I-380 Cedar River Crossing CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS CR I-380 Concept of Operations.pdfTable of Contents...

I-380 Cedar River CrossingCONCEPT OF OPERATIONS

Submitted by

HNTB Corporation

Submitted to

Iowa Department of Transportation

DOT Project IM-380-6(264)16-13-57

July, 2011

I-380 Cedar River Crossing

CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS

Submitted by

HNTB Corporation

Submitted to

Iowa Department of Transportation

DOT Project IM-380-6(264)16-13-57

July, 2011

Table of Contents

I-380 Cedar River Crossing Concept of Operations Page i DOT Project # IM-380-6(264)16-13-57

Table of Contents

Chapter 1 - Introduction 1

Study Overview 1

Purpose of Concept of Operations 1

Organization of Report 1

Chapter 2 - Needs Assessment 3

Stakeholder Input 3

Corridor Needs 6

Existing Technology 8

Goals and Objectives 10

Chapter 3 - Preferred Strategies 11

Evaluation Criteria 11

Candidate Strategies 11

Regional Strategies 14

Corridor Strategies 14

Recommended Strategies and Deployment Packages 23

Communications Interfaces 26

Cost 27

Chapter 4 - Operational Scenarios 30

Chapter 5 - Implementation Plan 33

Appendix A - Stakeholder Workshop Attendee List A-1

Appendix B - Stakeholder Workshop Comments B-1

Appendix C – Description of Candidate Strategies C-1

Appendix D – Stakeholder Comments and Responses D-1

Table of Contents

I-380 Cedar River Crossing Concept of Operations Page ii DOT Project # IM-380-6(264)16-13-57

List of Tables

Table 3-1 - Candidate Strategies Relationship to Goals and Objectives 12-13

Table 3-2 – Corridor Strategies 15

Table 3-3 – Active Warning Device Costs 17

Table 3-4 – Recommended Strategy Packages 24

Table 3-5 - Recommended Strategies Relationship to Goals and Objectives 25

Table 3-6 - Recommended Strategy Cost Estimates 27

Table 5-1 – Implementation Plan 34-40

List of Exhibits

Exhibit 1-1 – Study Area 2

Exhibit 2-1 – Prioritized Problems 6

Exhibit 3-1 – Communications Interfaces 26

Chapter 1 - Introduction

I-380 Cedar River Crossing Concept of Operations Page 1 DOT Project # IM-380-6(264)16-13-57


Study Overview

The Iowa Department of Transportation (Iowa DOT) is proposing transportation improvements to the I-380 Corridor at its crossing of the Cedar River in Cedar Rapids, Iowa within the I-380 Urban Corridor Feasibility Study. The crossing, also known as the 5-in-1 Bridge over the Cedar River, is an important transportation link in the City of Cedar Rapids. The roadway section in the vicinity of the Cedar River crossing, referred to as the S-curve area, has also been identified as an area where traffic incidents and weather related incidents frequently cause significant impact to traffic flow and safety along the I-380 corridor and at the river crossing. Exhibit 1-1 shows the study area for this section of the I-380 corridor.

In coordination with the feasibility study, this section of I-380 has been identified as a roadway segment that could benefit from the deployment of intelligent transportation systems (ITS) technology and implementation of enhanced traffic incident management procedures. To begin the process of determining what is appropriate for the corridor, a Concept of Operations is being developed.

Purpose of Concept of Operations

The Concept of Operations for managing incidents impacting the I-380 crossing and S-curve area will identify operational practices and systems that when implemented will reduce the impact of these incidents by managing them more efficiently. To proactively address incidents impacting traffic flow through this section of I-380 and determine what types of ITS applications are most beneficial, the Concept of Operations will:

Document the need for traffic incident management improvements;

Evaluate candidate strategies;

Recommend strategies for deployment;

Develop an implementation plan; and

Produce stakeholder commitment to implementing the plan.

Organization of Report

This report provides a summary of the research, stakeholder engagement and study process undertaken for the Concept of Operations. This report summarizes the activities conducted within the study and provides recommendations on the key traffic incident management strategies and ITS technologies to implement along the S-curve section of the I-380 Corridor including the Cedar River crossing. The Concept of Operations report is organized into the following chapters:




Chapter 2 - Needs Assessment

Chapter 3 - Preferred Strategies

Chapter 4 - Operational Scenarios

Chapter 5 - Implementation Plan

Exhibit 1-1 Study Area

Chapter 2 – Needs Assessment



The initial step in the process of developing the Concept of Operations is an assessment of the needs in the corridor. The needs were assessed through operational studies that have been completed for the corridor and discussion with stakeholders that maintain and operate this section of I-380. Based on the needs assessment, goals and objectives for the corridor were then developed and documented. This chapter provides a summary of the needs assessment process including:

A summary of the input and priority problems gathered from stakeholders;

Assessment of the needs of the corridor;

Inventory of how existing and planned ITS technologies in the Cedar Rapids region assist in addressing the needs of the study area; and

Development and articulation of the goals and objectives of the project.

Stakeholder Input

A stakeholder workshop was held in Cedar Rapids on March 3, 2011. The workshop was attended by 23 stakeholders including representatives from local public works departments, law enforcement, fire and rescue, the Iowa DOT, Federal Highway Administration, and the towing and recovery industry. Appendix A provides the list of attendees at the workshop. The four hour workshop included the following:

Introductions of each stakeholder, their agency and how they are involved in traffic incident management;

A video presentation on typical conflicts in traffic incident management and the need for coordination, cooperation and communications in traffic incident management;

Discussion of safety and operational problems in the Cedar Rapids region that impact the safety and efficiency of vehicular movement;

Review and discussion of the recommendations from an earlier safety audit;

Discussion of existing or planned ITS technologies that impact safety and mobility;

Discussion of existing or planned traffic incident management processes/programs; and

Discussion of goals and objectives for ITS deployment on I-380 in the vicinity of the Cedar River crossing.

During the workshop, the stakeholders were asked to identify problems related to mobility, safety and traffic incident management in the Cedar Rapids region. A complete list of input provided by the stakeholders is provided in Appendix B. The stakeholder input for the entire Cedar Rapids region was screened to determine what input was applicable to the I-380 Cedar River crossing area that is the focus of this needs assessment effort. The input was then



screened by categorizing the input as identifying a problem, an opportunity or an existing situation. The resulting problems were then grouped together when they were similar enough to be summarized with an overarching problem statement. The following overarching problem statements were developed and are presented with the associated problems expressed by the stakeholders:

DMS messages need to be improved to provide drivers information they can use to make educated route choices and adjust driving behavior as needed.

o Getting messages on DMS’s far enough in advance of incident to get drivers to good alternate routes

o Clearer messages on DMS’s that better inform drivers

o Getting drivers to “believe” the message on the signs

o Do not put too much reliance on drivers heeding messages on DMS

o Minimizing secondary incidents by better diversion of traffic – better use of diversion tools – DMS, arrow boards, etc.

Coordination at traffic incident locations and site management need improvement to minimize the impact to traffic.

o Improving communication with other agencies involved in an incident – “Many Hats”

o Even small incidents require a lot of resources to handle traffic control in the 5-in-1 area – only use cones during major incidents

o Police light “flooding” makes directional signs hard to distinguish, especially at night

o “rubbernecking” causes bottlenecks

o Currently not tracking overall response times for past incidents

A lack of situational awareness results in delayed and inefficient response to traffic incidents in the S-curve section of I-380.

o Response issues in the 5-in-1 area – getting proper equipment to deal with spills and other incidents – dispatching from various areas of the town to quickly respond – cameras would be very beneficial to get a more accurate description of the location of an incident

o Police not familiar with use of mile-marker - more intuitive to use street names

Towing of disabled vehicles can create or result in traffic incidents.

o Tow bans put in place for safety issues – how can we work around this or alter to allow tow trucks to work in the area and get the incident cleared safely

o Median-side incidents are hard to work on – especially from a towing perspective – use “truck stacking” to create a safe work area

o Lack of consistent training requirements for tow services



o Towing during rush hour – not a good idea – regardless of weather

Weather conditions can impact the roadway friction in the S-curve area resulting in traffic incidents.

o Inclement weather (rain and snow) conditions create problems in the 5-in-1

o Fog is an infrequent issue

Planning for roadway closures needs to take place. Diversion routes are currently developed for each closure on an ad hoc basis. The ad hoc nature can tax available resources.

o Development of diversion plans during incidents

o Closing of ramps during incidents on I-380 – how do you coordinate this?

o A lot of enforcement officers to implement a diversion route – deciding what routes, setting access points, etc.

o Shift changing of agency staff during major incidents

Barriers currently exist to sharing traffic camera video between agencies and with other interested parties.

o How do we share camera views/resources between agencies – who has control of the camera view? How do agencies coordinate this?

o Might be limitations with communications infrastructure to operate available technologies

o City just put up PTZ cameras- needs coordination with Iowa DOT ITS as well as local police, EMS, others

Required weaving maneuvers, the influence of the automated enforcement system and some driving habits result in speed differentials that create a hazardous situation.

o Traffic “blending” for entering and exiting vehicles at interchange ramps – difficult weaving due to slower traffic speeds – outside lane is a “comfort” lane for many drivers

o 5-in-1 interchanges – “NASCAR like driving conditions”

o Related to Speed Cameras – variable speeds of traffic (local drivers slow down, but other “out of area” drivers go faster creating more weaving of traffic)

Available diversion routes north of downtown Cedar Rapids are limited.

o North part of I-380 does not have a good diversion route – County Home Rd not adequate to handle good diversion (unlike south parts with Hwy 13/151) – lack of a good bypass route

Prioritized Stakeholder Problems

While all of the problems identified by stakeholders are valid concerns, they need to be prioritized to determine what should be addressed first. The problems were prioritized based



on how direct the safety benefit would be to the traveling public and responders. Exhibit 2-1 provides a summary of prioritization of key problems identified.

Exhibit 2-1 Prioritized Problems

High Priority: Addressing these problems will provide a direct improvement in the safety of the traveling public and responders.

DMS messages need to be improved to provide drivers information they can use to make educated route choices and adjust driving behavior as needed.

Coordination at traffic incident locations and site management need improvement to minimize the impact to traffic.

A lack of situational awareness results in delayed response and inefficient response to traffic incidents in the S-curve section of I-380.

Towing of disabled vehicles can create or result in traffic incidents.

Weather conditions can impact the roadway friction in the S-curve area resulting in traffic incidents.

Medium Priority: Addressing these problems will provide some improvement in the safety of the traveling public and responders. There will also be cost savings or maximization of benefits from other investment.

Planning for roadway closures needs to take place. Diversion routes are currently developed for each closure on an ad hoc basis. The ad hoc nature can tax available resources.

Barriers currently exist to sharing traffic camera video between agencies and with other interested parties.

Required weaving maneuvers, the influence of the automated enforcement system and variable driving habits result in speed differentials that create a hazardous situation.

Low Priority: Indirect safety benefit.

Available diversion routes north of downtown Cedar Rapids are limited.

Corridor Needs

Two recent study efforts assessed the need for improvements along I-380 in the vicinity of the Cedar River crossing. The first study was the Road Safety Audit for I-380 through the Cities of Cedar Rapids and Hiawatha in Linn County, Iowa1. The second study effort was the I-380 Urban Corridor Feasibility Study Phase 1 - Needs Assessment2. Results from these studies were used to establish the need for improvements along I-380 in the Cedar River crossing area. Key results from both studies are summarized below.

Road Safety Audit

A road safety audit for I-380 through the cities of Cedar Rapids and Hiawatha was completed in 2009. The study area included the section of I-380 crossing the Cedar River. The road safety audit was requested by the City of Cedar Rapids and the Iowa Department of Transportation based on concerns about the number of crashes and the number of serious crashes given the increasing volume of traffic in the corridor. The section of I-380 crossing the

1 McDonald, Thomas J. Road Safety Audit for I-380 through the Cities of Cedar Rapids and Hiawatha in

Linn County, Iowa. Center for Transportation Research and Education Iowa State University. March 2009. 2 I-380 Corridor Feasibility Study Phase 1 - Needs Assessment Final Report. HNTB Corporation. October 2010.



Cedar River and the horizontal curves either side of the river were of particular concern. The following issues and observations were presented in the audit:

It was suggested that the increased traffic volume on I-380 resulted from its designation as part of the “Avenue of the Saints” and many of the new drivers are unfamiliar with the roadway.

Law enforcement officers on the audit team noted that traffic surveillance and apprehension of violators was difficult through the S-curves.

The horizontal curves north and south of the Cedar River are designed for 60 mph and I-380 has a posted speed limit of 55 mph.

Safety concerns through the 5-in-1 Bridge area, notably between the 1st Avenue interchange and the 1st Street NE interchange were identified. Through this section, 139 crashes were reported from 2001 through most of 2008, including one fatal crash and four major injury crashes. The audit also reported that 21 of these crashes involved a truck and almost all of these truck-related crashes occurred on wet surface conditions, resulting in one fatality, eight injuries, and approximately $862,000 in property damages.

The audit provided the following recommendations related to traffic incident management and ITS technologies:

Establish an active multidisciplinary traffic safety team for the Cedar Rapids area.

Add 1/10-mile markers to help with locating traffic incidents.

The Cedar Rapids Police Department and Iowa DOT maintenance personnel should work together to develop acceptable messaging and operation of advisory notices for drivers using the existing DMS devices.

Consider installing additional sensors in the S-curve area to monitor traffic volume and speed.

Consider installation of an ice detection system on the 5-in-1 Bridge, with appropriate warning provided to approaching drivers using the existing dynamic message signs. The warning messaging could be automated.

Consider installation of additional dynamic message signs on each side of the S-curve to advise drivers of pavement surface conditions, crashes and delays.

Study the implementation of automated enforcement in this corridor, both traffic signal and speed enforcement.

Install traffic cameras along the corridor.

At the stakeholder meeting, the recommendations from the Road Safety Audit were reviewed with participants. The general consensus was that the recommendations were still valid. It was noted that an automated speed enforcement system has been implemented on I-380. Stakeholders felt that coordination between the Cedar Rapids Police Department and Iowa DOT on the use of the existing DMS’s was working well. Some concern was expressed about



the added maintenance requirements that would result from the installation of 1/10-mile markers. Use of 2/10-mile markers was proposed to reduce the number of new signs that must be maintained, while still providing location information that drivers can relay to 911 dispatchers. The need for training of the 911 dispatchers to facilitate the use of the markers was also discussed.

As a result of the Road Safety Audit recommendations, a high-friction surface treatment will be applied to the I-380 pavement. The treatment will cover the curve from just south of 3rd Avenue SW to the south end of the Cedar River bridge main span. The high-friction surface treatment will nearly double the roadway surface friction, which will reduce vehicle skidding when the pavement is wet. The project is planned for late summer 2011.

Feasibility Study

As part of the feasibility study for the I-380 corridor, a needs assessment was completed. The needs assessment covered the I-380 corridor from the Johnson/Linn county line to the I-380 interchange at County Home Road. The needs assessment and recommendations were made for four sections of the corridor. One of the sections was the downtown and S-curve area. Based on stakeholder engagement, conducted as part of the feasibility study, the following three priority concerns were identified in the vicinity of the S-curve area:

Accidents and incident management on the S-curve through downtown

Traffic congestion along A Avenue and 8th Street during the P.M. peak

Confusing truck access at the 7th and 8th Street ramp system

Community stakeholders suggested that the combination of inclement weather events and the design of the structure may contribute to incidents along I-380 in the vicinity of the Cedar River crossing. The superelevation through this portion of the I-380 corridor exceeds the current Iowa DOT preferred criteria of 6 percent. Along the southern portion of the S-curve area from approximately 2nd Avenue SW north to the Cedar River the superelevation is 8 percent. Between approximately 2nd Street NE and 4th Street NE the superelevation is 7.8 percent. The curve exiting downtown between 8th Street NE and F Avenue NE has a 7.3 percent superelevation. Each of these curves is along elevated portions of the freeway on structure and near to or spanning water bodies. Community stakeholders reported that crashes are caused on the 5-in-1 bridge by icing, fog and steam.

The feasibility study needs assessment noted that studies are underway to identify the feasibility of constructing a convention center near the U.S. Cellular Center as well as plans to expand the medical facilities around the 7th/8th Street interchanges. Both of these projects will likely impact traffic patterns and interchange utilization in the area.

The feasibility study needs assessment found that the City of Cedar Rapids installed automated speed enforcement on I-380. The Cedar Rapids Police Department administers the system. Observations by stakeholders at the stakeholder workshop suggest that the automated speed enforcement has reduced speeds of locals through the S-curves.



Existing Technology

This section describes ITS and other technology applications currently implemented or planned to be implemented by Iowa DOT or the City of Cedar Rapids, in the I-380 Corridor. Each of the following sections describes the current status of the application’s implementation and its relation to I-380 Corridor’s management and operation.

Dynamic Message Signs (DMS)

Dynamic message signs have been installed along northbound I-380 at two locations, south of the U.S. 30 interchange and just North of 15th Avenue SW. Southbound on I-380 there are also two dynamic message signs. One is located at the Boyson Road interchange and the second is located at 29th Street NE. The Cedar Rapids Police Department works with the Iowa DOT to post messages. In the Road Safety Audit it was noted that the Cedar Rapids Police Department and Iowa DOT have a good working relationship that allows for the dynamic message signs to be used when needed. At the stakeholder meeting this was reaffirmed. The Cedar Rapids Police Department can post messages on the signs following a usage policy agreed to by both agencies. It was suggested that the two agencies should work together to assess whether or not the messages and usage policy for the signs could be enhanced to provide more descriptive messages and allow the signs to be used more frequently.

Road Weather Information System (RWIS)

A road weather information system (RWIS) is in operation just off the west end of the I-380 Cedar River bridge. The RWIS site collects data on air temperature, dew point, relative humidity, precipitation type, precipitation intensity, wind speed, wind direction and roadway surface conditions from four surface sensors. Three of the pavement sensors are on the Cedar River bridge and one is in the ramp pavement. The sensors report pavement temperature, surface condition, salinity and winter chemical information. The site is installed in the northbound 1st Street NW on-ramp fill slope just west of 1st Street NW. Along with the environmental sensors, the RWIS site also has a radar detector and a camera. Sensor data is polled by a server in Ames every 10 minutes over a DSL communications line.

Automated Speed Enforcement

In 2010 the City of Cedar Rapids implemented automated speed enforcement on I-380 in the vicinity of the S-curve area. The automated speed enforcement sites are located on northbound I-380 at Diagonal Drive SW and H Avenue NE. On southbound I-380 the sites are at J Avenue NE and 1st Avenue SW.

Other ITS Technologies

At the stakeholder workshop attendees were asked what other technologies, systems or practices were currently used or planned. The following enhancements were mentioned as being underway or planned:



The City of Cedar Rapids is upgrading their traffic signal system fiber optic network. They are extending the fiber optic system to additional signals.

Within three years all Public Safety Answering Points (PSAPs) will have 10MB network connections.

The City of Cedar Rapids is using more in-pavement wireless detection. They are considering using it to provide travel time information for an Advanced Traveler Information System (ATIS).

The DOT is working on a project to integrate existing computer-aided dispatch (CAD) systems with the Statewide Operations and Support Center central software.

Goals and Objectives

Goals and objectives to guide development of the Concept of Operations for the I-380 Cedar River crossing were discussed with stakeholders. The following goals and objectives were developed based on information documented within the needs assessment process and refined based on stakeholder input:

Goal 1 – Improve safety on I-380 in the vicinity of the Cedar River crossing

Objective 1a – Provide roadway condition information to drivers before they reach the river crossing and adjacent curves

Objective 1b – Reduce traffic incident duration to minimize the chance for secondary crashes

Objective 1c – Enhance response to environmental conditions that reduce roadway surface friction

Goal 2 – Reduce the impact to traffic of incidents in the vicinity of the I-380 crossing of the Cedar River

Objective 2a – Reduce the time to detect and clear traffic incidents

Objective 2b – Improve traffic flow on alternative routes to accommodate diversion

Objective 2c – Provide drivers incident information so that alternative routes can be chosen or departure time can be adjusted

Objective 2d – Improve training for all traffic incident responders

These goals and objectives provide a general vision for what a proposed system must achieve. Since these goals and objectives were developed based on input from multiple stakeholders, they are comprehensive and take into consideration many viewpoints.

Chapter 3 – Preferred Strategies


Chapter 3 – Preferred Strategies

Once the needs assessment process was completed and the goals and objectives for the corridor were identified, the next step was to evaluate and identify alternatives that address the stated needs of the project and select preferred strategies for the corridor. Within the strategy selection process, candidate ITS technologies and operational measures were identified that could help meet the goals and objectives developed for the study corridor. The candidate strategies were evaluated using criteria primarily dictated by the goals and objectives. The evaluation then culminated in the selection of a range of recommended strategy packages for deployment for the study area.

Evaluation Criteria

In order to evaluate the candidate strategies for the corridor, evaluation criteria were developed based on the goals and objectives established by the project stakeholders, and how an ITS technology or operational strategy fits within the overall context of the study area. The following criteria were used to screen available ITS technology and operational strategies:

1. Does a candidate strategy help meet an objective identified for the study corridor?

2. Is a candidate strategy applicable to implementation in a short corridor such as the study area or is it more of a regional strategy?

3. Is a candidate strategy the most effective approach available to meeting an objective?

4. What is the viability of the candidate strategy given the current state of technology development and proliferation?

5. What is the level of liability risk?

Candidate Strategies

An ITS technology or operational strategy was considered applicable to the I-380 S-curve area if it helped achieve one of the objectives identified by project stakeholders. The list of available ITS technologies and operational strategies was reviewed to select those that could help achieve one or more of the objectives. Table 3-1 lists the ITS technologies and operational strategies that were determined to be candidate strategies for the corridor. The table also shows which objectives each candidate strategy helps address. A description of each of the candidate strategies is provided in Appendix C for further information.

Chapter 3 – Concept Selection


Table 3-1 Candidate Strategies Relationship to Goals and Objectives

GOALS Improve safety on I-380 in the vicinity

of the Cedar River crossing Reduce the impact to traffic of incidents in the vicinity

of the I-380 crossing of the Cedar River

OBJECTIVES

1a 1b 1c 2a 2b 2c 2d

Provide roadway condition

information to drivers before they

reach the river crossing and

adjacent curves

Reduce traffic incident duration to minimize the

chance for secondary crashes

Enhance response to environmental conditions that reduce roadway surface friction

Reduce the time to detect and clear traffic incidents

Improve traffic flow on alternative

routes to accommodate

diversion

Provide drivers incident

information so that alternative routes can be chosen or

departure time can be adjusted

Improve training for all traffic

incident responders

CANDIDATE STRATEGY

Existing DMS Messaging Linked to Existing RWIS Additional Roadway Surface Condition Sensors New Overhead DMSs for Roadway Condition Warnings Smaller Roadside DMSs for Roadway Condition Warnings Roadside LED Blank-Out Sign for Roadway Condition Warnings Warning Signs with Flashing Beacons for Roadway Condition Warnings Highway Advisory Radio/Signs for Roadway Condition Warnings Connected Vehicle (I2V) Application to Provide Warnings in Vehicles Combined Speed and Pavement Surface Warning Device Variable Speed Limit Icing/Slick Roadway Alerts On 511 Icing/Slick Roadway Alerts Via Mobile Devices Enhanced Winter Maintenance in S-curve Area Automated Anti-icing System 1/10-Mile Reference Markers Traffic Cameras Vehicle Detection Motorist Aid Call Boxes Automated Crash Notification Acceptance Personnel/Equipment Resource List Towing and Recovery Vehicle Identification Guide Instant Tow Dispatch Procedures Towing and Recovery Zone-Based Contracts Dual/Optimized Dispatch Procedures Equipment Staging Areas Pre-Positioned Equipment Incident Command System Response Vehicle Parking Plans High-Visibility Safety Apparel/Vehicle Markings On-Scene Emergency Lighting Procedures

Chapter 3 – Concept Selection


Table 3-1 (Continued) Candidate Strategies Relationship to Goals and Objectives




OBJECTIVES

1a 1b 1c 2a 2b 2c 2d




adjacent curves







diversion





incident responders

CANDIDATE STRATEGY

“Move Over” Law Effective Traffic Control Through On-Site Traffic Management Teams End-of-Queue Advance Warning Systems Abandoned Vehicle Legislation/Policy “Steer It Clear” Law Freeway Service Patrols Vehicle-Mounted Push Bumpers Incident Investigation Sites Authority Removal Laws Quick Clearance/Open Roads Policy Non-Cargo Vehicle Fluid Discharge Policy Fatality Certification/Removal Policy Expedited Crash Investigation Using Technology Towing and Recovery Quick Clearance Incentives/Disincentives Major Incident Response Teams Traffic Signal Preemption for Emergency Vehicles Alternate Route Plans Trailblazer Signs Alternative Traffic Signal Timing Plans Responsive Traffic Signal Control System Enhanced Usage and Messages on Existing DMSs Additional Overhead DMSs for Diversion Roadside DMSs for Diversion Highway Advisory Radio System for Diversions Traffic Incident Information on 511 Traffic Incident Information on Website Media Partnerships Traffic Incident Management Training Training on Incident Command System for Traffic Incident Management On-Ramp Closure Gates

Chapter 3 - Concept Selection

I-380 Cedar River Crossing Concept of Operations Page 14 Page 14 DOT Project # IM-380-6(264)16-13-57

Regional Strategies

Many of the candidate strategies need to be assessed and implemented on a regional basis. These are generally enhancements to traffic incident management practices that are regional in scope and not corridor specific. These strategies require commitment of resources that would only be warranted for a regional implementation. Therefore, the decision on level of value provided compared to the resources required to implement and level of commitment from stakeholders needs to be made in a regional context. The benefits of the various strategies need to be assessed by stakeholders in a comprehensive regional traffic incident management process. The following strategies are considered to be regional:

Automated Crash Notification

Personnel/Equipment Resource List

Towing and Recovery Vehicle Identification Guide

Instant Tow Dispatch Procedures

Towing and Recovery Zone-Based Contracts

Dual/Optimized Dispatch Procedures

Incident Command System

Response Vehicle Parking Plans

High-Visibility Safety Apparel/Vehicle Markings

On-Scene Emergency Lighting Procedures

“Move Over” Law

Effective Traffic Control Through On-Site Traffic Management Teams

End-of-Queue Advance Warning Systems

Abandoned Vehicle Legislation/Policy

“Steer It Clear” Law

Service Patrols

Vehicle-Mounted Push Bumpers

Authority Removal Laws

Non-Cargo Vehicle Fluid Discharge Policy

Fatality Certification/Removal Policy

Expedited Crash Investigation Using Technology

Towing and Recovery Quick Clearance Incentives

Traffic Signal Preemption for Emergency Vehicles

Major Incident Response Teams

Highway Advisory Radio System for Diversions

Traffic Incident Information on 511

Traffic Incident Information on Website

Media Partnerships

Traffic Incident Management Training

Training on Incident Command System for Traffic Incident Management

These regional strategies will be evaluated as part of the regional traffic incident

management planning efforts that the Iowa DOT will be supporting. When selected regional strategies are implemented, they will provide significant benefits to the I-380 Cedar River crossing area.

Corridor Strategies

The remaining candidate strategies are considered applicable to address challenges in the vicinity of the I-380 Cedar River crossing and implementable on a limited basis in the project corridor.



These remaining candidate strategies fall into three categories:

1) Roadway condition warning strategies; 2) Roadway treatment strategies; and 3) Traffic incident management strategies.

Table 3-2 provides a listing of the corridor strategies in each of the categories. In

addition, each of the corridor strategies is discussed in greater detail in the following sections.

Table 3-2 Corridor Strategies

Roadway Condition Warning Strategies:

Existing DMS Messaging Linked to Existing RWIS

Additional Roadway Surface Condition Sensors

New Overhead DMSs for Roadway Condition Warnings

Smaller Roadside DMSs for Roadway Condition Warnings

Roadside LED Blank-Out Sign for Roadway Condition Warnings

Warning Signs with Flashing Beacons for Roadway Condition Warnings

Highway Advisory Radio/Signs for Roadway Condition Warnings

Connected Vehicle (V2I) Safety Application to Provide Warnings in the Vehicle

Combined Speed and Pavement Surface Warning Device

Variable Speed Limit

Icing/Slick Roadway Alerts on 511

Icing/Slick Roadway Alerts Via Mobile Devices

Roadway Treatment Strategies:

Enhanced Winter Maintenance in S-curve Area

Automated Anti-Icing System

Traffic Incident Management Strategies

1/10-Mile Reference Markers

Traffic Cameras

Vehicle Detection

Motorist Aid Call boxes

Equipment Staging Areas

Pre-Positioned Equipment

Incident Investigation Sites

Quick Clearance/Open Roads Policy

Alternate Route Plans

Trailblazer Signs

Alternative Traffic Signal Timing Plans

Responsive Traffic Signal Control System

Additional Overhead DMSs for Diversion

Roadside DMSs for Diversion

Enhanced Usage and Messages on Existing DMSs

On-Ramp Closure Gates

Roadway Condition Warning Strategies

The objective “provide roadway condition information to drivers before they reach the river crossing and adjacent curves” is a policy decision that has not typically been made by Iowa DOT districts. Districts have generally avoided providing specific roadway condition



information because of concerns about the variability of roadway surface conditions. The roadway condition information currently provided by the 511 system is input by the Iowa State Patrol. The I-380 S-curve area, including the Cedar River crossing, is considered a unique situation that warrants providing drivers specific roadway condition information to allow them to make their own judgment on safe operating speeds. It is critical that reliable information is provided and withdrawn from the public in a timely manner.

Three levels of investment are available to address the challenge of hazardous driving conditions in the vicinity of the I-380 Cedar River bridge. The lowest cost option would be to better link the information being provided by the existing RWIS station with the posting of messages on the existing DMS signs. Ideally an alert can be provided within the Statewide Operations and Support Center central software when conditions on the bridge are nearing freezing and humidity is high. The alert could be a pop-up window or an audio alert. Along with the alert, proposed messages can be suggested. The operator would assess the environmental data and then provide an appropriate message. This should be coordinated with the local winter maintenance efforts. The central software currently being deployed has the capability of integrating the RWIS data into the operator interface. Adding active alert functionality would require some added implementation effort that is estimated to cost $30,000 to $50,000.

To provide additional information on roadway surface conditions, a second pavement condition sensor can be installed near the north end of the I-380 Cedar River bridge. The existing RWIS station has pavement condition sensors, but they are only located in the south end of the mainline bridge and on an adjacent ramp. A lower cost pavement condition sensor that uses infrared technology to determine if the roadway surface is dry, wet or icing could be installed. This would provide additional data on possible ice formation and will provide a backup to the RWIS station’s pavement condition sensors. If roadway condition information is going to be provided to the public, this added redundancy is very important.

The next level of investment would be to deploy new warning devices for traffic approaching the I-380 S-curve area. The new warning devices could be designed to provide an automated warning based on environmental parameters collected by the RWIS station or could provide an alert to the Statewide Operations and Support Center where an operator would evaluate and post a warning, if appropriate. It is critical that the procedures for providing and withdrawing information from the public be developed to facilitate presentation of accurate and timely information. As shown in the list of strategies, the warning could be provided by new full size DMSs, smaller DMSs, blank-out signs, static signs with flashing warning beacons, highway advisory radio, or in-vehicle warning devices.

In-Vehicle Warning Device – While in-vehicle warnings would be very effective, the technology is still in the research and development stage, and it will take many years before a majority of vehicles have such warning systems. For these reasons, the in-vehicle warning strategy has been eliminated. In the future, when the technology has developed and a significant percentage of vehicles have the required technology, the system can be implemented to supplement the selected strategy.

Highway Advisory Radio/Signs for Roadway Condition Warnings – Deployment of a highway advisory radio transmitter and two associated active warning signs could be used to notify drivers of hazardous roadway conditions before reaching the S-curve area. While the highway advisory radio system is good at providing detailed information for a large area, it is



limited in its ability to provide location specific information in a very timely manner. The driver must decide to tune their radio to the appropriate frequency before the message can be received. For this reason the highway advisory radio strategy is eliminated from further consideration as a method of warning drivers of icy/slick roadway conditions.

Active Warning Device – Active warning devices just upstream of the S-curve area can be full size DMSs, smaller roadside DMSs, blank-out signs or static signs with flashing warning beacons. A new full size DMS would be the most expensive option and is not warranted to provide the relatively simple message that is needed. The smaller roadside DMS is more cost effective than the full size over-the-roadway sign, but still provides flexibility to be used for other types of short messages. A blank-out sign can provide the same “ICY ROAD” message as the roadside DMS at a lesser cost. The drawback of the blank-out sign is that the message is limited to one and possibly two messages that, once manufactured, cannot be changed. The lowest cost option is the static sign with flashing beacons. This option would be just as effective as the blank-out sign. Table 3-3 provides a summary of the estimated cost for implementing each active warning device strategy approaching the S-curve area northbound and southbound.

Table 3-3

Active Warning Device Costs

Warning Device Option Deployment Cost Two Over the Roadway DMSs $309,000 Two Roadside DMSs $193,000 Two Roadside Blank-Out Signs $139,000 Two Static Signs with Flashing Beacons $30,000 Highway Advisory Radio & Two Signs $106,000 Note: The costs are for one device in each direction along with the associated cabinets, power supplies and local communications connections. Cost to communicate with the Statewide Operations and Support Center not included.

Balancing cost and effectiveness, the roadside DMS is recommended. It provides added functionality at a lower cost than new overhead DMSs. Maintenance costs and risks are also lower than the larger, overhead DMS. Because the smaller roadside DMS provides added flexibility, it is the recommended approach to provide active warnings just upstream of the S-curve area. The roadside DMSs can also be used to provide information related to special events being held at the US Cellular Center or other downtown Cedar Rapids locations. The location of the signs and messages available for display will be coordinated with traffic management procedures and technology implemented by the City to manage event traffic. This added flexibility outweighs the additional cost for the DMSs as compared to the static signs with flashing beacons.

Combined Speed and Pavement Surface Warning Device – A system to monitor individual vehicle speeds and only provide warnings when a vehicle’s speed is found to exceed the speed considered safe for the given conditions is feasible, but has several drawbacks. The determination of a safe speed for a roadway with ice is very problematic. This strategy also requires a relatively expensive structure to mount the individual lane warning devices over each



lane. The added effectiveness of this approach as compared to a roadside mounted sign is also limited. For these reasons, this strategy is eliminated from further consideration.

Variable Speed Limits – Variable regulatory (white) or advisory (yellow) speed limit signs are being used in several locations around the country. The variable speed limits are generally being used to smooth out traffic flow rather than to reduce speeds for safety reasons. A recent field test deployment along I-270 in St. Louis has resulted in changing the regulatory signs to advisory warning (yellow) speed signs. The use of the variable regulatory sign in conjunction with the automated speed enforcement system may be perceived as unfair by the public given the already sensitive nature of the automated enforcement system. The use of the yellow advisory speed signs does not tell drivers why the lower speed is being suggested, so compliance will be reduced. Another issue is determining what the appropriate speed is with hazardous roadway conditions. For these reasons, variable speed limits are not recommended for use in the I-380 S-curve area.

Icing/Slick Roadway Alerts on 511 – While placing icing/slick roadway alerts on 511 can easily be done, it will not have the ability to influence driver behavior immediately like a roadside warning device. Given the limited resources required to post icing/slick roadway alerts, they should be posted on the existing 511 system. This can provide drivers information before they leave on a trip.

Icing/Slick Roadway Alerts Via Mobile Devices – Similar to the 511 approach to providing roadway condition information, providing information “pushed” to the public on mobile devices is not effective at providing immediate and site specific alerts to drivers en-route. With the current mobile application, drivers are asked to not use it while driving. This same recommendation would apply to an application that “pushes” alerts unless the alerts are audio. Since applications to “push” alerts to the public are already being implemented, icing/slick roadway alerts should be provided using the applications to provide the public a warning before departing on a trip. To provide alerts to en-route drivers, an audio based alert system is needed.

Roadway Treatment Strategies

Two roadway treatment strategies offer the best applicability to the I-380 Corridor - enhanced winter maintenance in S-curve area and automated anti-icing system.

Enhanced Winter Maintenance in S-curve Area – The S-curve area of I-380 is already a focus of DOT maintenance operations, so the winter maintenance activities in the area are optimized given available information and resources. The existing RWIS station and associated pavement sensors are used by the District to make roadway treatment decisions, including pretreatment. The planned implementation of global positioning system (GPS) enabled maintenance vehicles will also enhance the treatment process. An additional roadway surface condition sensor in the area would enhance information used to make roadway treatment decisions. The existing RWIS station and its pavement sensors can be supplemented with a roadway surface condition sensor located on the north end of the Cedar River bridge or on the viaduct section of I-380. An added sensor will provide additional information and redundancy to the roadway treatment decision making process. Since winter maintenance operations in the S-curve area are already optimized, a change in operations is not recommended. Installation of an additional pavement condition sensor is recommended.



Automated Anti-Icing System – Automated anti-icing systems have been successfully used on many roadway bridges around the United States and Canada. The systems are successful at preventing ice formation while optimizing the amount of chemicals used. The challenge with these systems is the high capital cost and ongoing maintenance cost. Based on information provided by two anti-icing system vendors, the cost to install a system for the I-380 bridges over the Cedar River is $1.2 to $2.0 million. Anti-icing systems are most cost effective if they are in more isolated areas where treatment by winter maintenance vehicles is more expensive. An anti-icing system is not recommended because of the cost. Given the location of the S-curve area in the heart of Cedar Rapids, it should be cost effective to provide more strategic treatment of the roadway with normal winter maintenance assets.

Traffic Incident Management Strategies

There are a range of traffic incident management strategies that could have applicability to the I-380 Corridor. Each of these candidate strategies is discussed below.

1/10-Mile Reference Markers – Installation of 1/10-mile reference markers will facilitate more accurate traffic incident reporting by the public. The 911 call takers will need to specifically ask someone reporting an incident to find the nearest reference marker and report the information provided on the marker. If an incident is reported based on the reference marker, the location and direction of travel will be correct. The reference markers will need to be included in the 911 dispatch database to allow traffic incident locations to be effectively reported. The locations can be presented to responders using the reference markers or cross streets depending on the desire of the responders. For the study corridor the installation of 1/10-mile reference markers can extend from Diagonal Dr. on the south to H Ave. on the north in both directions along I-380. Since a significant amount of I-380 in this area is on structure, the reference markers must be installed on the bridge barrier rail. In areas where an appropriate median barrier exists, reference markers for both directions can be installed on one post. Given the benefit of reduced response time resulting from accurate traffic incident location reporting, the installation of 1/10-mile reference markers is recommended.

Traffic Cameras – To provide traffic monitoring of the I-380 mainline through the S-curve area, four cameras will be needed. One will be south of the river along the outside of the curve. North of the river the cameras will be at 2nd St. NE, 8th St. NE and at the north end of the north curve. These traffic cameras will allow for traffic incident verification and determination of appropriate responses. The video from the traffic cameras can be shared with responders to assist in their response. The ability to view incidents will allow operators at the Statewide Operations and Support Center to display better DMS messages based on an improved understanding of the situation in real-time. Deployment of cameras along I-380 is recommended.

Vehicle Detection – Vehicle detection deployed in conjunction with the cameras can be a very cost effective strategy. The data collected by the vehicle detectors can be used to generate alarms when congestion occurs, provide system status information to the public through the 511 system and collect performance measurement data. Vehicle speed information can also be valuable input into the assessment of roadway surface conditions during winter weather events. The generated alarms can assist in more quickly identifying incidents, thus reducing the overall duration of the incident. Given the cost effectiveness of deploying vehicle detectors along with the cameras, they are recommended for the corridor.



Motorist Aid Call boxes – The proliferation of cellular phones among the public reduces the benefit provided by motorist aid call boxes. The number of people that would use the call boxes because they do not have a personal cellular phone is very limited. Because of the limited benefit, motorist aid call boxes are not recommended.

Equipment Staging Areas – Given the long sections of I-380 in the S-curve area that are on viaduct and the Cedar River bridge, equipment staging areas would be useful. Staging areas could be located on local streets adjacent to on-ramp terminals or on the shoulders of on-ramps. With the limited space on the viaduct, minimizing the number of responding vehicles on the mainline at the incident scene would be beneficial. The cost to implement designated staging areas will be limited to the time required to identify specific areas and coordinate with stakeholders. Given the limited cost and the expected benefit, this strategy is recommended.

Pre-Positioned Equipment – Pre-positioned equipment has been very useful along roadway sections in rural areas where the distance between the nearest DOT maintenance facility and incident location can be long. The long travel distance results in response delays to provide appropriate traffic control. The distance from the nearest maintenance shed to the S-curve area is reasonable, since the corridor is in the heart of Cedar Rapids. Keeping the equipment at a centralized location, not pre-positioned, has the benefit of allowing it to be used when responding to traffic incidents on multiple routes. For these reasons, pre-positioning equipment is not a recommended strategy.

Incident Investigation Sites – Construction of new incident investigation sites is difficult on an existing facility, so construction of new sites is not recommended at this time. When major reconstruction of I-380 is planned and designed, providing incident investigation sites should be considered. The added cost for the investigation sites must be weighed against the amount of usage they will experience. On a regional basis the use of private property for designated investigation sites can be assessed during the regional traffic incident management planning efforts.

Quick Clearance/Open Roads Policy – Given the critical nature of the I-380 corridor passing through downtown Cedar Rapids and the limited number of alternative river crossings, the facility is a prime candidate for having a quick clearance/open roads policy agreement. With the proposed infrastructure investment to aid in traffic incident management, the quick clearance performance measures typically found in quick clearance agreements will be useful. Development of a quick clearance/open roads policy is recommended for the study corridor. While the quick clearance agreement can be limited to the section of I-380 in the vicinity of the Cedar River crossing, it may be agreed by stakeholders that the scope should extend outside of the study area. If the boundary of the agreement extends regionally, the agreement and facilities included can be developed as part of the regional traffic incident management process.

Alternative Diversion Routes – Given the critical nature of I-380 in the vicinity of the Cedar River, the need for predetermined alternative routes is increased. Regional diversion routes for I-380 are limited. The only current regional diversion route to bypass I-380 in Cedar Rapids is the combined use of U.S. 30, U.S. 151 and Hwy 100 (Collins Road). Special diversion timing plans for Hwy. 100 (Collins Road) would be beneficial when a significant increase in traffic occurs due to diversions. This diversion route would be useful in reducing the amount of traffic taking the localized diversion routes near the Cedar River crossing.

In the vicinity of the I-380 Cedar River crossing, there are the following potential diversion routes available:



I-380 closure between 5th Ave. SW/Diagonal Dr. SW and 1st Ave. NW o Northbound Diversion Route – Exit I-380 to 5th Ave. SW/Diagonal Dr. SW.

Take 3rd St. SW to 1st Ave. W. Access I-380 using the on-ramp just north of 1st Ave. NW. Along this diversion route all the intersections are traffic signal controlled, so special diversion route timings can be implemented. 3rd St. SW is a one-way street with three through lanes.

o Southbound Diversion Route – Exit I-380 to 1st Ave. W. Take L St. SW from 1st Ave W through 5th Ave. SW/Diagonal Dr. SW. Just south of 5th Ave. SW/Diagonal Dr. SW use the on-ramp to access I-380. Along this diversion route all the intersections are traffic signal controlled, so special diversion route timings can be implemented. L St. SW is a one-way street with three through lanes.

I-380 closure between 1st Ave. W and 1st St. NE and I-380 closure between 1st St. NE and 7th St. NE/8th St. NE

o Northbound Diversion Route 1 – Exit I-380 to 1st St. NW and cross the river on F Ave. NW. Take the on-ramp from 1st St. NE to access I-380. Along this diversion route all the intersections are traffic signal controlled, so special diversion route timings can be implemented.

o Northbound Diversion Route 2 (Avoid 5-in-1 Bridge) - Exit I-380 to 5th Ave. SW/Diagonal Dr. SW. Take 3rd St. SW to 1st Ave. W. Turn right and take 1st Ave. across the river to 8th St. NE. Turn left and take 8th St. NE to the I-380 northbound on-ramp. Along this diversion route all the intersections are traffic signal controlled, so special diversion route timings can be implemented.

o Southbound Diversion Route 1 - Exit I-380 to 1st St. NE. Take F Ave. NW across the river to 1st St. NW. Turn left and take 1st St. NW to 1st Ave. W. Turn right and take 1st Ave. W to L St. SW. Turn left and take L St. SW from 1st Ave W through 5th Ave. SW/Diagonal Dr. SW. Just south of 5th Ave. SW/Diagonal Dr. SW use the on-ramp to access I-380. Along this diversion route all the intersections are traffic signal controlled, so special diversion route timings can be implemented.

o Southbound Diversion Route 2 (Avoid 5-in-1 Bridge) – Exit I-380 at 7th St. NE. Turn left and take 7th St. NE southeast to 1st Ave. E. Turn right and take 1st Ave. southwest to L St. SW. Turn left and take L St. SW from 1st Ave NW through 5th Ave. SW/Diagonal Dr. SW. Just south of 5th Ave. SW/Diagonal Dr. SW use the on-ramp to access I-380. Along this diversion route all the intersections are traffic signal controlled, so special diversion route timings can be implemented.

I-380 closure between 7th St. NE/8th St. NE and H Ave. NE o Northbound Diversion Route – Exit I-380 to 7th St. NE. Turn right and take 7th

St. NE to 1st Ave E. Turn left and take 1st Ave. E to College Dr. NE. Turn left and take College Dr. NE to Oakland Rd. NE. Take Oakland Rd. to H Ave. NE. Turn left and take H Ave. NE to the I-380 northbound on-ramp. The intersections of H Ave. NE and Oakland Rd. and H Ave. NE and Center Point Rd. NE are 3-way stop controlled intersections, so police will likely need to provide traffic control at these intersections. Other controlled intersections are signalized.

o Southbound Diversion Route – Exit I-380 at H Ave. NE. Turn left and take H Ave. NE to Center Point Rd. NE. Turn right and take Center Point Rd. NE to



Coe Rd. NE. Take Coe Rd. NE to 1st Ave. E. Turn right and take 1st Ave. E to 8th St. NE. Turn right and take 8th St. NE to the I-380 loop ramp. Use the loop ramp from 8th St. NE to access I-380. A Ave. NE could be used between Coe Rd. NE and 8th St. NE, but this road passes through the St. Luke’s Methodist Hospital main entrance. The intersection of H Ave. NE and Center Point Rd. NE is a 3-way stop controlled intersection, so police will likely need to provide traffic control at this intersection. Other controlled intersections are signalized.

With the exception of the two H Ave. NE intersections, all of the controlled intersections along the diversion routes are controlled by traffic signals. Diversion route timing plans would allow the diversion routes to accommodate additional traffic with less impact.

Stakeholder meetings will need to be held to review these potential diversion routes. Once the diversion routes are agreed upon, the resources needed to implement them as a diversion route can be determined. The diversion routes should be shown on detailed maps along with locations where resources must be deployed to implement the diversion route. Pre-planning of diversion routes will allow them to be quickly and efficiently implemented when needed, so it is recommended that the diversion routes be formally developed.

Trailblazer Signs – Permanently mounted trailblazer signs are most beneficial for regional diversion routes and diversion routes that are used on a regular basis. Regional diversion routes take drivers farther away from their normal travel routes so the trailblazer signs are helpful. When a diversion route is used on a more regular basis, the higher usage justifies the cost of the trailblazer signs. Given the limited usage of the localized I-380 diversion routes, use of portable diversion route signs would be more cost effective if needed and would not require too much effort to deploy. For regional diversion routes the use of trailblazer signs should be determined as part of the regional traffic incident management planning effort.

Alternative Traffic Signal Timing Plans & Responsive Traffic Signal Control System – As discussed in the diversion route section, the available diversion routes are for the most part controlled by traffic signals. This will allow the use of diversion route timing plans designed to handle the influx of diverted traffic. Diversion route timing plans generally increase the cycle length and diversion movement splits to better accommodate the added traffic. The diversion timing plans will impact other drivers, but since the plans are developed for the added diversion traffic, the operation will be optimized to minimize delays. The activation of the diversion timing plans can be a manual process or automated. Automated systems are called traffic responsive systems.

To allow implementation of diversion route timing plans, traffic signals along the diversion route must be able to be coordinated and timing plans must be implementable remotely. The manual approach would require the timing plan change be made by someone from the signal system operating agency. A preset timing plan would be implemented based on the specific diversion route being used. The City of Cedar Rapids has a centralized ACTRA signal system that provides the needed functionality to implement diversion route timing plans along the proposed diversion routes.

A traffic responsive system would implement the diversion route signal timing plans based on system sensors that detect the significant increase in traffic resulting from the diversion of traffic. Traffic responsive signal systems require additional system tuning and maintenance of system detection.



Since the diversion timing plans will only be used occasionally, a manual timing plan activation process is recommended. When a traffic incident occurs that will require a roadway closure, the Statewide Operations and Support Center will need to contact the City of Cedar Rapids requesting that the diversion route signal timing plan be implemented. To provide the ability to implement diversion plans 24/7, some cities have developed formal agreements with state DOT’s to allow the implementation of timing plans after hours. These agreements include criteria under which the timing plans can be implemented and the timing plans are predetermined.

Additional Overhead DMSs for Diversion – The existing two northbound DMSs and two southbound DMSs are at good locations to facilitate diversions of drivers based on posted messages. They are sufficiently upstream from diversion alternatives to allow drivers to contemplate the message and make a decision on whether or not to take a diversion route. Overhead DMSs installed closer to the S-curve area would be too close to diversion points, so no additional overhead DMSs are recommended for the purpose of influencing traffic diversion.

Roadside DMSs for Diversion – The roadside DMSs recommended to provide icy/slick roadway warnings can also be used to provide general traffic information under normal roadway conditions, but additional roadside DMSs are not recommended for the purpose of influencing traffic diversion. The existing overhead DMSs are well placed to provide traveler information to drivers approaching the S-curve area.

Enhanced Usage and Messages on Existing DMSs – To maximize the effectiveness of DMSs, the messages must be provided in a timely fashion, at a location where alternative actions can be taken and the messages need to be clear and consistent. The State Operations and Support Center staff should work with law enforcement and other stakeholders to determine an appropriate message set for each DMS. These messages should be consistent with statewide DMS messaging procedures. Agreement on the general message sets will reduce the time required to implement the message, will more effectively communicate the desired message and will ensure consistency over time.

On-Ramp Closure Gates – The closure of a freeway on-ramp to require drivers to use alternative routes when the freeway mainline is closed requires a significant amount of law enforcement or DOT resources. Law enforcement must use an officer in all cases and vehicle in most cases to close the ramp. The DOT would need to transport and setup roadway barricades. Automated gates controlled remotely allow on-ramps to be blocked without using valuable field resources. On-ramp closure gates are recommended to reduce the need for law enforcement and DOT field personnel for closing critical ramps. During the continued incident management planning efforts the specific ramps where gates are warranted will be determined.

Recommended Strategies and Deployment Packages

Once the evaluation of the candidate strategies was completed the next step within the concept selection process was to recommend strategies, or packages of strategies, for deployment in the I-380 Corridor at the Cedar River crossing. The resulting recommended strategies are grouped into deployment packages that can logically be implemented in a phased approach. The packages are shown in Table 3-4.



Package 1 – This package includes recommended strategies that require limited investment in new equipment. The strategies do require focused coordination among stakeholders that will require an investment of time.

Package 2 – This package allows for more strategic winter maintenance in the S-curve area.

Package 3 – This package provides active warnings about slick roadway conditions to drivers approaching the S-curve area using new small roadside DMS. The additional roadway pavement sensor strategy is included in both the second and third package.

Package 4 - The final package implements ITS technology and traffic incident management strategies that require capital investments.

Table 3-5 illustrates how the recommended strategies relate to the goals and objectives agreed upon by the project stakeholders. The only objective not addressed concerns providing improved training for incident responders. This objective will be addressed through the regional incident management planning efforts.

Table 3-4

Recommended Strategy Packages

Package 1: No New Field Hardware








Package 2: Enhanced Maintenance

Additional Roadway Surface Condition Sensor

Package 3: Hazardous Roadway Condition Active Warning System

Additional Roadway Surface Condition Sensor


Package 4: ITS/Traffic Incident Management

Traffic Cameras

Vehicle Detection



On-Ramp Closure Gates

Chapter 3 - Concept Selection Concept Selection


Table 3-5 Recommended Strategies Relationship to Goals and Objectives




OBJECTIVES

1a 1b 1c 2a 2b 2c 2d




adjacent curves







diversion





incident responders

CANDIDATE STRATEGY

Package 1: No-New Field Hardware

Existing DMS Messaging Linked to Existing RWIS Icing/Slick Roadway Alerts On 511 Icing/Slick Roadway Alerts Via Mobile Devices Enhanced Usage and Messages on Existing DMSs Equipment Staging Areas Quick Clearance/Open Roads Policy Alternate Route Plans


Smaller Roadside DMSs for Roadway Condition Warnings Additional Roadway Surface Condition Sensor


Additional Surface Condition Sensor


1/10-Mile Reference Markers Traffic Cameras Vehicle Detection Alternative Traffic Signal Timing Plans On-Ramp Closure Gates



Communications Interfaces

The proposed ITS technologies and traffic incident management strategies require communications interfaces between operational entities. Exhibit 3-1 illustrates the communications interfaces between the entities from a high-level perspective. The communications interfaces are categorized as voice or data/video. Voice includes discussions over the telephone network or radio. The data/video communications occurs through some form of computer network.

New communications interfaces are required between the new ITS field devices and the Statewide Operations and Support Center. New communications interfaces are also needed between stakeholders sharing video and the Statewide Operations and Support Center. These new communications interfaces must transmit data and video. During design the type of network connections must be determined. It is expected that connections with the Statewide Operations and Support Center will use the Internet through the use of virtual private network (VPN) connections.

Exhibit 3-1 Communications Interfaces



Costs

Planning level cost estimates were developed for implementation of the recommended strategies. The cost estimates were based on recent costs experienced on other projects and estimated level of effort for facilitation of traffic incident management planning efforts. Table 3-6 provides the estimated capital cost for implementation and average annual maintenance costs in 2011 dollars. Capital costs include design, equipment and installation when applicable. The annual maintenance costs were estimated based on maintenance cost percentages from the U.S. DOT’s cost database or expected effort to facilitate traffic incident management related annual updates3.

Table 3-6 Recommended Strategy Cost Estimates (2011 Dollars)

Strategy Capital Cost Annual

Maintenance Cost


Existing DMS Messaging Linked to Existing RWIS $50,000 $2,500

Icing/Slick Roadway Alerts on 511 Incremental Incremental

Icing/Slick Roadway Alerts Via Mobile Devices Incremental Incremental


$25,000 $1,000 Equipment Staging Areas




Additional Roadway Surface Condition Sensor* $45,000 $2,700


Additional Roadway Surface Condition Sensor* $45,000 $2,700


$193,000 $12,500


Traffic Cameras $266,000 $13,400

Vehicle Detection $22,000 $200

1/10-Mile Reference Markers $17,000 $1,700

Alternative Traffic Signal Timing Plans $138,000 $12,000

On-Ramp Closure Gates $100,000 Per Ramp $1,000

* The same sensor would be used for Package 2 and Package 3.

For each of the recommended strategies, the following assumptions were made to develop the cost estimates:

Existing DMS Messaging Linked to Existing RWIS – The new SIMS central software will allow integration of the RWIS data into the event manager interface. The estimated cost is for integrating the RWIS data, implementing the alerts functionality in SIMS and developing proposed messages.

3 U.S DOT Cost Database - http://www.itscosts.its.dot.gov/

http://www.itscosts.its.dot.gov/



Icing/Slick Roadway Alerts on 511 – These roadway condition related alerts will function no different than alerts currently reported in the system, so the only cost is the operator’s time to input the alert.

Driver Alerts Via Mobile Devices – The DOT’s mobile alert system simply reformats the 511 information and “pushes” the information to subscribers, so there is no significant additional cost to provide the roadway condition alerts via mobile devices.

Enhanced Usage and Messages on Existing DMSs, Equipment Staging Areas, Quick Clearance/Open Roads Policy and Alternate Route Plans – To implement these strategies will require stakeholder meetings to agree on details of the strategies and plans to implement them. To estimate a cost for this effort, it was assumed that the process would be facilitated by a consultant. A sample fee estimate was developed for a consultant to facilitate the effort for the S-curve area.

Additional Roadway Surface Condition Sensors – The cost estimate reflects the installation of a non-invasive pavement condition sensor that can assess pavement condition from the side of the roadway. This sensor and control unit will be installed at the north end of the I-380 Cedar River bridge or on the I-380 viaduct to obtain additional and redundant condition information. This is not a full RWIS station.

Smaller Roadside DMSs for Roadway Condition Warnings – The cost reflects the installation of two roadside DMSs along with the associated cabinets, power supplies and local communications links.

Traffic Cameras – The estimated cost reflects the cost for four cameras along with the associated cabinets, power supplies and local communications links. A preliminary review of the corridor determined that complete traffic monitoring of mainline I-380 could be provided with four cameras.

Vehicle Detection – The vehicle detection cost assumes that side-fire radar detectors will be installed at the four camera sites to provide mainline detection. Since the detectors are located at the camera sites, no additional cost is included for poles, cabinets or power supplies.

1/10-Mile Reference Markers – The cost for the reference markers is based on Iowa DOT historical unit cost data for roadside mounted markers. Additional cost was added for mounting of the reference markers on the structures. To be conservative, it was assumed that they would be located on the outside along both sides of the roadway from 5th Ave. SW/Diagonal Dr. SW on the south to G St. NE on the north. For maintenance cost it was assumed that 10% of the markers would need replacement each year.

Alternative Traffic Signal Timing Plans – To estimate the cost for developing alternative route traffic signal timing plans, the number of traffic signals on the preliminary diversion routes were determined. There are 25 traffic signals along the local diversion routes and 21 along Hwy. 100 (Collins Rd.). A per signal cost of $2,600 was estimated based on the time required to develop the volumes and optimize the timings for two peak periods. Cost was also included to upgrade two intersections to allow centralized control.

On-Ramp Closure Gates – The cost to purchase and install an on-ramp closure gate is estimated at $100,000 per ramp location based on costs experienced for similar deployments in the Quad cities area. The final gate locations will not be determined until the next stage of the project, so a total cost cannot be estimated.



The cost estimates do not include the cost to provide the needed communications connection to the Statewide Operations and Support Center in Ames. It was assumed that the existing communications link used for the existing DMSs could be used for other devices implemented in the S-Curve area.

Chapter 4 –Operational Scenarios


Chapter 4 – Operational Scenarios

ITS technologies and traffic incident management scenarios work best when they are combined into a system. That is why a range of strategy packages were recommended in Chapter 3 versus one single preferred strategy. The following operational scenarios are provided to illustrate how the recommended ITS technologies and traffic incident management strategies will work together and how the various stakeholders will be impacted. The operational scenarios demonstrated below do not represent a specific strategy package from Table 3-6, but rather how different technologies from the various strategy packages will work together to address specific types of incidents or situations in the corridor. The scenarios represent a situation where all the recommended ITS technologies and strategies are deployed.

Operational Scenario 1 – There is a two-vehicle crash blocking a lane of traffic southbound on I-380 just south of the Cedar River bridge. The traffic incident occurs at 4:45 p.m. on a typical weekday.

Response –

The vehicle detectors sense a slowdown in traffic, which alerts an operator at the Statewide Operations and Support Center in Ames that there may be a problem.

The operator uses the nearest traffic camera to check out what the problem is at the site. Based on the visual confirmation that a crash is blocking a lane, the operator will notify the emergency services dispatch of the incident.

At about the same time, the 911 center receives a call reporting the crash. The call taker at the 911 center asks the caller to find the nearest 1/10-mile reference marker and provide the information shown on it. Based on this information, the 911 dispatch can identify the location of the crash and enters it into the CAD system.

Using the video being shared by the DOT, the emergency services dispatcher can confirm the location of the crash and determine the basic level of response needed.

Since one lane is blocked, the Statewide Operations and Support Center operator enters the incident into the central software as an event and posts appropriate messages on the southbound DMS signs north of the incident. The incident information is now available on the 511 system and will be distributed to mobile devices.

The tow truck drivers responding to the crash park at the designated staging area at the base of the southbound I-380 on-ramp from 3rd Street NE. When the crash investigation is completed the tow truck drivers are notified to move to the crash site and remove the damaged vehicles.

The Statewide Operations and Support Center operator continues to monitor the crash scene. When the last vehicle leaves clearing the lane the DMS messages are removed from the southbound DMSs and the incident event is closed out in the central software.



Operational Scenario 2 – A cold front sweeps into Cedar Rapids at 7:30 a.m. on a Tuesday. The cold front drops the temperature below freezing along with some light mixed precipitation.

Response –

A Statewide Operations and Support Center receives an alert from the central software based on data from the RWIS station located at the south end of the I-380 Cedar River bridge as the temperature drops to below the freezing point. At that point the RWIS data and pavement condition sensors are monitored.

District maintenance staff is monitoring the weather and roadway conditions including the existing RWIS station and new pavement sensor site. Maintenance trucks are dispatched to provide treatment in the S-curve area.

The pavement condition sensors detect the formation of ice on the I-380 Cedar River bridge. The operator displays an icing/slick roadway message on the small DMS located in both directions just upstream of the S-curve area. Based on the messages, drivers reduce their speeds.

After posting the messages on the DMS, the icing/slick roadway condition is entered into the central software as an event. The event is then provided as a warning through the 511 system and is distributed to mobile devices.

A combination of the winter maintenance treatments and the daytime temperature increase results in the roadway condition sensor reporting that the roadway surface conditions have improved to a point where icing is not a concern. The Statewide Operations and Support Center operator removes the warning messages from the two small DMSs and closes out the event in the central software.

Operational Scenario 3 – A truck carrying hazardous materials is involved in a crash on the southbound I-380 Cedar River bridge.

Response –

The 911 center receives a call reporting a truck crash. The caller is asked to find the nearest 1/10-mile marker and provide the information on the reference marker. Based on this information the location is determined to be on the I-380 Cedar River bridge. The crash is entered into the CAD system. The emergency services dispatcher reports the crash and location to the DOT’s Statewide Operations and Support Center.

An operator at the Statewide Operations and Support Center uses the nearby camera to view the crash.

The emergency dispatch center can see the crash site from the shared video. Based on the video of the crash site the response that is dispatched is notified that the crash involved a truck that may be carrying hazardous materials.

A decision is made that southbound I-380 needs to be closed to allow the crash to be managed and the hazardous materials to be cleaned up. Southbound I-380 is manually blocked initially using police vehicles at the off-ramp to 1st Street



NE and the 3rd Street NE on-ramp is blocked by closing of the on-ramp gate by the Statewide Operations and Support Center operators. In accordance with the “Quick Clearance/Open Roads” agreement, the DOT provides arrow boards and cones to direct mainline traffic off southbound I-380 to 1st Street NE.

As soon as it is determined that the roadway must be closed with traffic diverted on southbound I-380 to 1st Street, Cedar Rapids Public Works is notified. Public Works staff uses the central signal control software to implement the diversion timings for southbound 1st Street NE/westbound 1st Avenue/southbound L Street SW diversion route to provide additional cycle length and an increased diversion phase interval.

The Statewide Operations and Support Center operators will implement messages on the southbound I-380 DMSs north of the incident to notify drivers of the roadway closure so that alternative routes can be taken before drivers reach the queue developed upstream of the primary diversion route. The traffic incident event is entered into the central software. Once the roadway closure is entered into the central software, it is reported by the 511 system and distributed to mobile devices.

The Statewide Operations and Support Center operator continues to monitor the crash scene. When the last vehicle leaves, clearing the incident scene, the DMS messages are removed from the southbound DMSs, the on-ramp gate is opened, the District is notified to remove the temporary traffic control devices and the incident event is closed out in the central software. The operator must also notify the City of Cedar Rapids that the diversion route timings are no longer needed.

Chapter 5 –Implementation Plan


Chapter 5 – Implementation Plan

The final step within the Concept of Operations is to develop an implementation plan for the recommended ITS technologies and traffic incident management strategies. The implementation plan identifies the activities, resources, procurement process, budget and timeline needed to guide the implementation process. Table 5-1 lists the activities, resources, procurement, budget and timeline associated with each of the recommended strategies.

Activities - to implement any of the ITS technologies or traffic incident management strategies, certain activities must take place that require resources to be provided by one or several of the stakeholders.

Resources - the resources include the staff time or funding necessary to implement the strategy.

Procurement - the method of procurement must be determined in order to complete any of the activities that will require expenditure of funds.

Budget – the estimated costs to complete the activities and implement the strategy must be determined.

Timeline - the timeline for implementation of the technology or traffic incident management strategy must be identified.

There are multiple procurement approaches that have been used for ITS related projects. Some of the approaches that have been used include:

Qualifications Based Selection (QBS)

Cost (Low-bid)

Cost and Qualifications Combined

Fixed Price

Cost Reimbursement

Task Order

System Manager

To choose an appropriate procurement approach the project characteristics need to be considered. The key characteristics that must be considered are:

Maturity of Technology

Size/Scope/Complexity

Level of Coordination with Other Work

Status of Goals for Project

Definition of Final Product

The ITS technology deployments recommended generally include mature technologies, are small in size, do not require a lot of coordination with other projects, have well defined goals and well defined final products. Given these characteristics, a traditional design-bid-build procurement approach is recommended. The contracted services to facilitate the implementation of traffic incident management strategies and design of the ITS technology deployments should be selected based on qualifications.



Table 5-1 Implementation Plan

ITS Technology / Traffic Incident Management

Strategy Activities Resources Procurement Budget Timeline



Determine RWIS data needed to identify potential icing situations.

Develop DMS messages and criteria for when to display the messages.

Develop requirements for central software enhancements.

Modify central software and input new DMS messages into the system.

Formalize operational procedure for when message should be displayed.

DOT operations and maintenance staff to determine functionality, develop messages and develop operational procedures.

Central software provider to implement new software modules and integrate with the RWIS database.

The DOT will need a sole source contract with the central software provider. This is allowed under the original selection process and agreement with the provider.

$30,000 to $50,000 This includes the costs to make the needed enhancements and integrate with the RWIS database. The central software was originally selected because it can be efficiently enhanced to add additional functionality.

Short-term.

Development of requirements for system enhancements – 2 months.

Services to modify the central software and integrate with RWIS - 3 months.

Formalizing operational procedures and testing of the system - 1 month.

Total estimated time to implement strategy - 6 months.


Once a policy decision is made to provide icing/slick roadway notices to the public, providing the messages on the 511 system will require minimal effort. The icing/slick roadway alerts will be treated the same as other traffic incident alerts input as an event in the system.

When prompted by the new RWIS interface, the Statewide Operations and Support Center operators will need to enter the icy/slick roadway event into the central software as an event.

No services or equipment must be procured.

Minimal cost. The cost for this strategy is limited to the added time for operators to enter the event, so the cost is considered minimal.

Short-term. As soon as the RWIS interface is functioning and operational procedures are in place, this strategy can be implemented.


The system to distribute traffic incident alerts to mobile devices is part of the 511 system, so once the event is available in the 511 system it is available on mobile devices without any additional activities.

None. Once the event is entered into the central software, it is automatically distributed.

No services or equipment must be procured.

No additional cost. Short-term. Once the icing/slick roadway events are in the 511 database, they will be available.



Table 5-1 (Continued) Implementation Plan




The DOT will need to meet with traffic incident management stakeholders to discuss suggested enhancements in messages and the process for getting them posted.

Enhanced messages and operational procedures will need to be developed.

The new messages and procedures will then be presented to the stakeholders for comment and refinement.

DOT staff time will be needed to participate with other traffic incident management stakeholders in several meetings held to discuss the enhanced messages and operational procedures.

Traffic incident management stakeholders will need to meet with the DOT to provide input.

A consultant is needed to facilitate the process for this and several other tasks.

Development of these strategies will be rolled into the regional traffic incident management planning effort that the DOT will conduct using a consultant. The consultant will be selected through a qualifications based selection process.

$25,000 (Combined Cost) This cost includes the combined effort required by a consultant to facilitate the development of strategies for the S-curve area of I-380, including:





Mid-term.

Development of a plan to implement strategies for the S-curve area of I-380 - 3 months.

Includes conducting meetings, doing the needed field assessments and documenting the plan.

These efforts can be started anytime.

Equipment Staging Areas DOT and traffic incident management stakeholders will need to meet to determine the type of areas and the required attributes of acceptable staging areas.

Field reviews must be conducted to identify proposed staging areas that meet the agreed upon criteria.

An easy to use reference document showing staging areas must be developed that can be used by traffic incident stakeholders in the field.

DOT and other traffic incident management stakeholders staff time is required to agree on staging area criteria, review proposed staging areas and review the reference document.

A consultant is needed to facilitate the criteria development process, conduct the field assessment and produce the reference document.







Mid-term.

As noted for the budget this is a combined effort.










DOT and key traffic incident management stakeholders must meet to identify the agencies to be included and requirements that each agency is committing to in the formal agreement.

The stakeholders must get senior management’s formal approval of the agreement.

The stakeholders must work with senior management to obtain the needed resources to meet the agreement’s requirements.

DOT and other traffic incident management stakeholders staff time is needed to develop the policy document.

A consultant is needed to provide example agreements that can be used as starting points and to facilitate the negotiations.

Depending on the commitments agreed to, the agencies involved may need to provide additional personnel and equipment resources in order to meet performance requirements.







Mid-term.





Alternate Route Plans The DOT will need to meet with traffic incident management stakeholders to review the initial alternative route plans that have been developed internally.

Refined diversion routes will need to be developed and needed resources identified to implement each diversion route.

An easy to use diversion route reference document needs to be produced that illustrates the diversion routes and lists the resources required to implement the routes. The document must be suitable for use by field personnel.

DOT and other traffic incident management stakeholders staff time is needed to review and refine diversion route plans.

A consultant is needed to facilitate the process and develop the diversion route document.







Mid-term.











Additional Roadway Surface Condition Sensor Note: Included in Package 2 and 3.

Select the type of sensor to be implemented, design the installation and develop bid documents that can be used to procure the hardware and install it.

Integrate the new sensor into the central software’s RWIS interface to allow the data to be used along with the existing RWIS data.

DOT staff time will be required to participate in the assessment of available technology and review of the bid documents that are developed.

A consultant will need to be hired to design the sensor site and produce the bid documents.

The DOT will need to hire a contractor to procure and install the sensor site.

The central software provider will need to be engaged by the DOT to integrate the new sensor into the central software.

A standard design-bid-build approach will be used by the DOT.

The consultant designing the sensor site will be selected using a qualifications based process.

The contractor will be selected on low bid based on a detailed bid package focused on functionality.

The DOT will need a sole source contract with the central software provider. This is allowed under the original selection process and agreement with the provider.

$45,000 The estimated cost includes design, installation and integration.

Mid-term.

Design and procurement process to select the technology, design the site, produce the bid documents and select the contractor - 3 months.

Installation of site - 2 months.

Integration – 1 month.

Total time for installation of the new sensor site - 6 months.



The location where the small DMSs will be installed must be determined.

Other uses for the signs must be determined so that the sign size can be determined based on message sizes.

The two DMS sites must be designed and bid documents must be produced.

The DMSs must be installed and integrated into the central software.

A consultant will need to be hired to design the two DMS sites and produce the bid documents.

A contractor must be hired to furnish and install the sign’s site infrastructure.

DOT staff time will be required to input the new devices into the central software.


The consultant to do the DMS site design and produce bid documents will be selected using a qualifications based process.


$193,000 This includes the estimated cost to design and install two small DMSs.

Long-term. Construction of the DMSs as part of a larger project with other similar smaller DMSs will provide cost savings, so construction of the DMSs will occur in the first phase of the regional ITS deployment project. Funding for the initial regional deployment is expected in fiscal year 2013, so construction can start after July 1, 2012.







Traffic Cameras Camera locations within the S-curve area must be determined to provide full traffic monitoring of the mainline lanes.

The selected camera sites must be designed along with communications to provide the video to the Statewide Operations and Support Center in Ames.

The cameras must be installed and integrated into the central software.

The stakeholder agencies that want to share the traffic video must be determined and agreements developed to allow access.

Communications links must be developed between the Statewide Operations and Support Center and agencies sharing the video.

Agencies sharing video must be trained on the use of remote site central software.

A consultant will need to be hired to design the camera sites and communications link to the Statewide Operations and Support Center. They will produce the bid documents.

A contractor must be hired to furnish and install the cameras site infrastructure.

DOT staff is required to input the new devices into the central software and establish the connection to the remote terminal sites at agencies sharing the video.

The agencies sharing the video must provide workstations that will accommodate the remote site central software and provide the needed hardware and Internet connection to provide the secure VPN communications link.


The consultant to do the camera site design and produce the bid documents will be selected using a qualifications based process.


Procurement of computer hardware and internet access by agencies sharing video will follow their normal procurement process.

$266,000 – This includes the estimated costs to design and install four cameras.

$5,000 - The hardware cost for each agency to install a workstation.

Long-term. Construction of the cameras as part of a larger project with other cameras will provide cost savings, so construction of the cameras will occur in the first phase of the regional ITS deployment project. Funding for the initial regional deployment is expected in fiscal year 2013, so construction can start after July 1, 2012.

Vehicle Detection Vehicle detection will be installed in conjunction with the cameras.

The detectors will need to be integrated into the central software.

Design and bid document preparation will be in conjunction with the cameras.

Furnishing and installing the detectors will be in conjunction with the cameras.

DOT staff time will be required to input the detectors into the central software.

The detection implementation will be completed in conjunction with the camera procurement.

$22,000 This includes the estimated cost for installation of the detectors on the camera poles.

Long-term. Construction of the vehicle detection as part of a larger project will provide cost savings, so construction of the detectors will occur in the first phase of the regional ITS deployment project. Funding for the initial regional deployment is expected in fiscal year 2013, so construction can start after July 1, 2012.







Bid documents must be developed for installation of the reference markers.

The reference marker locations must be input into the 911 and emergency services dispatch databases.

Training must be provided to 911 call takers on the use of the reference markers to obtain incident locations.

The DOT will pay for design and construction of the reference markers.

Public safety answering point staff time is required for inputting the reference markers into their system and for training on the use of the reference markers.


DOT will produce the reference marker construction bid documents in-house.

Construction of the reference markers will be procured by low bid.

$17,000 This includes the estimated cost to construct the reference markers.

Short-term.

Construction of reference markers - 6 months.

The project start is not constrained by any other strategy.


Existing traffic count data for the signalized intersections along the diversion routes must be obtained.

Diversion scenario volumes must be developed by adding diversion traffic to the existing volumes.

Signal timings that optimized signal operations during diversions must be developed.

The diversion timings must be input into the central signal system database.

Given limits on available City of Cedar Rapids staff, a consultant will be needed to collect the needed data, develop diversion scenario volumes and complete the analysis to develop the optimized signal timings.

City of Cedar Rapids staff time will be required to input the diversion timings into the signal system database.

The consultant to develop the diversion signal timings will be selected using a qualifications based process by the city of Cedar Rapids.

$138,000

This includes the estimated cost to

develop the diversion route signal

timings.

There may be an opportunity for

the DOT to provide some funding

for this effort.

Mid-term.

Once the diversion routes are agreed upon, development and implementation of signal timings - 6 months.

On-Ramp Closure Gates On-ramps on which gates should

be installed must be determined.

The gate sites must be designed

along with communications to

allow for control from the

Statewide Operations and Support

Center in Ames.

The gates must be installed and integrated into the central software.

A consultant will need to be hired

to design the gate sites and

communications link to the

Statewide Operations and Support

Center. They will produce the bid

documents.

A contractor must be hired to

furnish and install the gates.

DOT staff is required to input the new devices into the central software.


The consultant to do the gate site design and produce the bid documents will be selected using a qualifications based process.


$100,000 per ramp location. This includes the estimated costs to design and install one gate.

Long-term. Construction of the gates as part of a larger project with other infrastructure will provide cost savings, so construction of the gates will occur in the first phase of the regional ITS deployment project. Funding for the initial regional deployment is expected in fiscal year 2013, so construction can start after July 1, 2012.

Appendix A - Stakeholder Workshop Attendee List Concept Selection

I-380 Cedar River Crossing Concept of Operations Page A- 1 Page 1 DOT Project # IM-380-6(264)16-13-57

Appendix A - Stakeholder Workshop Attendee List

Name Organization Telephone E-Mail

Jerry Roche FHWA 515-233-7323 [email protected]

Dale Sexton Iowa DOT - Cedar Rapids Maintenance

319-364-8189 [email protected]

Randall Roethlisberger Iowa DOT - Cedar Rapids Maintenance


Roger Walton Iowa DOT - Staff Engineer


Dennis Perrin Iowa DOT - Cedar Rapids Maintenance


John Wilson Iowa DOT - Dist 6 Maintenance Manager


John Haas Iowa DOT - Office of Maintenance


David Willis Iowa State Patrol - Cedar Rapids


Greg McGivern Linn County Sheriff 319-892-6100 [email protected]

Kyle Halligan Iowa DOT - Research & Technology


Sushil Nepal

Corridor MPO - Long-Range Planning Coordinator


Thomas Smith Corridor MPO 319-286-5161 [email protected]

Steve Gannon Linn County Engineer 319-892-6400 [email protected]

Carmela Darrah-Chiafos

Darrahs Towing 319-363-7900 [email protected]

Cathy Cutler Iowa DOT - District 6 Planner


Leslie Hart Cedar Rapids Public Works


Appendix A - Stakeholder Workshop Attendee List Concept Selection

I-380 Cedar River Crossing Concept of Operations Page A- 2 Page 2 DOT Project # IM-380-6(264)16-13-57

Name Organization Telephone E-Mail

Mike Goldberg Linn County EMA 319-892-6501 [email protected]

Mike Wallerstedt Cedar Rapids Police Department


Cory McGarvey Cedar Rapids Police Department


Robert Murphy Cedar Rapids Police Department


Barbara Vos IA Homeland Security & Emergency Management


Rich Holland Marion Police Department


Jason Hansen Marion Fire Department


Tony Taylor Iowa DOT - Research & Technology


Greg Smith Cedar Rapids Fire Department


Mike Jackson Iowa DOT - Research & Technology


Chuck Miller HNTB - Kansas City 816-527-2696 [email protected]

Mark Pohlmann HNTB - Omaha 402-342-4421 [email protected]

Appendix B - Stakeholder Workshop Comments Concept Selection

I-380 Cedar River Crossing Concept of Operations Page B- 1 Page 1 DOT Project # IM-380-6(264)16-13-57

Appendix B - Stakeholder Workshop Comments

Stakeholders were asked to identify issues that they see related to safety, traffic operations and traffic incident management along I-380 in the vicinity of the Cedar River crossing and regionally. The following issues were mentioned:

Risk County for Radiological – Traffic control, access during major evacuation events – Manual being developed – County will be doing “time studies”

Traffic “blending” for entering and exiting vehicles at interchange ramps – difficult weaving due to slower traffic speeds – outside lane is a “comfort” lane for many drivers

Traffic lights (lack of) at Hwy 13/Hwy 151 and Mt. Vernon Rd. – creates bottlenecks – existing all-way stop

Look at why yield signs are/are not installed at ramp merge points

5 in 1 interchanges – NASCAR like driving conditions

Operation of DMS signs – effective?? – during construction and other incident events

Development of diversion plans during incidents

Closing of ramps during incidents on I-380 – how do you coordinate this?

Getting messages on DMS’s far enough from incident to get drivers to good alternate routes

Improving communication with other agencies involved in an incident – “Many hats”

Minimizing secondary incidents by better diversion of traffic – better use of diversion tools – DMS, arrow boards, etc.

Maintaining good access to/from I-380 with addition of new developments in downtown

Use of ITS on arterial streets to provide direction to drivers to use alternate interchanges to avoid congestion

City just put up PTZ cameras – needs coordination with Iowa DOT ITS as well as local police, EMS, others

Related to Speed Cameras – variable speeds of traffic (local drivers slow down, but other “out of area” drivers go faster and creates more weaving of traffic)

Speed cameras are still needed - many local drivers speeding through I-380 corridor (and specifically 5 in 1)

Need to get local 911 centers involved in incident management efforts and planning – not present at this meeting

Funding!!!!



North part of I-380 does not have a good diversion route – County Home Rd not adequate to handle good diversion (unlike south parts with Hwy 13/151) – lack of a good bypass route

New Tower Terrace interchange would aid in the evacuation plans – additional access

NB I-380 and Hwy 30 – weaving traffic creates lane usage issues – becomes a safety and bottleneck area – merging traffic slows overall traffic flow

SB I-380 and Hwy 30 – challenging geometry at ramp split – signing is not adequate – creates a safety issue – lane usage is not intuitive for the driver

Aging driver population – challenge to adequately sign routes

Response issues in the 5-in-1 area – getting proper equipment to deal with spills and other incidents – dispatching from various areas of the town to quickly respond – cameras would be very beneficial to get a more accurate description of the location of an incident

Police not familiar with use of mile-marker – more intuitive to use street names

City building new fire station near 6th/7th/8th interchange – looking at use of more advanced traffic signal emergency vehicle preemption system

Cedar Rapids has a consolidated dispatching system

Working on joint communication system with law enforcement agencies

Do not have signal pre-emption for emergency/fire

Even small incidents require a lot of resources to handle traffic control in 5 in 1 area – only use cones during major incidents

Do not put too much reliance on drivers heeding messages on DMS

Better messages on DMS’s that better inform drivers

Getting drivers to “believe” the message on the signs

Median-side incidents are hard to work on – especially from a towing perspective – use “truck stacking” to create a safe work area

Tow bans put in place for safety issues – how can we work around this or alter to allow tow trucks to work in the area and get the incident cleared safely

Police light “flooding” impact both directions of travel, especially at night

Lack of consistent training requirements for tow services

A lot of enforcement officers to implement a diversion route – deciding what routes, setting access points, etc.

DOT has developed a draft set of diversion route plans – working to distribute for review and comment

Shift changing of agency staff during major incidents



Currently using total stations to investigate fatality related crashes more efficiently

Are currently not tracking overall response times for past incidents

Inclement weather (rain and snow) conditions create problems in 5 in 1

Fog is an infrequent issue

Most of the time have good warning of need for ice treatment on 5 in 1

S-Curves to be friction treated in 2011

More development along Hwy 30 – creates safety issues with more at-grade intersections

Towing during rush hour – not a good idea – regardless of weather

“rubbernecking” causes bottlenecks

Abandoned trucks are left at the incident location until a time it can be done safely with the right resources

How do we share camera views/resources between agencies – who has control of the camera view? How do agencies coordinate this?

Might be limitations with communications infrastructure to operate available technologies

Appendix C – Description of Candidate Strategies Concept Selection

I-380 Cedar River Crossing Concept of Operations Page C- 1 Page 1 DOT Project # IM-380-6(264)16-13-57

Appendix C – Description of Candidate Strategies

Existing DMS Messaging Linked to Existing RWIS – The existing RWIS station at the south end of the I-380 Cedar River bridge monitors weather and roadway surface conditions, so when icing of the roadway is expected messages can be posted on the existing DMSs located north and south of the bridge. This will require that operators at the Statewide Operations and Support Center have access to the RWIS information in a format that can be efficiently monitored. An audio or screen pop-up notification would be beneficial to alert operators when environmental parameters near conditions that result in icing.

Additional Roadway Surface Condition Sensors – The existing RWIS station only has roadway surface condition sensors on the south end of the I-380 Cedar River bridge. To help identify conditions that will lead to loss of traction, additional pavement surface condition sensors could be deployed at other locations along the bridge. This will help insure conditions that will result in loss of traction can be identified when they first occur. This will also provide redundancy in surface condition assessment.

New Overhead DMSs for Roadway Condition Warnings – New DMSs could be located on I-380 both north and south of the S-curve area to provide approaching traffic a last warning of possible icing and the need to slowdown just before drivers reach the S-curve area. The warning messages could be provided by a smaller DMS or a static sign with flashing beacons. The full size DMS would only be warranted if they provide additional functionality as part of the regional ATMS.

Smaller Roadside DMSs for Roadway Condition Warnings – These proposed DMSs have limited messaging capabilities, but would be able to warn of icing roadway surface conditions. The primary purpose of these signs would be to provide “ICY ROAD” messages, but could also be used for other short messages. The DMS size would be three lines with eight 18”-characters per line, which will accommodate the “ICY ROAD” message and other messages.

Roadside LED Blank-Out Sign for Roadway Condition Warnings – The “ICY ROAD” message can be displayed on an LED blank-out sign. This type of sign is limited to one or two messages, so it cannot be used to display other messages. The available message would look similar to the full featured DMS messages.

Warning Signs with Flashing Beacons for Roadway Condition Warnings – A slippery pavement warning sign combined with a supplemental plaque and flashing beacons would provide an active warning by flashing the beacon when the formation of ice is expected or occurring. These active warning signs would be located just upstream from the beginning of the S-curve area on the northbound and southbound approaches.

Highway Advisory Radio/Signs for Roadway Condition Warnings – A highway advisory radio (HAR) system could provide hazardous roadway condition information, but drivers need to be influenced to tune into the station. It also takes time for a driver to



tune the radio to the appropriate station. Active alert signs can be used to provide drivers the station frequency and notify them that urgent information is available through the use of flashing beacons. HAR systems are efficient at covering a large area and providing longer messages. The icy roadway concern in the vicinity of the Cedar River crossing is specific to one segment of roadway and only requires very simple and short messaging, so a new HAR system is not ideal to address the problem. If a HAR system is to be deployed as part of a regional system, it could be used to provide icy road information.

Connected Vehicle (V2I) Safety Application to Provide Warnings in Vehicles – Current U.S. DOT research is focusing on developing Connected Vehicle applications that will allow roadside infrastructure to transmit safety warning information to devices in vehicles that will present the warning to drivers. This effort is still at an early stage, so implementation in the next few years is not possible. Once the technology is fully developed, there will also be a significant time period for the vehicle fleet to turnover so that a majority of drivers have vehicles with the required in-vehicle devices.

Combined Speed and Pavement Surface Warning Device – This strategy would combine speed detection of individual vehicles with individual (per lane) active warning signs. The active warning sign can be a static warning sign with flashing beacons or a blank-out sign. The system would only warn drivers that were exceeding the safe speed. This would require a sign bridge to support the individual lane signs. A significant consideration with this strategy is the need to determine what is considered a safe speed under icy roadway conditions.

Variable Speed Limit – A variable regulatory speed limit could be implemented in the vicinity of the Cedar River crossing. The speed limit would be lowered when conditions resulted in more hazardous roadway conditions. Public perception of unfairness with the variable regulatory speed limit and automated speed enforcement along the same corridor is a consideration. A variable advisory speed limit could be installed to address this concern.

Icing/Slick Roadway Alerts on 511 – Along with tools to provide en-route information, hazardous roadway condition information could be posted to the 511 phone system and website. This requires that when roadside devices are activated, a message is also posted on the 511 system.

Icing/Slick Roadway Alerts Via Mobile Devices – Hazardous roadway condition information can also be “pushed” to travelers through mobile devices. These systems usually allow travelers to request alerts for certain corridors, days of the week and times during the day. These systems in general should not be used to obtain en-route information because obtaining the information from a mobile device requires reading of text or viewing a map. This creates distracted driver problems. Drivers are able to access the information before leaving on a trip. New smartphone applications are becoming available that provide audio traveler alert messages through the use of text to speech technology. This approach significantly reduces the distracted driver problem while providing drivers en-route information.

Enhanced Winter Maintenance in S-curve Area – Enhanced winter maintenance for the S-curve area could be implemented to monitor and treat the roadway more



strategically and aggressively. A system could be implemented to automate the determination of when treatments are needed on the I-380 Cedar River bridge and neighboring viaducts. The system would use information from the existing RWIS station and possibly other pavement condition sensors along the structure. The availability of maintenance crews to apply the treatments and the impact to winter maintenance operations are important considerations.

Automated Anti-Icing System – An automated anti-icing system sprays chemicals on a roadway surface to prevent icing and eliminate ice that has formed. When the system detects conditions that are likely to result in ice formation, the system sprays deicing chemicals on the roadway surface. The systems include environmental sensors, chemical storage tanks, a pump, a pipe network, pump house building and spray heads located in the roadway. These systems are relatively expensive, so their application is generally limited to critical bridge structures that have a history of icing problems. These systems have been in use for the past eight to ten years, so they have had time for design refinements to be made to allow them to work in harsh roadway conditions.

1/10-Mile Reference Markers – Installing 1/10-mile reference markers can help to ensure that an accurate location can be obtained from a motorist reporting an incident. Directional and route information can also be included on the markers. It is important that the use of the 1/10-mile reference markers is integrated into the 911 call taking process. Operators at the 911 answering point must prompt callers for the marker information and the marker locations need to be represented in the GIS database used to locate incidents.

Traffic Cameras – Deployment of traffic cameras along a roadway corridor and sharing of the video from those cameras would provide incident responders better information. Video images allow for incident verification and determination of the most appropriate response. Verification includes confirming that an incident has occurred and most importantly where it is located. The video can allow for appropriate resources to be dispatched in response, although some on scene verification will still be necessary. Camera views of the roadway can also help guide the routing of response vehicles. Cameras are not very useful for actual incident detection.

Vehicle Detection – Vehicle detectors monitor traffic flow to determine when a breakdown in traffic flow occurs. When speed reductions or high vehicle occupancies are detected, an alarm is issued to notify system operators of a possible incident. Vehicle detection can also be used to provide travel condition information to motorists. The most commonly used detection technology used today are side-fire radar detectors. From the side of the roadway these detectors can collect speed, volume and occupancy data by lane in both directions of travel.

Motorist Aid Call Boxes – Motorist aid call boxes are permanently mounted roadside communications devices that allow motorists to request assistance or report an incident. With the proliferation of cellular phones and other mobile devices, the benefit provided by call boxes is reduced. Modern call box technology typically uses cellular service.

Automated Crash Notification – Automated crash notification systems are currently available from over a dozen vendors. The systems are available either as factory-installed options on high-end luxury vehicles or as after-market products. When a crash occurs,



an automated or driver initiated alarm is transmitted that provides location data and information on the crash. At this time, these systems are routed to third-party call centers that contact the appropriate 911 center. With the growing number of automated crash notification systems, work on allowing direct contact to 911 centers is underway.

Personnel/Equipment Resource List – The availability of personnel or equipment resource lists can minimize problems with indirect communication and unnecessary calls to request personnel or equipment. Information compiled in the resource lists should include geographic or jurisdictional response areas, telephone numbers, fax numbers, pager numbers, procedures for radio contact, alternative contacts, available equipment, available supplies or materials, and anticipated response times. This information should be provided for both daytime and nighttime timeframes and resource lists must be regularly updated.

Towing and Recovery Vehicle Identification Guide – The Towing and Recovery Association of America publishes a Vehicle Identification Guide that can be carried in response vehicles to ensure that responders who are requesting towing and recovery services provide the necessary information to tow operators prior to dispatch. Use of this guide helps to prevent inappropriate equipment and personnel dispatch, which in turn reduces overall incident duration resulting from sequential or redundant response.

Instant Tow Dispatch Procedures – To expedite response and removal of disabled vehicles impacting traffic flow, instant tow dispatch procedures initiate response from towing and recovery personnel and law enforcement at the same time. This essentially eliminates the on-site verification process. If traffic cameras are available that provide surveillance of the incident location, the need for towing and recovery response can be verified remotely and the type of equipment can usually be determined.

Towing and Recovery Zone-Based Contracts – Under this approach to managing towing and recovery services, companies are assigned to specific geographic areas. One benefit of this is a reduction in travel time to incident scenes. Another benefit is that towing and recovery service providers will develop a detailed knowledge of their assigned area, which will also help reduce the time to arrive on scene. The larger the urban area, the greater the benefit provided by this strategy.

Dual/Optimized Dispatch Procedures – Under this approach, response units are dispatched from both directions. The first unit to locate the incident provides the response, and the other units return to their stations. Dual dispatch has proven to be successful in improving response times to incidents; however, the benefits of dual dispatch procedures may not be fully realized if traffic volumes are high along all routes leading to the incident or if travel distances for supplemental responders are lengthy.

Equipment Staging Areas – For major incidents, significant and varied equipment may be required to clear the incident. Certain pieces of equipment that may be slow to mobilize should be requested early in the traffic incident management process to minimize lost time waiting for its arrival. Conversely, the early and intermittent arrival of equipment may compromise scene access and maneuverability. To enhance operations, a temporary staging area can be created to organize the equipment and designate its use. The staging area should be near the incident scene and easily accessible to responders.



Pre-Positioned Equipment – Equipment and materials can be pre-positioned and stored long term at key locations near areas that suffer from high incident rates. Temporary traffic control equipment is a common type of equipment that can be pre-positioned. Pre-positioned traffic incident management equipment, which is easily accessible by appropriate responding agencies, can speed the deployment of necessary resources to an incident scene.

Incident Command System – The Incident Command System (ICS) is a systematic tool used for the command, control and coordination of an emergency response. ICS allows agencies to work together using common terminology and operating procedures for controlling personnel, facilities, equipment, and communications at a single incident scene. The ICS has been successfully applied to traffic incident management.

Response Vehicle Parking Plans – Response vehicle parking plans serve to preserve maneuverability at the incident scene, ensure response personnel safety, protect response personnel at the incident scene, and maintain traffic flow past the incident. While it is not possible to develop parking plans to fit all incident scenarios, it is possible to develop guidelines or policies about how and where response vehicles should be parked so that travel lanes can be opened when they are no longer needed by responders.

High-Visibility Safety Apparel/Vehicle Markings – High-visibility safety apparel plays an important concurrent role in ensuring scene safety. High-visibility safety apparel is defined as personal protective safety clothing that is intended to provide conspicuity during both daytime and nighttime usage. The U.S. Fire Administration and the International Fire Service Training Association published the Emergency Vehicle Visibility and Conspicuity Study, intended to improve on-scene safety for all incident responders with a focus on passive visibility and conspicuity treatments.

On-Scene Emergency Lighting Procedures – In the initial stages of an incident, the appropriate use of emergency lights is essential for responder and motorist safety. Emergency lights help speed the response of emergency personnel to the incident and serve as a warning to approaching traffic of the presence of stopped or slowed vehicles in the area. However, the prolonged use of emergency lights at the scene of an incident can have detrimental effects. Emergency lights are often distracting and confusing to motorists, especially at night and for major incidents that involve a number of emergency vehicles. Emergency lights also contribute to congestion as motorists slow down to observe the cause of the flashing lights. Consequently, the use of emergency lights should be reduced as soon as sufficient traffic control has been established at the incident scene.

“Move Over” Law – The current Iowa Move Over, Slow Down laws require drivers approaching a scene where emergency responders are present to either change lanes when possible and/or reduce speed with the intent of enhancing responder safety. Continued education of the public on the law will continue to be a need.

Effective Traffic Control Through On-Site Traffic Management Teams – The rapid deployment of traffic control devices at the scene of an incident can improve access to the scene for responders, provide a safe on-scene environment for responders performing traffic incident management duties and minimize the potential for secondary



incidents involving approaching motorists. Under this strategy a designated on-site team is responsible for deployment of the traffic control.

End-of-Queue Advance Warning Systems – Static signs, arrow boards, or dynamic message signs can be used to warn approaching motorists of a downstream traffic queue. Arrow boards and DMSs used for this purpose are commonly portable, and mounted on trailers or installed on appropriate response vehicles. End-of-queue advance warning must occur far enough upstream to provide motorists with sufficient notice to slow and stop their vehicle, as necessary. Warning devices must be moved as needed to remain well in advance of the queue.

Abandoned Vehicle Legislation/Policy – Abandoned vehicles on or near the roadway shoulder increase the hazard for passing motorists. Legislation or policies can be modified to reduce the amount of time abandoned vehicles remain a hazard along roadways. The most extreme approach allows for abandon vehicles to be towed immediately. In other states the amount of time before the vehicle can be towed has been reduced through legislative action. In other jurisdictions, policies have been revised to designate abandon vehicles as hazards that can then be towed.

“Steer It Clear” Law – Driver quick clearance laws encourage or require drivers involved in non-injury, property-damage-only crashes to move their vehicle out of the travel lanes if they can do so safely. Concurrent legislation or language that protects drivers from liability resulting from their actions or waives at-fault determination regarding the cause of the incident as a result of moving their vehicle is often included to encourage drivers to expeditiously move their vehicle.

Freeway Service Patrols – Service patrols can support quick clearance of minor incidents and provide traffic control for major incidents. If a vehicle is simply disabled, service patrol operators may also provide gasoline, water, or minor mechanical repair services to quickly remedy the problem. If vehicles are disabled, a freeway service patrol can relocate the vehicle from the travel lane or shoulder to a safe refuge, eliminating the delay caused when a tow truck is needed. During major incidents, service patrols provide an important traffic control and scene protection function that allows emergency and other response personnel to quickly access the scene, focus on performing duties for which they are specially trained without the distraction or concern for traffic control, and rapidly exit the scene to ensure speedy transport of victims to a medical center or to expedite the opening of blocked lanes. Operation of freeway service patrols can be flexible depending on hours of the day and days of the week they are needed.

Vehicle-Mounted Push Bumpers – Push bumpers mounted on response vehicles are used to quickly and safely relocate disabled vehicles from the travel lanes reducing the likelihood of secondary incidents and improving the safety of both response personnel and motorists. Push bumpers are commonly mounted on vehicles that reach incident scenes first such as law enforcement and service patrols.

Incident Investigation Sites – Incident investigation sites are implemented to provide a safe refuge off the main roadway where further investigation or documentation can take place following a crash. Sites should be easily accessible from the main roadway, yet sufficiently out of sight to prevent motorist delay caused by rubbernecking. Sites should be adequately signed, be lit and provide enough space to accommodate multiple vehicles



or a large truck. Investigation sites can be constructed by a public agency or be developed though agreements with adjacent property owners.

Authority Removal Laws – Authority removal laws provide authorization to a pre-designated set of public agencies to remove damaged or disabled vehicles and spilled cargo determined to be a hazard from the roadway. Concurrent “hold harmless” language that protects responders from liability resulting from their actions is often included with the authority removal laws to encourage responders to expeditiously move damaged or disabled vehicles and spilled cargo from the roadway.

Quick Clearance/Open Roads Policy – A quick clearance or “open roads” policy formally commits agencies to a quick clearance consensus by setting implied or explicit goals for clearing traffic incidents from the roadway. The inclusion of performance goals in quick clearance policies helps to ensure continued focus on quick clearance and improvement in operations.

Non-Cargo Vehicle Fluid Discharge Policy – Procedures or policies can be developed and adopted that exempt non-cargo vehicle fluid spills from hazardous materials response procedures, provided the spill has been contained on the pavement. Appropriate procedures must be included to mitigate and remove the spilled fluid.

Fatality Certification/Removal Policy – To reduce the time required to handle crashes involving fatalities, agreements can be developed with the medical examiner’s office to expedite response to fatal crash scenes. Laws or policies can be implemented that allow a designated EMS unit to certify death or permit the removal of the victim before the arrival of the coroner when the incident poses a safety hazard.

Expedited Crash Investigation Using Technology – Technology can be used to make collecting physical evidence at a crash scene more efficient. Total station surveying equipment can measure and record the locations of evidentiary items. The use of photogrammetry to conduct crash scene investigations is growing in popularity. A series of digital photos from overlapping view perspectives are taken of the scene. If known distances are available in the photos, other measurements can be taken in the office using special software tools.

Towing and Recovery Quick Clearance Incentives – A combination of financial incentives for quick clearance and pricing disincentives for slow performance can be implemented to improve tower performance and reduce clearance times.

Major Incident Response Teams – Major incident response teams are typically comprised of high-ranking individuals from a variety of disciplines (e.g., law enforcement, fire and rescue, and transportation) who train for and respond to major incidents together and who are available 24/7.

Traffic Signal Preemption for Emergency Vehicles – Traffic signal preemption forces traffic signals to provide a green signal interval sooner to emergency responders, so responders can more safely make the expedited trip to an incident scene. The risk of a secondary incident involving an emergency response vehicle is reduced. If an emergency response vehicle is involved in a crash while responding, it will delay the incident response.



Alternate Route Plans – An alternate route provides additional capacity to service primary route traffic during a traffic incident. Alternate routes begin from one point on the primary route and terminate at another point on the primary route. The terminal point of an alternate route must be downstream of the congested area. Diverting traffic to a parallel roadway specified in a carefully planned alternate route plan provides a temporary response to facilitate increased mobility and improved travel time reliability in the corridor.

Trailblazer Signs – Trailblazer signs guide motorists along the alternate route and back to the primary route at a point downstream of the incident site. Trailblazer signs can be permanently erected along an alternate route that is frequently used, blank-out signs with electronic changeable arrows, permanently mounted flip signs, fold-out signs, color-coded signs (i.e., “blue route”), or permanent or portable CMSs.

Alternative Traffic Signal Timing Plans – To accommodate the added traffic demand along a diversion route, alternative signal timing plans can be used. The cycle length can be increased and the split time for the diversion route movements can be increased. Implementation of alternative signal timing plans can be done efficiently if a traffic signal management system is in place and alternative timing plans have been developed before the event.

Responsive Traffic Signal Control System – A responsive traffic signal system can automate the process of implementing alternative signal timing plans. The responsive traffic signal system uses system detectors to sense the increase in traffic demand. Based on the detected increase in demand an alternative timing plan can be implemented by the system.

Enhanced Usage and Messages on Existing DMSs – The process for posting messages and the messages themselves can be reviewed to determine if refinements can be made to improve the timeliness and effectiveness of messages.

Additional Overhead DMSs for Diversion – On I-380 there are two DMSs northbound and two DMSs southbound approaching the Cedar River crossing. These signs are located sufficiently upstream of available diversion route options to allow drivers to process the message provided and make a decision on whether or not to take a different route. Overhead DMSs provide the most flexibility in providing information to the public because the available message space is greater.

Roadside DMSs for Diversion – A roadside DMS is limited to shorter messages, but can be implemented at a lower cost.

Highway Advisory Radio System for Diversions – A highway advisory radio system can provide traveler information to drivers in a relatively large area and can provide longer messages than a DMS. Given a highway advisory radio system’s ability to cover multiple roadway facilities, it is more of a regional method for providing traveler alerts. The drawback with highway advisory radio is that drivers must tune their radio to the appropriate station to receive the message. Static signs with flashing beacons are often used to notify drivers of urgent information and influence them to tune their radio to the appropriate radio station.



Traffic Incident Information on 511 – Incident information is currently provided on the 511 system. Through cellular phone, websites and a mobile application the information can be obtained by motorists. These information sources require the motorist to request the data by accessing a website or calling the 511 system.

Traffic Incident Information on Website – Incident information is provided on the DOT’s 511 website. This information is not available to drivers en-route.

Media Partnerships – Local media can be used to facilitate sharing incident information to the public. Most traveler information is broadcast over commercial AM and FM radio or television. Cooperative media partnerships help to ensure that public-sector agencies can fully utilize the media to share traveler information with the public. Effective media relationships require an understanding of media perspectives, needs, and limitations. A media education effort to stress the importance of accurate and timely information can also be very beneficial.

Traffic Incident Management Training – Local multidisciplinary traffic incident management training, tabletop exercises and after-action reviews can be used to encourage improved traffic incident management operations at the local level. Basic incident management training is available through the Federal Highway Administration at times.

Training on Incident Command System for Traffic Incident Management – Basic training on the Incident Command System can be obtained along with how it can be applied to traffic incidents. Use of the Incident Command System for traffic incident management has been very effective in many regions. For this training all examples used to illustrate the system should be related to traffic incident management.

On-Ramp Closure Gates – An automated gate that can be closed from the traffic operations center, which when closed does not allow drivers to access the freeway. The purpose of the gates is to minimize the traffic entering a freeway upstream of a mainline roadway closure. The presence of these gates reduces the resources needed to close a ramp. Without a gate, law enforcement personnel would be needed to close the ramp or DOT staff must transport and place roadway closed barriers.

Appendix D – Stakeholder Comments and Responses Concept Selection

I-380 Cedar River Crossing Concept of Operations Page D- 1 Page 1 DOT Project # IM-380-6(264)16-13-57

Appendix D – Stakeholder Comments and Responses

The following table summarizes comments received at a stakeholder meeting held June 28th and comments provided following the meeting. The response column contains a discussion of the comment and how the document was revised to address the comment.

Comments Response

Consider additional ITS measures to address “recurring” congestion at downtown interchanges – (i.e. – 7th/8th interchange), ITS elements that can help with traffic diversion for both I-380 mainline traffic as well as surface street routes. City currently investigating possible ITS measures to manage arterial street congestion.

Text was added to the section discussing the small roadside DMSs indicating that the location and messages will be coordinated with the City’s plans for event traffic management.

Is there any “liability” or risk regarding the message that is posted on DMS’s for weather related conditions? Message needs to be reliable and accurate to get the most benefit to the drivers.

Text was added stressing the need for procedures that provide timely and accurate information.

Travel speed information may provide additional verification that weather conditions are deteriorating and that appropriate messages can be posted on DMS’s.

Text was added highlighting this added use for vehicle detectors.

Does the number of lanes on the freeway affect the messaging and recognition by drivers with the smaller roadside DMS’s?

Yes, but the roadside signs are presenting a relatively simple message. Since the message is simple, a driver needs less unobstructed viewing of the message. No change to the document.

What is standard spacing of DMS’s for large vs. smaller signs?

Same spacing regardless of size of sign. Details will be worked out in design. No change to the document.

Cantilevered DMS signs should be considered as a more visible alternative.

During design cantilevered signs will be considered for mounting small signs. No change to the document.

Can local agency alerts be provided by the system when messages or other ITS actions are implemented?

Yes the 511 alerts can be used for this purpose. No change to the document.

Manpower to treat area during winter conditions is more costly and requires more staff. Would need to dedicate 1-2 maintenance vehicles to increase winter maintenance operations.

The report text was revised to document that currently optimized treatment procedures are used. Enhanced treatment is not recommended, but an additional roadway condition sensor is recommended.



Comments Response

DOT District maintenance currently uses existing RWIS extensively to monitor winter conditions.

The revised text mentions that the District maintenance staff uses the exiting RWIS station information.

Automated anti-icing system may have benefits, but cost and maintenance are limiting factors to implementation.

This is consistent with the report recommendations. No changes made to the report.

Can GPS AVL technology be incorporated to more accurately place winter treatments to the pavement surface?

The implementation of GPS/AVL winter maintenance monitoring system is mentioned as an added tool to help with roadway conditions in the S-curve area.

Terminology – use “traffic cameras” rather than “surveillance” cameras.

Text was revised to use “traffic camera” instead of “surveillance camera”.

Were ramp closures gates included as part of the recommended strategies?

The document was revised to include on-ramp closure gates and recommended that they be used.

Is trailblazing signing eliminated from further consideration? Trail blazer signs are to be considered as part of the regional ITS/Incident Management planning and deployment as stated in the document. The document was not revised.

The use of video from cameras will be able to assist in the preliminary response assessment, but on-site assessment will still be required.

Text was revised to mention that some on scene input will be needed even at locations within view of traffic cameras.

In discussing activities related to dealing with winter weather, it is important to remember that pretreatment is an important strategy that is used.

The text was revised to mention pretreatment being used.

The Statewide Operations and Support Center will provide District Maintenance support and information, but decisions on winter maintenance activities are made by District Maintenance.

The operational scenario text was clarified to document that maintenance decisions are made by the District maintenance staff.

The notification of traffic incident from the PSAP to the Statewide Operations and Support Center will be automated by having the CAD system send notifications when traffic related incidents are entered into the CAD system.

Under the “Other ITS Technologies” section in Chapter 2 a bullet was added mentioning the DOT project to integrate CAD with the central software.



Comments Response

One other thought that I had, since the photo enforcement of posted speed limits we have noticed a dramatic decrease in the accidents that have occurred in the past on that section of roadway. The accidents that have occurred since that time have also been less serious when the speeds were too excessive to maintain control on the roadway, with the photo enforcement and the use of the reflector strips on the median barricades I feel that has made a dramatic improvement.

Input noted. No revisions made to the document text.

I think the meeting went well and I think that planning for the secondary accidents with limiting access to the interstate and having a staging area already designated for other resources could be of benefit with the operations that we conduct on the roadway. Personally I am not sure about the feasibility of the automated de-icing on the current road with the cost to maintain the system would be of benefit, other ideas about the early warnings etc. I believe have merit to increase the safety of travelers through our city.

Input noted. No revisions made to the document text.

The document looks good; no comment on that but a question: Would the Linn County Sheriff’s Office be able to install monitors in our dispatch center to observe the traffic on I-380 when/if the surveillance cameras are installed?

Input noted. No revisions made to draft document text.

First, in Exhibit 2-1 on page 6, Planning for roadway closures and diversion routes is listed as a medium priority. In my opinion that would be a high priority. I think the length of incidents and the risk of secondary, often-more severe crashes can be mitigated by having a plan and designated diversion routes.

Traffic incident management enhancements that directly impact traffic safety on mainline I-380 are included in the high priority list. Diversion route planning was considered to have more of a travel efficiency benefit than a safety benefits, so it was considered a medium priority. Medium priority issues are still considered important to address. The report text was not revised.

Second, I see no mention in the document about the high-friction surface treatment that will be place on the 5-in-1 through the curves in late summer of this year. The friction values should go from the 30-40s to the 90s which I think will greatly help reduce the wet weather crashes. I have attached a general overview of the project including some of the plan sheets. Let me know if you have any questions.

The discussion of the Road Safety Audited was revised to discuss the planned high-friction treatments.

I-380 Cedar River Crossing CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS CR I-380 Concept of Operations.pdfTable of Contents...

Documents

Transcript of I-380 Cedar River Crossing CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS CR I-380 Concept of Operations.pdfTable of Contents...