Forge a partnership among the local public sector agencies managing transportation operations along a multi-jurisdictional corridor and the private sector for deployment and integration of ITS.
Experiences from the Integrated Corridor Traffic Management project in Minnesota.
Made Public Date
07/09/2010

1036

Twin Cities
Minnesota
United States
TwitterLinkedInFacebook
Identifier
2010-00532

Integrated Corridor Traffic Management Final Evaluation Report

Background

To address the growing congestion levels in the Twin Cities area, the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT), in partnership with Hennepin County and the cities of Bloomington, Richfield and Edina, launched the integrated corridor traffic management (ICTM) project as a field operational test (FOT) in 1994. The purpose of the ICTM project was to increase corridor capacity along an 8-mile section of the Interstate-494 south of the Twin Cities by installing an integrated system of adaptive ramp metering, adaptive traffic signals, and motorist information and surveillance systems. The conclusion from the evaluation report was that the ICTM project produced improvements to traffic operations and the use of capacity. One of the most important outcomes was the emergence of a strong, cross-jurisdictional partnership that continued collaborating to improve corridor operations, even after the completion of the ICTM project.

Lessons Learned

The Integrated Corridor Traffic Management (ICTM) project in Minnesota was technologically complex and institutionally challenging. The project's aim was to integrate traffic operations on a corridor along an 8-mile section of Interstate-494 with four parallel arterials and seven perpendicular arterial streets. The corridor spanned several jurisdictions. Prior to ICTM, each jurisdiction managed traffic operations within its boundaries on the corridor independently from the others, a practice that resulted in discontinuous traffic operations from one section to the next. To achieve the goals of the ICTM, the jurisdictions, the Mn/DOT and the FHWA formed a new partnership for the purpose of designing, deploying and managing an integrated suite of traffic control systems for coordinating traffic signals, ramp metering and incident response, as well as private sector partners. The members of the partnership are listed in the table below.

 

Affiliation

Partner

Public

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
Image removed. Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT)
Image removed. Hennepin County
Image removed. City of Bloomington
City of Richfield
City of Edina

Private

Skyline Products, Inc.
Image removed. AWA Traffic System
Image removed. Rennix Corporation
Image removed. Traffic Control Corporation

The success of the ICTM is largely attributable to the effectiveness of the partnership. Key lessons learned from the ICTM experience on partnering include the following.

 

  • Develop an organizational structure for the partnership that establishes the decision-making process and clarifies agency roles and responsibilities. The ICTM partnership was led by a management committee and three working committees that addressed operations, evaluation and public relations (as shown below). A project manager designated by Mn/DOT chaired the managing committee, which was comprised of representatives from the public sector partners. The managing committee was responsible for the overall project and controlled the budget. The operations committee included traffic engineers and front-line operators who controlled signal timing, system configuration and maintenance. The evaluation committee was responsible for the design and implementation of the evaluation plan, and the public relations committee developed and implemented a motorist information and public relations plan. Members from each agency were represented in the working committees.

 

ICTM Management
Committee

Operations
Committee

Evaluation
Committee

Public Relations
Committee

  • Increase the effectiveness of the partnership by motivating the partners to contribute resources. The partnership encouraged the different jurisdictions to view transportation improvements in terms of the whole corridor, not just the sections within their boundaries. The shared vision of improving the entire corridor acted as an incentive for partners to contribute their resources to the ICTM project. The public partners shared financial and staff resources to collectively procure, deploy and manage ITS technology along the corridor and support maintenance and operation of the system.
  • Use the partnership to engage local residents and businesses. The public relations committee engaged the public by distributing information to the public, elected officials and community organizations on ICTM's purpose, expected outcomes and schedule. In addition, the members of the ICTM management committee had responsibility for mustering community support in their jurisdiction, due to their familiarity and involvement in local city councils.
  • Develop partnering agreements that allow flexibility in funding so that local agencies can make in-kind contributions. The partnership provided a strong funding base, which was a key element to the success of the project. Early on the management committee had established the goal of keeping the project within the allotted budget by reducing scope in the case of cost overruns. To support this goal, the partnership allowed partners could make in-kind contributions in lieu of cash through staffing and materials resources. When funding demands outpaced original expectations and resources of the local agencies, the agencies continued contributing to the project with other resources.

A groundbreaking concept in Minnesota, forging the partnership was the most significant benefit achieved in the ICTM project. The partnership continued its collaboration on improvement projects beyond the ICTM. Hallmarks of the partnership included trust, respect, good relationships and communications, ground rules, a common mission and shared vision, clearly delineated roles and responsibilities and a defined decision-making process, active participation, shared risks and responsibilities, and the active participation of key person from each agency in the project management process. Similar efforts to develop partnerships across jurisdictions for integration of ITS in other areas will gain from the experience of the ICTM, ultimately promote transportation goals of productivity, efficiency and customer satisfaction.

Integrated Corridor Traffic Management Final Evaluation Report

Integrated Corridor Traffic Management Final Evaluation Report
Publication Sort Date
04/01/2000
Author
BOOZ·ALLEN & HAMILTON
Publisher
Minnesota Department of Transportation

(Our website has many links to other organizations. While we offer these electronic linkages for your convenience in accessing transportation-related information, please be aware that when you exit our website, the privacy and accessibility policies stated on our website may not be the same as that on other websites.)

System Engineering Elements

Focus Areas Taxonomy: