establish an organizational framework among state agencies and motor carriers for

cooperative system development.

■ Create a state CVISN system design that conforms to the CVISN architecture

and can evolve to include new technology and capabilities.

■ Implement all the elements of three capability areas, as described in Table 6-2

(Richeson 1999). These systems must be implemented using applicable architectural guidelines, operational concepts, and standards.
114 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

Table 6-2. CVISN Level 1 Deployment

Electronic Credentialing

Safety Information Exchange

Electronic Screening

■ Use of Aspen (or equivalent software for access to safety data) at all major inspection sites

■ Connection to the SAFER system so that states can exchange “snapshots” of information on 

interstate carriers and individual vehicles 

■ Implementation of the CVIEW (or equivalent) system for exchange of intrastate snapshots 

and for integration of SAFER and other national/interstate data

■ Electronic screening at one or more fixed or mobile inspection sites

■ Readiness to replicate electronic screening capability at other sites

■ Automated processing (application, state processing, issuance, tax filing) of at least 

international registration plan (IRP) and international fuel tax agreement (IFTA) credentials;

readiness to extend to other credentials [intrastate, titling, oversize/overweight carrier 

registration, and hazardous material]

■ Connection to IRP and IFTA Clearinghouses

■ At least 10 percent of transaction volume handled electronically; readiness to sign up more 

carriers; readiness to extend to branch offices where applicable

Source: Richeson, K.E., Introductory Guide to CVISN (May 1999).

At least three states—Maryland, Virginia, and Kentucky—have demonstrated

Level 1 capabilities in all three areas, and many others have made significant

progress in one or two areas. The CVISN initiative is now being expanded to other

states. According to the FMCSA, 8 of the 48 contiguous states have been fully

funded to achieve Level 1 deployment by September 30, 2003. An additional 30

states have indicated that they expect to complete Level 1 deployment by

September 30, 2003, depending on receipt of FY 2001 Federal ITS deployment or

state resources to support CVISN deployment. CVISN deployment Levels 2 and 3

are currently being defined; it is assumed that states will pursue these levels of

deployment without Federal support.

Expected costs and benefits of CVISN technologies have been analyzed in several

studies. For reference, a pilot project to deploy CVISN roadside and credentialing

technologies in the State of Washington in 1997 through 1999 was estimated to

incur incremental costs of $2.7 million, with support expenses estimated to average

approximately $600,000 per year for 10 years (Washington State 1998). A benefits

study by Mitretek Systems, citing an earlier study by the American Trucking

Associations (ATA) Foundation, predicted benefit/cost ratios between 1:1 and

19.8:1 for electronic credentialing; between 1.9:1 and 6.5:1 for electronic screening;

and between 1.3:1 and 1.4:1 for automated roadside safety inspection (Mitretek

Systems 1999). A benefit/cost assessment in Maryland, which combined CVISN

credential processing and safety enforcement technologies, estimated worst-case 

benefit/cost ratios to be 1.45 for state agencies and 6.67 for motor carriers
CHAPTER 6: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ITS FOR COMMERCIAL VEHICLE OPERATIONS? 115

(Bapna et al. 1998). Several of these analyses were based on preliminary cost 

estimates prepared before actual deployment, so findings should be interpreted with

caution.

This paper summarizes what has been learned concerning the benefits, costs, issues,

and challenges experienced by states and private organizations involved in developing

and deploying ITS/CVO technologies. Much of the information is based on

Battelle’s experience as the independent evaluator for the CVISN Model

Deployment Initiative and related field operating tests, including those involving

eastern states that make up the I-95 Corridor Coalition. However, many of the

opinions herein are derived from organizations participating in developing and

deploying these technologies. Some of their views were obtained in formal discussions

at recent conferences and meetings, including the following:

■ Institute for Transportation Engineers (ITE) 2000 International Conference,

April 2000, Irvine, California.

■ CVISN MDI Prototype and Pilot States Program Managers Meeting, April 25,

2000, Tampa, Florida.

■ Great Lakes and Southeast States CVISN Mainstreaming Conference, May

11–12, 2000, West Palm Beach, Florida.

At each of these forums, a brief presentation—“The Evaluator’s Perspective on

Deployment Status, Challenges, Benefits, and Outlook”—was followed by facilitated

discussions. Participants were encouraged to offer opinions on successes, failures,

obstacles, lessons learned, and issues to be resolved. A summary of what we have

learned about ITS for CVO is presented in the following sections, organized under the

three CVISN technology areas. A brief overview at the end predicts what the future

might hold and includes ideas about what needs to happen to help ensure success.

SAFET Y INFORMATION EXCHANGE

FMCSA has established goals to reduce commercial vehicle fatalities 50 percent 

by 2010, with a baseline of 5,374 fatalities in 1998, and to reduce the number of 

persons injured in commercial vehicle crashes 20 percent by 2008, with a baseline 

of 127,000 injuries in 1998. Although FMSCA plans new research (e.g., the Large

Truck Crash Causation project) to better understand the causes of these crashes,

vehicle safety defects and driver violations of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety

Regulations (FMCSR) are known to contribute to a portion of them (Volpe

Center 1999). Therefore, more and more state agencies responsible for enforcing

safety regulations are deploying new technologies that enable enforcement personnel

to use current motor carrier and vehicle-specific safety performance data—obtained

through safety information exchange—during roadside inspections.

In 1996, about 64 percent of states deployed roadside computers with an early version

of Aspen, the software that facilitates recording and processing of inspection data

and provides historical information on the safety performance of motor carriers

(Radin 2000). Since then, FMCSA activated the SAFER database, which contains
116 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

carrier safety data as well as recent inspection results, and Aspen was enhanced to

take advantage of more current data being available at the roadside. As of

December 1999, 84 percent of states were using Aspen, with more than half connected

to the SAFER system (Pennsylvania Transportation Institute 2000).

In parallel with SAFER activities, FMCSA has also implemented the Performance

Registration Information Systems Management (PRISM) program. PRISM, formerly

referred to as Commercial Vehicle Information System (CVIS), links motor carrier

information, including inspection information, with registration and licensing 

information. The PRISM project was piloted in five states for four years, ending in

1997. The pilot study showed that a link could be established between Federal and

state information systems and that commercial vehicle registration could serve as a

powerful enforcement tool in motor carrier safety programs (Office of Motor Carrier

Research and Standards [OMCRS] 1999). Currently, 15 states participate in PRISM

(Hart 2000), and U.S. DOT expects to add four to five new states each year for the

next several years (OMCRS 1999).

This growth in deployment of safety information exchange technology stems in part

from recognition by state commercial vehicle enforcement agencies that this 

technology facilitates the inspection process and helps focus inspection resources on

high-risk carriers (i.e., those with poor safety records). Forthcoming results from a

roadside screening study in Connecticut show computers to offer an advantage in

helping inspectors select high-risk carriers for inspection from other vehicles in the

general population (Battelle 2000). However, this advantage is expected to increase

as states develop new ways to integrate this capability into electronic screening and

other types of vehicle screening programs at the roadside. 

One of the advantages of Aspen is that it provides a tool to record, store, and transmit inspection results. Previously inspection reports had to be handwritten, then

keyed in and checked for errors before being submitted in batches to Federal databases. Although cost savings result from eliminating this activity, these savings are

offset by the additional time required from enforcement staff to enter the data at

roadside for transmission to Federal and state databases (Battelle 2000). A budget

analysis performed for U.S. DOT concluded that direct savings to the states from

roadside electronic safety systems, including clearance, would generally be less than

the cost to deploy and operate the systems (Apogee Research, Inc., 1997).

All states use this data reporting feature of Aspen. However, many differences 

characterize the way states make use of the data it provides. For example, Aspen

contains the ISS, which provides a safety rating for each motor carrier organization

(Lantz 2000). As shown in Figure 6-1, ISS gives a rating as well as a description of

the carrier’s safety record. But despite its name, most states do not use ISS to select

vehicles for inspection. Instead, inspectors look up the ISS rating only after a vehicle

has been selected for inspection. Two reasons explain this approach: (1) some states

have laws that require “probable cause” to stop a vehicle for inspection and (2) there

are logistical problems with entering a motor carrier identification number and

interpreting results while the vehicle is moving through an inspection site.

Nevertheless, inspectors report that they use information from ISS to adjust the way
CHAPTER 6: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ITS FOR COMMERCIAL VEHICLE OPERATIONS? 117

they conduct inspections. For example, the inspector might choose to adjust the

level of inspection, or pay particular attention to safety issues reported in the past

regarding the carrier in question.

Figure 6-1. Example of the Inspection Selection System Data Available

through Aspen

On the other hand, Connecticut officials have found a way to use ISS in selecting

vehicles for inspection. Two weigh stations in Connecticut use weigh-in-motion

equipment to prescreen trucks. Trucks that fail the screening or are otherwise 

chosen to stop at the fixed scale are screened again using ISS and prioritized for

inspection. This is the only known use of ISS for prescreening trucks at the roadside. A study of the screening efficiency at these sites indicates that a vehicle from 

a high-risk carrier is twice as likely to be inspected than if inspections were performed

at random (Battelle 2000). This efficiency may be due in part to inspector experience,

but the study shows that efficiency is slightly greater at sites where the technology is

more fully utilized. Also, the inspectors themselves report that ISS helps to improve

their efficiency.

Another form of safety information exchange that shows promise is the SAFER data

mailbox (SDM). Several states have tested or are routinely using SDM to transmit

inspection reports directly from the roadside to the SAFER system. They can also

receive previous inspection reports by performing a past inspection query on individual

trucks stopped for inspection. States use a variety of communication methods to

exchange safety information, including standard telephone lines (land lines) and 

wireless systems (e.g., cellular or digital). Figure 6-2 shows one way to configure SDM.
118 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

Initially, SDM was developed to help identify trucks (and drivers) violating out-ofservice (OOS) orders. OOS orders are issued when serious vehicle defects or driver

violations must be remedied before the vehicle can return to the highway. SDM was

conceived as a tool for helping states identify trucks that leave an inspection site

before OOS violations are corrected. However, given the time it takes to enter a

vehicle license number, transmit a PIQ to SAFER, retrieve past inspections, and

review the results, SDM will not have a big impact on catching OOS order violators

unless systems are routinely used to automatically identify vehicles and process the

information. Also, this system cannot reach its potential until it is up and running

in many more states where officials are committed to uploading inspection results in

a timely manner. Currently, some states can upload inspection results by wireless

communication immediately following inspection; others perform uploads only once

a week.

Figure 6-2. Typical Configuration of SAFER Data Mailbox (SDM)

Some eastern and southern states are now using SDM on a regular basis.

Connecticut, for example, reports that inspectors routinely identify recently 

inspected commercial vehicles. Out of 1,095 PIQs performed in Connecticut during

a two-month period in 1999, inspectors found 115 cases (11 percent) where an

inspection had not been made on the vehicle in question within the past 45 days.

OOS orders had been issued to 40 out of 115 vehicles with positive PIQs. Interviews

with inspectors in Connecticut and elsewhere revealed SDM to be helping inspectors

identify trends in violations, as some carriers tend to repeat the same kinds of 

violations over time. The general reaction of states using SDM is positive.
CHAPTER 6: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ITS FOR COMMERCIAL VEHICLE OPERATIONS? 119

While states have encountered challenges in attempting to deploy roadside computers

with Aspen, ISS, and SDM, there appear to be no major impediments to widespread

deployment. Difficulties include selection of hardware (hardened for field use), costs

and availability of wireless communication services, and finding of qualified internal

or external support for developing and integrating computer systems. Efforts such as

the I-95 Corridor Coalition and the CVISN Mainstreaming program are helping to

resolve these problems by providing forums for information sharing and joint efforts

on technology issues. Mainstreaming is a formal program established by FMCSA to

promote deployment of CVISN through cooperative planning and problem solving

by participating states.

Finally, a key factor in the future of roadside enforcement activities involves deployment of CVIEW or equivalent systems. The purpose of CVIEW is to integrate

interstate and intrastate carrier safety data, driver and vehicle information, and a

variety of carrier credentials and insurance data. These data will be made available

at the roadside in the form of “snapshots” and will be shared with neighboring states.

FMCSA has sponsored and funded development of CVIEW to facilitate state-level

exchange of inter- and intrastate carrier, vehicle, and driver safety and credential

data to support electronic screening operations and to allow states greater control

and flexibility for establishing interfaces with internal state legacy systems. FMCSA

will continue to fund development and maintenance support of CVIEW through

Version 3.0, which includes all the capabilities required for CVISN Level 1 deployment.

As of January 2001, FMCSA will not continue to support CVIEW development

because of funding limitations. States that elect to develop a CVIEW system based

on the FMCSA-sponsored model will be required to assume responsibility for

CVIEW enhancement and maintenance operations.

ELECTRONIC SCREENING

Starting in the early 1990s, field operational tests, such as Advantage I-75

(Interstate 75 corridor), HELP/Crescent (I-5 corridor), and Oregon Green Light

demonstrated the technical feasibility and time-saving benefits of using electronic

screening systems for commercial vehicle operations. In particular, these tests

proved that DSRC technologies provide reliable communication between moving

vehicles and roadside enforcement operations. However, most of the growth in 

electronic screening deployment has occurred with the emergence of three programs:

HELP, PrePass, NORPASS, and Oregon’s Green Light. Currently, as Table 6-3

shows, 25 states in the United States and nearly 7,000 motor carrier fleets participate

in these programs. Furthermore, total truck enrollment in the three programs has

grown by approximately 100 percent per year for the past few years.
120 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

Table 6-3. State and Motor Carrier Participation in Electronic Screening

Programs

Pre-Pass NORPASS Green Light

States 17 7 1

Trucks 129,393 7,500 13,000

Fleets 5,019 800 1,000

PrePass, NORPASS, and Green Light provide similar services and enabling 

technologies to participating states and motor carriers. Both PrePass and NORPASS

assist participating states in recruiting and enrolling motor carriers and provide 

flexible options to states for motor carrier enrollment and bypass criteria. However,

significant differences characterize their business models and operations. PrePass uses

private capital to build the infrastructure for automatic vehicle identification (AVI),

then recovers those costs through user fees. Generally, trucks pay $0.99 per bypass,

up to a specified limit. On the other hand, NORPASS uses state-owned AVI infrastructure and charges an annual administration fee of $45 per truck. Green Light is

constructed and administered by the Oregon Department of Transportation (DOT).

Oregon offers preclearance to motor carriers at no charge.

The potential benefits of electronic screening are widely acknowledged. The early

field operational tests estimated an average time savings to participating motor 

carriers of between 1.5 and 4.5 minutes per bypass (U.S. DOT 1998). Carriers with

good safety records also expect to have fewer inspections. States benefit from electronic

screening because it helps them reduce station traffic and thereby avoid the costs of

building bigger weigh stations, which can cost as much as $1 million or more,

depending on size and on the type of facilities and technologies included. Electronic

screening also helps states focus more of their inspection resources on high-risk carriers.

As previously discussed, results from a roadside screening study in Connecticut

demonstrated that computer-based inspection screening offers an advantage in helping

inspectors target high-risk carriers for inspection (Battelle 2000). Integrating electronic

screening and safety information exchange capabilities will likely extend this advantage

to a higher percentage of the commercial vehicle traffic.

Several key issues can affect further deployment of electronic screening. Most people

in the CVO industry agree that interoperability, or the ability for a vehicle to operate

with the same equipment and under similar rules as it travels from state to state, is

critical to increased participation. Interoperability has three primary dimensions:

technical, operational, and business. Technical interoperability refers to the type of

DSRC transponders used. So far, transponder type has not been a problem, as all

electronic screening applications are using the same equipment. However, interest

exists for establishing interoperability with other applications, such as electronic toll

collection and border crossings.
CHAPTER 6: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ITS FOR COMMERCIAL VEHICLE OPERATIONS? 121

Operational interoperability refers to criteria used to enroll and, more importantly,

permit trucks to bypass weigh stations. Motor carriers can be expected to want the

same bypass criteria as vehicles travel from state to state. Complete uniformity of

enrollment and bypass criteria is unlikely to occur, however, because states have different regulations and requirements. For example, states with high volumes of hazardous material (HAZMAT) cargo are likely to have different regulatory priorities

than states that deal with agricultural products. Also, differences among states in

truck size and weight regulations will lead to differences in bypass criteria. Some

success has been achieved toward operational interoperability with the Commercial

Vehicle Safety Alliance defining e-screening eligibility categories and the Intelligent

Transportation Society of America (ITS America) CVO Committee’s Policy

Subcommittee working toward establishing minimum enrollment criteria.

The interoperability issue receiving the most attention involves business, namely the

relationship between the separate PrePass and NORPASS systems. Some believe

that it will be necessary to establish one business entity so that all carriers can deal

with multiple states through a single business plan. However, this view is not 

universal. Features of PrePass and NORPASS are attractive to different types of

motor carriers and state agencies. For example, states with an existing AVI infrastructure at fixed sites may prefer the NORPASS plan, whereas states that rely more

on mobile enforcement (i.e., stopping and inspecting vehicles along the roadway) or

have fewer available capital resources may prefer the PrePass plan. Also, the different fee structures (annual versus use-based) are likely to be attractive to different

types of carriers.

Recently, PrePass and NORPASS established a one-way interoperability agreement

whereby qualified motor carriers enrolled in NORPASS can operate in the PrePass

network (Werner 2000). No corresponding agreement was reached concerning

PrePass carriers operating at NORPASS sites. Most agree that some type of interoperability is necessary to attract more carrier participation. However, few agree on

the best solution. Some states have negotiated, or are in the process of negotiating,

special interoperability arrangements with both PrePass and NORPASS; however,

these agreements may not apply to bordering states. While finding a Federal solution

has been suggested, it is not a popular choice. The best solution, according to some

of the state CVISN program managers, is to have every state pursue business

arrangements either with PrePass or NORPASS, then work within the program to

achieve interoperability as needed. Most believe that the issues will be resolved

through the marketplace.

ELECTRONIC CREDENTIALING

State agencies and motor carriers agree that electronic credentialing offers opportunity

for significant cost savings related to motor carrier registration processes.

Preliminary estimates, based on experiences in Kentucky, are that cost savings using

electronic credentialing can be as high as 75 percent for both the state and the 

participating motor carriers. For the state, this percentage translates into a potential

cost savings of $20 per processed credential. A budget analysis of costs and benefits
122 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

over time in eight case study states concluded that electronic credentialing can be

financially self-supporting (Apogee Research, Inc., 1997).

Although most states are committed to deploying electronic credentialing, these systems have not yet achieved the same level of widespread deployment as experienced

roadside systems. This result primarily stems from the many technical challenges

involved in establishing interfaces between new and legacy, or archival, databases

and software systems.

To date, three states—Maryland, Virginia, and Kentucky—have successfully demonstrated Level 1 capabilities for electronic credentialing. These states are now 

working with a limited number of carriers to test and refine the developed systems.

Additional development continues as issues are identified. The experiences of these

states, as well as those of the other seven CVISN pilot states, are being shared with

others through FMCSA-sponsored mainstreaming efforts and training workshops.

Some of the lessons learned by pilot and prototype states deal with understanding

the scope of the project and obtaining the appropriate capabilities to get the job

done. Originally, many states had unrealistic expectations that making new systems

operational was a simple “plug and play” exercise. However, integration of legacy

systems (e.g., licensing, insurance, fee payment, invoicing) with new applications

(e.g., SAFER, carrier automated transaction [CAT] software, and Web applications)

requires careful planning. Furthermore, some states relied too heavily on technical

support from outside contractors without providing adequate technical leadership

from state personnel familiar with the business applications. The use of in-house

capabilities is considered important, particularly given the shortage of qualified 

contractors familiar with credentialing operations.

Two issues concern the future direction of electronic credentialing: (1) type of data

communications that should be adopted and (2) type of software system (specialized

computer programs or Web applications) preferred by and acceptable to motor carriers.

The first issue focuses on which of two standards to use for data transmission—

electronic data interface (EDI) or eXtensible Markup Language (XML). Some prefer

EDI because it is well established; however, others find XML to be more appropriate

for Web applications. FMCSA recently sponsored a study to explore the technical

approach preferred by large carriers, service providers, fleet management system 

vendors, and states for electronic credentialing. Results, expected to be available in

late 2000, will be used by FMCSA to issue new policies on electronic credentialing.

Originally, the CVISN architecture focused on the use of specialized computerto-computer (also called PC-based) software, such as the CAT system. With this

application, participating carriers obtain the specialized software, then dial in to

state credentialing systems to perform various functions (e.g., new and renewal 

applications, invoicing, error checking, etc.). Discussions with motor carriers using

this system in Kentucky reveal that it works well, with carriers experiencing time

and cost savings of up to approximately 75 percent.

Since 1999, interest has grown in developing Web-based systems that allow carriers

to conduct credentialing business over the Internet. The key advantage of this
CHAPTER 6: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ITS FOR COMMERCIAL VEHICLE OPERATIONS? 123

approach is that any carrier with access to a Web browser can participate in electronic credentialing. Discussions with motor carriers and credentialing software

developers suggest that both PC-based and Web-based systems will be needed to satisfy the variety of needs within the motor carrier industry. Figure 6-3 shows the dual

interface approach being considered.

Figure 6-3. Dual Interfaces for Electronic Credentialing

A VIEW OF THE FUTURE

Because of rapid changes in technology, especially in the areas of computer electronics

and communication, predictions of where CVISN technology will be in five or 10

years are difficult to make. Nevertheless, a good starting point is to look at the key

technology components in terms of their current deployment level, conceptually

illustrated in Figure 6-4.

Some technologies used in roadside operations, such as weigh-in-motion equipment,

and software systems, such as Aspen (including ISS), are already widely deployed.

On the other hand, license plate readers, because of their inherent inaccuracies, are

not likely to play a key role in roadside operations. In addition, FMCSA is planning

to examine new technologies that identify commercial vehicles not equipped with

transponders. Automated inspection technologies, such as those used to detect

defective brakes, are still being developed and tested.
124 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

Growth in electronic screening is expected to continue, both in terms of the number

of states participating and number of screening sites. Carrier enrollment, a key to

success, is heavily dependent on solving interoperability issues. Furthermore, as

states decide the type of bypass criteria to use, they must communicate these criteria

to the carriers and, to the degree possible, establish some level of uniformity within

key corridors.

The type and amount of safety information that will be used to conduct roadside

inspections or to select the vehicle for inspection is likely to change dramatically 

as faster and less costly wireless communication technologies become available.

Systems like the SAFER data mailbox will permit greater use of vehicle-specific 

safety data (i.e., prior inspection results) during vehicle inspections. Collection 

and dissemination of other types of data, such as driver information and crash and

citation data, will be integrated into roadside systems like Aspen and CVIEW—

necessitating continued development and refinement of these systems.

Although electronic credentialing got off to a slow start, recent successes and the

desire to reduce costs will help promote further deployment. It now appears that

multiple solutions, including PC- and Web-based systems as well as current “paper”

systems, will be needed to satisfy the various needs of a diverse industry.

The IRP and international fuel tax agreement (IFTA) clearinghouses, which are

being developed to facilitate distribution of funds among states, are still in the early

stages of deployment. The IRP clearinghouse currently has 11 states participating in

a pilot project. The IFTA clearinghouse has two participating states, with eight

more signed up to participate.

Wireless Communications Aspen/ISS

WIM

Electronic Screening

Electronic Credentialing

License Plate Readers

Automated Inspections CVIEW or equivalent

IRP/IFTA Clearinghouse

R&D Technology

Test

Operational

Test

Limited

Deployment

Widespread

Deployment

Figure 6-4. Conceptual View of the Status of CVISN Technology Deployment

in 2000 
CHAPTER 6: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ITS FOR COMMERCIAL VEHICLE OPERATIONS? 125

One of the key lessons learned over the past few years is that collaboration among

states, in cooperation with the Federal Government, is key to success. Through the

mainstreaming program and corridor coalitions, states have been working together

to identify and solve technology problems. Many of the issues presented in this

paper were identified and discussed extensively in such forums. As key stakeholders

in the future deployment of CVISN, their views on what works and does not work

must be considered in charting the future direction of this technology deployment.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This paper presents information derived from Battelle’s experience as an independent evaluator for the CVISN Model Deployment Initiative and the I-95 Corridor

Coalition CVO safety field operational tests. Many of the state CVISN program

managers and key personnel have contributed to this effort through their participation

in data collection efforts and thoughtful conversations on important issues. The

author is especially grateful to Lt. Rudolph Supina, Connecticut Department of

Motor Vehicles; Commissioner Ed Logsdon, Kentucky Transportation Cabinet; and

Gregg Dal Ponte, Oregon DOT, for exceptional cooperation in the data collection

efforts; and Norm Schneider, New York DOT, for his support and guidance as chair

of the I-95 CVO Safety Committee. Major subcontractors on the Battelle team

include Charles River Associates, Castle Rock Consultants, E-Squared Engineering,

RS Information Systems, Western Highway Institute, Apogee Research, and Oregon

State University. Vince Brown of Battelle provided significant editorial support in

preparation of this paper. 

REFERENCES

Apogee Research, Inc., Budgetary Implications of ITS/CVO for State Agencies

(Washington, D.C.: Federal Highway Administration, 1997), EDL No. 10125.

Bapna, S., J. Zaveri, and Z. A. Farkas, Benefit/Cost Assessment of the Commercial

Vehicle Information Systems and Networks in Maryland (Baltimore, MD: National

Transportation Center Morgan State University), EDL No. 9369.

Battelle, Evaluation of the I-95 Commercial Vehicle Operations Roadside Safety and

SAFER Data Mailbox Field Operational Tests unpublished draft (Columbus, OH:

Battelle, June 29, 2000).

U.S. DOT, Commercial Vehicle Operations—Roadside ITS Field Operational Test CrossCutting Study (Washington, DC: U.S. DOT, November 1998), 

EDL No. 7863.

Federal Highway Administration, The Performance and Registration Information

Systems Management (PRISM) Pilot Demonstration Project, MCRT-000-005

(Washington, DC: Federal Highway Administration, December 1999).

Hart, C. J., untitled presentation, Proceedings of the National Intelligent Vehicle

Initiative (IVI) Meeting (Washington, DC: ITS America, July 19-20).
126 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, OMCHS Safety Program

Performance Measures: Assessment of Initial Models and Plans for Second Generation

Models (Cambridge, MA: John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center,

May 28, 1999).

Lantz, B.M., ISS-2: The Integration of the Motor Carrier Safety Status Measurement

System (SAFESTAT) into the Roadside Inspection Selection System (Fargo, ND: Upper

Great Plains Transportation Institute, North Dakota State University, January

2000).

Mitretek Systems, Intelligent Transportation Systems Benefits: 1999 Update, FHWAOP-99-012 (Washington, DC: U.S. DOT, May 28, 1999), EDL No. 8323.

Pennsylvania Transportation Institute, Survey of Motor Carrier Safety Activities –

Interim Technical Memorandum 2 (University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State

University, January 2000).

Radin, S., Tracking State Deployments of Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and

Networks: 1998 National Report (Washington, DC: U.S. DOT, May 30, 2000), EDL

No. 13082.

Richeson, K.E., Introductory Guide to CVISN, POR-99-7186 (Laurel, MD: Johns

Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory, May 1999).

SAFER, “Integrating State Systems into SAFER,” SAFER Report V. 1.2

(Washington, DC: Federal Highway Administration, November 30, 1998).

U.S. DOT, Introduction to ITS/CVO: Module 8 ITS/CVO Mainstreaming and Next

Steps (Washington, DC: U.S. DOT, undated).

Washington State Patrol Department of Licensing, Information Technology Feasibility

Study for the Washington State Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Networks

Pilot Project (Olympia, WA: Washington State Patrol, January 8, 1998) EDL No.

9363.

Werner, J., “Nationwide Interoperability of CVO Transponders Takes a First 

(Small) Step,” ITS Cooperative Deployment Network (ICDN) Web Page

http://www.nawgits.com/icdn/cvo-compat.html (Austin, TX: Institute of

Transportation Engineers, March 29, 2000).
chapter 7

WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT

CROSS-CUTTING TECHNICAL

AND PROGRAMMATIC ISSUES?
CHAPTER 7: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT CROSS-CUTTING TECHNICAL AND PROGRAMMATIC

ISSUES?

129

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Introduction

This paper strives to answer the question, “What have we learned about crosscutting technical and programmatic issues over the last decade of the National ITS

Program?” In addition to contributing to the overall topic of what we have learned

about intelligent transportation systems (ITS), this paper looks at new areas where

ITS investments should be made. It focuses on major findings or trends, rather than 

providing a comprehensive list of findings derived over the last decade of ITS work.

Because it is not possible to develop a precise or quantitative definition for success,

this paper qualitatively considers two main factors: (1) demonstrated success in 

contributing to one of the key measures for ITS benefits, which include delay reduction,

capacity increase, cost savings, crash and/or fatality reduction, and customer satisfaction;

and (2) amount and rate of deployment achieved compared to time elapsed since

the technology or method was first demonstrated. For example, a technology that

has low levels of deployment but has just emerged from the research and development

(R&D) stage may be considered promising, whereas a technology with the same

level of deployment that has been commercially available for over a decade might 

be considered unsuccessful. 

This paper discusses sensors and surveillance, communications, analysis tools,

archived data, architecture, and standards. Each of these topics cuts across the

domain-specific subsets of ITS, such as freeway management, arterial management,

transit systems, and commercial vehicle operations.

Findings

While successes and failures characterize individual technologies, successful technologies do exist and do meet ITS requirements for sensing and communications.

The information processing area needs further algorithm development for specific

ITS applications.

Surveillance: Sensing and surveillance of traffic flows are key enabling technologies,

needed for efficient management of both freeways and arterials, for integrated freeway/arterial management, and for real-time traveler information. The lack of traffic

flow sensors in many areas and roadway types continues to inhibit the growth of

traveler information and improved transportation operations management systems.

Cell phone reports from drivers have proved the quickest means of identifying urban

incidents. Where present, video cameras provide effective confirmation and information

on the precise location and nature of the incident, and the needed response. New

cellular geolocation techniques have great promise for providing low-cost traffic

probe information on arterials as well as freeways, but field testing is just beginning.

Communications: New Internet-based services and wireless data communications

technologies have the greatest potential for influencing future ITS direction.

Analysis Tools: Current transportation planning tools and techniques do not

address the impacts of traffic operations management, including ITS impacts. To

evaluate such approaches, the variance of factors such as travel demand, incidents,
130 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

and weather must be considered. New tools and techniques, such as IDAS (ITS

Deployment Analysis System), PRUEVIIN (Process for Regional Understanding and

EValuation of Integrated ITS Networks), and TRANSIMS (TRansportation

ANalysis SIMulation System) have been or are being developed to address these

shortcomings.

Archived Data: Increasing use of sensors and information for real-time operations

promises to reduce the incremental cost and improve the quality of information used

for long-range planning, transportation operations analysis, safety improvement

tracking, and other potential new applications. In addition, new technology, such as

low-cost global positioning system (GPS) receivers and handheld computers, can do

the same for traditional data collection processes. 

Architecture: The National ITS Architecture has proven to be an important tool

for promoting both technical and institutional integration of ITS. A growing

acceptance of the need for regional architectures is occurring within the United

States. In addition, the National ITS Architecture effort is being used as a model

for national architecture work in many foreign countries. 

An architecture maintenance program is needed to keep the National ITS

Architecture current and meaningful to increasing numbers of ITS deployers

throughout the country who are seeking integrated ITS solutions and system 

interoperability. Current procedures for achieving this task in the most timely and

economic fashion should be reviewed to make the process a smooth one.

Standards: The federal program of providing funding to expedite and facilitate

development of ITS standards has had many successes. In particular, work on the

ITS Data Bus (IDB) was accelerated and handed off to the private sector, and development of the National Transportation Communications for ITS Protocol (NTCIP)

family of standards is being accelerated. The standards program is undergoing a critical

period, as the first generations of standards-based products are being deployed.

The availability of Federal funds, however, has led to a large number of concurrent

efforts, some of which would not exist without partial Federal funding. Partly

because of so many parallel efforts, some standards in important subject areas may

not be receiving sufficient evaluation and critical review from the appropriate 

developer and user community.

In a few cases, standards development efforts have been unsuccessful because of the

perception by participants that their proprietary interests outweighed the potential

benefits of uniform standards. This result occurred in the area of Dedicated ShortRange Communications (DSRC) and in high-speed FM subcarrier communications.

A need exists for agreed-upon testing procedures related to standards, although there

is disagreement over whether third-party independent testing is needed or whether

vendor self-testing and warranties are adequate.

Deployment Levels: Table 7-1 summarizes the status and deployment levels of the

technologies discussed in this paper. Some areas, such as the National ITS

Architecture program, are not included, as they do not lend themselves to such a

summary. 
CHAPTER 7: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT CROSS-CUTTING TECHNICAL AND PROGRAMMATIC

ISSUES?

131

In most cases, deployment level is based on the number of cities reporting deployment

of the technology in the 1999 survey of ITS deployment. To reiterate deployment

category definitions, if the technology was deployed in fewer than 10 percent of the

78 cities surveyed, it is categorized as having limited deployment. If 10 to 30 percent

of cities deployed the technology, it is categorized as moderate deployment. Greater

levels are categorized as widespread deployment.

In the Comments column of the table, the classification “Holds promise” reflects

technologies that are successfully operational in at least one location, with potential

for much wider deployment. The “Jury still out” category is used for two different

cases: for technologies that have been available for some time but may or may not

catch on broadly, and for technologies so new that they have not yet advanced

beyond field testing—no matter how promising the tests may appear. For example,

the current, newer technology using cellular geolocation for providing traffic flow

information is in the testing stages. If it works, the technology has tremendous

potential for deployment, but because it has not been used operationally and has not

demonstrated technical and cost feasibility, it is placed in the “Jury still out” category.

Table 7-1. Cross-Cutting Technical Issues Summary Table

Technology Deployment Level Limiting Factors Comments

Cell phones for incident 

reporting

Widespread Deployment*† N/A Successful

Cell phones for emergency 

notification

Limited Deployment*† Relatively new, mostly sold in

new vehicles, takes long time

to reach 30% of vehicle fleet

Successful—number of

equipped vehicles growing

rapidly

DSRC (toll-tags) for travel 

time data

Limited Deployment Mostly used only in areas 

with electronic toll collection.

Requires power and 

communications to readers

Successful—holds promise

GPS for position,

determination, automatic 

vehicle location

Moderate Deployment in

fleets (transit, trucking,

emergency vehicles)‡

N/A Successful—use continuing

to grow. See footnote

Video surveillance Widespread Deployment N/A Successful

Direct link between 

Mayday systems and 

public safety answering 

points

Limited Deployment† Still in research and test

phase, significant institutional

policy and technical issues

Jury is still out—no known

deployments

Cellular geo-location for 

traffic probes

Limited Deployment New technologies just 

beginning field trials

Jury is still out—older 

technology unsuccessful

Sensor and Surveillance Technologies
Communications Technologies

132 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

LIDAR for measuring 

automotive emissions

Limited Deployment† Minnesota test was unsuccessful, technology didn’t

work well enough

Unsuccessful—no known

deployment

Real-time, in-vehicle traffic 

information

Limited Deployment*† Cost, commercial viability Jury is still out

Technology Deployment Level Limiting Factors Comments

Loop detectors Widespread Deployment N/A Successful

Alternatives to loop 

detectors

Widespread Deployment Initial cost, familiarity Holds promise—video 

widespread, others limited,

many cities only use for a 

few locations

Communications Technologies

Internet for traveler 

information

Widespread Deployment N/A Successful—free services

Jury is still out—on 

commercial viability

220 MHz radio channels

for ITS

Limited Deployment ITS is too small a market to

support unique communications systems

Unsuccessful—only known

use during Atlanta test 

during the 1996 Olympic

Games

DSRC Widespread Deployment N/A Successful—current use

mostly limited to Electronic

Toll Collection

High speed Internet Limited Deployment† Slow rollout, availability 

limited

Holds promise

Fully-automated Internetbased ExchangeLimited Deployment† New technology Holds promise

Digital subscriber line Limited Deployment New technology, first applied

to ITS in 1999

Holds promise—several

deployments, many more

locations considering

DSRC at 5.9 GHz Limited Deployment† Frequency just recently

approved for use, standards in

development

Jury is still out—no known

deployments in U.S., but 

used in other countries at 

5.8 GHz

Fiber optics for wireline 

communications

Widespread Deployment N/A Successful

High speed FM subcarrier 

for ITS

Limited Deployment†* Low demand to-date for invehicle real-time dataJury is still out—multiple 

conflicting “standards” and

proprietary approaches,

competition from other 

wireless technologies
CHAPTER 7: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT CROSS-CUTTING TECHNICAL AND PROGRAMMATIC

ISSUES?

133

* Quantitative deployment tracking data are not available. Deployment level was determined by expert

judgment.

† For in-vehicle consumer systems, deployment levels are based on the percent of users or vehicle fleet, not

number of cities available. For example, real-time in-vehicle traffic is available in over two dozen cities, but

the percentage of drivers subscribing to it is small.

‡ For AVL using GPS in transit, the moderate-level assessment is based on the percent of transit agencies

using the technology according to a 1998 survey of 525 transit agencies conducted by the John A. Volpe

National Transportation Systems Center. This measure was used for consistency with the transit section of

this report. If the 78 major metropolitan areas are used as a measure, then the deployment level is “widespread,” as 24 of 78 cities use GPS-based AVL.

Recommendations

Based on what has been learned to-date about cross-cutting technical and 

programmatic issues, the following recommendations are made for future national

level activities.

Traffic Sensing (Surveillance) 

The U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) should encourage deployment

of traffic sensing (surveillance) systems, provide deployment incentives, and consider

establishing minimum surveillance requirements for portions of the National

Highway System. The use of electronic toll-tag technology as traffic probes should

be considered wherever there is a significant existing base of tag-equipped vehicles.

Analysis Tools

Technology Deployment Level Limiting Factors Comments

CDPD for traveler 

information

Limited Deployment†* Lack of real-time information

to send, limited use of CDPD

by consumers

Unsuccessful—CDPD will

soon be overtaken by other

wireless data technologies

Models incorporating 

operations into transportation planning

Limited Deployment† Emerging technology, cost

and institutional issues may

become factors for some

approaches

Jury is still out—IDAS

available, PRUEVIIN 

methodology demonstrated,

TRANSIMS in development

Low power FM Limited Deployment† Just legalized by FCC, first

licenses not yet granted

Jury is still out—Brand new,

no deployments yet

Local area wireless Limited Deployment New Technology Jury is still out

High speed fixed wireless Limited Deployment† New Technology Jury is still out

Wireless Internet Limited Deployment†* New technology Jury is still out—on ITS 

uses, general use predicted 

to grow rapidly 

Communications Technologies
134 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

Testing of cellular geolocation technologies for collecting travel time data should be

a near-term priority. 

Standards Development and Deployment

Federal support should continue for a limited set of key standards, including maintenance, updates, and revisions of recently approved standards. The first generation of

products and deployments will identify necessary revisions. 

U.S. DOT should closely monitor deployments of standards-based traffic management

and roadside products. Much skepticism surrounds the utility of these standards; any

failures will be well-publicized and cause a setback of the National ITS Program.

U.S. DOT should be prepared to react quickly if standards-based products are not

being developed, or if problems impede deployments of standards-based products.

The appropriate action would depend on the nature of the problem. One example

would be “tiger teams” to quickly provide assistance in deploying standards-based

products. These teams would help identify the problem, devise solutions for the 

particular deployment, and use lessons learned to recommend changes to avoid 

similar problems in the future.

Evaluation Voids

U.S. DOT should continue efforts to close gaps in the knowledge of ITS impacts.

Gaps exist in the areas of ITS integration, rural ITS, traveler information benefits,

and transit maintenance management. Types of knowledge gaps deal with more

than just benefits and cost information. Information is also missing on how ownership, intellectual property, and liability issues are resolved.

Tracking New Technologies 

New technologies and trends should continue to be identified and assessed for their

potential positive or negative effects on ITS.

INTRODUCTION

This paper strives to answer the question, “What have we learned about crosscutting technical and programmatic issues over the last decade of the National ITS

Program?” Because it is not possible to develop a precise or quantitative definition

for success of ITS in terms of cross-cutting technical and programmatic issues, this

paper qualitatively considers two main factors. The first is a technology’s demonstrated

success in contributing to one of several key measures for ITS benefits, including

delay reduction, capacity increase, cost savings, crash and/or fatality reduction, and

customer satisfaction. The second factor is the amount and rate of deployment,

compared to time that has elapsed since the technology or method was first 

demonstrated. For example, a technology having low deployment levels, but just

emerging from the R&D stage, may be considered promising, whereas a technology

with the same level of deployment that has been commercially available for more

than a decade might be considered unsuccessful. 
CHAPTER 7: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT CROSS-CUTTING TECHNICAL AND PROGRAMMATIC

ISSUES?

135

Scope

ITS is defined as the application of advanced sensor, communications, and information processing technology to improve the safety and efficiency of surface transportation systems. Sensors and communications technology often serve multiple ITS

application areas; therefore, they are a prime focus of this paper on cross-cutting

issues. Specific information processing techniques or algorithms are often more

closely related to a single ITS application area and are not discussed in this paper.

This paper discusses sensors and surveillance, communications, analysis tools,

archived data, architecture, and standards. Each of these areas cuts across domainspecific subsets of ITS, such as freeway management, arterial management, transit

systems, and commercial vehicle operations. (See Chapter 8 for a discussion of 

cross-cutting institutional issues.) Following discussion of the major cross-cutting

areas is a section on additional new technologies that may impact ITS and a final

section of recommendations for the National ITS Program. Focus is on success in

the field, rather than on R&D results; however, research and field test results are

included where relevant. 

SENSORS AND SURVEILLANCE

Sensors and surveillance systems for measuring traffic flow and identifying incidents

are key enabling technologies for freeway management, arterial management, and

traveler information. 

Successes

Cellular phone calls from motorists have proven to be the most frequently used

means of first identifying incidents in metropolitan cities. Incidents are usually

reported by cell phone before they are detected and reported by incident detection

algorithms using data from equipped roadways. 

Cell phones combined with GPS-based vehicle location are a successful combination for emergency notification. Commercially available systems such as OnStarTM

and RESCU have proven popular with consumers. Automatic crash notification

systems, which automatically trigger an emergency call based on certain parameters

like air bag detonation, have been successfully tested and are just now becoming

commercially available on some new cars.

In general, GPS has emerged as the clear technology of choice for position 

determination and is used in transit, commercial vehicle, and emergency management fleets. GPS dominates other forms of radio-based location determination 

(e.g., LORAN-C). GPS-based position determination is also used to determine 

passenger vehicle position for emergency response and navigation systems. Today

GPS is often supplemented with other systems such as dead-reckoning or mapmatching, which handle shortcomings in GPS accuracy that were present before 

the removal of selective availability, announced in May 2000. These supplemental

systems also address areas where the GPS signal is lost, as often occurs when a 

vehicle is surrounded by tall buildings.
136 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

At present, the other technology with significant but limited use is electronic 

sign-post-based vehicle location for transit fleets. These systems use transponders at

key points, such as bus stops, to track vehicles, but cannot track a vehicle between

points. This technology represents an older, legacy technology typically deployed

before GPS-based systems were available and proven. It is not the technology of

choice today.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rule requiring geolocation of 

cellular 911 emergency calls may lead to new, non-GPS approaches for ITS location

determination. The geolocation function can have many other uses beyond 

emergency call location. These systems can also use GPS-equipped phones, but

alternative approaches that use radio triangulation from multiple cell sites or location pattern matching of multipath signatures are also being tested and deployed.

Video surveillance of freeways has been effective in reducing incident verification

time and in guiding the appropriate response. Video cameras are continuing to be

widely deployed on metropolitan freeways, with limited deployment under way on

some arterials.

Use of toll-tags for collecting travel time data on non-tolled roads holds promise.

The technology has been successfully used in several areas, including Houston,

Texas, and northern New Jersey. San Antonio, as part of the Metropolitan Model

Deployment Initiative, used toll-tag technology to collect travel time information,

even absent toll roads in the area. Instead, tens of thousands of volunteers were

successfully solicited to equip their vehicle with tags. Despite these successes,

deployment of this technique has been limited, even in areas with electronic toll

collection (ETC) and large fleets of tag-equipped vehicles. One limitation cited is

the cost of bringing power and communications to the tag reader sites.

An important research result is that only a small percentage of the vehicle fleet

needs to serve as traffic probes to provide useful traveler information. In fact, in one

simulation study of an incident on an interstate freeway, half the maximum travel

time benefit was obtained with only 2 percent of vehicles providing probe information. This result is important, as it greatly reduces the chicken-and-egg problem of

needing a large number of participating vehicles before participants see any benefit.

A need still exists, however, to verify these research results in the field.

The Jury is Still Out

Current emergency notification systems have a communications link to private, 

centralized response centers. When public safety assistance is required, these centers

then contact the appropriate emergency offices based on the vehicle’s location. 

The FCC has mandated geolocation of mobile 911 calls beginning in 2001. As

implementation proceeds, it is unknown whether the current model for manual and

automated call handling will continue, or will eventually be supplemented or

replaced with direct links between the in-vehicle system and the local public safety

answering point. Questions have also been raised concerning the ability of these

new technologies to provide location information in some rural areas. 
CHAPTER 7: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT CROSS-CUTTING TECHNICAL AND PROGRAMMATIC

ISSUES?

137

The use of cellular geolocation to collect traffic flow information is a promising 

new area, but testing is needed. An operational test of older cellular geolocation

technology—the CAPITAL (Cellular APplied to ITS Tracking And Location)

test—revealed many problems with the technology then available. The FCC mandate,

however, has brought about major investments in this technology, and several 

companies using varying approaches believe they have systems that can be used to

collect traffic flow information. Results from early tests should be available within 

one or two years.

At least one operational test—ADVANCE (Advanced Driver and Vehicle Advisory

Navigation ConcEpt)—identified problems with processing vehicle probe data from

multiple vehicles traveling on arterials. The problem is that random variations, such

as stopping at a red traffic light, can make a significant difference in reported travel

time. In addition, the best algorithms for combining data from multiple types of 

sensors are still under investigation. Several research projects on travel time data

fusion are currently under way. 

Embedded loops remain the predominant form of traffic detection technology,

whether for presence, volume, or speed detection. Many alternatives are on the

market, including video processing systems, sonic detection systems, and microwave

radar, but their market penetration is still relatively small. The Metropolitan ITS

Deployment Tracking Database (ITS Deployment Tracking Database 1999) shows

that while a large number of cities have deployed one or more of these technologies,

often deployment is limited to a handful of locations. Many transportation practitioners remain unconvinced that these new approaches have a significant advantage

over loops. Concerns have been raised about the reliability of loops, and many 

people desire a more reliable alternative that is not more expensive. Proponents 

and some users of these alternative systems argue that they have a lower total life

cycle cost than loops.

Real-time, in-vehicle traffic information and route guidance, as well as for-fee, 

pre-trip services have not yet proven successful. One constraint limiting their use 

is the limited availability of real-time surveillance information.

Unsuccessful Approaches

Light detection and ranging (LIDAR) was tried as a remote sensing tool for measuring

automotive emissions. The prototype system only operated accurately under restrictive

conditions of location and pollution type. The system was also found to be cumbersome to operate and not practical for traffic pollution monitoring (U.S. DOT 1998).

Tests of other remote sensing technologies, however, were more successful.
138 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

COMMUNICATIONS

Successes

The Internet 

The Internet has emerged as the primary source of pre-trip travel information. In

most or almost all cases, this information is provided at no charge. In many cities

with both phone and Internet traveler information services, the Internet service

receives much higher usage. In addition, Web-based forms are beginning to be used

for commercial vehicle credentials registration as part of a broader trend for government agencies to provide services over the Internet. This event is not surprising,

given that more than 70 million people in the United States now have access to the

Internet, and more than 700 people gain access every hour. At the same time, it is

important to remember that 70 million people represent only 25 percent of the U.S.

population, so the majority of citizens do not have Internet access.

Dedicated Short-Range Communications 

Electronic tolls and commercial vehicle credential checking are two of the few ITS

applications that use lower layer communications protocols unique to ITS. The

DSRC systems for these applications have been widely and successfully deployed.

Although various vendors and operators have been unable to agree on a single, open

standard for DSRC, the technology is clearly successful. DSRC at 5.9 GHz is further

discussed in the “Jury Still Out” section below.

Fiber Optics for Wireline Communications

When the ITS program began, debate still took place over the merits of coaxial

cable (coax) versus fiber optics for freeway video systems. This debate has ended,

with fiber optics the clear medium of choice for any new fixed cable installations.

Digital Subscriber Line technologies

Digital subscriber line (DSL) technologies are an emerging success story and reflective of technologies characterized as “holding promise,” despite limited deployment

to date. DSL allows high-speed digital signals, including video, to be carried over

existing copper twisted-pair wiring. It provides an alternative to laying new fiber

optic cabling where existing leased or owned twisted-pair wiring already exists,

which is the case for many centrally controlled traffic signal systems around the

country. 

DSL for ITS applications was successfully field tested in 1999 in Fairfax City, and

Alexandria, Virginia. As of April 2000, Baltimore, Maryland, has 30 cameras up

and running over DSL, and at least two other cities are drafting procurement 

specifications. More than 15 additional cities have requested information in the

technology. One city—Birmingham, Alabama—was able to install a camera and 

DSL communications link in only 2 1/2 hours, with near full-motion video over

12,000 feet of 25-year-old wire. Given these results within such a short time frame,

this technology must be characterized as a success.
CHAPTER 7: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT CROSS-CUTTING TECHNICAL AND PROGRAMMATIC

ISSUES?

139

DSL deployed for ITS systems uses digital subscriber lines owned by the transportation agencies. Delays reported in ordering DSL service over lines leased from local

telephone companies are consistent with reported experience with DSL installations

in general—and with other new technologies when they are first offered.

The Jury is Still Out

High Speed FM Subcarrier Systems for ITS 

FM subcarrier systems are widely used for both data and voice transmissions. RBDS

(Radio Broadcast Data Systems) is a standard for low-speed FM subcarriers in the

United States. Subcarrier technology involves piggybacking a second channel on

commercial FM broadcast frequencies, providing an inexpensive one-way wireless

communications medium. Specially equipped radios are required to receive the 

signals. This technology was viewed as a low-cost medium for broadcasting traveler

information. It was successfully field tested in several cities; however, only one 

company currently provides such a traveler information service, albeit in 30 markets.

Two reasons have been cited as possible explanations for this low use. The first is

immaturity of the in-vehicle traveler information market, partially due to lack of

adequate surveillance information. Without an application, there was no need for

this communications medium. The second reason, further discussed in the standards

section of this paper, was the inability of the ITS and FM broadcasting communities

to agree on a single standard for high-speed subcarriers. The prolonged debate and

lack of resolution may have chilled the market for such systems.

FM subcarriers may yet see broader use for ITS, but will face competition from 

digital broadcasting and alternative two-way systems, which are becoming increasingly

widespread. It is unclear whether the use of high-speed subcarriers for ITS will

increase, stay level, or decline.

Unsuccessful Approaches

Several wireless communications technologies that were considered likely to receive

widespread use in ITS applications have not achieved this level of success. The

technologies themselves work, but ITS applications have not been built around them.

220 MHz Radio Channels

Blocks of radio spectrum became available in this band, and the ITS program initially obtained 12 channel pairs for ITS applications. Outside of limited use in Atlanta,

Georgia—for tests held during the 1996 summer Olympic Games—no use has been

made of these frequencies. In fact, six channel pairs were turned over to the U.S.

Postal Service at its request. The consensus view is that ITS is too small a market to

support development of unique communications services and devices.

CDPD for Two-Way Traveler Information Services

Cellular digital packet data (CDPD) is a technology for exchanging digital 

information over the Nation’s analog cellular phone systems. The service is widely

available in metropolitan areas (over half the U.S. population is currently served).
140 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

The National ITS Architecture program envisioned CDPD as a primary means of

providing two-way communications to moving vehicles for ITS services. CDPD has

been successfully used by a number of transit and public safety agencies for wireless

data communications, but has not been used for commercial in-vehicle traveler

information. The primary reason is the same as for one-way FM subcarrier information:

the immaturity of the in-vehicle traveler information market. Technologies such as

CDPD exist for providing the communications link, but the services that would use

the link do not yet exist.

As the United States, along with the rest of the world, moves to digital cellular

technologies, CDPD use will most likely peak and then decline, which is why this

technology is characterized as unsuccessful for this application rather than placed in

the “Jury still out” category.

Emerging Communications Media

Communications technologies continue to evolve rapidly. The areas where rapidly

evolving technology may have a significant impact on ITS include wireless communications, the Internet, and the convergence of the two into the wireless Internet.

It is too soon to categorize these technologies in terms of success in ITS applications.

Wireless Internet 

While more people in the United States have Internet than cell phone access, this

circumstance is not true in the rest of the world, and cell phone access in this country is growing at a rate similar to or faster than the Internet access rate. At the same

time, second and third generation cellular technologies support much faster data

transmission, which will further wireless access to the Internet, including Internet

phones and other Web-enabled devices. Traveler information will be one of many

services available over these media—through handheld portable devices and as an

integrated part of in-vehicle telematics systems.

Local Area Wireless 

A number of recent and emerging technologies exist for providing local area wireless

data networks. These include the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers

(IEEE) 802.11 wireless local area network standard and the Bluetooth Initiative for

wirelessly linking notebook personal computers (PCs), handheld devices, and

peripherals. (The Bluetooth Initiative has recently added an interest group for invehicle communications.) These technologies may make interactions between

handheld portable and in-vehicle telematics more seamless. Portions of the technology

may also be applicable to the next generation of DSRC.

DSRC at 5.9 GHz

The FCC recently approved radio spectrum in the 5.9 GHz band for ITS DSRC

applications, consistent with a worldwide trend to move DSRC applications to higher

frequencies in the 5.8-5.9 GHz bands. In the United States, increasing use of the

902-928 MHz industrial, scientific, and medical band has raised concerns that the

band will be too crowded and noisy to support a growing range of potential DSRC

applications, including toll collection, drive-through purchasing, and intersection
CHAPTER 7: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT CROSS-CUTTING TECHNICAL AND PROGRAMMATIC

ISSUES?

141

collision avoidance systems. Discussions are under way to determine how to allocate

spectrum in the 5.9 GHz band and to address the need for standards. Various new

local area wireless standards (e.g., IEEE 802.11 and Bluetooth) are being examined

to see if they or a portion of them may provide the basis for standardization. At the

same time, these new local area wireless standards may end up being used for many

potential new DSRC applications. Using these alternative approaches instead of

DSRC technology will mitigate the need to migrate to the 5.9 GHz band.

Low-Power FM Licenses 

This technology is not new, but is newly legalized. In the past, no provisions existed

for licensing low-power FM radio stations, and the FCC only recently issued rules

providing for such licenses. These rules specify highway advisory radio (HAR) as an

allowed use. FM has the potential to provide a much clearer signal to drivers than

many current AM HAR systems, and most cars currently have FM radios. However,

the U.S. Congress is currently considering several bills to overturn the FCC ruling.

High-Speed Fixed Wireless

A number of new radio spectrum sections and new commercial services available for

high-speed wireless voice and data connectivity are becoming available. These

alternatives to owned or leased wireline links will increase competition and provide

connectivity that might not otherwise be available.

The Internet 

While the Internet itself is not a new medium, several new features and uses are

emerging that may impact ITS. The first is the slowly growing use of high-speed,

always-on Internet access via cable modems or DSL. This technology turns the

home PC into a convenient information appliance. As this type of access becomes

more prevalent, it will increase routine use of the Internet as an information source. 

A second rapidly emerging application is the use of the Internet for electronic commerce, whether business-to-consumer, business-to-business, business-to-government,

or government-to-citizen. This application will push more and more transactions

and services to the Internet.

Finally, a related trend is the move to fully automated Web-based information

exchange. Most Web-based information exchange today is semi-automated. An

automated server provides information for display on a screen read by humans. In

some cases, the user then re-enters the relevant pieces of information into another

processing system. This method is being supplemented by automated server-to-server

information exchange using XML (eXtensible Markup Language). Potential impact

areas for ITS include the following:

■ XML-based vocabularies as a supplement to or replacement for American

National Standards Institute (ANSI) X12 electronic data interchange standards

for Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Networks (CVISN) applications,

fleet management, and intermodal freight shipments.
142 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

■ XML-based traveler information: the Society of Automotive Engineers Advanced

Traveler Information Systems Committee has recently begun work on an XMLbased version of their traveler information message set standard. At least one

state is using XML on the server side to prepare Web pages and is publishing the

XML-based information as well, for reprocessing by others.

■ Location referencing: the Open Geographic Information Systems (GIS)

Committee is developing an XML-based standard for Web-based exchange of geographic information. ITS mapping standards committees are investigating XML.

■ Archived Data User Service (ADUS): to the extent that XML is used by systems

providing archived data, it will impact this new area of ITS. In addition, XML

may provide the basis for exchange of some ADUS information.

■ Electronic payment systems: the open financial exchange protocol used by home

banking software and by the banks and investment companies they link to is

being updated to be XML-compliant. New financial exchange standards with

broader applicability are also being developed using XML, which may affect future

ITS electronic payment applications.

ANALYSIS TOOLS

Experience has shown that traditional transportation planning analysis cannot assess

the impact or capture the benefits of more efficient transportation operations, such

as those obtained using ITS. The traditional approach to transportation planning

analysis assumes no day-to-day variability in demand and no incidents or weather

effects, and assigns vehicles to their optimal routes. With these simplifying but 

unrealistic input assumptions, little or no benefits can be shown for increasing the

amount of information available to travelers and transportation operators, or for

real-time management of transportation resources. 

ITS research has identified several new analysis methods to address these limitations.

The ITS Deployment Analysis System tool allows benefits estimates to be made for

specific ITS investments. Using methodologies consistent with current planning

analyses, IDAS imports planning model data and allows users to estimate incremental costs and benefits of adding ITS deployments to existing planning alternatives.

PRUEVIIN methodology allows off-the-shelf planning and traffic models to be

merged, and explicitly captures and analyzes effects of variations in demand, weather,

and incidents. These enhancements are made possible by improvements in modeling

techniques and computer processing power, allowing large areas and vehicle populations

to be modeled at the mesoscopic level.1 For example, 300,000 vehicle trips in a

morning peak period can be simulated in sufficient detail to capture ITS impacts.

Finally, the TRANSIMS model, now under development, uses synthetic household

trip generation and microscopic traffic simulation to analyze transportation 

planning issues.

1 Traffic models can be categorized into three categories: macroscopic, microscopic, and mesoscopic.

Macroscopic models look at overall vehicle flows, speeds, and rates, and do not explicitly model individual vehicles. Microscopic models model individual vehicles and their interactions, including headway,

gap acceptance, lane changing, etc. Mesoscopic models are hybrids; they model and track individual

vehicles, but model their travel using flow equations and simple queueing models.
CHAPTER 7: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT CROSS-CUTTING TECHNICAL AND PROGRAMMATIC

ISSUES?

143

Macro-level estimates indicate that large cost savings can result from using ITS in

conjunction with conventional construction to meet increases in travel demand.

Also, ITS projects can typically be completed more quickly, resulting in a faster

return on investment and lower disbenefits associated with major construction.

Because ITS improvements offer a means of deferring capital investments, they can

be viewed as buying an option with an estimated value (the economist perspective)

or as optimizing the allocation of the available budget. New approaches to life cycle

costing may be needed to accurately and adequately capture these impacts.

ARCHIVED DATA

The Archived Data User Service was added to the National ITS Architecture in

1999. Information collected for real-time operations or from ITS technologies has

many additional uses. Of course, some communities have archived this type of

information for many years, efforts that the ADUS program will recommend

expanding, along with developing new tools and approaches for effectively using this

information to improve surface transportation operations. 

The growing deployment of ITS sensors has the potential, if planned appropriately,

to lower data collection costs. For example, if sufficiently accurate, freeway loops

could provide continual, around-the-clock traffic counts, eliminating the need for

separate tube counters to provide snapshot traffic counts. 

A second example of potential cost savings stems from increasing availability of

urban travel time information to support real-time traveler information systems.

Such data, if properly archived, can be used as input to new forms of simulation

models that can replace more expensive field studies involving paired drivers. One

example is HOWLATE (Heuristic On-Line Web-Linked Arrival Time Estimator.

HOWLATE uses archived travel time data to assess the user benefits of traveler

information systems. It also provides a mechanism to track road, link, and networkwide trends in average travel time and travel time variability. 

Finally, new technology can simplify and improve traditional data collection processes.

For example, off-the-shelf GPS receivers coupled to notebook PCs or handheld 

computers can automate floating car and speed run data collection, reducing cost

and improving accuracy.

ARCHITECTURE

The National ITS Architecture has proven to be an important tool for promoting

both technical and institutional integration. The architecture has provided a basis

for developing ITS standards and for developing local and regional architectures,

promoting use of the systems engineering process in ITS. 

Many areas are either developing or starting to develop regional architectures, with a

growing acceptance of the need for such work to provide a framework for project

coordination and integration. Most of these areas are using the National ITS

Architecture as a tool to reduce the time and effort required to develop their tailored

regional architecture. U.S. DOT has developed a software tool, “Turbo
144 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

Architecture,” which is available through McTransTM Center for Microcomputers in

Transportation at the University of Florida. This tool has the potential to greatly

assist production of regional and project architectures for those using the National

ITS Architecture as a basis for the communications and interface framework.

Importantly, this software tool will associate interfaces within the developed 

architecture to standards that could potentially help in detailed system design and

system-to-system interoperability. Areas using the National ITS Architecture

include Virginia, Maryland, Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Dallas, New York City, the 

mid-Ohio region and Washington, DC.

In addition, many countries initially skeptical of the need for an overall National

ITS Architecture have come to recognize the value of such an approach, pioneered

by the United States. National and multinational architectures have now been

developed or are being developed by many nations and groups, including the

European Community, Korea, Japan, Australia, Canada, Italy, the Netherlands, and

the International Organization for Standardization (ISO).2 Many of these countries

explicitly or implicitly borrow from the U.S. National ITS Architecture.

To continue to be useful, the National ITS Architecture must and should be maintained to accommodate new or revised ITS user services. The current process for

accommodating new or revised user services, however, is costly and time-consuming.

This issue raises an important concern, as several new services are under consideration and require the architecture to be kept up-to-date. The current process

involves intensive and time-consuming efforts to:

■ Coordinate development of informal user requirements from the stakeholder 

community.

■ Translate informal requirements into formal “user service requirements.”

■ Implement requirements in a revised architecture, down to the lowest level of the

current national architecture. 

■ Update related documents such as the standards requirements document.

■ Elicit review by the user community.

This process adds time and significant cost to the overall National ITS Program. 

It would be appropriate to revisit these procedures and determine ways to reduce 

the time and cost involved in maintaining the National ITS Architecture. Areas

for consideration include streamlining the requirements generation process, reducing

the level of detail maintained in the current architecture, and eliminating maintenance

on some of the noncore architecture documents, such as the standards 

requirements document. 

STANDARDS

With some important exceptions, ITS systems use standard off-the-shelf communications media and applicable general purpose data communications standards.

Standards unique to ITS are developed primarily for application messages exchanged

2 ISO is the short-form name of the organization, not an acronym, hence the apparent mismatch

between the formal name in English and the letters “ISO.”
CHAPTER 7: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT CROSS-CUTTING TECHNICAL AND PROGRAMMATIC

ISSUES?

145

over these media. One notable exception is DSRC for such applications as ETC

and commercial vehicle prescreening. 

ITS standards can allow equipment from multiple vendors to interoperate, reducing

lock-in to single vendors and allowing easier upgrades or expansion of systems. ITS

standards also make it easier to add new capabilities and, ultimately, reduce cost.

The ITS standards program is based on a unique partnership, with U.S. DOT 

providing partial funding to facilitate and expedite he development of ITS-specific

standards. The concept is to use the voluntary standards development process 

normally used in the United States, but with additional funding for specific types of

support that facilitate and speed standards development.

Federal funding is made available on a case-by-case basis for the following purposes:

■ To pay for consultant time to help draft standards.

■ To cover travel and per diem costs of state and local public sector participants, to

ensure that the standards development process adequately represents the customer

perspective.

■ To conduct testing to ensure quality and completeness of a standard.

■ To cover certain administrative costs associated with developing ITS standards.

■ Where appropriate, to fund limited participation in international standards 

development.

The standards program has led to many successful standards development efforts. 

In particular, federal support has expedited the development of several important

standards, including the in-vehicle ITS Data Bus and NTCIP family of standards,

particularly the center-to-roadside subset. 

At the same time, availability of Federal support has generated a large number of

concurrent efforts, which has made it difficult to track and coordinate efforts and

ensure proper focus on critical and timely areas. In addition, some of these efforts,

while useful, do not address critical needs and lack the necessary push for successful

development and adoption of standards. Some standards efforts would not merely

slow down, but would evaporate without Federal funding, which indicates the standard is not essential. Having a large number of concurrent efforts also dilutes 

available resources, attention, and oversight. Some standards may not be getting

sufficient evaluation and critical review from a broad enough base of product 

developers and users before being adopted.

A few unsuccessful efforts to develop standards have occurred where a perception

held that proprietary interests of individual product developers were greater than the

benefits of uniform standards. For example, the DSRC area has no approved standard for this reason, and high-speed FM subcarrier communications finally adopted

multiple incompatible standards after much delay and forum-shopping.

On a more minor note, the time from start of a standards development effort to

availability of standards-conforming products was often underestimated. ITS standards typically take several years or more to develop, and at least another year before

products that implement the standard become commercially available.
146 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

Despite these problems, a large number of useful ITS standards have been completed,

and products that comply with the standards are being developed and deployed. ITS

standards are undergoing a critical period within the ITS community, which has

expressed skepticism about their value. Successful projects will greatly aid in overcoming the hesitation to move to new, standards-based products, while well-publicized

failures will set the program back, regardless of reason for the failure. Guidance and

assistance must be available to ensure that first adopters are successful in deploying

standards-based systems.

Some critics have cited the need for independent testing of products for standards

conformance, including participants at the Institute of Transportation Engineers

(ITE) 2000 International Conference in April 2000. Others have stated that vendor

self-testing and warranties would be adequate. Both groups have urged standardardized testing procedures. 

ADDITIONAL FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS

The main reason for the “What Have We Learned About ITS” Initiative was to

identify successes, failures, and open issues to help in planning the future of the ITS

effort. To conduct this planning, one must not only look back at what has been

learned, but also look forward to what is expected. This section briefly identifies

some of the expected near-term developments in ITS:

■ Continued integration of services and components. There will be increased 

integration of various ITS user services within a locality, as well as increased 

integration across local jurisdictional boundaries. In many areas, this event will

be a loose integration based on information exchange, but in some areas, transportation needs will drive tighter integration, despite current institutional barriers.

■ Continued migration of analytical and simulation tools that integrate ITS and

operational analyses into the transportation planning process.

■ Reduced need for differential GPS or supplemental position determination methods, stemming from removal of the intentional “selective availability” degradation

in GPS accuracy. Elimination of selective availability in May 2000 increased the

accuracy of basic GPS data from about 100 meters to between 10 and 20 meters. 

■ Continued impact of new information technologies. A current example is the

emergence of extensible markup language for automated Web-based information

exchange. This innovation will bring both opportunities and challenges. Newer,

cheaper, and simpler tools will enhance the ability of both the public and private

sectors to bring services to citizens and customers. At the same time, the rapid

evolution of technology and related standards will continue to make implementation decisions difficult. This circumstance will be true, regardless of whether the

technology is purchased or the service leased from a service provider. 

■ Lower cost and new methods for evaluating ITS. Archiving of ITS data will

lower the costs of evaluation and performance monitoring and, perhaps more

importantly, will provide new methods and metrics for assessing and evaluating

the effectiveness of transportation operations.
CHAPTER 7: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT CROSS-CUTTING TECHNICAL AND PROGRAMMATIC

ISSUES?

147

■ Development of national traveler information systems. Multiple private,

state/regional, and national projects will promote necessary data and message

standards and database developments, leading to interstate and national level

traveler information systems.

■ Expanded use of weather information systems. Increased focus on rural needs will

expand research, testing, and deployment of improved road weather information

systems. Sensing and warning networks will expand, and new tools for integrating

and fusing information to aid decision-makers will be developed.

■ Increasing statewide integration for areas outside of major metropolitan areas.

This integration may include statewide public safety answering points and

statewide traffic and emergency management coordination.

■ Increased efficiency of transit and paratransit services for health and human services.

This increase will result from greater coordination and expanded brokerage services

between agencies.

■ More widespread vehicle-based safety systems, such as collision warning systems.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR NEXT STEPS

Based on what has been learned to date on technical issues, the following recommendations are made for future national-level activities:

Traffic Sensing (Surveillance) 

U.S. DOT should encourage deployment of traffic sensing (surveillance) systems, 

as they are a key enabler for arterial and freeway traffic management as well as for 

traveler information systems and real-time route guidance. U.S. DOT should 

promote deployment, provide incentives, and consider establishing minimum

requirements for portions of the National Highway System. Use of electronic tolltag technology as traffic probes should be promoted where appropriate, and testing of

cellular geolocation technologies for collecting travel time data should be a nearterm priority. The latter recommendation may already be occurring at the state and

local levels, and may not require a large Federal role.

Standards Development and Deployment 

Federal support should continue for a limited set of key standards, including maintenance, updates, and revisions of recently approved standards. The first generation of

products and deployments will identify necessary revisions. Also, as technology

evolves, new, overlapping standards will be developed in some areas—a fact of life

that must be accommodated.

U.S. DOT should closely monitor deployments of standards-based traffic management and roadside products. Some in the traffic management community are 

skeptical about the utility of these standards, which call for ongoing education as to

their purpose, use, and benefits. Publicizing successful deployments will also help to

mitigate skepticism. 

Skepticism and a general reluctance to try new “leading edge” approaches will

heighten any failures of standards-based procurements. Negative publicity will 
148 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

create a setback for the National ITS Program. U.S. DOT should be prepared to

react quickly if standards-based products are not being developed or if problems

ensue with deployments. Appropriate action will depend on the nature of the problem.

For example, if standards-related problems develop in a deployment project, U.S.

DOT could send in an expert “tiger team” to rapidly assist in identifying the problem

and developing a solution for that project. Information gleaned would then be used

to guard against similar problems occurring with future procurements.

Evaluation Voids 

U.S. DOT should continue efforts to close gaps in knowledge of ITS impacts. Gaps

exist in the areas of ITS integration, rural ITS, traveler information benefits, and

transit maintenance management. Types of knowledge gaps include more than just

benefits and cost information. They also include information on how ownership,

intellectual property, and liability issues are resolved. U.S. DOT is already using the

identified gaps as criteria for deciding which ITS deployment projects to evaluate at

the Federal level, and has begun new research to quantify the benefits of pre-trip

traveler information systems.

Efforts to track deployment levels in a cost-effective manner for various ITS services

should also continue, as these results are an important consideration in deciding how

to make National ITS Program investments. 

Tracking New Technologies 

New technologies and trends that might affect ITS should continue to be identified

and assessed for their potential effects, both positive and negative.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This paper is primarily based on work conducted for the ITS Joint Program Office by

Mitretek Systems. It also draws on results from other U.S. DOT organizations and

contractors supporting the “What Have We Learned about ITS” Initiative. These

include the John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Battelle, BoozAllen & Hamilton, SAIC, and Oak Ridge National Lab. Information is also based

on feedback and comments received at the ITE 2000 International Conference.

REFERENCES

U.S. DOT, Emissions Management Using ITS Technology ITS Field Operational Test

Cross-Cutting Study (Washington, DC: U.S. DOT, June 1998), EDL No. 6325.

Metropolitan ITS Deployment Tracking Database Web Page, Oak Ridge National

Laboratory, http://itsdeployment.ed.ornl.gov (Washington, DC: U.S. DOT, 1999).
chapter 8

WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED

ABOUT CROSS-CUTTING

INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES?
CHAPTER 8: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT CROSS-CUTTING INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES? 151

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In 1991, the U.S. Congress initiated the Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems

(IVHS) program, now called the Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) program.

While Congress was enthusiastic about the potential benefits of using advanced

technologies in the surface transportation system, it was also concerned that 

nontechnical barriers and constraints would impede the progress of the program.

Therefore, it instructed the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation

(U.S. DOT) to identify significant institutional issues and to study their potential

effects on the program. To fulfill this mandate, the U.S. DOT commissioned extensive

studies of institutional and legal issues. These activities included evaluations of ITS

field operational tests, demonstration projects, and model deployment activities. 

In addition to the work of U.S. DOT, representatives of state, regional, and local

governments, private sector firms, and academia investigated the impacts of 

institutional and legal issues. U.S. DOT, Intelligent Transportation Society of

America (ITS America), and other professional organizations also sponsored 

conferences and workshops addressing the impacts of institutional issues. 

The major finding of these activities is that no nontechnical or institutional issue

has completely halted deployment of an ITS project. While institutional and legal

impediments do exist, they either have been or can be overcome. Some areas, such

as privacy, public-private partnerships, and government procurement regulations,

required legislative change. Other areas, including attracting and retaining staff and

dealing with liability issues, require outreach, technical training, and education. 

Investigation of barriers showed that the key to overcoming most constraints is 

realizing that certain problems will arise and must be addressed early in project 

planning. It should be noted, however, that success did not always come easily.

Often, implementors of ITS products and services spent a considerable amount 

of time and other resources addressing these issues. It was only through their 

perseverance and commitment that they were able to overcome these barriers. 

INTRODUCTION

Since the inception of the IVHS program nearly a decade ago and its continuation

as the National ITS Program, the U.S. Congress, other public policymakers, and the

transportation community have recognized that nontechnical and institutional issues

can adversely affect the implementation of ITS products and services. To address

this concern, Congress requested, through the Intermodal Surface Transportation

Efficiency Act of 1991, that the Secretary of U.S. DOT prepare two special reports

on ITS nontechnical and institutional constraints and barriers. 

The Secretary, through his staff, also commissioned other studies to address potential

obstructions to ITS implementation. In particular, the ITS Joint Program Office (JPO)

oversaw the evaluation of a number of field operational tests and Metropolitan

Model Deployment Initiative (MMDI) sites. Furthermore, representatives of state,

regional, and local governments, private sector firms, and academia analyzed the

potential and real effects of these issues as they deployed ITS. U.S. DOT, ITS
152 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

America, and other professional organizations also sponsored conferences and workshops addressing the impacts of institutional issues. 

This paper brings together the findings from these activities, addressing the question,

“What have we learned about cross-cutting institutional issues?” It discusses how

the planning and deployment of ITS projects differ from procedures required by 

traditional transportation projects, the challenges presented to the transportation

community, the issues that may be encountered in the future, and how these issues

may already have been addressed.

A NEW AND DIFFERENT ALTERNATIVE

The National ITS Program provided the transportation community with a new

alternative for solving transportation problems, offering another tool to better 

manage the transportation system. In the early days of the program, however, the

concept of ITS was not clearly defined and left transportation officials uncertain

about the program’s direction. Also, the transportation community felt that ITS

technologies focused more on highways than transit and was more conducive to 

freeways than to arterials.

The implementation of ITS products and services also differed from the implementation of traditional construction projects. ITS planning and deployment required

coordination among jurisdictions, data sharing, unique technical knowledge, and

involvement of nontraditional players. These differences meant that several barriers

had to be overcome. Coalitions had to be built where none existed before, and new

communication channels had to be created among agencies within a region.

Employees with new skills had to be found, and current employees needed to receive

new training. Public works personnel had to work with public safety personnel and

representatives of private sector firms.

The newness and difference of ITS also caused the creation of additional stumbling

blocks. Because public officials were more familiar with traditional, more “tangible”

projects and because the benefits of ITS were not readily available, ITS projects

required a greater proof of value than traditional projects. Furthermore, staff apathy

and/or skepticism had to be overcome.

Other differences were also noticeable. First, ITS involved larger operations and

maintenance components than previously experienced in “build and ignore” 

construction projects. Second, procurement of ITS technologies required a different

process than that used for construction projects. Finally and on the positive side,

ITS projects were eligible for nontraditional sources of funding, such as funding from

the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality program.

A NEW ENVIRONMENT

Creation of the National ITS Program produced a new work environment for the

transportation community. This new framework anticipated the emergence of 

different emphasis areas within U.S. DOT. It also required the formation of new

relationships leading to new alliances among an area’s public sector agencies, along
CHAPTER 8: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT CROSS-CUTTING INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES? 153

with collaboration of public and private sectors. This environment involves a 

different portioning of project costs as well.

New Federal Transportation Emphasis Areas

For the past four decades, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) emphasized

the construction and maintenance of the National Highway System and other roads

on the Federal-aid highway system. With that job largely completed, FHWA needed

to turn its attention to better operating and managing the assets already in place.

Partly in response to the National ITS Program, FHWA management now places a

greater emphasis on the management and operation of the Nation’s highway system,

evidenced by the creation of a core business unit for operations within the agency.

The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) increased its emphasis on advanced 

public transportation systems and services innovations. The planning offices of 

both agencies now promote ITS solutions within the statewide and metropolitan

transportation planning processes. 

The most significant change within U.S. DOT caused by the National ITS Program

was the creation of the ITS JPO. This office serves as the U.S. DOT’s advocate and

national leader for ITS research and deployment, establishes strategic direction, and

provides cross-departmental coordination of ITS activities.

JPO staff are engaged in many activities new to U.S. DOT. These activities include

creating the National ITS Architecture, accelerating the development of standards,

and ensuring consistency of federally funded ITS projects with the architecture 

and standards. JPO staff are also active in developing a program to increase ITS

knowledge and skills among transportation professionals; conducting outreach and

communications activities that include showcasing benefits of ITS products and

services; and evaluating ITS activities, including the tracking of ITS deployments

across the United States. Furthermore, the National ITS Program has also led the

JPO staff to consider the traveling public as a user of ITS services and to engage in

market research to understand user acceptance of ITS products and services and user

willingness to pay for them.

New Regional Organizations 

Before the inception of the National ITS Program, extensive interactions among

transportation agencies were not necessary. The planning and deployment of 

ITS projects, however, require more in-depth cooperation, coordination, and 

communications among these agencies. Strong relationships are needed to ensure

development of a regional perspective, integration of individual products and 

services, and effective operation and maintenance of installed systems. Use of a

regional organization has proven to foster and maintain the close relationships 

needed to successfully deploy ITS. 

Sometimes an existing organization can be used as the central agency. For example,

in the New York-New Jersey-Connecticut metropolitan area, TRANSCOMSM

(Transportation Operations Coordinating Committee), a coalition of representatives

from 15 traffic, transit, and law enforcement agencies in the tri-state area, came to

coordinate construction and regional incident management. The agency’s role later
154 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

broadened to include coordinating the region’s ITS activities, including leading the

ITS model deployment initiative.

Sometimes new organizations are created. The E-ZPass Interagency Group, which

now comprises representatives from 16 toll agencies in seven eastern states

(Delaware, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, and

West Virginia), was created when executives from the region’s transportation agencies

and toll authorities determined that the successful implementation of a regional

electronic toll collection system required a regional management structure. In either

case, the concept of a regional transportation body to oversee transportation projects

is another facet of the new environment in which transportation professionals 

must work.

New Public and Private Sector Collaboration 

The advent of the National ITS Program brought the public and private sectors

together in a new way. The dissemination of data, for instance, necessitated 

the interaction of public and private sectors. For while the public sector operated

the physical infrastructure that collected the data, the private sector operated the 

media that disseminated them. Often, large bureaucracies and small entrepreneurial

firms started working together for the first time. For this collaboration to work, 

participants had to learn to overcome biases toward the other sector, understand

each other’s cultures and responsibilities, and establish strong cooperative relationships. Working with representatives of another sector was an adjustment for all 

participants.

Implementing new ITS technologies brought together as partners several governmental agencies and private firms, which had previously worked together only in a

customer-vendor role. All parties had to adjust to a new business style and working

environment. The newness of this type of collaboration also made public sector 

officials aware that representatives from private firms were entitled to provide input

into the decision-making process. Likewise, private sector management had to learn

about local, state, and federal procedures and contracting requirements. 

The public and private sectors also have different business cultures and biases toward

each other. Sometimes representatives from the private sector were not totally

aware of the political realities faced by public agencies, and focused only on business

issues. Similarly, some public agency staff were unreceptive to innovation and, in

the eyes of the private sector, made decisions too slowly. Conflicts also occurred

over the public and private sector’s differing expectations about proprietary interests

and intellectual property rights.

New Cost Flows

With traditional highway projects, costs are weighed more for construction than for

operations and maintenance. This scenario is reversed with ITS projects. Very

often, the construction costs to deploy ITS products and services are low compared

to the costs to operate and maintain them over the system’s life cycle. This situation

requires transportation officials to present the funding need for operations and 

maintenance to elected officials and upper management.
CHAPTER 8: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT CROSS-CUTTING INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES? 155

Also in this new ITS environment, operations costs can be offset by the generation

of revenues. Placing a value on an ITS product or service and determining the 

distribution of revenues among project participants are activities previously unfamiliar

to public sector transportation personnel. Furthermore, providing the funds to 

construct, operate, and maintain ITS infrastructure is no longer the sole responsibility

of the public sector. The National ITS Program created the opportunity for the 

private sector to be involved in providing services and sharing the costs and 

revenues to do so.

CURRENT AND FUTURE ISSUES

Implementors of ITS products and services will continue to be confronted by 

nontechnical issues. Analysts from the U.S. DOT’s John A. Volpe National

Transportation Systems Center identified areas in which issues have arisen and may

continue to arise. They identified these areas through evaluation of model deployment initiative projects;1 review of nontechnical barrier studies; and discussions with

program managers, evaluators, and others involved in the ITS community. These

areas were subjectively ranked using responses to an informal survey of ITS program

managers and voting results obtained from participants at a roundtable discussion 

on ITS cross-cutting institutional issues convened during a conference sponsored by

the Institute of Transportation Engineers.2 The following discussion of the issues

includes comments from participants of the roundtable session. Ten issues were

identified, with the most prominent listed first:

■ Awareness and perception of ITS.

■ Long-term operations and maintenance. 

■ Regional deployment.

■ Human resources.

■ Multi-organizational relationship. 

■ Ownership and use of resources.

■ Procurement.

■ Intellectual property.

■ Privacy.

■ Liability.

These issues are not mutually exclusive. Often an action taken to address one issue

may help overcome another.

1 On February 26, 1996, U.S. DOT issued a request for participation in the Metropolitan Model

Deployment Initiative. The sites to be selected were envisioned as demonstrations and showcases of

the measurable benefits resulting from application of an integrated, regionwide approach to transportation management and provision of traveler information services. 

2 The Institute of Transportation Engineers held their 2000 International Conference in April 2000, in

Irvine, California. During this conference, U.S. DOT’s ITS JPO sponsored seven roundtable discussions. In the session that covered cross-cutting institutional issues, 19 participants representing federal,

state, and regional transportation and planning agencies; private firms; and transit properties identified,

discussed, and ranked nontechnical issues that have arisen or may occur in the future. This paper

incorporates their input.
156 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

Awareness and Perception of ITS

Although ITS activities have been under way for approximately 10 years, numerous

elected and appointed officials are still not familiar with the concept. Also, some

see ITS technologies as “gizmos” looking for a problem to solve. For ITS programs

to achieve widespread acceptance, ITS proponents must garner explicit public

awareness and support for them. Failure to do so means a lack of financial resources

and other support for ITS projects.

Public officials must understand the transportation needs in their area. They must

be shown how improving the transportation system will help achieve the goals set

for the community, such as those addressing economic development and quality of

life. Once the problems and goals have been identified, then the officials can be

shown the solutions available to them, which, naturally, would include ITS products

and services.

The effective management of the transportation system will always be a goal of the

public sector. The operations and maintenance of this system have become increasingly

more difficult because of decreasing opportunities for new construction and because

of reductions in staff, funding, and other resources. Again, in this context, ITS 

solutions can be promoted as one way to improve management of the system.

Safety is another area of visible need and concern for public officials. Whenever

ITS products and services can help improve safety, they should be touted toward

that end.

Often, there is a lack of solid evidence that ITS solutions are effective. The ITS

community must continue to develop tools to measure effectiveness and move from

empirical and anecdotal knowledge to quantifiable, explicit benefits. Evaluations of

deployed ITS must continue, and the findings from these evaluations must be widely

publicized. 

Lack of awareness continues to be an intra-agency problem in some agencies.

Coordination of personnel performing different functions (e.g., planners, ITS 

personnel, and maintenance staff) may also be limited. Agency management must

continue to show how ITS solutions can improve both the effectiveness of the

agency as well as the effectiveness of the transportation system.

Management at the San Antonio District of the Texas Department of

Transportation (DOT) understood well the need to make ITS visible to decisionmakers and the general public. Their public relations staff reached out to the 

general public through radio and television commercials, printed pamphlets and

newsletters, and real-time video images and traffic information on local radio and

television news. District management also championed ITS and went before the

Texas Transportation Commission to promote it. Furthermore, the San Antonio

District approached their management at headquarters and helped them understand

the concepts and terms of ITS. They also sponsored tours and demonstrations of

their ITS facilities for state and federal elected officials.
CHAPTER 8: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT CROSS-CUTTING INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES? 157

The staff of the San Antonio-Bexar County Metropolitan Transportation Planning

Organization brought ITS to elected officials through its board and to the general

public through citizen task force meetings featuring discussion of the 20-year 

regional transportation plan. The planning staff discussed ITS before groups 

and transportation agencies at public hearings for the region’s transportation

improvement plan. 

Long-term Operations and Maintenance 

As more and more ITS technologies are deployed, the issue of continued operations

and maintenance of these systems becomes more prominent. As previously noted,

ITS projects are unlike most typical construction projects in that they are designed

for continuous operations. Transportation professionals need to approach planning

for ITS projects differently than they have for capital projects. The lack of longterm planning could result in a poor transition from project deployment to day-today system operation.

The cost of a project’s operation and maintenance must be identified in the project

planning stage, and the impacts of these costs addressed. The life cycle of each 

operational improvement must be considered. Procedures similar to those used in

the private sector should be developed to examine capital costs as well as costs for

operations, maintenance, and repair. These procedures must be flexible, for sometimes public staff do not know the full cost of operations and maintenance until the

technology is installed and operating. In other cases, ITS use is expanded to include

new functions. The procedures should be easy to change based on feedback and

expanded uses.

Working in a new environment, transportation professionals must address operations

and maintenance costs earlier than before in the project timeline, as doing so will

bring the need for continued funding before elected and appointed officials—a need

often overlooked. Up-front costs for ITS projects are usually less than those for conventional infrastructure projects; however, continuing costs are usually greater than

conventional maintenance costs.

Considering operations and maintenance activities early in the project development

process will also ensure that the designed system operates as expected, is used as

planned, and can be easily maintained. Staff responsible for different functional

areas should be encouraged to provide input during the different phases of the 

project—including, for example, those responsible for operations and maintenance

functions in the system design and construction phases. This action will reduce the

risk of having to modify the system after it is installed.

Although they did not always start planning for long-term operations and management at a project’s initiation, participants in several ITS deployments recognized

that this planning should be addressed early in the project’s life. They learned that

knowing what would happen at a later step might prompt them to change what they

did at an earlier step.
158 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

To ensure continuation of its ITS activities, Washington DOT staff developed a

business plan addressing long-term operations and management of their advanced

traveler information system. This plan helped them to understand the direction the

project would take once it was deployed. The plan also covered the transfer of 

control of existing systems and defined public sector and private sector roles.

Management personnel at the Road Commission for Oakland County in Michigan

were also concerned about the long-term operation and maintenance of its FASTTRAC (Faster And Safer Travel through Traffic Routing and Advanced Controls)

system. During the field operational test, management wanted to ensure that the

advanced traffic management system would be maintained. Given the amount of

hardware involved, contractors performed most of the installation. Commission

management, however, retained some of the installation work for its technicians,

feeling that the new technology would challenge and motivate its staff. Because of

their involvement, the staff developed an appreciation of the system and a sense of

pride and satisfaction, which helped to ensure its long-term maintenance.

Regional Deployment

So many perceptions exist of what constitutes a region. Metropolitan planning

organizations (MPOs) look at the metropolitan area, while politicians look at where

their electorate resides. The media looks at its market. In contrast, an ITS program

must not be imprisoned by jurisdictional boundaries. Because there are various ways

to get people to act regionally, participants of any ITS program should thoughtfully

consider how to group the region, identifying the scale of the transportation system

serving the region and bringing varied people together.

The adoption of a regional perspective for ITS use is one of the most important

strategies for success. A regional perspective means that project participants view

projects from the standpoint of other project participants in their region as well as

from their own. This outlook, which fosters a more cohesive and integrated project

vision for all involved, is key to facilitating development of ITS products and services.

Failure to craft such a vision leads to confusion among project participants and often

to severe delays. Unfortunately, developing a regional perspective and bringing the

necessary players together will continue to be a challenge. Differing agendas of public

agencies and differences between public and private sectors will continue to be

impediments. 

Often within transportation planning and design processes, ITS projects are 

considered to be in competition with capital projects for a region’s transportation

funds. In reality, ITS projects should be developed in concert with capital projects. 

Project planners and designers should routinely consider ITS technologies that 

could complement the capital project and help to operate it more effectively.

Advancing the routine consideration of ITS solutions in the metropolitan transportation planning process will help foster a regional vision for ITS. Moreover, this

action may increase support from elected officials who sit on the MPO’s governing

board. The MPO structure can also be used to heighten communications among

public agencies and the private sector.
CHAPTER 8: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT CROSS-CUTTING INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES? 159

Implementers of successful ITS projects have used four strategies to develop 

a regional perspective: (1) they built on existing relationships, (2) they developed 

a shared vision, (3) they involved nontraditional players, and (4) they augmented

existing systems.

A regional ITS perspective was developed within the New York-New JerseyConnecticut metropolitan area by following the four strategies outlined above. 

First, Trips123 project participants built on existing relationships and promoted an

existing organization of transportation agencies, TRANSCOM,SM as the lead agency.

They then reviewed the ITS plans and activities of the member agencies and selected a course of action best suited for the region. They brought in private sector firms

previously not affiliated with TRANSCOM.SM They also augmented existing systems,

which included a traffic management and accident detection system, a transit 

information system, a regional architecture, and the incident and construction data

already collected by the agency’s operations information center. 

Most importantly, participants realized that in order to ensure success, they would

have to adjust their priorities or possibly give up some autonomy or control. This

event occurred when a request was made to move the implementation of the first

phase of the traffic management system from the southern portion of the region to

the northern portion. TRANSCOMSM members unanimously decided to accept

this request, easily making the decision because they had already developed 

a regional perspective for traffic management.

Human Resources

Problems in this area may be manifested in several ways. First, public agencies may

lack the staff needed to develop, install, and operate ITS. Second, the staff may lack

the expertise required. Third, talented public sector staff may be lured to the private

sector.

These conditions will occur when a public sector agency has limited resources to

hire and train staff, and to provide salaries and benefits comparable to the private

sector. This issue intensifies when resources become less available. Project administrators must clearly identify the resources required and bring their needs before 

management. They must also identify areas in which the private sector can 

contribute its expertise.

An inflexible agency culture and organizational structure may also lead to problems.

Agency personnel may not accept new technologies or develop new ways of doing

business, such as modifying the procurement process to accommodate ITS products

and services. Activities that promote the benefits of ITS technologies need to 

continue.

Labor issues may also arise. Installing new technologies will definitely affect the 

way jobs are performed. Agency managers get concerned that union members may

perceive these technologies as increasing their workloads or forcing them to change

the ways they do their jobs. The perception may be that ITS will reduce the number

of employees needed by an agency or within a particular job category. Project developers

should invite union representatives into the ITS development process at an early
160 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

stage, not only to explain the project and assuage fears, but also to receive labor’s

input into the design and operation of the system.

There are several examples of MMDI project participants overcoming possible staff

reluctance and insufficient training. In San Antonio, the Ambulance Committee

solicited feedback from emergency medical technicians and firefighters concerning

the placement of video equipment in ambulances. VIA Metropolitan Transit

Authority bus drivers were asked to provide input on the placement of cameras

within buses. Operators of the traffic management center were involved in designing the upgrade and expanding the TransGuide center.

The training of San Antonio firefighters and emergency medical technicians on new

equipment occurs through a phased program in which a small group is selected and

trained and, in turn, trains others. This system works well for the San Antonio Fire

Department because the units are geographically dispersed. Fire department management preferred to conduct in-house training, as outside trainers lack familiarity

with personnel concerns and with San Antonio Fire Department procedures. 

In Indianapolis, Indiana, the Metropolitan Emergency Communications Agency

(MECA) was formed to develop a regional emergency communications system. 

In response to elected and appointed officials’ concerns that potential users were 

adequately trained to use the system, agency staff successfully launched a pilot project.

They installed seven mobile data terminals in cars used by the sheriff’s department.

After a small number of sheriff’s deputies used the outfitted cars for a short period of

time, MECA staff formally trained them. Following their training and further use of

the units, these deputies wrote the user’s manual. As additional units were installed,

the deputies were able to train their fellow deputies on the equipment, thereby 

contributing to the system’s acceptance and effective use.

Multi-organizational Relationships

The establishment of strong working relationships will continue to be a challenge to

the ITS community. As previously mentioned, differing agendas between public 

sector agencies and between the public and private sectors must be addressed.

Public sector personnel must look at the traveling public as their customer and provide a seamless and efficient transportation system. To best serve their customers,

managers of public agencies must be willing to give up some of their autonomy and

develop a regional perspective when establishing coalitions with other public agencies.

Collaborations between public sector agencies and private sector firms will also continue to confront stumbling blocks. The cultural differences between the two sectors

must be considered. The public sector must understand the profit motive and how

to work it into a partnership agreement with the private sector. The private sector

must understand the public sector’s charge to be vigilant for the welfare of all citizens,

regardless of their ability to pay more for a product or service. 

There are other factors that will hinder the creation of public-private partnerships.

For instance, the roles of the public and private sectors still remain unclear in many

locations. Often no clear incentives for private sector involvement are evident, and

uncertainty still exists about the commercial market and user willingness to pay for
CHAPTER 8: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT CROSS-CUTTING INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES? 161

ITS products and services. Project participants must ensure that these vague areas

become better defined.

To address the issue of partnering, staff at the Washington DOT developed a business

plan for its advanced traveler information system that identifies public and private

sector roles. In the Smart Trek MMDI, private sector representatives were included

from the inception of the project and involved in developing the project proposal.

They have a role in every aspect of the project’s development. The Smart Trek 

decision-making structure includes two deputy project managers and four bundle

managers (similar to committee chairmen) from the private sector. 

Furthermore, to encourage private sector involvement, public sector participants are

trying to develop a market for the private sector. Smart Trek project participants are

encouraging private sector information service providers to disseminate traveler and

traffic information by making it widely available and free of charge. 

The Minnesota DOT developed an innovative process that involved the private 

sector in the initial identification of ITS partnering opportunities. Rather than 

issuing a request for contract proposals for specific projects already defined by the

public sector, the agency’s staff issued a request for proposed partners. This request

contains a broad strategic plan presenting many possible ITS applications. Private

firms responded with specific project partnering approaches and technologies to

meet the state’s overall objectives.

Ownership, Sharing, and Use of Resources

Issues in this area may compound as more systems are implemented and as more 

private sector firms become involved in dissemination of traveler information.

These issues include who owns the data generated, whether there should be a charge

for the data, how this information will be shared among the partners, and to whom

the information will be released.

Complicating this scenario is the recent development by private firms to gather 

traffic data using cellular phones as traffic probes. It is uncertain whether this new

dataset will complement or substitute for the data being collected by public agencies.

Should this new approach prove reliable, it will change relationships between 

existing traffic information providers and traffic data collectors. 

Many public sector agencies release data free of charge. Some public agencies, 

however, are hesitant to release information to the private sector for fear that it will

obtain revenues from data collected with public resources. Similarly, some private

firms are hesitant to share data for fear the public agency will release proprietary

information. Policies covering data issues should be established early in the project.

Because of the media’s ability to quickly reach a wide audience, the Washington

DOT policy actually gives the media priority over other users. The agency’s staff

provide video images to the media, but the media outlet has to make the connection.

Currently, there are no charges for the connection and none are anticipated. There

is, however, no existing policy that would preclude implementing a charge. 
162 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

In the New York-New Jersey-Connecticut metropolitan area, TRANSCOMSM

staff developed a regional information policy that is applied to numerous projects,

including Trips123 and the I-95 Corridor Coalition’s Traveler Information project.

The policy sets out the information deemed to be “TRANSCOMSM information”

and, therefore, the property of TRANSCOM.SM The policy further presents who

may have access to the information, the level of compensation required for the

information, and how compensation will be established. Briefly, the policy states

that any public or private organization using the information to generate revenues

must compensate TRANSCOMSM for this use.

Ownership of equipment purchased within the project may be another problem.

Questions will arise as to who owns the equipment provided as an in-kind match

and who owns the equipment purchased with project funds. A related question is

who is responsible for the maintenance of the equipment.

The Texas DOT has a policy stating that Texas DOT staff own and must maintain

any equipment they purchase. This policy raised a question of maintenance liability

within the Bus Incident Management System project in San Antonio. If the cameras for this system, to be placed on buses owned by the VIA Metropolitan Transit

Authority, were bought by the Texas DOT, then according to policy, the cameras

would be considered Texas DOT property, and their maintenance would become the

responsibility of the Texas DOT. Agency officials felt that maintaining equipment

on buses they do not operate would be impractical, so transit authority staff purchased

the equipment and assumed maintenance responsibility.

Another related question is who will be responsible for the eventual replacement of

the technology purchased during an ITS project. The City of Bellevue, Washington,

provides an example of how public agencies can successfully address this concern.

City staff developed an equipment rental fund that is used to replace outdated 

computers and other equipment. Three independent sub-funds are included within

the main rental fund: the electrical equipment rental fund, the mechanical equipment

rental fund, and the information services replacement fund. The equipment rental

fund was created as an internal process designed to rent equipment to other funds,

maintain and repair equipment administered by the fund, and provide equipment

replacement through establishment of replacement services. These services are

grouped into different functions, each with a separate revenue stream. Although

Washington legislation allows all cities within the state to develop equipment

replacement funds, the City of Bellevue has developed the most sophisticated 

procedure.

Procurement

Even when procurement issues have been addressed, they can still impede the

progress of some ITS deployments. The lack of flexibility in the procurement

process and the public sector’s aversion to taking risks contribute to this problem.

ITS participants have found that the traditional approach to procurement is often

too restrictive when contracting for the rapidly evolving technologies and systems
CHAPTER 8: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT CROSS-CUTTING INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES? 163

that constitute ITS. Changes to legislation, policies, or procedures may be necessary

to allow the parties flexibility to use the most appropriate procurement method, as

determined by project needs. Failure to be flexible in the procurement process

means that acquisition procedures used for construction projects are the only tools

available for procurement of advanced technologies.

Because the Maricopa County DOT in Arizona had a flexible procurement process

and was able to work with the local stakeholders, AZTechTM Model Deployment

Initiative participants determined that it was more efficient to use the county for the

official procurement agency than to use the Arizona DOT. Other agencies involved

in the project, however, were given the flexibility to use the county as the procuring

agency for their selected technologies, or to procure products and services themselves

through existing or new contracts and be reimbursed by the AZTechTM project.

Project participants can use a variety of procurement mechanisms, and must choose

those best suited to meet their needs:

■ Federal competitive process.3

■ State catalog.

■ Multiparty agreements.

■ Competitive contracts.

■ Sole-source contracts.

■ Phased contracts.

■ On-call and other existing contracts.

■ Design/build contracts.

■ Joint, interjurisdictional procurements.

■ Turnkey procurements.

ITS project administrators have learned that they also must build flexibility into

their contracts. Many felt that contracts based on “cost-plus” payments, lump-sum

payments, or “best efforts” and labor hours payments would not ensure tangible

results or acceptable products. While the Trips123 project administrators in the

New York-New Jersey-Connecticut metropolitan area allowed compensation for

design work on a cost-plus-fixed-fee basis, they scheduled deployment compensation

on a firm fixed price based on approved designs, and provided operations and management compensation on a firm fixed-price basis. 

In San Antonio, Texas, City of San Antonio DOT officials executed a fixed-price

contract with their systems integrator, with variations available on each task. Under

this contract, the systems integrator offered different options that could be completed

under different funding levels. The Texas DOT administrators allowed the task cost

variation provisions to be incorporated into the contract, transferring funds among

the tasks when necessary.

3 Staff at the Washington State Department of Transportation used the U.S. DOT process to select

Metropolitan Model Deployment Initiative sites as their competitive process for procuring project 

participants from the private sector.
164 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

Intellectual Property

The proper assignment of intellectual property rights presents a continual challenge

to ITS projects. Applications of ITS raise vexing new questions regarding

patentable inventions, copyrights, and trade secrets, as well as compilations of data

derived from the operation of ITS technologies. The private sector, in particular,

has a vested interest in maintaining intellectual property rights to those technologies

and services they help develop. These issues must be addressed early in the life of an

ITS project to promote the involvement of private sector representatives. Failure to

do so will delay entry of private sector firms, along with access to their expertise. 

Also, failure to address this issue early may lead to contentious situations. Project

participants may be misled by ambiguous contracting language into thinking their

rights will be covered. Drafting the proper language into the contract guards against

misunderstandings.

Participants in the AZTechTM MMDI struggled with and overcame the issue of

assigning intellectual property rights. As a starting point to resolving their concerns,

administrators from the AZTechTM project requested clarification of the FHWA’s

policy on intellectual property rights. A letter4 from FHWA’s associate chief counsel

clarified the Federal Government’s policy. This letter was then included in all contracts between the public and private sectors.

Following the FHWA’s policy, the AZTechTM public officials developed two licensing

agreements: one for pre-existing products and privately funded developments and

one for products developed with Federal funds during the course of the MMDI. The

license for pre-existing products allows public sector participants to make limited use

of pre-existing products. The license for products developed during the course of the

project allows public sector participants to receive a royalty-free, nonexclusive, and

irrevocable license to reproduce, publish, or otherwise use—and to authorize others

to use—the publicly funded software, data, and documentation solely for official

governmental purposes. The private sector partner similarly retains all ownership

rights, including copyrights. 

Privacy

To date, ITS professionals have addressed most of the privacy concerns surrounding

ITS, including concerns that traffic surveillance cameras would be used for purposes

other than monitoring traffic and that information on trucking firms collected by

preclearance systems would be released to competitors. With more and different

technologies being deployed, however, concerns about privacy may grow.

Each new ITS application may require a database or the collection of additional

data. Users of these applications must be informed as to the data being collected

and how they will be stored and used. Users may not accept data for non-trafficmanagement purposes or for identification of individual travel patterns. Agencies

must develop strategies to inform their customers about the collection and use of

data and to protect their privacy. One strategy should be to use the media to explain

the application to the public.

4 A copy of this letter is included in the cross-cutting study, What’s Yours, Mine, and Ours: Overcoming

Intellectual Property Rights, EDL No. 11486.
CHAPTER 8: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT CROSS-CUTTING INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES? 165

This issue may also intensify if ITS technologies are used for law enforcement, especially automated law enforcement. To reach their full potential for improving traffic

safety, applications that both detect and identify traffic law violators, such as red

light runners, require the release of identifying driver information to law enforcement personnel. In some instances, this information leads to issuance of a citation

or other legal action against the violating driver. The integration of law enforcement

and traffic safety technology applications is both highly sensitive and extremely

promising. Addressing privacy concerns related to collecting individual driver 

identifiers is key to public acceptance and success in this area. The Intelligent

Transportation Society of America (ITS America) has drafted privacy principles that

promote such practices. ITS America expects to finalize and approve the principles

by the close of 2000.

Because staff at the University of Washington are developing the traveler information

backbone for the Seattle area, a large amount of data is passed through its operations.

To protect the privacy of individuals, staff have developed procedures to remove 

personal information from the data. Each data source linked to the backbone has a

computer, or “firewall,” to strip out any private data before they go onto the backbone. The stripped data always reside at the source agency. For example, the 

computer residing at the King County DOT Transit Division extracts bus driver

identification before vehicle identification data are passed to the communications

backbone. 

In Phoenix, transportation officials have tried to counteract concerns about camera

use. First, Arizona DOT officials made a linguistic change, replacing the intrusivesounding “video surveillance” with “video monitoring.” This change helped to allay

some of the “Big Brother” fears and negative connotations associated with the word

“surveillance.” Second, in keeping with the limited and defined role of the cameras,

agency administrators agreed that this technology should not play a law enforcement

role, even when an officer is stationed in the traffic operations center. Third, the

AZTechTM participants provide open access to the camera feeds by means of local

television. Finally, the AZTechTM managers enacted an informal policy of not

retaining any tapes from the camera feeds, thus avoiding the tapes being subpoenaed

and used in lawsuits. 

Both New Jersey and New York passed laws governing the use of photo-monitoring

systems to enforce automated toll collection. These laws specify restrictions on the

use of images captured by these systems.

Liability

Although liability concerns were discussed during the early stages of many ITS

deployments, liability has not been a major issue to date; however, as with the area

of privacy, these concerns may grow over time.

Some ITS applications may require the use of an in-vehicle device, which could 

create liability issues if drivers claim that such devices distracted them, leading to an

incident. Also, the emergence of anti-collision applications may give rise to liability

questions if these technologies transfer control of the car from the driver to the technology, and an incident occurs. Also, the failure of a technology or the provision of
166 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

inaccurate information by a technology may lead to liability problems, especially

with increased use of automated collision notification technologies.

Another area of potential concern is the sharing of system control by more than a

single jurisdiction, such as a traffic signal control system. Good planning and engineering practices must be exercised when establishing procedures to share control.

Good practices help demonstrate that appropriate standards were used.

Some public sector partners in the Phoenix metropolitan area note that liability

issues in their area have already been resolved through discussions in the Signals

Working Group, a regional group resulting from a study that looked at coordinating

traffic signals along corridors running through several jurisdictions. Through their

involvement in the study and working group, participants are confident that only

appropriate actions will be taken when representatives of one jurisdiction assume

temporary control of another jurisdiction’s traffic signal system. One method the

group employed was to define and document a series of thresholds under which signal plans can be altered (e.g., in the event of a freeway closure). Representatives of

some adjacent municipalities and the Maricopa County DOT have drafted 

coordination policies and plans to cover signalized corridors bordering two jurisdictions

and other multijurisdictional corridors.

CONCLUSION

Original proponents of IVHS and the current ITS community have long stated that

institutional issues pose more of a challenge than technical ones. The good news is

that these nontechnical barriers can be overcome. The bad news is that they will

always be present in one form or another. As discussion of these issues shows, some

previously addressed barriers will reoccur throughout ITS deployment. The key to

overcoming any constraint is to acknowledge its likelihood and address it early.

Project participants should anticipate these obstacles and come to the table prepared

to discuss them. They should also look to successes in other areas that demonstrate

how nontechnical barriers can be overcome.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This paper synthesizes the work of many evaluators—in particular, the Metropolitan

Model Deployment Initiative Institutional Benefits Study Team. This team included

John P. O’Donnell, Chief of the Economic Analysis Division; David W. Jackson and

Deidre Waz from the John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center; and

Dana Larkin, Anne C. Tallon, and Gerald M. Powers from EG&G Technical

Services. Matt Edelman, Executive Director of TRANSCOM,SM facilitated the

roundtable discussion at the ITE 2000 International Conference, and Mr. Jackson

served as the recorder. Suzanne Sloan and Maureen Luna-Long from the John A.

Volpe National Transportation Systems Center helped analyze previous activities

covering nontechnical barriers and assisted in developing the list of the most 

prominent issues.
CHAPTER 8: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT CROSS-CUTTING INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES? 167

REFERENCES

Briggs, V., “New Regional Transportation Organizations,” ITS Quarterly

(Washington, DC: ITS America, Fall 1999).

Camus, J.P. and M. Fortin, Road Transport Informatics, Institutional and Legal Issues

(Paris, France: European Conference of Ministers of Transport, 1995).

ITS America, Saving Lives, Time and Money, Using Intelligent Transportation Systems,

Opportunities and Actions for Deployment (Washington, DC: ITS America, February

2000).

John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Intelligent Transportation

Systems, Assessment of ITS Deployment, Review of Metropolitan Areas, Discussion of

Crosscutting Issues, FHWA-JPO-96-0035 (Cambridge, MA: U.S. DOT ITS Joint

Program Office, July 1996), EDL No. 426.

John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Intelligent Transportation

Systems, Assessment of ITS Deployment, The New York-New Jersey-Connecticut

Metropolitan Model Deployment Initiative, Review of the Initial Negotiations Process,

FHWA-JPO-98-033, DOT-VNTSC-FHWA-98-4 (Cambridge, MA: U.S. DOT ITS

Joint Program Office, July 1998), EDL No. 4309.

John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Intelligent Transportation

Systems, Institutional and Legal Issues Program, Analysis of ITS Operational Tests, Findings

and Recommendations, FHWA-JPO-95-009, DOT-VNTSC-FHWA-95-5 (Cambridge,

MA: U.S. DOT ITS Joint Program Office, September 1995), EDL No. 700.

John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Intelligent Transportation Systems

Program - Analysis of U.S. DOT-Sponsored Reports on Non-Technical Issues (Cambridge,

MA: U.S. DOT ITS Joint Program Office, December 1995), EDL No. 792.

John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Marketing ITS Infrastructure

in the Public Interest, FHWA-JPO-98-029, DOT-VNTSC-FHWA-98-3 (Cambridge,

MA: U.S. DOT ITS Joint Program Office, 1998), EDL No. 7043.

John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Successful Approaches to

Deploying a Metropolitan Intelligent Transportation System, FHWA-JPO-99-032, DOTVNTSC-FHWA-98-7 (Cambridge, MA: U.S. DOT ITS Joint Program Office,

March 1999), EDL No. 8483.

Klick, Kent, and Allen, “Partnerships in the Implementation of ITS,” Workshop

Reference Materials (Washington, DC: Federal Highway Administration, 1994).

Klick, Kent, and Allen, Summary Document for FHWA Contract DTFH61-94-C00116 Public/Private Partnership for Enhanced Traffic Engineering (Washington, DC:

Federal Highway Administration, 1996).

L.S. Gallegos & Associates, Inc., Innovative Procurement Practices for ITS

(Washington, DC: Federal Highway Administration, April 1997), EDL Nos. 1868

and 2859. 
168 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

Mitretek Systems, Key Findings from the Intelligent Transportation Systems Program,

What Have We Learned?, FHWA-JPO-96-0036 (Washington, DC: U.S. DOT ITS

Joint Program Office, September 1996), EDL No. 425.

Mitretek Systems, The Road to Successful ITS Software Acquisition, FHWA-JPO-98-

035, 036, and 037 (Washington, DC: U.S. DOT ITS Joint Program Office, July

1998), EDL Nos. 4130, 4131, and 4132.

Public Technology, Inc., Roads Less Traveled: Intelligent Transportation Systems for

Sustainable Communities, (Washington, DC: Environmental Protection Agency,

1998), EDL No. 8523.

Public Technology, Inc., Smart Moves: A Decision-Maker’s Guide to the Intelligent

Transportation Infrastructure (Washington, DC: Federal Highway Administration,

1996), EDL No. 2545.

Public Technology, Inc., Traveling with Success: How Local Governments Use Intelligent

Transportation Systems, (Washington, DC: Federal Highway Administration, 1995),

EDL No. 5683.

SAIC, John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, IVHS Institutional

Issues and Case Studies, Analysis and Lessons Learned, FHWA-SA-94-061, DOTVNTSC-FHWA-94-15 (Cambridge, MA: Federal Highway Administration, April

1994), EDL No. 6683.

Sarah J. Siwek & Associates, Transportation Planning and ITS: Putting the Pieces

Together, FHWA-PD-98-026 (Washington, DC: Federal Highway Administration,

1998), EDL No. 3683.

Urban Institute, Overcoming Barriers to ITS—Lessons from Other Technologies

(Washington, DC: Federal Highway Administration, revised January 1996).

U.S. DOT, A Report to Congress, Nontechnical Constraints and Barriers to the

Implementation of Intelligent Transportation Systems (Washington, DC: U.S. DOT,

June 1994), EDL No. 7845.

U.S. DOT, A Report to Congress, Nontechnical Constraints and Barriers to the

Implementation of Intelligent Transportation Systems, Update of the 1994 Report

(Washington, DC: U.S. DOT, September 1997), EDL No. 3303.

U.S. DOT, Department of Transportation’s IVHS Strategic Plan, Report to Congress

(Washington, DC: U.S. DOT, December 1992), EDL No. 1823.

U.S. DOT, ITS Procurement Resource Guide (Washington, DC: U.S. DOT, October

1997), EDL No. 2859.

U.S. DOT, Let’s Talk It Over: Interagency Cooperation Facilitates Success, A Case Study

(Washington, DC, Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit

Administration, August 2000), EDL No. 11493.

U.S. DOT, National Intelligent Transportation Systems Program Plan, Five-Year Horizon

(Washington, DC: U.S. DOT ITS Joint Program Office, 2000), EDL No. 11943.
CHAPTER 8: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT CROSS-CUTTING INSTITUTIONAL ISSUES? 169

U.S. DOT, What’s Yours, Mine, and Ours: Overcoming Intellectual Property Rights

Issues, A Cross-Cutting Study (Washington, DC, Federal Highway Administration

and Federal Transit Administration, August 2000), EDL No. 11486.

U.S. DOT and ITS America, National ITS Program Plan, Intelligent Transportation

Systems (Washington, DC: ITS America, March 1995), EDL Nos. 3845, 3827, 

and 3786.

Washington State Transportation Center, Choosing the Route to Traveler Information

Systems Deployment, Decision Factors for Creating Public/Private Business Plans

(Washington, DC: ITS America and U.S. DOT, 1998), EDL No. 5326.
chapter 9

WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT

ITS? FINAL COMMENTS
CHAPTER 9: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ITS? FINAL COMMENTS 173

ITS AND CHANGE

Intelligent transportation systems (ITS) represent a sea change in surface transportation, equivalent in a sense to the introduction of air traffic control systems into air

transportation. The change is on the scale of what occurred in the second decade 

of the 20th Century, when creation of the Federal-aid highway program forged a 

fundamentally new relationship between the Federal Government and state 

governments, as the idea of a national highway transportation system began to 

take shape. 

The changes today are no less important. The electronic linkage between vehicle

and infrastructure represented by ITS has profound implications for surface 

transportation. But the changes thus far have been largely incremental, the real

impact yet to be felt. Integrated, regional systems are examples of the kinds of

changes to come. 

To truly absorb the functional change in transportation that ITS represents, one

must go beyond just creating institutional change in transportation organizations to

creating cultural change—reflecting the importance of operations, new technology,

and market-based forces, especially in the highway sector. Achieving these cultural

changes will take leadership, education, and training. 

ITS represents a major opportunity for the transportation profession to evolve to 

a more sophisticated level. Advanced technologies, systemic thinking about 

transportation services, and expanded possibilities for important policy initiatives 

in technology-enabled transportation all create vital professional opportunities—

which the educational sector must recognize and build upon. 

To conclude, this study imparts the following overarching lessons about ITS:

■ Integrated Systems: The real leverage of ITS will occur in integrating systems 

and services. The low hanging ITS fruit, already picked, was often a product of

stand-alone deployments. Now the ITS community must be careful not to create

its own legacy systems and thereby build barriers to deployment of more advanced

integrated systems.

■ Regional Systems: The ability to deal functionally with transportation management on a regional scale is an important opportunity to enhance transportation

system effectiveness. 

■ Partnerships: ITS requires partnerships among public organizations at various 

levels—Federal, state, local—to achieve its full potential. The long tradition 

of cooperation among these organizations can be effectively used as a basis for

building public-public partnerships.

Because of its electronic connection to vehicles and infrastructure, ITS requires

that the public and private sectors cooperate at a level not previously required for

surface transportation. Even though the public and private sectors differ in 

capability, mission, and philosophy, they can cooperate and they must cooperate

to achieve successful ITS deployment on a large scale.
174 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

■ Institutionalization of Operations: ITS enables more effective operation of

transportation systems, particularly meaningful in the current environment, 

where conventional infrastructure is difficult to build. To optimize transportation

efficiency, organizations providing transportation infrastructure and services must

institutionalize their operations.

■ Political Support and Public Acceptance: Political support and public acceptance of ITS can come about by carefully focusing on issues that matter—safety

and quality of life. Anticipated results should be described both qualitatively and

quantitatively, if possible. Further, it is important to create bipartisan political

acceptance of ITS and to recognize the media’s central role in helping to build

the case for ITS. 

■ Human Resources: Deployment of any of the systems described in this report

will require transportation professionals who can deal effectively with new ITS

technologies and their service and political implications. Educating and training

these individuals and integrating them into transportation organizations is a 

primary consideration.

■ The Traveler as a Customer: Although a controversial point, surface transportation must be considered a market of divergent customers with varying individual

requirements. ITS technologies can greatly enhance provision of differentiated

service.

So, what have we learned about ITS? We are at the end of the beginning. The low

hanging fruit is gone from the tree, and much has been achieved by choosing clearcut, sure winners—an appropriate strategy for the first generation of any technology.

However, for true deployment success, we must reach higher into the tree, focusing

on integrated, regional, and market-driven systems. 

That ITS can be an important component of surface transportation is beyond 

question, but so much more can be done. It is the Internet age and the public’s

expectations are changing. People, including travelers, are using sophisticated 

information technology and telecommunications equipment in their everyday lives.

The ability to access information from multiple sources with the click of a mouse 

or television switch is a trend poised to continue.

Intelligent transportation systems are the transportation community’s opportunity 

to be part of this revolution and to advance transportation and the transportation

profession. In 1997, the prestigious Annals of the American Academy of Political and

Social Science published a special issue entitled “Transport at the Millennium.”1

Comprised of 18 essays, it provides a broad perspective on the transportation field:

where it has been, where it is now, and where it is likely to go in the future. Two

themes dominated:

1. The need for fundamental change in the relationship between the public and 

private sectors in the transportation industry. These changes involve letting the

market work through deregulation and privatization. 

1 “Transport at the Millennium,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science

(September 1997).
CHAPTER 9: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT ITS? FINAL COMMENTS 175

2. The use of pricing to create a more rational transportation system by overcoming

market failure from “unpriced” externalities—such as congestion, environmental

impacts, etc.— caused by the operation of transportation systems. 

Clearly ITS has both these ideas at its core and can build on them to make a major

contribution for years to come.

The papers included in this compendium give a good sense of where we are in seven

major ITS areas and how we can advance to the future. They provide real insight

into where successes have already occurred, as well as what is preventing further 

successes in the future. The ITS community can and should build on the information

contained herein to take the next important steps. 

Finally, the future demands a more stringent judging of ITS technologies. Success

should be predicated on more extensive deployment and on integrated, regionally

scaled systems. For now, we are on the right track, but in years to come, we must

demand more, as more will be expected.
Table 2-1. Incident Management Summary Table appendix

SUMMARY TABLES
APPENDIX: SUMMARY TABLES 179

Table 2-1. Incident Management Summary Table

* Cross-cutting technologies, such as telecommunications, are addressed in Chapter 7,“What Have We

Learned About Cross-Cutting Technical and Programmatic Issue?”

† Quantitative deployment tracking data not available. Deployment level determined by expert judgment.

Technology* Deployment Level Limiting Factors Comments

Widespread

Deployment

Service patrols Cost, staffing Successful

Limited Deployment† Cost, institutional

issues

Common communication frequencies Successful

Automated incident detection algorithms Medium Deployment† Technical performance Mixed

Widespread

Deployment

Availability, institutional issuesCellular communication for incident detection Jury is still out

Limited Deployment† Being replaced by 

cell phone use

Motorist callboxes Successful

Widespread

Deployment

CCTV (ground, airborne, high magnification) Cost Successful

Cellular geolocation (old generation) Operational Testing† Accuracy Unsuccessful

Operational Testing† Availability, institutional issuesCellular geolocation (emerging generation) Jury is still out

Regional incident management programs Limited Deployment† Institutional issues Holds promise
180 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

Table 2-2. Freeway Management Summary Table

* Cross-cutting technologies, such as telecommunications and pavement sensors, are addressed in

Chapter 7,“What Have We Learned About Cross-Cutting Technical and Programmatic Issues?”

† A transportation management center may control several of the systems listed further down the table,

and will possibly utilize additional technologies, such as video display systems, local area networks, flow

monitoring algorithms, geographic information systems, graphic user interfaces, and database management systems.

‡ Quantitative deployment tracking data not available. Deployment level determined by expert judgment.

§ Mainlanes are freeway lanes that are not tunnels or bridges.

Technology/System* Deployment Level Limiting Factors Comments

Widespread

Deployment‡ Implementation cost,staffing

Transportation management centers Successful

(may incorporate multiple technologies)†

Limited Deployment‡ Implementation cost,

staffing

Portable transportation management centers Successful

(may incorporate multiple technologies)

Road closure and restriction systems Limited Deployment‡ Institutional issues Successful

(may incorporate multiple technologies)

Widespread

Deployment

Cost, maintenance Mixed—depends

upon technology

Vehicle detection systems 

(may incorporate multiple technologies)

Vehicles as probes Limited Deployment Cost, integration Jury is still out

(may incorporate multiple technologies)

Medium Deployment Politics, user appearanceRamp metering Successful

(includes multiple technologies)

Widespread

Deployment

Cost, changing 

technology

Mixed—due to 

operations quality

Dynamic message signs

(includes multiple technologies)

Medium Deployment Staffing Mixed—due to 

operations quality

Highway advisory radio

(includes multiple technologies)

Medium Deployment Not in MUTCD for

mainlanes§

Successful—

especially on bridges

and in tunnels

Dynamic lane control

Downhill speed warning and rollover warning Limited Deployment‡ Cost Successful

systems

Technical Testing‡ Not in MUTCD; may

require local legislation

to be enforceable

Dynamic speed control/variable speed limit Holds promise 
APPENDIX: SUMMARY TABLES 181

* Quantitative deployment tracking data not available. Deployment level determined by expert judgment.

Table 2-4. Electronic Toll Collection Summary Table

* Quantitative deployment tracking data not available. Deployment level determined by expert judgment.

Table 2-3. Emergency Management Summary Table

Technology Deployment Level Limiting Factors Comments

Widespread

Deployment

GPS/Differential GPS on emergency Cost Successful

management fleets

Widespread

Deployment*

Mayday systems Cost, vehicle choice Successful

Widespread

Deployment*

Mayday processing centers/customer service Cost Successful

centers

Widespread

Deployment*

Public safety answering points Cost, staffing Successful

CDPD communication Limited Deployment* Availability Jury is still out

Widespread

Deployment

Onboard display Cost, user acceptance Successful

Widespread

Deployment

Institutional issues,

lack of standards

Preemption infra-red signal system Successful

Widespread

Deployment

Computer-aided dispatch Cost, support staffing Successful

Widespread

Deployment

Automatic vehicle location Cost Successful

Limited Deployment* Institutional issues,

integration cost

Networked systems among agencies Holds promise

Technology Deployment Level Limiting Factors Comments

Widespread

Deployment

Dedicated short-range communication Need for standard Successful

Limited Deployment Commercial and user

acceptance; need for

standard

Smart cards Successful

Widespread

Deployment

Transponders Privacy Successful

Widespread

Deployment

Antennas Technical performance Successful

License plate recognition Limited Deployment* Technical performance Jury is still out
182 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

Table 3-1. Arterial Management Summary Table

Technology Deployment Level Limiting Factors Comments

Adaptive control strategies Limited Deployment Cost, technology, perceived

lack of benefits

Jury is still out—has shown

benefits in some cases, cost

still a prohibitive factor, some

doubt among practitioners

on its effectiveness

Arterial information for ATIS Moderate Deployment Limited deployment of 

appropriate surveillance,

difficulty in accurately

describing arterial congestion

Holds promise—new 

surveillance technology 

likely to increase the quality

and quantity of arterial 

information

Automated red light 

running enforcement

Moderate Deployment* Controversial, some concerns

about privacy, legality

Successful—but must be

deployed with sensitivity 

and education

Automated speed 

enforcement on arterial 

streets

Limited Deployment* Controversial, some concerns

about privacy, legality

Jury is still out—public

acceptance lacking, very 

controversial

Integration of time-of-day 

and fixed-time signal 

control across jurisdictions

Widespread Deployment Institutional issues still exist 

in many areas

Successful—encouraged 

by spread of closed-loop 

signal systems and improved

communications

Integration of real-time or 

adaptive control strategies 

across jurisdictions 

(including special events)

Limited Deployment Limited deployment of

Adaptive Control Strategies,

numerous institutional 

barriers

Holds promise—

technology is becoming 

more available, institutional

barriers falling

Integration with emergency 

(signal preemption)

Widespread Deployment None Successful

Integration with freeway 

(integrated management)

Limited Deployment Institutional issues exist, lack 

of standards between systems

preventing integration

Holds promise—benefits

have been realized from 

integrated freeway arterial

corridors

*Quantitative deployment tracking data not available. Deployment level determined by expert judgment.

Integration with transit 

(signal priority)

See Chapter 5,“What Have 

We Learned About Advanced

Public Transportation

Systems?”

See Chapter 5,“What Have 

We Learned About Advanced

Public Transportation

Systems?”

See Chapter 5,“What Have 

We Learned About 

Advanced Public

Transportation Systems?”
APPENDIX: SUMMARY TABLES 183

* Quantitative deployment tracking data not available. Deployment level determined by expert judgment.

Table 4-1. ATIS Summary Table

ATIS Service Deployment Level Limiting Factors Comments

Real-time traffic information

on the internet

Widespread Deployment While deployment is widespread, customer satisfaction

with the services seems related to local traffic conditions

and website information

quality

Mixed—the characteristics 

of the websites vary,

depending on the availability

and quality of the user 

interface and underlying 

traffic data.

Real-time transit status 

information on the Internet

Limited Deployment Transit authorities have 

limited funds for ATIS investments and little data that

establish a relationship

between ridership and ATIS

Holds promise—where the

service is available, reports

suggest that there is high 

customer satisfaction with 

the service

Static transit system 

information on the Internet

Widespread Deployment N/A Successful

Real-time traffic information

on cable television

Limited Deployment Limited by information 

quality and production costs,

although one service provider

has developed a way to 

automate production

Successful—as evaluated in 

a highly congested metropolitan area where consumers

value the easy, low-tech access

to traffic information

Real-time transit status 

information at terminals and

major bus stops

Limited Deployment Cost Successful—where 

evaluated in greater Seattle

In-vehicle navigation 

systems (no traffic 

information)

Limited Deployment* Purchase cost Holds Promise—as prices

fall, more drivers will 

purchase the systems

In-vehicle dynamic route 

guidance (navigation with 

real-time traffic information)

No commercial deployment;

the San Antonio MMDI

installed prototype systems 

in public agency vehicles*

Irregular coverage and data

quality, combined with conflicting industry geocode

standards, have kept this

product from the market

Holds Promise—

manufacturers are poised 

to provide this service once

issues are resolved

Fee-based traffic and transit 

information services on 

palm-type computers

Unknown Deployment Service providers make this

service available through

their websites, actual subscription levels are unknown

Jury is still out—requires

larger numbers of subscribers becoming 

acclimated to mobile 

information services

Dynamic message signs Widespread Deployment Positive driver response is a

function of sign placement,

content, and accuracy

Successful—drivers really

appreciate accurate en-route

information
184 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

*Quantitative deployment tracking data not available. Deployment level determined by expert judgment.

Table 5-1. APTS Summary Table

Technology Deployment Level Limiting Factors Comments

Automatic vehicle location Moderate Deployment Cost, fleet size, service 

type, staff technological 

competence

Successful—use continues 

to grow, new systems 

principally use GPS technology

but usually augmented by

dead reckoning

Operations software Widespread Deployment N/A Successful

Fully-automated 

dispatching for demand 

response

Research & Development* Still in research and development stageJury is still out

Mobile data terminals Moderate Deployment* Most frequently deployed

with automatic vehicle 

location systems

Successful—reduces radio

frequency requirements

Silent alarm/covert 

microphone

Moderate Deployment* Most frequently deployed

with automatic vehicle 

location systems

Successful—improves 

security of transit operations

Surveillance cameras Limited Deployment* Cost Holds promise—enhances

on-board security. Deters

vandalism

Automated passenger 

counters

Limited Deployment Cost Holds promise—provides

better data for operations,

scheduling, planning, and

recruiting at lower cost

Vehicle diagnostics Limited Deployment Cost, lack of data on benefits Jury is still out

Traffic signal priority Limited Deployment Institutional issues, concerns

about impacts on traffic flows

Holds promise—reduces

transit trip times. May 

reduce required fleet size

Electronic fare payment Limited Deployment Cost Holds promise—increases

customer convenience

En-route and in-vehicle 

passenger information

Limited Deployment Cost, lack of evidence of ridership increasesJury is still out

Pre-trip passenger 

information

Widespread Deployment N/A Successful—improves 

customer satisfaction
APPENDIX: SUMMARY TABLES 185

Table 6-1. CVISN Summary Table

Technology Deployment Level Limiting Factors Comments

Laptop computers with 

Aspen or equivalent

Widespread Deployment N/A Successful

Wireless connection to 

SAFER at roadside

Moderate Deployment Technical challenges with 

communications among 

systems

Holds promise—for 

identifying frequent 

violators of safety laws

CVIEW or equivalent Limited Deployment Connections to legacy state

system

Jury is still out—being 

tested in three or four states

One or more sites equipped 

with DSRC

Widespread Deployment 

(no. of states); Limited

Deployment (no. of carriers)

Interoperability Holds promise—

deployment trend is positive

End-to-end IRP & IFTA 

processing

Limited Deployment Challenges and costs of connecting legacy systemsHolds promise—potential 

for significant cost savings 

to states and carriers

Connection to IRP & IFTA 

clearinghouses

Limited Deployment Institutional issues Jury is still out—cost 

savings can only be realized

with widespread deployment

Safety Information Exchange

Electronic Screening

Electronic Credentialing
186 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

Table 7-1. Cross-Cutting Technical Issues Summary Table

Technology Deployment Level Limiting Factors Comments

Cell phones for incident 

reporting

Widespread Deployment*† N/A Successful

Cell phones for emergency 

notification

Limited Deployment*† Relatively new, mostly sold in

new vehicles, takes long time

to reach 30% of vehicle fleet

Successful—number of

equipped vehicles growing

rapidly

DSRC (toll-tags) for travel 

time data

Limited Deployment Mostly used only in areas 

with electronic toll collection.

Requires power and 

communications to readers

Successful—holds promise

GPS for position,

determination, automatic 

vehicle location

Moderate Deployment in

fleets (transit, trucking,

emergency vehicles)‡

N/A Successful—use continuing

to grow. See footnote

Video surveillance Widespread Deployment N/A Successful

Direct link between 

Mayday systems and 

public safety answering 

points

Limited Deployment† Still in research and test

phase, significant institutional

policy and technical issues

Jury is still out—no known

deployments

Cellular geo-location for 

traffic probes

Limited Deployment New technologies just 

beginning field trials

Jury is still out—older 

technology unsuccessful

Sensor and Surveillance Technologies

LIDAR for measuring 

automotive emissions

Limited Deployment† Minnesota test was unsuccessful, technology didn’t

work well enough

Unsuccessful—no known

deployment

Real-time, in-vehicle traffic 

information

Limited Deployment*† Cost, commercial viability Jury is still out

Loop detectors Widespread Deployment N/A Successful

Alternatives to loop 

detectors

Widespread Deployment Initial cost, familiarity Holds promise—video 

widespread, others limited,

many cities only use for a 

few locations

Communications Technologies

Internet for traveler 

information

Widespread Deployment N/A Successful—free services

Jury is still out—on 

commercial viability

High speed Internet Limited Deployment† Slow rollout, availability 

limited

Holds promise
Analysis Tools

APPENDIX: SUMMARY TABLES 187

See footnotes on the next page.

Technology Deployment Level Limiting Factors Comments

Communications Technologies

220 MHz radio channels

for ITS

Limited Deployment ITS is too small a market to

support unique communications systems

Unsuccessful—only known

use during Atlanta test 

during the 1996 Olympic

Games

DSRC Widespread Deployment N/A Successful—current use

mostly limited to Electronic

Toll Collection

Fully-automated Internetbased ExchangeLimited Deployment† New technology Holds promise

Digital subscriber line Limited Deployment New technology, first applied

to ITS in 1999

Holds promise—several

deployments, many more

locations considering

DSRC at 5.9 GHz Limited Deployment† Frequency just recently

approved for use, standards in

development

Jury is still out—no known

deployments in U.S., but 

used in other countries at 

5.8 GHz

Fiber optics for wireline 

communications

Widespread Deployment N/A Successful

High speed FM subcarrier 

for ITS

Limited Deployment†* Low demand to-date for invehicle real-time dataJury is still out—multiple 

conflicting “standards” and

proprietary approaches,

competition from other 

wireless technologies

CDPD for traveler 

information

Limited Deployment†* Lack of real-time information

to send, limited use of CDPD

by consumers

Unsuccessful—CDPD will

soon be overtaken by other

wireless data technologies

Models incorporating 

operations into transportation planning

Limited Deployment† Emerging technology, cost

and institutional issues may

become factors for some

approaches

Jury is still out—IDAS

available, PRUEVIIN 

methodology demonstrated,

TRANSIMS in development

Low power FM Limited Deployment† Just legalized by FCC, first

licenses not yet granted

Jury is still out—Brand new,

no deployments yet

Local area wireless Limited Deployment New Technology Jury is still out

High speed fixed wireless Limited Deployment† New Technology Jury is still out

Wireless Internet Limited Deployment†* New technology Jury is still out—on ITS 

uses, general use predicted 

to grow rapidly 
188 WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED ABOUT INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS?

* Quantitative deployment tracking data are not available. Deployment level was determined by expert

judgment.

† For in-vehicle consumer systems, deployment levels are based on the percent of users or vehicle fleet, not

number of cities available. For example, real-time in-vehicle traffic is available in over two dozen cities, but

the percentage of drivers subscribing to it is small.

‡ For AVL using GPS in transit, the moderate-level assessment is based on the percent of transit agencies

using the technology according to a 1998 survey of 525 transit agencies conducted by the John A. Volpe

National Transportation Systems Center. This measure was used for consistency with the transit section of

this report. If the 78 major metropolitan areas are used as a measure, then the deployment level is “widespread,” as 24 of 78 cities use GPS-based AVL.