4. ICM SYSTEM CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS

• Executive Summary
• References
• Existing Corridor Scope and Operational Characteristics
• ICM System Concept of Operation
• ICM Implementation Issues
• Appendixes
• Notice/Quality Assurance Statement
• Technical Report Documentation Page
• Full Table of Contents

This chapter begins with a description of the approach taken in developing the Concept of Operations for the I-880 ICM project, then works through the approach step by step. The Vision, Goals and Objectives are defined, and the basic concept behind the project is described. The operational strategies are described, then discussed in the context of the five basic application scenarios and how they can help improve transportation in the corridor.

4.1 I-880 ICM ConOps Development Approach

4.1.1 System Engineering Approach

The development of the integrated corridor management (ICM) system has to be founded on a sound system engineering approach because of the inherent complexity of ICM and the need to connect diverse legacy systems in order for it to work, in addition to the applicable federal regulations. Corridor integration cannot be approached haphazardly, but requires careful consideration of both technical and institutional issues, because both of these will determine the needs that must be satisfied and the impediments to satisfying them.

The San Francisco Bay Area is already well served by ITS deployments on the various networks of its transportation system, which have been making important contributions to the performance of the system under normal operating conditions and for managing incidents. The region has even benefited from a first level of integration through its regional 5-1-1 system, which provides real-time information about highway and transit network operating conditions (speeds, travel times and incidents) and its TransLink integrated transit fare payment system. Mention east bay smart corridor? Given this relatively advanced current state of affairs, it is important to consider carefully the most important advances still to be gained through work on the ICM program.

A carefully structured process, based on a systems engineering approach, has been followed to determine how best to proceed in defining the Concept of Operations for the I-880 ICM. This represents the initial stages of the systems engineering model recommended by USUSDOT for ITS projects, which is shown schematically in the "V diagram" of Figure 4.1.

FIGURE 4.1 USDOT's "V diagram" Schematic of System Engineering Process for ICM Projects Larger View - use back button to return.

4.1.2 Guiding Principles and Development Process

The I-880 ICM team first defined two guiding principles for the development of the Concept of Operations:

(1) Base it on stakeholders' needs and constraints:

The starting point for definition of the ICM has to be with the stakeholder organizations that can most directly affect and are most directly affected by the transportation operations in the corridor. They need to see the benefits of participating and working together in order for the ICM to succeed, and indeed all have participated in the ConOps development process. A series of workshops has been convened among the senior staff of these agencies at the start of the ICM project to gather their inputs and to give them an opportunity to exchange ideas about their respective needs and constraints. Their inputs were solicited with regard to the most pressing operational needs in the corridor in categories such as: reduction of recurrent congestion, reduction of non-recurrent congestion, incident management, special event management, relieving specific bottlenecks, encouraging mode shifts, and responding to catastrophic events involving natural or man-made disasters. They have been asked to identify the impediments that need to be overcome in order to advance the cause of corridor integration in categories such as: conflicting interests of adjoining jurisdictions; legal, political or administrative constraints against taking needed actions; technical incompatibilities among systems; and capital and/or operating funding limitations.

(2) Focus on integration needs as opposed to new infrastructure:

Since the emphasis of this program is on integration rather than on implementation of new field devices, the technology options are expected to be relatively limited, so the primary focus of the ConOps development is to understand the current capabilities and to see what new capabilities or functions can be developed within the program scope and to achieve desired benefits by the stakeholders. Starting from these two guiding principles and following the system engineering approach, the 880 ICM Team followed the following five-step ConOps development process:

Step One

Develop vision, goals and objectives: During the development process, the stakeholders reflected long-term vision, goals and objectives for the I-880 corridor in the context of the Bay Area transportation system, but then recognized the need to carefully choose those that can be accomplished within the lifetime and scope of the I-880 ICM program.

Step Two

Identify operational scenarios: The ICM team studied the full range of operational scenarios for the corridor, identified issues and problems for the existing transportation networks and considered opportunities for ICM to produce benefits.

Step Three

Define candidate ICM strategies: The ICM team identified gaps and needs for the existing systems and operations (documented in 3.9). Using the set of candidate strategies developed by FHWA in the Generic ICM ConOps document as the starting point, through a series of stakeholder workshops and meetings, additional strategies desired by the stakeholders were included and a set of candidate ICM strategies to meet the I-880 corridor's specific needs were developed.

Step Four

Analyze how the candidate strategies are applicable and beneficial to the I-880 corridor: Based on a set of criteria, the stakeholders participated in a series of exercises to evaluate the technical, operational and institutional feasibility of the candidate strategies developed under Step Three and selected a final set of candidate ICM strategies.

Step Five

Study the implementation issues (reported in Chapter 5): In order to understand the implementation issues, the 880 ICM Team conducted detailed functional analysis to define the actions needed to implement the candidate strategies. Functional analysis is an important element of the system engineering approach. Through functional analysis, both existing and new functions required for implementing ICM are identified and mapped into asset requirements. The functional analysis was complimented by stakeholders' inputs on technical and institutional feasibilities of proposed ICM strategies.

4.1.3 Approach for Selecting ICM Strategies

The major component of ICM ConOps is ICM Strategies. The development of I-880 ICM strategies included a series of exercises with the stakeholders to determine, based on current conditions, what strategies can provide improvements that are urgently needed and whether the strategies are practical for implementation along the I-880 corridor. Working with all the stakeholders, the following considerations were used in the 880 ICM strategy selection:

1) Operational feasibility: The foremost issue in the evaluation of implementability of candidate strategies is whether the proposed strategies are operationally feasible. Some of the candidate ICM strategies are very desirable but may create negative burdens on operations or significantly increase operational costs, so these strategies may still not be practical for implementation.

2) Technical feasibility: Based on the requirements, alternative system configurations and technology options will be analyzed to determine the most appropriate choices for the ICM implementation.

3) Institutional constraints: The I-880 ICM team intends to use the ICM program as a vehicle to improve institutional integration among the stakeholders along the I-880 corridor. However, given the fact that not all existing institutional gaps among stakeholders can be eliminated through the ICM program due to complexity, time, funding and other constraints, the I-880 ICM team analyzed institutional issues related to the candidate ICM strategies, considering the stakeholders' opportunities and constraints, and prioritized the candidate strategies.

4) Benefits and costs: The stakeholders along the I-880 corridor expect to gain benefits and improvements in a number of areas. The I-880 ICM team evaluated benefits at a relatively high level to get a first order estimate of what kind of benefits the proposed candidate strategies may bring about. The benefits and costs for implementing the candidate strategies will also be evaluated in Stage 2. It is expected that, as some of the strategies require acquisition of a wider range of data under more demanding conditions, while imposing more challenging requirements for component and system robustness, the cost for implementation will also increase. The trade-offs between these increasing costs and benefits will be evaluated to identify the level of capabilities that can be achieved in the corridor, particularly based on the constraints imposed by the existing and available sources of real-time operations data. The results of the trade-off analyses will be shared with the stakeholder organizations to provide them an opportunity to participate in the decision regarding the most appropriate operational scenarios to target for implementation.

5) Compliance with ITS architecture: The ICM design and development will proceed consistent with the Bay Area's Regional ITS Architecture. The existing projects that Caltrans, MTC and Alameda CMA have sponsored have extensively used the regional ITS architecture, and the new ICM functions must apply the regional ITS architecture as well.

4.2 I-880 Corridor Vision, Goals and Objectives

The San Francisco Bay Area has been a national champion for implementing advanced ITS technologies for improving efficiency and effectiveness of the transportation systems. It has become a program objective for the stakeholders along the 880 corridor to use ICM as a tool to further integrate the ITS systems already deployed in the San Francisco Bay Area and to enhance collaborative operations among the operation agencies. Under this program objective, through various workshops and meetings, the stakeholders have formulated ICM visions intending to address the current corridor conditions, deficiencies, and needs, and to help achieve the long-term. The 880 corridor stakeholders also developed the ICM goal and objectives of the ICM program for the 880 corridor is to provide the information sharing tools to enable the individual network operators within the corridor to manage their respective systems collaboratively and cooperatively.

Vision: The I-880 ICM program will help the existing highway, arterial, rail and bus transit networks along the corridor, operated by separate agencies, to function as an integrated transportation system, enhancing efficiency, mobility and transportation choices for all travelers (people and goods) under all conditions.

880 ICM GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

Goals	Objectives
Improve the efficiency of their individual networks through shared information from, and collaborative operations with, the other networks.	Improve highway efficiency by sharing information between arterial and freeways Improve operation efficiency of transit operation by using information about highway conditions and by improving the interface between highway and transit Reduce waiting times for transfers between transit services through enhanced coordination
Reduce delays for truck traffic to and from Port of Oakland Balance demand across the networks to most efficiently utilize the available capacity.	Reduce recurrent congestion through improved real-time balancing of demand and supply between freeways and arterials.
Enable travelers to make informed choices among transportation options, based on reliable information about travel conditions.	Support travelers' trip planning using improved multimodal real-time information. Advise travelers about modal shift using real-time operations information (connections, traffic interactions).
Respond quickly and effectively to service disruptions that may be planned or unplanned, whether based on human or natural causes.	Reduce non-recurrent congestion through improved incident response and incident information to travelers. Improve the ability of the transportation network operators to respond to service disruptions through information sharing and better information to travelers.

4.3 ICM Application Scenarios

The benefits of ICM will depend on the range of scenarios that its implementation can support, and the benefits are expected to increase for operational concepts that can support the most demanding applications (such as responding to a major earthquake). The needs for ICM must be based on specific application scenarios, because these scenarios can vary widely in the technical requirements they impose on an ICM system.

In order to evaluate the applicability and implementability of ICM strategies, the application scenarios under which the ICM strategies will function must be defined. The identification of needs started with the inputs received from the stakeholder organizations, which were organized and combined into a set of integrated corridor-wide application scenarios. Based on the corridor-level goals and objectives, the I-880 ICM team defined the general scenarios for which its ICM will be designed:

• Normal daily operating conditions
• Highway incidents
• Transit incidents
• Planned events
• Major Events

The scenarios were then used for further defining the ICM strategies and their requirements and will later be used for verification of the effectiveness of each strategy during the modeling and analysis stage of work on the ICM project.

4.3.1 Normal Operations Scenario

The normal operations scenario addresses corridor management activities in response to typical day-to-day traffic flows and recurrent congestion. It is important to note that the I-880 corridor does not routinely face such normal conditions, since it experiences over 100 incidents every day. Of those incidents, 10 to 15 are actual collisions. Moreover, the corridor serves travelers from and to the Oakland Sports Arena and Coliseum, each of which serves over 100 major events every year. Nevertheless, even with these frequent special conditions, the corridor experiences recurrent delays at known bottlenecks that could benefit greatly from the implementation of ICM strategies to provide comprehensive multi-modal information to travelers, enhanced transit service quality, more efficient sharing of roadway capacity among freeways and arterials and facilitated emergency vehicle access.

The I-880 freeway experiences high levels of traffic congestion for much of the day under normal conditions, not only during the typical AM and PM peak periods but also in the middle of the day, as shown in Figure 4.2. Indeed, the total hours of delay during the mid-day period now exceed the hours of delay in the AM peak period. The total estimated weekday delay for the freeway in both directions reached 11,600 hours in 2005. The PeMS database helps reveal the locations along the freeway where the main recurrent delays occur, due to high traffic volumes, merging maneuvers, and roadway geometrics. These can be seen graphically in the displays of Figure 4.3, indicated separately for the northbound and southbound travel directions.

The AC Transit bus services in the corridor are operating at capacity during peak periods, and the agency cannot afford to add more buses or drivers in its current budget condition. This capacity constraint also limits their ability to make operational adjustments to respond to incidents within their own or the other networks. The peak period capacity of the BART rail transit services in the corridor is limited by the availability of rolling stock, but with additional rolling stock it would be possible to increase the length of trains and hence their capacity. However, ridership might still be constrained by the limitations in the capacity of BART's park-and-ride garages, which are already operating completely full during weekdays. During the off-peak times both transit agencies have excess capacity, although their practical ability to expand operations at those times is still constrained by their operating budgets.

The overall roadway capacity of the corridor is not fully utilized at present because of the lack of coordination between freeway and arterial operations and the lack of information for travelers about real-time arterial operating conditions. Most automobile-oriented travelers also lack information about the public transit alternatives that could potentially be viable for serving their travel needs.

Finally, there is limited direct coordination between the transportation network operators and the public sector operators of the major traffic generators within the corridor, such as the Port of Oakland, which operates both the container port and Oakland Airport.

FIGURE 4.2 (A) Southbound hours of delay on I-880 by time of day Larger View - use back button to return.

(Source: PeMS, https://pems.eecs.berkeley.edu/)

FIGURE 4.2 (B) Northbound hours of delay on I-880 by time of day Larger View - use back button to return.

(Source: PeMS, https://pems.eecs.berkeley.edu/)

FIGURE 4.3 (A) PeMS displays of aggregate traffic speeds on I-880 by time of day and milepost, showing normal bottleneck patterns Larger View - use back button to return.

FIGURE 4.3 (B) PeMS displays of aggregate traffic speeds on I-880 by time of day and milepost, showing normal bottleneck patterns Larger View - use back button to return.

4.3.2 Incident Scenario (Highway and Arterial)

The incident scenario addresses corridor management activities and strategies in response to incident-related non-recurrent congestion.

EXISTING CONDITIONS

A significant amount of congestion delay on the I-880 freeway is caused by incidents (crashes, breakdowns, spilled loads and other random events). The I-880 corridor experiences over 100 incidents every day. Of those incidents, ten are actual collisions. Figure 4.4 depicts a representative sample of incidents on I-880 during one week in July 2004 and Figure 4.5 shows a summary of I-880 incidents by time of day. Many of these incidents occur in the afternoon, when traffic volumes and congestion are greater than at other times of the day. Figure 4.6 shows the number of I-880 collisions occurring daily between 1999 and 2004. The sources for these data are the TASAS crash database and California Highway Patrol (CHP) logs.

FIGURE 4.4 Sample of number of I-880 incidents per day during the week including July 4, 2004 Larger View - use back button to return.

(Source: PeMS TASAS)

FIGURE 4.5 Distribution of I-880 Incidents by Time of Day Larger View - use back button to return.

(Source: PeMS TASAS)

FIGURE 4.6 Number of collisions per day on I-880 over five years Larger View - use back button to return.

It is important that effective and efficient management procedures be in place to quickly detect, verify, respond and clear incidents to minimize their adverse impacts to traffic. In 2003 the Bay Area Incident Response System (BAIRS), a computerized incident management tool, was implemented by Caltrans District 4 in the San Francisco Bay Area to improve freeway incident management capabilities. BAIRS uses a real-time web-based set of databases integrated into Geographic Information System (GIS) software to identify and map the location of the incident and the location and availability of Caltrans maintenance supervisors, workers, and equipment. The responding supervisor can locate the nearest maintenance crew, equipment and materials using laptop computers and BAIRS. By providing real-time communication and access to information, BAIRS keeps both the dispatcher and the responding maintenance crew up-to-date with all pertinent information about incidents.

Although BAIRS reduced incident durations by about 15%, the dispatching process and corresponding personnel response times to clear incidents could be improved in the following areas:

• Multiple calls are frequently required to secure appropriate response personnel.
• Contact and availability information is not frequently updated, causing delays in contacting the appropriate party to dispatch.
• Limited information about incidents results in an inability to determine which tools and resources are needed to resolve the incident prior to arriving on-scene.

Further reducing incident response times and incident clearance times will improve safety on I-880, reduce mobile emissions, and shorten emergency vehicle response times to other incidents. Broader concerns about current capabilities for managing roadway incidents in the corridor include:

• real-time information about impacts of incidents on travel times is not generally available to system operators or travelers
• system operators lack the tools to adjust their operations accordingly in response to incidents
• there is currently no effective way to provide guidance to drivers to minimize their delay if the incident occurs after they have started their trip
• prompt incident detection on arterials is not generally available
• even after an arterial incident is detected, there is no effective way to notify drivers about it.

4.3.3 Incident Scenario (Transit)

The I-880 corridor depends heavily on its two primary transit services, the BART rail transit line and the AC Transit buses. Minor incidents involving these services are nuisances to their riders and in the long term tend to discourage choice riders, while major incidents can adversely affect the entire corridor. The transit operators have to contend with a wide range of potential incidents, which have different implications when they occur during peak and off-peak operations:

BART rail transit

• station closure (e.g., local law enforcement action)
• brief service interruption (i.e., 15 minutes) any between 15 to 60 minutes?
• major service interruption (one hour or longer)
• capacity reduction, but without interruption
• wildcat strike or work slowdown

AC Transit bus services

• bus crash requiring emergency response and replacement bus and driver
• disabled bus requiring replacement
• local traffic incident causing service delays
• maintenance or equipment problems limiting availability of buses
• wildcat strike or work slowdown

In addition, the AC Transit express bus services operating on the freeway may encounter major freeway incidents that require re-routing of the buses and/or serious schedule delays.

The transit agencies have general procedures in place for handling incidents such as these, but they are limited by resource constraints as well as shortfalls in real-time information. For example, AC Transit is not able to do dynamic dispatching of buses in response to peak-period incidents because they do not have slack capacity to work with. Resource limitations have also tended to force the transit operators into reactive modes of responding to problems rather than enabling them to proactively plan responses, particularly for incidents that require multi-agency cooperation.

Issues of particular concern with regard to transit incidents include:

• need for enhanced coordination between the two major transit system operators
• limited availability to travelers of information about alternative modes
• the transit trip planner in the 511 system is based on nominal transit schedules and does not include a dynamic capability to respond to real-time schedule deviations
• real-time information about service interruptions and connection problems is not available to travelers
• transit-dependent travelers have limited options, even if better information is available to them.

4.3.4 Planned/Scheduled Event Scenario

Planned and scheduled events can place severe demands on the transportation system, but because they are planned and scheduled it should be possible to mitigate their impacts on transportation services by developing and implementing effective strategies. These strategies are likely to depend at least as much on pre-event coordination as on real-time information sharing.

Some of the planned/special events anticipated for the I-880 corridor are generally applicable anywhere in the country, while others are likely to be specific to this corridor. The initial candidate list of such events includes:

• major sporting or entertainment event at the Oakland Coliseum, especially if scheduled on a weeknight, overlapping the evening commute peak
• major weeknight sporting event in San Francisco, impacting evening peak traffic in this corridor
• major travel surge at Oakland Airport, particularly associated with holiday travel periods
• AC Transit or BART strike
• AC Transit or BART service change
• Highway maintenance or construction activity requiring closure of lane(s) and/or interchange(s) in or adjacent to the corridor
• Street fairs causing closures of major streets (generally on holidays or weekends)
• Major holiday events (Fourth of July fireworks displays, pre-Christmas surges at shopping malls).

Each event has its own character, stakeholder organizations and geographic scope, so they tend to require customized approaches. However, in all cases it is better to have coordinated planning among all of the involved organizations far enough in advance to provide time to settle on the most acceptable response strategy and contingency plans. This is likely to require consultations beyond the traditional transportation operating organizations, including as well organizations such as:

• Local police forces and California Highway Patrol
• Local emergency responders (fire, EMS)
• Event venue managers (Coliseum) and organizers (sports teams)
• Oakland Airport and major airlines
• Shopping center management
• Street fair organizers
• Mass media outlets (TV, radio, newspapers).

Some of the scheduled events (especially the infrequent ones) occur in locations that do not normally handle the volume or patterns of traffic that are generated by the special events. This requires particular care in planning, particularly for providing assets that are not normally in place there (officers to direct traffic, portable CMS to provide information, etc.) and to disseminate information to the public.

One particularly significant aspect of special events traffic is that a large proportion of the people traveling for these events are not familiar with the area. They may not know the most appropriate routes to take, where parking is available, what turn restrictions apply at intersections, which transit services can take them there, etc. This places a particular premium on providing comprehensive and easily understandable information to the traveling public. Examples of these needs for scheduled events at the Oakland Coliseum include:

• Real-time data dissemination for traffic - Motorists may be redirected from the event congestion along I-880 via Changeable Message Signs or Trailblazers deployed by Caltrans, via 511 phone or web messages disseminated by MTC, or via web data disseminated by East Bay SMART Corridors. Motorists can access real-time driving times and notifications of slowdown locations.
• Real-time data dissemination for transit - Transit users and potential transit users would have AC Transit and BART travel time estimates via station and stop displays, station announcements, and announcements on 511.
• Alternate routes - Motorists may be redirected from the event congestion along I-880 primarily onto the adjacent SMART Corridors leading up to the Coliseum. These arterials include San Pablo Avenue from the north, International Boulevard and San Leandro Street in close proximity to the Coliseum area, and Hesperian Boulevard from the south. These parallel arterials could then in turn be monitored by the video cameras located along the SMART Corridors.
• Real-time parking information - There are 9 parking lots in the immediate vicinity of the Coliseum area, as well as additional lots in the surrounding areas. Dissemination of this information to motorists attending the scheduled event via CMSs, trailblazers, PDAs or by phone would reduce congestion both along I-880 and adjacent local streets by directing motorists quickly to available spaces.
• Impact to Oakland Airport travelers – The Oakland International Airport is located in close proximity to the Coliseum and is operated by the Port of Oakland. Thus, the Port of Oakland, Caltrans, and the City of Oakland could coordinate any messages disseminated via CMS or other means, to facilitate announcement of delays along I-880, or alternate routes to the Airport.
• On-site traffic control – During scheduled Coliseum events, both the CHP and City of Oakland police may have roles in on-site traffic control. Two-way communication of traffic conditions (to assist the officers in traffic control and directing traffic towards less congested routes, and also from the office to the management center to provide real-time information on traffic conditions at their locations) could be provided via a combination of cameras and wireless devices interfaced with the network.
• Advance static data dissemination for traffic and transit – On the MTC 511 phone and web sites, and on the ACCMA web site, advance notification could be provided regarding the scheduled event. Travelers could be advised to expect delays, and also to consider taking transit to the scheduled event.
• Data sources – A combination of various data sources would provide real-time traffic and transit information. These data sources include Caltrans sensors, SpeedInfo and FasTrak feeding data to the 511 system, video cameras along parallel SMART Corridors, and real-time information from on-site personnel (such as traffic-directing police officers through wireless communication or other means).
• Traffic Control – The following could be enhanced for the scheduled event since the responsible agencies would be notified in advance of the event:
  • Signal timing along adjacent arterials and leading up to I-880 ramps could be enhanced by the City of Oakland and/or the Oakland Police Department to accommodate the additional expected flow
  • Ramp metering could be enhanced by Caltrans to accommodate the additional expected flow
  • Transit Signal Priority could be enhanced to help move additional transit vehicles through the Coliseum area
  • Coordinated operation could be achieved between signals and ramp meters
• Interagency communication – For a scheduled event, impacted Transportation Management Centers (TMCs) would have predefined strategies and a predefined schedule for coordinated traffic control and data dissemination. These agencies specifically include the Caltrans District 4 TMC, the Oakland TMC and related facilities, the Port of Oakland TMC, and the East Bay SMART Corridors TMC, and MTC's 511 Traveler Information Center (TIC).
• Emergency response and emergency vehicle pre-emption – Although the event is a planned/scheduled event, the additional congestion could increase the likelihood of an incident. Emergency responders such as CHP, Oakland Police Department and Oakland Fire Department would have immediate notification of any incidents related to the actual scheduled event. Also, emergency responders would be given priority on the adjacent arterials in order to reach any incident scene.
• Data Archiving - Data archiving by Caltrans, MTC (511), ACCMA, PeMS and CHP could improve operations in preparation for, and during, future scheduled events.

4.3.5 Catastrophic Event Scenario

Major events are generally unpredictable and have widespread impacts on the transportation system as well as on other aspects of the regional economy, so the transportation system responses need to account for the likelihood of other services being disrupted. Examples of major event scenarios for the I-880 corridor could include:

• large fire requiring closure of major transportation arteries (such as the Oakland Hills fire of October 1991, which closed I-580 and a BART line)
• widespread flooding, blocking major transportation arteries
• terrorist attack destroying infrastructure and requiring sudden evacuation
• major earthquake (such as the Loma Prieta earthquake of October 1989, which destroyed the section of I-880 immediately to the north of the ICM corridor).

Major events such as these unfold in stages, which are quite different from each other and require different transportation responses:

1. Immediate aftermath, with the potential for public panic and the need to evacuate people from dangerous areas promptly and safely.
2. Recovery operations, tending to injured people and trying to limit damage (firefighting, sandbagging for floods, preventing structures from collapsing, etc.).
3. Repairing damaged infrastructure and restoring utility services (electric, telecommunications, water and gas). Since this may take considerable time, this stage is also likely to overlap with a gradual return to normal operation of the regional economy, with people returning to work. Goods movement may be substantially impacted by the need to remove debris and bring in new building materials.
4. Returning to normal operations in stages, as the regional economy recovers.

Because the I-880 corridor is immediately adjacent to the Hayward Fault, the most dangerous earthquake fault in the San Francisco Bay Area, the logical candidate example to consider is a major earthquake on that fault. Seismic research, based on historical data, indicates a 62% probability of an earthquake of magnitude 6.7 or greater, which is capable of causing widespread damage, striking the region before 2032. This could be a disaster of national economic significance, potentially comparable to Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans, and in that sense is probably a uniquely drastic scenario among the ICM Pioneer Sites. The impacts of such an earthquake could include:

• loss of electrical power for hours or even days, disabling traffic signals, most telecommunications, fueling stations for motor vehicles, and power for BART trains;
• structural damage to elevated BART tracks and/or stations;
• derailing of BART train during earth motion;
• structural damage to I-880 freeway where built on elevated structure or at grade on land fill;
• collapse of freeway overpasses, disrupting arterial traffic as well as freeway traffic.
• The time needed to recover and restore these types of damage could vary widely, so different parts of the transportation system could become usable at different times after the event.

Some of the key challenges to managing this scenario include:

• The priorities and constraints faced by the public authorities will change multiple times as the corridor management activities progress through the different stages of emergency response and recovery, requiring timely information and decision making agility.
• The patterns of damage could occur in infinite combinations, making it impossible to anticipate them all in detail. These are likely to include localized losses of structures, power, communications, people and vehicles.
• With some sources of information likely to be disabled by the event, there will be large uncertainties about the true condition of the transportation infrastructure, vehicles, and personnel.
• The transportation needs of the corridor will change significantly throughout the event and recovery, depending on the extent and geographical distribution of the disruptions to commerce and work patterns.

MTC is already working towards integrated coordination of responses to catastrophic events by various transportation agencies throughout the San Francisco Bay Area, and has developed agreements for resource sharing, timely communication, and unified public information. ICM should be able to support multiple sources of information about the true condition and operations of the transportation networks within the corridor, helping to improve operational effectiveness and flexibility for responding to a major event and facilitating the cooperation among the operators of the different networks.

4.4 Development of Candidate ICM Strategies

The proposed 880 ICM system will be built upon on the existing ITS systems already deployed for the networks that operate along the I-880 corridor. The focus of the ICM ConOps is therefore placed on the integration of the existing ITS systems, which will facilitate data sharing capabilities, enhanced real-time cross-network coordination and operations involving various agencies and jurisdictions using a set of transportation management strategies.

4.4.1 Information Sharing

Addresses the gaps G1 and needs N1 discussed in sections 3.10 and 3.11)

Information sharing is an enabler for ICM, which enable improved coordination and operations among the transportation networks and therefore facilitate management of the total capacity and demand of the corridor. Communication links among operating agencies, system interfaces, and bridging functions will be critical for ICM, by which information and system operations and control functions can be effectively shared and distributed among networks and their respective transportation management systems and by which the impacts of operational decisions can be immediately viewed and evaluated by the affected agencies and across networks.

FIGURE 4.6 Proposed 880 ICM Information Sharing Scheme Larger View - use back button to return.

The proposed I-880 ICM information sharing scheme is shown in Figure 4.6, changing from existing information sharing shown on Figure 3.17 to allow full information sharing among I-880 stakeholder agencies. Note that the ICM processing will likely be implemented by a number of physically distributed information processing functions. However, these distributed information processing functions will be designed to seamlessly perform ICM needed information sharing.

4.4.2 Candidate ICM Strategies

In developing the ICM candidate strategies, the I-880 ICM Team conducted a series of workshops with the stakeholders to determine those strategies that can be realized based on the current infrastructure and ITS system condition, strategies that can address the gaps and needs identified under Section 3.9.

In order to quickly ramp up the ConOps development process and at the recommendation of USDOT representatives, the I-880 ICM team referenced the list of candidate strategies provided by FHWA in the Generic ICM Concept of Operations document, eliminating those that are not applicable to the I-880 corridor and adding additional ICM strategies that will provide benefits for the corridor. Appendix B is a working table used by the 880 ICM Team to conduct exercises on candidate selected scenarios.

The I-880 ICM Team initially selected 29 candidate strategies for consideration. In addition to soliciting stakeholders inputs, in an effort to determine which ones should be further analyzed, the initial set of candidate strategies were evaluated by the project consultant team based on five criteria – significant traffic impact, high benefit/cost ratio, minimal institutional or political challenge, little technical complexity, and improved national competitiveness (see Appendix C for the rating results). When the non-numerical scale of the rating sheets was converted to a simple linear scale with a range of possible combined scores from -60 to +60, all of the 14 strategies under active consideration scored within the relatively narrow range of -2 to +20. At the January 18 meeting, the stakeholders suggested keeping this full set for functional analysis, since they believed all the 14 strategies could bring significant benefit to the corridor and shouldn't be eliminated prematurely.

Based on stakeholders' inputs and preliminary analyses (as reported in section 5.3), 14 candidate strategies were selected for the I-880 ICM. These strategies are categorized into three groups, including:

• The "Influencing Travelers' Decisions and Choices" strategies aim at providing travelers with accurate information either pre-trip or en-route so that they can make informed decisions about mode of travel and/or route of travel.
• The "Facilitating Collaboration among Agencies for Operational Improvement" strategies focus on better coordination of operations and incident response among different agencies, so that existing capacities on these networks can be fully utilized to reduce congestion and to improve travelers' trip experience.
• The "Facilitating Collaboration among Agencies for Event Planning" strategies coordinate maintenance and construction works on different networks to minimize their impacts on the transportation system.

The Candidate I-880 ICM strategies are:

 

 

 

4.5 Analysis of Candidate ICM Strategies

With the stakeholders' participation, the I-880 ICM Team consultants analyzed the candidate strategies to assess their applicability, implementability and benefits of the candidate strategies.

4.5.1 Assessment of Candidate ICM Strategies against issues and ICM goals

The candidate strategies were analyzed against the gaps and needs as well as 880 ICM goals and objectives. Table 4.2 shows the mapping between gaps/needs and strategies. Table 4.3 shows the mapping between strategies and goals. These tables indicate that the selected candidate I-880 ICM strategies all contribute to reducing gaps and achieving the goals and objectives set for the I-880 corridor.

TABLE 4.2 The mapping between the gaps and needs

Gaps and Needs	Strategies
Gaps in traveler information for influencing travelers' decisions and choices
N2) Needs for a corridor/regional based traveler information system	Strategy #1 A corridor-based multimodal advanced traveler information system that supports travelers pre-trip planning Strategy #2 Promote route shifts between roadways via en-route traveler information devices advising motorists of congestion ahead, directing them to adjacent freeways or arterials. Strategy #3 Promote modal shifts from roadways to transit via en-route traveler information devices advising motorists Strategy #4 Promote shifts between transit facilities via en-route traveler information devices advising riders of outages and directing them to adjacent rail or bus services.
II. Gaps in collaboration among agencies for operational collaborations
N3) Needs for coordination between freeway and arterial operations N4) Needs for coordination between highway and transit operations N5) Needs for coordination between transit systems N6) Needs for coordination between highway and freight operations N7) Needs for coordination between highway control systems and emergency response needs N8) Needs for coordination for incident responses	Strategy #5 Coordinated operation between freeways and arterial traffic signals Strategy #6 Enhance arterial signal timing with advance information about special events at Oakland Coliseum. Strategy#8 AC Transit adjusts operations based on real-time information about highway incidents and special events Strategy #9 Transit hub connection protection for special events or major incidents Strategy # 10 Port of Oakland advises arriving and departing trucks about port delay and estimated travel times Strategy #11 Signal preemption or "best Route" for emergency vehicles Strategy #12 Multi-agency or multi-network incident response teams and service patrols and training exercises.
Gaps in Collaboration among Agencies for Event Planning
(N9) Needs for coordination for infrastructure construction and maintenance N10) Needs for coordination of construction work during emergencies	Strategy #13 Coordinate scheduled maintenance and construction activities among corridor networks. Strategy #14 Guidelines for construction work hours during emergencies.

TABLE 4.3 Relationships between candidate strategies and corridor Goals

	Improve efficiency of individual network	Balance demand across the networks	Enable travelers to make informed choices	Respond quickly and effectively to service disruptions
#1 A corridor-based pre-trip ATIS database	•	°	•	°
#2 Promote route shifts between roadways via en-route traveler information device		•	•	•
#3 Promote modal shifts from roadways to transit via en-route traveler information devices	°	•	•	•
#4 Promote shifts between transit facilities via en-route traveler information devices		•	•	•
#5 Coordinated operation between freeway and arterial traffic signals	•	•		•
#6 Enhance arterial signal timing with advance information about special events at Coliseum				•
#7 Transit signal priority	•	°		°
#8 AC Transit adjusts operations based on real-time about incidents and special events				•
#9 Transit hub connection protection for special events or major incidents		•		°
#10 Port of Oakland advise trucks travel time based on real-time traffic information			•	°
#11 Signal pre-emption or "best route" for emergency vehicles	•			•
#12 Multi-agency or multi-network incident response teams and service patrols and training exercises	•			•
#13 Coordinate scheduled maintenance and construction activities among corridor networks	•	•		•
#14 Guidelines for construction work hours during emergencies or special events	•			•

° Strategy indirectly supports objective
• Strategy directly supports objective

4.5.2 Analysis of Candidate ICM Strategies

The candidate ICM strategies were further analyzed from the following perspectives:

• What are the current operations
• The objective of the strategy
• How the strategy would work under different scenarios
• Expected benefits
• Information sharing requirements
• How this strategy is measured
• Stakeholders involved
• Technical implementation challenges
• Institutional implementation challenges

The analysis is documented in worksheets. The next few worksheets provide detailed descriptions of the I-880 ICM candidate strategies involving using real-time information. The analysis helps to facilitate the understanding of the proposed strategies.

Table of Analyzed Strategies

Strategy #1		A corridor-based advanced traveler information system (ATIS) database that provides information to travelers pre-trip.
What is the current operation?		511 Traveler Information System (MTC) real-time speed and predicted travel times. Real-time transit arrival data for select Muni and AC Transit (NextBus).
How would it work under different scenario and what are expected benefits	Objectives of this ICM Strategy	1) To provide travelers and transportation managers with accurate real-time and historic traffic conditions along the 880 corridor for them to make pre-trip decisions to adjust route, mode, time of travel or operations. 2) To improve user access to pre-trip traveler information. 3) To improve individual travel time and overall congestion levels by showing effect of trip delay, route change or mode shift.
	Normal Operation	Agencies provide and share information on duration of special events and the affected network. The 511 web portal could provide 880 specific conditions, personalized travel time predictions, historic travel time comparisons based on similar events, routing suggestions, alternate mode choices, schedules of upcoming events.
	Incidents (Highway and Arterials)	Agencies provide and share information on incident and the affected network. The 511 web portal could provide 880 specific conditions, personalized travel time predictions, historic travel time comparisons based on similar incidents, routing suggestions, and alternate mode choices.
	Incidents (Transit)	Agencies provide and share information on transit incident and the affected network. The 511 web portal could provide alternate routing or mode choices, service interruption information time estimates.
	Major events	Agencies provide and share information on the extent of the emergency and the affected network. Based on regional protocols, coordinated emergency operation service plan should include 511. The 511 web portal could provide 880 specific conditions, emergency communications, routing suggestions, and alternate mode choices.
Information sharing requirements(Specify information type, accuracy and updated rate)		Traffic condition information along corridor, including real-time and historical speeds, bottleneck locations and queue lengths Incident information, including real-time and historical incident data Predicted travel time, including real-time and historical travel times
How this strategy is measured (MOEs)		Percentage of corridor lane-miles and transit fleets with accurate real-time speed and travel time data Percentage of transit fleets with real-time arrival data Number of agencies that can share real-time traveler information Percentage of information consumers who believe information is helpful
Stakeholders involved (and their functions)		MTC (operations & management of 511, information dissemination); Caltrans (providing freeway traffic and incident information); AC Transit (sharing real-time location info); BART (sharing real-time location info); Alameda County Congestion Management Agency (providing arterial traffic and incident info); California Highway Patrol; Media (information dissemination)
Technical implementation challenges		1) Upgrade existing 511 system to improve user access, communicate/integrate with historical travel time and incident data, add new functionalities of matching/mining historical data, and to implement personalized travel times; 2) Additional detection and monitoring coverage required beyond 880 corridor to provide better travel time accuracy for alternate routes; 3) Reliable and efficient models to generate accurate predicted travel time and appropriate alternate routes under incident or congestion scenarios
Institutional implementation challenges		511 Strategic Plan leaves open possibility of alternative business models for delivery of traveler information; Possibility of resistance from transit agency staff of real-time location info, fearing monitoring of individual's record of schedule adherence
Strategy #2		Promote route shifts between roadways via en-route traveler information devices (e.g. CMS, HAR, "511") advising motorists of congestion ahead, directing them to adjacent freeways or arterials.
What is the current operation?		Limited coordination between Caltrans Traffic Operations System (including Changeable Message Signs and Highway Advisory Radio), MTC 511 system, local news media and Information Service Providers.
Objectives of this ICM Strategy		Divert traffic demand from congested locations to areas of the roadway network with excess capacity. Improve individual travel time and reduce overall congestion levels by providing travelers with travel times and alternative route choices en-route.
How would it work under different scenario and what are expected benefits?	Normal Operation	Expansion and enhanced coordination of TOS (CMS and HAR), 511 and other agency's detection and information dissemination capabilities to provide coordinated real-time traffic conditions combined with travel times, alternative routing suggestions and assistance. Result would be increased diversion away from congested locations.
	Scheduled Events	In addition to Normal Operation, improve coordination with event organizers to implement coordinated response of TOS, 511 and other agency's detection and information dissemination capabilities. Result would be early warning of traffic impacts for planned special events and dissemination of alternative routing information.
	Incidents (Highway and Arterials)	In addition to Normal Operation, expand and enhance coordination of TOS, 511 and other agency's information dissemination capabilities to quickly provide incident information, revised travel times and alternative routing information to roadway users.
	Incidents (Transit)	Incidents (Transit) Expand and enhance coordination of TOS and 511 with transit agencies to quickly provide transit incident information to transit operators. Bus transit operators can utilize incident information to quickly make service routing adjustments as needed.
	Major events	Following regional emergency protocols, coordinate TOS, 511 and other agency's information dissemination capabilities to quickly provide emergency routing information to the public and divert traffic away from hazards.
Information sharing requirements (Specify information type, accuracy and updated rate)		Traffic information along corridor Traffic information on parallel arterials and alternative routes, including speeds, bottleneck locations and queue lengths if any, ramp metering logic, traffic signal timing planning and coordination Incident location and severity information, including whether it is related to traffic or transit network, incident type, location, date and time, severity and estimated delays, roadway condition, weather condition, etc.
Information sharing requirements (Specify information type, accuracy and updated rate)		Traffic information along corridor Traffic information on parallel arterials and alternative routes, including speeds, bottleneck locations and queue lengths if any, ramp metering logic, traffic signal timing planning and coordination Incident location and severity information, including whether it is related to traffic or transit network, incident type, location, date and time, severity and estimated delays, roadway condition, weather condition, etc.
		Predicted travel time, including predicted travel times along corridor, on alternative routes, and via transit
How this strategy is measured (MOEs)		Improved individual travel time Reduced overall travel delay (under special events, incidents or major events) Responsiveness to changes due to events and changes of roadway/traffic conditions
Stakeholders involved (and their functions)		MTC (operations & management of 511, information dissemination) Caltrans (TOS operations) Alameda County Congestion Management Agency (providing arterial traffic and incident info) California Highway Patrol (incident response) Port of Oakland (information dissemination) Media (information dissemination)
Technical implementation challenges		Integration of multiple existing systems (e.g., 511, Caltrans CMS) into a unified system that can smoothly interchange corridor level traffic information (such as real time traffic conditions, incidents, and travel times) and disseminate the information to the public via different channels in a timely manner Development of reliable models to predict corridor level travel times, incident detection, alternate routes recommendations, etc. Development of reliable methods for assisting drivers to take the alternative routes, e.g., using the alternative route signing system.
Institutional implementation challenges		Local government concern over potential diversion of excess demand on freeways to local streets There is a need for updating operations guidelines to incorporate enhanced interagency coordination strategy for information delivery The operation is more complex than the current approach; more training of traffic and transit operations personnel for response planning will be needed Logistics of coordinated response among agencies, especially for incident and emergency management, will require detailed interagency agreements.
Strategy #3		Promote modal shifts from roadways to transit via en-route traveler information devices (e.g. CMS, HAR, "511") advising motorists of congestion ahead, directing them to high-capacity transit networks and providing real-time information on the number of parking spaces available in the park and ride facility.
What is the current operation?		Some promotion of alternative modes through media and information service providers. Other static promotion of alternative modes through traditional media outlets (print, radio, employer incentives). Pilot demonstration of Smart Parking at Rockridge BART on SR-24..
Objectives of this ICM Strategy		Divert traffic demand from congested locations of the roadway network to high-capacity transit networks. Improve transit ridership and reduce overall congestion levels by providing travelers with guidance to alternative mode choices and transit status en-route.
How would it work under different scenario and what are expected benefits?	Normal Operation	Expand, enhance and coordinate outlets for providing travelers with en-route guidance to alternative mode choices and transit scheduling/status linked to real-time traffic conditions and congestion hotspots. Information dissemination outlets include CMS, HAR, 511, media and information service providers. The result would be Smart Parking deployments at all BART and major transit hubs in the 880 corridor, providing true coordination between the freeway system, transit stations/park & ride lots and transit scheduling.
	Scheduled Events	In addition to Normal Operation, implement enhanced coordination of transit scheduling with event organizers in pre-planned locations, including real-time parking availability and driver guidance to available parking and transit connection. Result would be rapid transit response to divert freeway traffic to transit for planned special events.
	Incidents (Highway and Arterials)	In addition to Normal Operation, implement rapid transit response to major roadway network incidents, including coordination of transit scheduling with incident response at transit stations/park & rides, including real-time parking availability and driver guidance to available parking and transit connection. Result would be rapid transit response to divert traffic from roadways to transit during major incidents.
	Incidents (Transit)	In addition to Normal Operation, provide information to roadway users of major transit incidents, including guidance to alternate transit stations/park & rides, including real-time parking availability. Result would be additional flexibility of transit network in the event of major transit disruptions, retention of transit ridership during service interruptions.
	Major events	Following regional emergency protocols, coordinate TOS, 511 and transit agency's information dissemination capabilities to quickly provide emergency transit routing information to the public, divert traffic away from hazards and facilitate mass evacuations if necessary.
Information sharing requirements (Specify information type, accuracy and updated rate)		Traffic information along corridor, including real time speeds, bottleneck locations and queue lengths Traffic information on parallel arterials and alternative routes, including real time speeds, bottleneck locations, and queue lengths Transit scheduling Transit station/P&R facility locations
		Real-time transit vehicle location and arrival times Incident information, including whether it is related to traffic or transit network, incident type, location, date and time, severity and estimated delays, roadway condition, weather condition, etc. Predicted travel time, for both corridor, alternative routes and transit networks Travel information on transit networks, including schedules, delays, trip times, parking space availability (for BART)
How this strategy is measured (MOEs)		Improved transit ridership Improved transit customer satisfaction Reduced overall travel delay (under special events, incidents or major events) Responsiveness to changes due to events and changes of roadway/traffic conditions
Stakeholders involved (and their functions)		MTC (operations & management of 511, information dissemination) Caltrans (TOS operations) AC Transit (sharing real-time location info) BART (sharing real-time location info) Alameda County Congestion Management Agency (providing arterial traffic and incident info) California Highway Patrol Media (information dissemination)
Technical implementation challenges		Integration of multiple existing systems (e.g., 511, Caltrans CMS) into a unified system that can smoothly interchange multi-modal traffic information (such as real time traffic conditions, incidents, and travel times for both traffic and transit networks) and disseminate the information to the public via appropriate channels in a timely manner Development of reliable models to predict corridor level travel times, transit parking space availability, incident detection, etc.
Institutional implementation challenges		Possibility of resistance from neighborhoods with major transit stations, fearing parking overflow in local streets (especially during major incidents). Transit agencies may need to consider appropriate access control schemes for available parking to control demand during normal operations, including parking pricing and reservation systems. There is a need for updating operations guidelines to incorporate enhanced interagency coordination strategy for information delivery The operation is more complex than the current approach; more training of traffic and transit operations personnel for response planning will be needed Logistics of coordinated response among agencies, especially for incident and emergency management, will require detailed interagency agreements.
Strategy #4		Promote shifts between transit facilities via en-route traveler information devices (e.g. station message signs and public announcements) advising riders of outages and directing them to adjacent rail or bus services.
What is the current operation?		Manual coordination among transit agencies providing information on transfer locations and schedule coordination.
Objectives of this ICM Strategy		Improve transit ridership and convenience of transit usage by providing travelers with guidance with transfers among alternative mode choices as well as real-time transit status en-route.
How would it work under different scenario and what are expected benefits?	Normal Operation	Expand, enhance and coordinate outlets for providing travelers with en-route transit trip guidance, transit scheduling/status and transfer assistance. Information dissemination outlets include station information message systems, 511, media and information service providers. Result is hoped to be networked station information systems, Smart Parking and TransLink deployments at all major transit stations & park & ride facilities in the 880 corridor.
	Scheduled Events	In addition to Normal Operation, implement enhanced coordination of transit operations and connectivity with event organizers in pre-planned locations, including timed connections and rider guidance for transit connections. An example would be coordinated ferry, BART and AC Transit response to a major festival on Treasure Island. The result would be coordinated interagency transit response to planned special events.
	Incidents (Highway and Arterials)	In addition to Normal Operation, implement rapid transit operations response to major roadway incidents that impact transit operations. This would include coordination of transit scheduling with incident response at transit stations/park & rides, including real-time transit status, alternative routing availability, rider guidance to alternative connections, and updated travel time estimates.
	Incidents (Transit)	In addition to Normal Operation, provide information to transit users of major transit service interruptions, coordination of transit scheduling with incident response at transit stations/park & rides, including real-time transit status, alternative routing availability, rider guidance to alternative connections, and updated travel time estimates. Result would be additional flexibility of transit network in the event of major transit disruptions and retention of transit ridership during service interruptions.
	Major events	Following regional emergency protocols, coordinate TOS, 511 and transit agency's information dissemination capabilities to quickly provide emergency transit routing information to the public, divert traffic away from hazards and facilitate mass evacuations if necessary.
Information sharing requirements (Specify information type, accuracy and updated rate)		Traffic information along transit routes, including real time speeds, congestion locations and duration Incident information, including whether it is related to traffic or transit network, incident type, location, date and time, severity and estimated delays, roadway condition, weather condition, etc. Real-time transit vehicle location and arrival times Transit routing and scheduling information Predicted transit travel time
How this strategy is measured (MOEs)		Convenience of transit use (customer satisfaction) Improved ridership Retention of transit usage for travelers with multiple transfers to reach destination (under special events, incidents or major events) Responsiveness to changes due to events and changes of transit and traffic conditions
Stakeholders involved (and their functions)		MTC (operations & management of 511, information dissemination) Caltrans (TOS operations) AC Transit (sharing real-time location, routing and scheduling info) BART (sharing real-time location, routing and scheduling info) Alameda County Congestion Management Agency (providing arterial traffic and incident info) California Highway Patrol Media (information dissemination)
Technical implementation challenges		Information integration of all transit modes and development of a unified system to automatically coordinate transit agencies in case of recurrent congestion, incidents, and major events. Development of reliable methods to automatically generate alternate transit route and transfer locations based on real-time transit conditions
Institutional implementation challenges		Possibility of resistance from transit agency staff of real-time location info, fearing monitoring of individual's record of schedule adherence There is a need for updating operations guidelines to incorporate enhanced interagency coordination strategy for information delivery The operation is more complex than the current approach; more training of traffic and transit operations personnel for response planning will be needed
Strategy #5		Coordinated operation between freeway and arterial traffic signals
What is the current operation?		Currently there is direct linkage between arterial signal timing (on State, county, and city arterials) and ramp metering on the 880 freeway. Caltrans can and presumably does use arterial signal timing plans from the various jurisdictions in setting the ramp meter plans at individual on-ramps on the 880. However, the systems are not directly linked and total travel times that encompass both arterial and freeway travel are not optimized. It is unclear whether arterial signal timing currently considers ramp meter rates at all (need to check with different jurisdictions)
Objectives of this ICM Strategy		To optimize overall corridor travel times by integrating arterial signal planning systems with ramp metering systems.
How would it work under different scenario and what are expected benefits?	Normal Operation	Detection on both arterials and freeways provide traffic conditions that in turn modify arterial signal timing and ramp metering to optimize overall travel times. Note that significant detection may be needed on the 880 arterials to enable this strategy.
	Scheduled Events	When arterial configurations are modified for special events (e.g., a ball game at the Coliseum), the ramp metering system needs to understand these changes so that overall travel times can be optimized. Most likely, there will be pre-defined configurations that will be used so that the ramp metering systems can properly understand the traffic conditions sent by the arterial detection systems.
	Incidents (Highway and Arterials)	Same as under normal operations.
	Incidents (Transit)	Same as under normal operations.
	Major events	Same as under normal operations.
Information sharing requirements (Specify information type, accuracy and updated rate)		Arterial configuration in operations Real-time information on freeway traffic conditions Real-time information on arterials traffic conditions
How this strategy is measured (MOEs)		Overall travel time on both freeway and arterials Total delay on both freeways and arterials
Stakeholders involved (and their functions)		Caltrans County of Alameda Cities (Fremont, Union City, Oakland, Hayward)
Technical implementation challenges		This strategy requires significant detection capabilities on both arterials and freeways. Mid-block detectors on arterials will be needed. Caltrans, the county, and the cities do not all use the same arterial software, which makes it difficult to add specific real-time optimizations of signal timing plans. Many arterial signals only connect to a central hub upon request. This would slow down the real-time optimization of signal timing plans. The same lack of continuous communications will make it difficult for ramp metering systems to receive traffic conditions on the arterials.
Institutional implementation challenges		A multi-agency participation agreement needs to be established that defines thresholds of performance on arterials. Cities are likely to require such an agreement before they sign off on this strategy. If possible, an agreement on using one single software platform for arterial signal timing may be required. Fortunately, there is a system developed by Caltrans (CTnet) that could be used without additional capital costs.
Strategy #6		Special Events Signal Timing
What is the current operation?		Existing time of day signal timings are implemented along the project corridors. As these timing are static in nature, the system cannot react to real-time major fluctuations in traffic demand.
Objectives of this ICM Strategy		To accommodate a short-term increase in traffic volumes by adjusting signal timing parameters and reducing delays as a result of planning special events.
How would it work under different scenario and what are expected benefits?	Normal Operation	Existing time of day signal timings are implemented along the project corridors. With Special Events, the operation is same as normal operations, except local Police Departments may put the signals on flashing operation and manual direct traffic.
	Scheduled Events	See Above
	Incidents (Highway and Arterials)	Same as normal operations.
	Incidents (Transit)	NA
	Major events	NA
Information sharing requirements (Specify information type, accuracy and updated rate)		Incident information on Freeways on other Agency roadways
How this strategy is measured (MOEs)		Reduction in delay Reduction in secondary incidents
Stakeholders involved (and their functions)		Local Agencies Caltrans
Technical implementation challenges		Integrate local agencies traffic management systems and add a Traffic Adaptive/Traffic Responsive Module
Institutional implementation challenges		Local agencies not willing to allow diversion to local roads as a result of normal freeway congestion.
Strategy #7		Signal Priority for Transit
What is the current operation?		Transit signal priority system is used for the AC Transit Rapid Bus route along the E.14th Street/International Blvd. There are approximately 50 intersections equipped with the transit signal priority along the E.14th Street/International Blvd corridor
Objectives of this ICM Strategy		To address negative impact on buses caused by moving traffic from freeway to arterials by providing transit signal priority To provide reliable resources for modal shifts.
How would it work under different scenario and what are expected benefits?	Normal Operation	Expanded network of transit signal priority at local intersections. When the buses approach the intersection, an early green is granted to the buses to allow the buses to avoid stopping. The result would be decrease in transit travel time, thereby providing reliable resource for modal shifts.
	Scheduled Events	NA
	Incidents (Highway and Arterials)	Depending on the types of incidents, signal priority may be disabled under situations where incident clearance has higher priority..
	Incidents (Transit)	Unless signal priority system is disabled, TSP should work in same way as normal operation
	Major events	Depending on the types of events, signal priority may be disabled if it begin to disrupt emergency operations.
Information sharing requirements (Specify information type, accuracy and updated rate)		Caltrans and local agencies to share Transit Signal Priority information with Easy Bay SMART Corridors Program
How this strategy is measured (MOEs)		Reduction in transit travel time
Stakeholders involved (and their functions)		Local Agencies ACCMA MTC Caltrans
Technical implementation challenges		NA
Institutional implementation challenges		Agreements for institution arrangements
Strategy #8		AC Transit adjusts bus routes, schedules and operations based on real-time information about highway and arterial traffic and special events
What is the current operation?		AC Transit Operation does not directly have real-time traffic and incident information. Traffic information may be relayed by bus drivers through ACS.
Objectives of this ICM Strategy		To provide AC Transit Operation traffic conditions along AC bus routes in order for them to make real-time decisions to adjust operations provide more info about how to make such adjustment is to be included specific example to be included
How would it work under different scenario and what are expected benefits?	Normal Operation	Under concurrent congestions, real-time traffic information will help AC Transit Operation to better estimate trip time and to make decisions on bus dispatching schedule (with more specifics and examples for 880)
	Scheduled Events	AC Transit Operation will route buses based on traffic conditions (with more specifics and examples)
	Incidents (Highway and Arterials)	When highway incident occurs, AC Transit Operation will adjust bus routing to avoid excessive delays (with more specifics and examples for 880)
	Incidents (Transit)	N/A
	Major events	Real-time traffic information allows transit operations to be able to dispatch buses based on needs, the condition of the roadways and traffic information (specifics and examples for 880)
Traffic information along bus route Incident information Predicted travel time
How this strategy is measured (MOEs)		Better schedule adherence Improved ridership (under major events) Responsive to changes due to events and changes of roadway/traffic conditions
Stakeholders involved (and their functions)		Caltrans (providing traffic and incident information) AC Transit (real-time operation adjustments)
Technical implementation challenges		Integrate traffic information with ACS Modify ACS software to enable decision support based on real-time traffic and incident information
Institutional implementation challenges		There is a need for updating operation guidelines to incorporate this new operation strategy The operation is more complicated than current approach and training of operation personnel and bus drivers is needed There can be resistance from unionized workers
Strategy #9		Transit hub connection protection for special events during major incidents
What is the current operation?		1. Transfer between AC Transit buses: Bus schedules are developed to minimize the waiting time between different routes a adjacent bus stops 2. Transfer between AC Transit bus and BART: 3. Connection information for riders: Schedule is available for each individual route, but connection information is not given. Currently no real-time connection information is available.
Objectives of this ICM Strategy		To minimize the transfer waiting time among AC Transit Buses BART trains for special events or major incidents
How would it work under different scenario and what are expected benefits?	Normal Operation	Service plan coordination: BART and AC Transit establish a protocol which identifies a process through which an effective connection protection plan for each special event is made prior to the event. In operation, AC Transit buses needs to follow predetermined schedule. Adjustment of the schedule at one station can affect the arrival time at downstream stations. Therefore, it is not practical to do connection protection under normal operation scenario.
	Scheduled Events	For scheduled events, AC Transit and BART will develop a coordinated service plan, including connection protection protocols: a. AC Transit and BART share real-time operation info for relevant buses and trains that involves special event transportation. AC Transit operation center will decide and inform drivers to hold buses for a TBD time period in order to facilitate connection. b. Provide real-time information to AC Transit bus drivers and based on a predetermined operation protocol, drivers will decide to hold buses for connection.
	Incidents (Highway and Arterials)	When highway incidents occur, Caltrans shares incident information with BART and AC Transit. Based on this information. This adjusted schedule, together with real time operation information will be shared between the two agencies and will be used for connection protection operation: Operation procedures are the same as described in (a) and (b) in the scheduled event.
	Incidents (Transit)	BART and AC Transit will exchange connection information and perform connection protection using a pre-agreed protocol. Operation procedures are the same as described in (a) and (b) in the scheduled event.
	Major events (unplanned)	Immediate after the major event (such as earthquake) occurs, information about conditions of highways and BRT will become available to all operation agencies. Based on protocols, coordinated emergency operation service plan will be made.
Information sharing requirements (Specify information type, accuracy and updated rate)		Schedule information (bus routes intersecting with BART, train schedule, real-time information on buses, schedule adherence and/or predicted bus arrival at each stop Real time information on Train (schedule adherence and/or predicted train arrival at each station, service breakdown information (where, what and predicted recovery time) for BART, real time information on freeway and arterials)
How this strategy is measured (MOEs)		Reduction of average transfer waiting time, with minimum impact to schedule adherence Increase of ridership
AC Transit, BART, Caltrans and MTC/511
Technical implementation challenges		Information is mostly available. Technical challenge includes: AC Transit ACS has the capability of making real-time adjustment of the operation service but not being used at this time Data communication among AC Transit, BART and Caltrans is not available Operational constraints AC and BART have to become adaptive to problems or changes in other systems
Institutional implementation challenges		There is a need for AC Transit and BART to develop a connection protection protocol How much flexibility AC and BART have for real-time adjustments to become adaptive to problems or changes in other systems
Strategy #10		Port of Oakland Truck Information
What is the current operation?		Congestion and incident information is available to commercial vehicle operators (CVO) via the 511 system. No other information real-time feedback is available from the Port of Oakland to other agencies.
Objectives of this ICM Strategy		Create two-way information sharing between Port of Oakland and other agencies. Port of Oakland can provide port delays and incident information to ACCMA, Caltrans and 511 systems. Real-time port operation delays, congestion, incident and travel time information can be provided to the commercial vehicle operators via CMS board at locations near Port of Oakland and at the Central Valley freight center, so that truckers can adjust their departure times, based on current conditions.
How would it work under different scenario and what are expected benefits?	Normal Operation	Information about port delay, highway conditions and estimated travel time will be communicated to truck through CMS or other effective means so that truck operators can make decisions on their departure time.
	Scheduled Events	NA
	Incidents (Highway and Arterials)	Same as normal operations.
	Incidents (Transit)	NA
	Major events	Same as normal operations..
Information sharing requirements (Specify information type, accuracy and updated rate)		(Specify information type, accuracy and updated rate) Between Port of Oakland, ACCMA, MTC and Caltrans.
How this strategy is measured (MOEs)		Reduction in trucking total travel times and delay Reduction in overall congestion as a result of schedule changes by the trucking industry
Stakeholders involved (and their functions)		Port of Oakland ACCMA MTC Caltrans
Technical implementation challenges		Requires CMS signs near Port of Oakland and at Central Valley freight center to disseminate information
Institutional implementation challenges		Agreements for institution arrangements
Strategy #11		Signal Pre-emption System for Emergency Services
What is the current operation?		Main arterials along the project corridor are equipped with Opticom Emergency pre-emption equipment. Most of the equipment is predominately location on the main line and sometimes on crossing arterials on major intersections. Fire Department apparatus are equipped with emitters. Intersections are trigged as they approach the intersection. Some of the Fire Department apparatus are equipped with Mobile Data Terminal (MDT) units that are connected to the East Bay SMART Corridors web site.
Objectives of this ICM Strategy		Dynamically recommend a preferred route, based on real-time congestion information. Provide comprehensive real-time congestion information to mobile fire trucks so that a more optimum path can be selected.
How would it work under different scenario and what are expected benefits?	Normal Operation	Emergency response personnel can be informed what is the best route based on real-time traffic conditions. Preemption will be provided at local intersections.
	Scheduled Events	NA
	Same as normal operations.
	Incidents (Transit)	NA
	Major events	Same as under normal operations.
Information sharing requirements (Specify information type, accuracy and updated rate)		Caltrans and local agencies need to share congestion information and incidents with East Bay SMART Corridors program
How this strategy is measured (MOEs)		Reduction in response time
Stakeholders involved (and their functions)		Local Agencies (Fire Departments) ACCMA MTC Caltrans
Technical implementation challenges		Integration of Fire Department CAD system to the 511 and East Bay SMART Corridors program Installation of MDT on all fire departments apparatus
Institutional implementation challenges		Agreements with Emergency Service providers for system integration
Strategy #12		Multi-agency or multi-network incident response teams and service patrols and training exercises
What is the current operation?		FSP provides incident response 6-10AM and 3-7PM BAIRS (Bay Area Incident Response System) provides incident response outside of FSP hours
Objectives of this ICM Strategy		To improve incident detection, verification, response, clearance
How would it work under different scenario and what are expected benefits?	Normal Operation	Faster incident clearance
	Scheduled Events	Faster incident clearance
	Incidents (Highway and Arterials)	Faster incident clearance. Three areas of improvement have been identified: Improve response time for supervisors to come to incident scene and verify conditions Provide special heavy-duty incident response trucks (either roving or stationary) to assist with removal of trucks or in case on multi-vehicle accidents Improve accuracy of incident logging at CHP CAD system
	Incidents (Transit)	N/A
	Major events	Faster incident clearance
Information sharing requirements (Specify information type, accuracy and updated rate)		Faster incident clearance
How this strategy is measured (MOEs)		Time elapsed for incident detection, verification, response, clearance Delay caused because of incident
Stakeholders involved (and their functions)		Caltrans (providing traffic and incident information, BAIRS) FSP
Technical implementation challenges		Improve accuracy of incident logging at CHP CAD system
Institutional implementation challenges		Better coordination between supervisors responsible for incident verification

4.5.3. Potential Benefits of 880 ICM Strategies

The strategies that will be developed for the ICM demonstration will facilitate aggressive and proactive integration and management of major transportation corridors, and therefore will become a tool for Caltrans, MTC, ACCMAand the local cities to effectively manage their transportation networks to best utilize existing capacity, mitigate congestion, and achieve higher productivity. Specifically, the ICM system should provide the following improvements in the I-880 corridor:

• Enhance the ability of the partner agencies to provide true integration of multiple operational components of the corridor. Although the operators of each transportation network in the corridor have expressed the desire to integrate their operations with the other networks, this has not fully occurred because the necessary analysis and design work has not yet been conducted.
• Better management of non-recurrent congestion caused by major incidents, unexpected weather events, unexpectedly high travel demand, and major construction and maintenance activities by allowing the full capacity of the corridor to be utilized through improved integration.
• Provide improved capabilities to manage daily recurrent congestion in the corridor. Specifically, the ICM could benefit the operation of the existing freeway ramp meters by allowing the system to adapt to evolving conditions on both the freeway and arterial system.
• Improve incident clearance times (including coordination with CHP and Freeway Service Patrol to tow disabled vehicles).
• Increase transit mode share.
• Improve the reliability (or predictability) of travel time.
• Provide travelers with real-time information and routing options based on changing conditions.

The ICM strategies proposed for further evaluation in the I-880 corridor build on existing systems that represent the foundation for integration. For instance, freeway ramp metering and arterial signal coordination are key systems that help reduce travel times, bottleneck queues, and overall delay. Integrating these two systems (or sets of systems) offers additional benefits to both the person movement and goods movement markets.

These two systems also rely on the detection systems that provide valuable data for the traveler information systems in the corridor and on the regional 511 Traveler Information System. For instance, the changeable message signs (CMS) on the corridor currently provide travelers with estimated travel times to key destinations (e.g., downtown San Francisco). The proposed ICM strategies would expand such en-route traveler information to the airport and sea port to provide truck drivers and arriving air passengers with pre-trip travel time estimates to key destinations.

So in essence, the proposed strategies leverage existing investments in systems and field equipment by integrating and expanding the set of strategies currently employed in the corridor. It is expected that the benefits of selected strategies will vary in type and magnitude. Some benefits will be quantified by one or more system performance outcomes and associated measures (metrics), which include:

• Mobility (travel time, speed, delay, bottleneck queues)
• Reliability (variation in travel time, on-time performance, buffer index)
• Productivity (percent utilization during peak demand conditions)
• Safety (number of accidents, accident rates)

Other strategies will focus on improving the effectiveness of specific business processes. These improvements will also impact system performance, but will include additional measures such as:

• Incident clearance times
• Wait times at ramps
• Magnitude of road traffic shifts
• Magnitude of modal shifts
• Percent truck traffic during peak demand conditions

Finally, additional qualitative benefits are expected from some of the selected strategies. For instance, en-route traveler information (e.g., travel times to key destinations) do not always lead to route or mode shifts. However, they do provide information to drivers that benefit their work (e.g., calling the office to postpone a meeting for a few minutes) or personal lives (e.g., knowing that one will be on time for a personal event).

The rest of this section provides more detailed examples of the aforementioned benefits. Where possible, an estimate is provided for the magnitude of benefits based on previous studies and associated evaluations. The following table summarizes the types of benefits expected for each set of related strategies.

TABLE 4.4 Summary of the types of benefits expected for each set of related strategies

Set of Related Strategies	Strategies Included	Types of Benefits
Traveler Information Strategies	A corridor-based advanced traveler information system (ATIS) database that provides information to travelers pre-trip. En-route traveler information devices owned and operated by network agencies (e.g., DMS, 511, transit public announcement systems) being used to describe current operational conditions on another network(s) within the corridor. Promote route shifts between roadways via en-route traveler information devices (e.g. DMS, HAR, "511") advising motorists of congestion ahead, directing them to adjacent freeways or arterials. Promote modal shifts from roadways to transit via en-route traveler information devices (e.g. DMS, HAR, "511") advising motorists of congestion ahead, directing them to high capacity transit networks and providing real-time information on the number of parking spaces available in the park and ride facility.	Moderate mobility and reliability benefits derived from modal shifts, route shifts, and change in time of travel Increased transit usage during unusual congestion Reduced emissions from modal shifts Customer satisfaction from improved information
Roadway/Transit Coordinated Operations Strategies	Signal priority for transit (e.g. extended green times to buses that are operating behind schedule) AC Transit adjusts bus routes, schedules and operations based on real-time information about highway traffic and special events	Transit travel time and reliability improvements Increased transit usage Reduced emissions Moderate mobility and reliability improvements for roadways (to the extent modal shifts occur)
Freeway/Arterial Operations Integration Strategies	Coordinated operation between ramp meters and arterial traffic signals. Modify arterial signal timing to accommodate traffic shifting from freeway. Modify ramp metering rates to accommodate traffic shifting from arterial. Enhance arterial signal timing with advance information about special events at Coliseum.	Significant mobility and reliability improvements Improved productivity of the roadway system (i.e., higher throughput during peak demand conditions), possibly leading to peak period contraction Reduced emissions Strategies and associated algorithms can benefit other corridors in the Bay Area and beyond Possible cost reductions from automation
Transit-Transit Operations Integration Strategies	Transit hub connection protection (holding one service while waiting for another service to arrive). Promote shifts between transit facilities via en-route traveler information devices (e.g. station message signs and public announcements) advising riders of outages and directing them to adjacent rail or bus services.	Reduced transit passenger travel time Improved customer satisfaction Reduced non-recurrent delays
Freight Operations Strategy	Port of Oakland advises truck travel time based on real-time traffic information.	Reduced travel times and reliability for trucks Reduced truck traffic during incident events on corridor Improved reliability on corridor
Emergency Response and Special Events Integration Strategies	Signal pre-emption or "best route" for emergency vehicles. Multi-agency or multi-network incident response teams and service patrols and training exercises.	Reduced fatality rates due to faster emergency responses Reduced secondary accidents Improved incident clearance times reducing impacts on traffic Improved reliability on the corridor Reduced emissions
Planning Integrated Operations Strategies	Coordinate scheduled maintenance and construction activities among corridor networks. Guidelines for construction work hours during emergencies or special events.	Reduced non-recurrent delays due to construction Reduced emissions

The evaluation of these strategies will include algorithm development, travel demand modeling, simulation modeling, air quality assessments, cost estimation, benefit-cost analysis, and additional stakeholder discussion, likely resulting in institutional changes/improvements. Below are short discussions on a number of system improvements and estimated targets from ICM implementation.

Estimated Total Weekday Delay Reduction Target – 10 percent

It is anticipated that current conditions will improve in significant ways. For instance, Table 4.5 shows the average total delays for the corridor over the last few years. Note how the mid-day delays have increased significantly. Total delays averaged more than 11,000 hours for weekdays. The initial estimate shows the strategies proposed should reduce these delays by about 10 percent. These reductions include both recurrent delay reductions as well as non-recurrent delay reductions (e.g., from improved incident clearance times).

Northbound Direction
Year	AM Peak	Mid Day	Evening and Early AM	PM Peak	Total Daily
2003	1,499	1,237	552	2,547	5,835
2004	1,124	1,067	360	2,317	4,867
2005	1,331	1,434	285	2,351	5,402
Southbound Direction
Year	AM Peak	Mid Day	Evening and Early AM	PM Peak	Total Daily
2003	1,924	1,397	276	2,249	5,846
2004	1,728	1,427	291	2,375	5,821
2005	1,678	1,848	232	2,444	6,202
Total Corridor
Year	AM Peak	Mid Day	Evening and Early AM	PM Peak	Total Daily
2003	3,423	2,634	828	4,796	11,682
2004	2,852	2,494	651	4,691	10,688
2005	3,009	3,262	517	4,795	11,604

Peak Period Contraction Target – 10 to 15 percent

Figure 4.7 shows the delay by hour for the corridor. Note how the peak afternoon period lasts longer than the morning commute period (not unlike other corridors). It is predicted that the strategies will reduce the length of the peak delay periods by improving flows through the corridor bottlenecks. As flow improves (even at reduced speeds), the total number of vehicles "served" by the corridor increases, reducing the total time needed to fully serve the corridor demand. The initial estimate is that the strategies proposed may target a reduction of peak congestion period by 10 percent in the morning peak and 15 percent in the afternoon peak.

FIGURE 4.7 Delay by Hour for Weekdays on the 880 Corridor Larger View - use back button to return.

(Source: PeMS, https://pems.eecs.berkeley.edu/)

Reliability Improvements – 10 percent

Travel times on the freeway component of the corridor vary greatly as shown on Figure 4.8, which shows the travel time distribution for the southbound travel direction by time of day. Many of the proposed strategies target the narrowing of the red and light blue bands in the exhibit, which represent the highest 15 percent of travel times experienced on the corridor. Every measure used for reliability would show an improvement if these two bands narrow. For instance, if the red band narrows from 70 minutes to 64 minutes and the light blue band also narrows, measures such as the buffer index (used nationally) and the percent variability (used in California) would both reflect this improvement. Based on previous efforts, the overall improvement in reliability for the proposed strategies is estimated at 10 percent.

FIGURE 4.8 2005 Southbound Travel Time Distributions on the I-880 Corridor Larger View - use back button to return.

(Source: PeMS, https://pems.eecs.berkeley.edu/)

Bottleneck Queue Lengths - 10 to 20 percent

The major causes for congestion and resulting delays in the corridor relate to a number of specific bottlenecks. This is illustrated in figure 4.9, which represents a speed contour diagram for northbound direction of travel on the freeway. The diagram displays average weekday speeds by location (post mile) by time of day for the entire month of October, 2005. Note that there are three bottleneck areas with queues ranging from two miles to as much as eight to nine miles.

FIGURE 4.9 Northbound Speed Contour Map for October, 2005 for the Corridor Larger View - use back button to return.

(Source: PeMS, https://pems.eecs.berkeley.edu/)

The bottleneck at Tennyson affects both AM and PM peak traffic. The PM peak queue length is around three miles long (from around post mile 26 back to around post mile 23). Previous analysis suggests that the cause behind this bottleneck is a major on-ramp with heavy demand that causes significant merges and weaves within an extremely short auxiliary lane. A picture of this merge is shown on figure 4.10. We believe the our proposed strategies such as on-ramp integration with arterial signaling should help alleviate some of these merges and weaves and together with a planned extension of the auxiliary lane is estimated to reduce the queue length and duration of the bottleneck by 10 percent.

FIGURE 4.10 Tennyson On-Ramps and Resulting Bottleneck

(Source: Caltrans 2007)

Collisions are a major cause of delays on the 880 corridor. On an average day, the corridor experiences between 10 and 15 collisions as reported by the California Highway Patrol and logged into the Caltrans accident database (TASAS). Through research and analysis of speed data, the times and impact of these collisions were used to derive the incremental delays due to these collisions. Algorithms were developed by UC Berkeley PATH research to automate the analyses within PeMS. The results are shown on figure 4.11.

FIGURE 4.11 I-880 Corridor Delay Breakdown by Cause for the PM Peak Period Larger View - use back button to return.

As can be seen from the exhibit, collisions account for approximately a third of total congestion on the freeway during the PM peak period. Our incident management strategies should reduce collision clearance times. This in return should reduce the incremental delays. It is expected that these strategies will likely reduce these delays by at least 10 percent. Other strategies, such as increased traveler information, improved ramp metering coordination, and physical projects already programmed could further reduce these delays by reducing the number of collisions overall.

Signal Timing Coordination-delay reductions and increase in travel time

The goal of signal coordination is to get the greatest number of vehicles through corridor with the fewest stops in the safest and most efficient manner. According to a paper presented at the 2001 TRB Annual Meeting, a TRANSYT-7F model which estimated 163 projects reported an average of 7.7% reduction in travel time. 13.8% reduction in stops and 7.8% decline in fuel use. New signal coordination timing plans were developed and implemented on the San Pablo Ave Corridor which is a part of ACCMA East Bay SMART Corridors. The timing plans were updated, implemented, fine-tuned, and travel time runs were conducted to assess the benefits of updated signal timings on travel speed. The average results of four travel time runs are tabulated below.

TABLE 4.6 TRAVEL TIME IN NORTHBOUND DIRECTION (MINUTES)

Period	Before	After	Time Saved	% Change
AM Peak	35.3	32.7	2.6 minutes	7% less
Midday	35.5	34.2	1.3 minutes	4% less
PM Peak	42.1	38.9	3.3 minutes	7% less

TABLE 4.7 TRAVEL TIME IN SOUTHBOUND DIRECTION (MINUTES)

Period	Before	After	Time Saved	% Change
AM Peak	37.3	36.2	1.1 minutes	3% less
Midday	39.0	34.3	4.7 minutes	12% less
PM Peak	42.2	38.9	3.3 minutes	8% less

The benefits of updated signal timing coordination are based on how well the existing signal timings are coordinated. The expected benefits of traffic signal timing modification for the I-880 ICM corridor could be 10% to 20% increase in travel speed with reductions in delay between 10% and 15%.

Transit Signal Priority-Reduction in Transit Delays

The desired outcome of the transit signal priority (TSP) is to reduce the overall run time for a bus along its route. TSP is providing a significant travel time advantage to the San Pablo Rapid route in the Bay Area, probably in the range of 15 to 19 minutes for each one-way run through the corridor. This would equate to a route travel time of 54 minutes with TSP versus 72 minutes without TSP, or a 25% reduction. The actual transit travel time savings measured was 17%. Considering other TSP projects in the area and their benefits, the expected reduction in transit delays through TSP application for the I-880 ICM Corridor should be in the magnitude of 9 to 10 percent.

With the application of TSP, AC Transit has replaced regular bus service along the San Pablo Ave Corridor with rapid bus service, which attracted between 25% and 33% more riders than regular service. Similar benefits can be expected with the same kind of application in the I-880 ICM Corridor.