IoTAB Smart Traffic and Transit Technologies Subgroup

Draft Outline

• Technology Overview

o Infrastructure – hardware, software, connectivity, edge computing

 Hardware –

• Traffic signals and controller assemblies, 

• Roadside units, 

• Traffic signal cameras and sensors that can detect near collisions 

to impact signal timing (ATSPM – Advanced Traffic Signal 

Performance Measure)

• EV charging equipment (i.e., Level 1, Level 2, DC Fast Charging); 

• LIDAR/Camera sensors

• Solar panels mounted on poles.

• Parking sensors

• Road maintenance sensors

• Vehicle mounted sensors that also measure road conditions.

• Off road equipment that interacts with these various sensors

• Drones

• (Planes/Airports?)

 Systems - security, intelligence, monitoring, management, maintenance

 Software – route planning – cars and buses 

 Connectivity- Cellular Vehicle to Everything (C-V2X), 5G, autonomous 

navigation (both edge and cloud)

 Edge computing- self-driving vehicles-last mile delivery

 Tied into the infrastructure (linkage to the IoT AB Smart and Critical 

Infrastructure)

 Artificial intelligence

• Opportunities and benefits (for personas) 

o Safety applications/use cases- technology can save lives

 emergency vehicle traffic pre-emption, 

 entering school or work zone, 

 pedestrian crossing ahead; 

 improving road safety; 

 protecting Vulnerable Road Users

 Vision zero; 

o Support Function

 Package and Food Delivery

o Congestion mitigation/environmental benefits

 orderly flow of traffic.

 limit traffic to reduce congestion (congestion/smart toll pricing)

 increase productivity (less time spent in traffic)

o Commerce/trade –

 want organizations to thrive when developing these devices. 

 incentivize companies to develop systems for common good and use;
 ability to develop systems for companies outside the US; increase 

harmonization with other countries 

• Barriers (faced by personas for IoT implementation)

o Policy/regulation/practices –

 need clarity with respect to privacy

• Notice when PII captured; 

• transparency for the individual; 

• lack of clarity on what is collected can violate expectations; 

• important to minimize PII to limit risk to individuals; 

• organizations need to be clear on retention, not over-retain, delete 

data when no longer needed; 

• need transparency on what is collected, use of collected data, and 

retention of data 

• Linkage back to privacy subgroup

 Policy on use of traffic camera data for accident investigation, assignment 

of insurance claim

 Policies and regulations for self-driving automobiles/drones

• Liability concerns when self-driving automobiles are hacked.

• Liability concerns if drone delivers the wrong medicine 

o Accessibility and inclusion –

 Benefits not necessarily available to everybody; 

 smarter the technology requires more presentation of information to 

users/general public and can’t make assumptions about what is available; 

 EV charging not available in all areas

o Education/Training and resources –

 For the highway engineers, learning curve for communication/smart 

transportation technologies; not traditionally part of highway engineers 

background; 

 operation of smart traffic technology will require more support and 

training; need to design so that someone with a fourth-grade education 

can operate it

 education and awareness for users needed especially if a traffic system 

runs through multiple jurisdictions 

 some state DOTs have very few staff

 Workforce development issues that are unique to this area

o Interoperability versus IP

 developed technology needs to be protected and not stolen; don’t want to 

lose control when manufactured by others; 

 important for IP for research and manufacturing to be linked together.

 interoperability challenge when dealing with different jurisdictions

o Cybersecurity Risk–

 Connected devices used as gateway devices for other things.

 Physical security- traffic cabinets can be opened with a single key

 Organizations that don’t have a robust cybersecurity approach

 Need linkage back to Security Sub-team.

o Funding -
 public, public/private partnerships, private –

 states have to submit plans to receive EV infrastructure funding; 

• Potential industry experts we have to speak with (Specific speakers TBD)-

o Select State DOTs; 

o representative from the Vision Zero network; 

o representative from the Highway engineering exchange program; 

o Australia smart cities expert, 

o Representative from a research firm that can talk about grid impacts with 

increased EVs (NREL, McKinsey, World Resources Institute).

o Someone that can speak to security risks specific to transportation (future 

looking-especially with the increase in autonomous vehicles). 

• Potential industry references we should consider - industry papers, case studies, 

other countries, etc.-

o Federal Agencies - National Highway Transportation Safety Board; US DOT 

(work related to intelligent transportation systems- pilots in NYC, Tampa, and

Wyoming:https://www.its.dot.gov/pilots/)

o State and local jurisdictions: Georgia (Fulton Country School District), Utah, 

California

o Smart City examples: Columbus, NYC, Singapore

o Studies on the growth of the EV market and how it impacts the grid (possibly 

NREL, McKinsey, World Resources Institute).

• Standards Organizations in this space- NEMA, SAE, IEEE