Welcome. Presenter/Co-Author: Jason Shykowski P.E., T.E. Traffic Operations Manager City of Roseville NorCal ITE Past-President.

Transcription

1 Welcome Presenter/Co-Author: Jason Shykowski P.E., T.E. Traffic Operations Manager City of Roseville NorCal ITE Past-President Lead Author: Matt Weir, P.E., T.E., PTOE Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

2 Objectives: Introduction Share the City of Roseville s experience with traffic adaptive Show why we claim that traffic adaptive may not always outperform Really Good time of day coordination Show that traffic adaptive is still a powerful tool

3 Setting City of Roseville

4 Setting - City of Roseville Area 43 Square Miles Population - 124,000 Full service City with Fire, Police, Water, Sewer, Refuse, Electric Utility, and a Power Plant. Union Pacific Railroad s Northern California hub. Regional retail center area s largest shopping mall and auto mall. Other Key employers - Hewlett Packard NEC

5 Setting Staff

6 Setting - Technology ITS equipment value - $70 million 166 traffic signals 50 miles of fiber optic cable 30 miles of high speed copper cable 172 PTZ traffic cameras 9 full color, full matrix CMS 1,200 SF Traffic Operations Center

7 Traffic Adaptive Pilot Project: Project Description Purpose Test adaptive technology before large scale implementation Test Period November 2011 through July 2012 Desired Outcome maintain or improve corridor s traffic operations Council approval

8 Project Location

9 First Coordinated in 2006 Updated in January 2011 Baseline Conditions Coordinated 7 am to 7 pm Four weekday plans 120 second cycle length GPS travel time Weekday peak periods Delay, stops, & speed 10 runs minimum Side street delay at two typical locations

10 Install server software Install field firmware/hardware Establish communications Check detection Input system settings Operate in learning mode Activate system Implementing Adaptive

11 Adaptive in Operation

12 Performance Evaluation - Data

13 Performance Evaluation - Corridor

14 Performance Evaluation - Corridor

15 Performance Evaluation - Corridor

16 Performance Evaluation - Corridor

17 Performance Evaluation Side Street

18 Performance Evaluation Side Street

19 Performance Evaluation Overall

20 Direct: Conclusions City had really good existing TOD coordination Adaptive showed mixed result but an overall increase in corridor travel time Adaptive did show an overall reduction in side street delay However, the shorter cycle lengths that reduced the delay resulted in short side street splits and occasional unmet queue demand

21 Conclusions Adaptive could not adjust quickly to large variations in side street volumes which also resulted in unmet queue demand The unmet queue demand was unacceptable to the public and resulted in numerous complaints Adaptive cost 10 to 15 times more than our in-house TOD coordination

22 Inferred: Conclusions Adaptive did perform relatively close to our really good TOD coordination Adaptive has potential for agencies without signal timing resources or with remote coordinated corridors Not a one size fits all solution Adaptive may better excel with unpredictable traffic volumes Baseline conditions can have a huge effect on results

23 Potential: Conclusions Using historical data or side street advanced detection would help adaptive be more proactive Traffic adaptive is still a major tool identified in our recent ITS Master Plan update Roseville hopes to test adaptive again once some of the side street challenges have been addressed

24 Thank You Presenter/Co-Author: Jason Shykowski P.E., T.E. Traffic Operations Manager City of Roseville NorCal ITE Past-President Lead Author: Matt Weir, P.E., T.E., PTOE Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc