Two approaches were taken to evaluate the potential solutions:

1. The first approach was the traditional benefit-to-cost analysis approach where benefits of each solution (particularly quantified safety benefits from crash reduction) were monetized and compared for three deployment scenarios that were developed to illustrate potential costs.
2. The second approach was a benefits assessment that qualitatively evaluated each solution across a set of metrics and applying a weighted scale. This qualitative assessment allowed the inclusion of characteristics such as training and coordination needs as well as deployment readiness for each alternative.

Results

• Both the benefit-to-cost analysis and benefits assessment unanimously support the recommendation of using flashing beacons for the warning device; however, the results of the analysis were not as clear for the sensor technology.
• The top three sensors based on the benefit-to-cost analysis were Remote control (benefit--to-cost ratio of 5.17), Bluetooth (4.68), and Ultrasonic (4.42).
• The top three sensors based on the benefits assessment were: (1) Bluetooth, (2 tied) RFID, (2 tied) signal preemption, and (3) time-activated warning. Based on the benefit-to-cost analysis, the benefits are estimated to outweigh the costs for each of these alternatives.

The full results of the benefits assessment are presented in the following table: