thinking highways north america june 2007

THINKING HIGHWAYS

Volume 2 • Issue 2 • June/July 2007

REPLENISHING STOCKSPhil Tarnoff addresses the great expertise shortfall

NORTHERN EXPOSURE Grush, Peters, Spencer,

Sabean and Gullon on Canada’s ITS policy shift

HEAR AND NOWMike Sena on what makes a

telematics call center

THE HEAT IS ON Richard Bishop and Louis Nastro

on the DARPA Urban Grand Challenge

NORTH AMERICAN EDITION

Advanced transportation management policy • strategy • technology

• finance • innovation • implementation • integration • interoperability

the

INTELLIGENTchoice

OSI LASERSCAN. WE FIT INTO ANY ENVIRONMENT. A dynamic industry requires dynamic solutions—extremely flexible options that can change when

your needs change, quickly and efficiently. Options that are precise, upgradable, and able to work with legacy

elements and emerging technologies. By deploying the AutoSenseTM or Idris® products either individually

or in tandem, you’ll soon realize lower life cycle costs, increased accuracy and increased reliability.

To see how well we can fit into your environment, contact Eric Carr, [email protected] today.

AutoSense is a product line of OSI LaserScan focused on the development and deployment of sensor and system solutions for the toll and traffic management markets worldwide.

Idris is a registered trademark of Diamond Consulting Services Ltd.

www.osi-laserscan.com

Vehicle Separation

Axle Counting

Vehicle Classification

Vehicle EnforcementSecurity Camera Trigger

Data Collection andTransmission

First-time visitors to my house tend to spend at least the first half-hour of their stay staring in amazement at my wall of CDs.

I have the length of an entire wall of my dining room, floor to ceiling, devoted to my rather unwieldy ‘collection’ (not that I consider them to be a collection - collections are normally made up of things you can’t actually use, like frog ornaments and autographs). The word ‘eclectic’ tends to crop up rather a lot in the post-gawp conversation.

I hold my hands up to that one. I suppose if you have albums by Metallica, Samuel Barber, Arcade Fire, The Who and Bob Marley in equal measure then your musical taste can indeed be described as eclectic (and I prefer that to the “that many CDs is just stupid” comment I had last year.

The thing with eclecticism is that it has to be tempered with some kind of logic (mine is that I have all 4,000+ CDs filed alphabetically by artist and then chronologically, which makes buying albums by bands that begin with A something of a traumatic

Editor-in-Chief Kevin Borras

Sales and Marketing Luis Hill, Tim Guest

Design and Layout Phoebe Bentley, Kevin Borras

Associate Editors Richard Bishop, Amy Zuckerman

Contributing Editors Bruce Abernethy, Andrew Pickford, Phil Sayeg, Phil Tarnoff, Darryll Thomas, Harold Worrall

Contributors to this issue Bruce Abernethy, Kevin Aguigui, Paulo Andre, Richard Bishop, Andreas Friebolin, Neil Gray, Bern Grush, Al Gullon, Mark Johnson, Bob Kelly, Tim McGuckin, Bob McQueen, Louis Nastro, Jack Opiola, Justin Peters, Frank Provenzano, Jonathan Sabean, Mike Sena, Susan Spencer,

Thinking Highways is published by H3B Media Ltd.

ISSN 1753-43Z1

Thinking Highways is published quarterly in two editions – North America and Europe/Rest of the World - and is available on subscription at £30/€40 (Europe/RoW) and US$60 (North America). Distributed in the USA by DSW 75 Aberdeen Road, Emigsville, PA 17318-0437 USA. Periodicals postage paid at Emigsville, PA. POSTMASTER: send address changes to Thinking Highways, 401 S W Water Street, Suite 201B, Peoria, Illinois 61602, USA.

Although due care has been taken to ensure that the content of this publication is accurate and up-to-date, the publisher can accept no liability for errors and omissions. Unless otherwise stated, this publication has not tested products or services that are described herein, and their inclusion does not imply any form of endorsement. By accepting advertisements in this publication, the publisher does not warrant their accuracy, nor accept responsibility for their contents. The publisher welcomes unsolicited manuscripts and illustrations but can accept no liability for their safe return.

© 2007 H3B Media Ltd. All rights reserved. The views and opinions of the authors are not necessarily those of H3B Media Ltd.Reproduction (in whole or in part) of any text, photograph or illustration contained in this publication without the written permission of the publisher is strictly prohibited.

Printed in the UK by Stones the Printers

All kinds of everything“They” say that variety is the spice of life. If that’s true, then we have a particularly hot issue for you

1Thinking Highways Vol 2 No 2www.h3bmedia.com

Foreword Thinking

Managing Director Luis Hill

[email protected]

Publishing Director Kevin Borras

[email protected]

www.h3bmedia.com

Kevin Borras is publishing director of H3B Media and editor-in-chief of Thinking Highways North American Edition.

event). You could just as easily describe this issue of Thinking Highways as ‘eclectic’, he said, finally getting to the point. Especially when you consider that its 21 articles have all come from just two countries.

Our cover story is a typically thought-provoking piece from Phil Tarnoff about how his Operations Academy is attempting (and succeeding) to address the thorny issue of a lack of experienced traffic operations center staff.

Where else would you find a three-article look at Canada’s congestion pricing, traffic management and highway safety efforts in the same publication as Amy Zuckerman’s examination of how traffic patterns will be affected by the first wave of baby boomers reaching retirement age? Or how about Mike Sena’s epic voyage into telematics call centers countered by Kevin Aguigui’s assertion that this industry too often comes up with solutions for which there are no problems? And if that wasn’t enough you’ll get to learn the difference between congestion pricing and electronic toll collection (and

yes, you probably thought you knew already) and find out why two European companies doing rather well over there have decided to take a well-planned crack at the market over here.

You might have guessed that we are very pleased with ourselves at the moment.

On a personal note we would like to draw your attention once again to the Associate Editors heading in the panel below as you will now find that we have been joined by the world’s leading expert on intelligent vehicles, Richard Bishop.

Richard’s first column for Thinking Highways is an up close and personal account of Team-LUX’s DARPA Urban Grand Challenge demonstration, held in blistering Alabama heat in June. In September our editorial board will be further enhanced by yet another well-known industry expert, but you’ll have to wait until then to find out his identity (although narrows it down a fair bit).

So, what is the logical thread running through this eclectic mix of stories? Read them all and you’ll see for yourself. TH

Phil Tarnoff, Brian Taylor, Harold Worrall, Daniel Zaydman, Amy Zuckerman

Sub-Editor and Proofreader Maria Vasconcelos

Subscriptions and Circulation Pilarin Harvey-Granell

Visualisation Tom Waldschmidt

Conferences and Events Odile Pignier

Website Code Liquid Financial Director Martin Brookstein

EDITORIAL AND ADVERTISING H3B Media Ltd, 15 Onslow Gardens, Wallington, Surrey SM6 9QL, UK Tel +44 (0)870 919 3770 Fax +44 (0)870 919 3771 Email [email protected]

Communication Products

Part of GE Security

Now, a single source for all your ITS Signal Communication Solutions.

• Broad range compatibility with all manufacturers• Signal transmission products for any application• Legendary reliability and world class support

• Free transmission requirement design assistance• Lifetime Product Warranty

-Traffic Signalization -Traffic Monitoring-Toll Plaza Vehicle Enforcement -CCTV Surveillance

- IFS Fiber Optic Audio Video and Data Transmission Products - Orion™ Fiber Optic Transmission Systems for Large Scale Applications- CopperLine™ Video over UTP and EtherNav™ Ethernet Switch Products

Turn to IFS products from GE as the single source solution for all your transmission challenges.

16 Commerce Road • Newtown, CT 06470 USA

For immediate information call: 800-824-5990, ext. 180

Tel: +1 203 426-1180 • Fax: +1 203 426-3326

E-mail: [email protected] • Design Center: 1-888-999-9IFS

Or visit www.ifs.com and enter your request.

With offices in US, Mexico, UK and Asia

COLUMNS04 Bob Kelly and Mark Johnson

08 Richard Bishop’s Intelligent Vehicles

12 Harold Worrall’s Bright Ideas

THE THINKER16 ITS guru Phil Tarnoff’s thoughts on the desperate need for experience

CANADA20 Is the Government of Ontario finally waking up

to the idea of congestion pricing? Bern Grush and Justin Peters would like to think so

26 Susan Spencer and Jonathan Sabean look at Transport Canada’s ITS stance

30 Al Gullon has ideas on how to make Canada’s

roads safer. If only Canada would listen

DARPA URBAN GRAND CHALLENGE34 The countdown begins: Louis Nastro is on hand

with the latest developments THE THOUGHT PROCESS38 Tim McGuckin, Executive Director, OmniAir Consortium THE VIRTUAL WORKPLACE42 Amy Zuckerman wonders how and if the rise in

homeworking will affect North America’s traffic patterns

TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT46 Bob McQueen details San Diego’s ITS Portfolio TELEMATICS50 Just what does constitute a telematics call

center? Mike Sena explains DATA COLLECTION58 Brian Taylor discusses a whole new way of thinking - bid low, aim high

STANDARDS62 Bruce Abernethy advcocates using examples

from the ‘real world’ for ITS standards

CONGESTION PRICING 68 Tim McGuckin, Jack Opiola and Neil Gray outline the all-important differences between

congestion pricing and ETC BUSINESS MATTERS74 RedSpeed International’s Daniel Zaydman

and Paulo Andre of SICE talk about why their companies have crossed the Atlantic

MARKET INTELLIGENCE78 Kevin Aguigui wonders why there are often

more solutions than there are problems

VII82 Frank Provenzano on the trail of the Vehicle

Infrastructure Integration Showcase roadshow

T-FOCUS82 Dambach’s Andreas Friebolin sheds some

light on LEDs for tunnels

88 Advertisers Index

Don’t

forget!

To receive future issues

of Thinking Highw

ays register

online NOW

at ww

w.h3bmedia.com

CONTENTS

Canada Canada

Great North Run SUSAN SPENCER and

JONATHAN SABEAN explain how and why Canada is taking ITS to the next level

themes or “pillars”. The first pillar was called Partner-ships for Knowledge. As in many countries, there is no one player responsible for the transportation system in Canada. The federal department of transportation, Transport Canada, administers policies, regulations and programs for a safe, efficient and environmentally friendly transportation system. The provinces and municipalities build, own and operate the elements of the transportation network. Thus, in order to improve the transportation system, partnerships are essential. Under the partnership component of the plan, collabo-rative partnerships were established with the operators of ITS systems throughout the country, namely prov-inces, municipalities, transportation authorities and international agencies.

Transport Canada also developed a solid relationship with the industry’s professional society, ITS Canada, to work together to build awareness of the technologies across the country.

Under the second pillar, Transport Canada developed the ITS Architecture for Canada, in collaboration with Canadian ITS stakeholders and with the valued assist-ance of the US Department of Transportation’s (USDOT) Architecture team. The Architecture was an essential building block to the strategy because it provided a common framework for ensuring the integration and interoperability of new ITS installations.

On 29 March 2007 the Canadian Federal Govern-ment announced an unprecedented C$33 billion in new and continued infrastructure funding.

This signalled a greater commitment to the predicta-bility, flexibility and accountability of federal invest-ments in infrastructure, and makes an important contribution towards the economy, the environment and Canada’s energy needs. As part of this plan, new fund-ing is envisioned to help consolidate and expand the Federal Government’s support of Intelligent Transpor-tation Systems (ITS).

On the eve of the announcement of new money, the timing is opportune to look back on the success of Can-ada’s strategic approach to introducing ITS in Canada, assess its impact, and look ahead to how the new fund-ing will be directed toward renewed ITS development in Canada.

The ITS Strategic PlanIn 1999, the federal government realized that there was a need to modernize and optimize the ground transpor-tation system to ensure the high level of mobility demanded by a global society and scheduled economy, in part by taking advantage of the advances brought on by the information revolution. To that end, a Strategic Plan called ‘En Route to Intelligent Mobility’ was devel-oped to set out the Federal Government’s strategy for

deployment projects, establish a national system of Road Weather Information System (RWIS) installations, and reserve the “511” telephone number for a national traveller information system.

In this way, a modest amount of federal funding has resulted in 125 projects that cover all regions and include systems from all ITS user service groups. Another major success of note is the fact that, through its emphasis on partnerships, the federal contribution to project fund-ing has been matched or exceeded by project partners. Indeed, statistics show that every federal dollar was able to lever three dollars from project partners. In this way, a great deal more has been achieved than would otherwise have been possible.

En Route to Intelligent Mobility also recognized the importance of innovative R&D, to ensure that new ideas and technologies would continue to be developed. Under this pillar, an ITS Research and Development Plan entitled Innovation Through Partnership was launched through which R&D projects were funded and provinces were encouraged to establish R&D pri-orities. The R&D Plan also established Centres of Excellence in the areas of traffic management, freight security and rural applications of ITS, and encouraged the development of Cana-dian academic expertise, including participation in the ATLANTIC (A The-matic Long-term Approach to Network-ing for the Telematics and ITS Community) initiative.

Finally, under the Strengthen Canada’s ITS Industry pillar, Transport Canada worked in cooperation with other Canadian government departments and ITS Canada in international trade missions to help promote Canadian expertise abroad.

Successes achievedIt is a fair conclusion to say that a strategic approach to ITS deployment has had a very positive impact in Can-ada. En Route to Intelligent Mobility established a clear framework for the advancement of ITS in Canada and encouraged other levels of governments to develop their own strategic plans. It ensured a framework for interoperability between systems through the develop-ment of the Architecture. And finally, it guided deploy-ment of a limited amount of funding to support key government objectives, partner with other governments and the industry, support R&D for continued innovation, and build capacity for ITS expertise in Canada.

The basic foundation for ITS across Canada has now been established. A vibrant and diversified community of ITS partners – from government, industry and academia – is now solidly in place and working together, both within Canada and in the global context.

tions for ITS in Canada. The Plan has had considerable success and, with a new funding program on the hori-zon, the question arises as to how to carry forward the momentum already established.

Part of the answer lies in the domain of ITS Architec-ture. The success of the ITS Architecture to date has meant that early legacy systems retain the potential to be linked interoperatively with new investments and with emerging ITS technologies. As a consequence, the Architecture maintains its relevance and should con-tinue to be a necessary cornerstone of a renewed vision.

What is needed now, however, is an update of the Architecture. Revisions are required to existing func-tional areas. Additions are needed to reflect new func-tional areas such as Security and process mapping of the multimodal supply chain logistics for freight , and new specifications and standards that have been devel-oped in the last few years. An update would also pro-vide an opportunity to include links to the US. ITS

Architecture through the bi-national Border Information Flow Architecture. In parallel with this exercise, a new bi-lingual software tool, similar to the US’s Turbo Architecture, could also be developed to make it easier to apply the Architecture while planning ITS projects. Upgrading the ITS Architec-ture in this way will ensure that it con-tinues to be an essential tool and will ensure interoperability on a continen-tal basis.

A second major theme for a renewed vision for ITS could build on successes

under the previous ITS R&D Plan. R&D projects provide the opportunity to think about our transportation sys-tem in innovative ways. They provide new knowledge through the development and application of new tech-nologies and systems, and from refinements to existing ones. These are essential underpinnings to finding new ways to maximize the efficiency of the transportation system, while at the same time improving its safety, security and environmental sustainability.

Further ITS R&D will support new policy directions and prepare for the inevitable arrival of the “intelligent infrastructure” concept that will enable vehicles to talk to each other and to the roadside. Continued support for ITS R&D Centres of Excellence should also be con-sidered as a key element to research capacity building.

These are two excellent starting points for a new strat-egy. But the question remains as to how to move even further to achieve the next level of efficiency gains from ITS. In a Canadian context, this we believe means that we will need to move towards an even greater level of integration. This belief is borne out by studies con-ducted by the USDOT’s ITS Joint Program Office that

“A modest amount of federal funding has resulted in 125 projects that cover

all regions and include systems from all ITS user service groups”

www.h3bmedia.com Thinking Highways Vol 2 No 2 3

p10

With the recent announcement by the Mayor of New York City, Michael Bloomberg, that his administration intends to consider deploying a congestion pricing program to reduce traffic congestion in Manhattan, such programs are going to get much greater scrutiny than ever before in the United States. Although there are already several congesting pricing programs in this country, such a program in New York City would represent a bellwether event.

One area of likely scrutiny would concern questions of privacy and data security. Like some other ITS technologies and programs, congestion pricing involves the collection of certain pieces of personal information, financial and other.

Two questions arise: What information is the project collecting? And how is that information being used? The first question concerns whether and how personal information is collected. The second concerns how that information is used – and potentially misused.

Need to knowBy necessity, congestion pricing projects need to collect certain personal information about users. Users who want to access the service will need to provide certain personal information to do so: basic identification and address information, type of vehicle and license number,

We know where you’re going...Is congestion pricing a risk to privacy?

4 Vol 2 No 2 Thinking Highways www.h3bmedia.com

Robert Kelly and Mark Johnson

Robert Kelly is a partner with the Washington, DC based law firm Squire, Sanders, Dempsey

“There are few, if any,

restrictions on photographing people in public

spaces”

and some form of financial information, such as a credit card to be charge against when the service is accessed. Presumably, the user will be put on notice at the time of subscription as to the types of information that will be collected. In some cases, the program subscription contract includes a notice regarding what data is collected and for what purpose – and

violation of the program, and who can then be identified and charged.

Cameras will record the license plate, location and time of entry into the restricted area and can track the vehicle’s movements. The vehicle owner then can be traced through the license plate and sent a bill or face other penalties.

One area of privacy concern about such projects is the use of cameras to photograph vehicles and the individuals inside them. It is the case, however, that there are few, if any, restrictions on photographing people in public spaces.

In plain sightGenerally speaking, if someone or something can be seen from the street, including a person inside a building or a house or car, then it can be photographed by both public and private interests.

Drivers and occupants of vehicles also have limited privacy rights under the US Constitution’s Fourth Amendment protection from unreasonable search and seizures. There are no privacy rights on public rights-of-way.

A second area of privacy concern is the potential for so-called “scope creep.” As discussed above, by necessity congestion pricing programs involve the collection of certain personally identifiable information about subscribers.

The concern here is that a program will collect

participation in the program constitutes consent to the data collection – or there is a separate notice statement on the program website or distributed as a stand-alone “flyer” to the subscriber. Some programs, however, provide no notice to subscribers about their data collection practices.

LDN then NYC...Urban congestion pricing projects, such as the current one in London, which is also the model for New York City’s initial plans, employs multiple closed circuit television cameras at key points to monitor traffic flow, but also to spot any vehicles entering the restricted traffic area in

Mark Johnson is an attorney at law with Squire, Sanders, Dempsey’s Buenos Aires, Argentina office

Robert Kelly and Mark JohnsonRobert Kelly and Mark Johnson

information it must have in order to provide the requested service, but then uses or disseminates that same information in a manner inconsistent with the scope of its services or its statements to its subscribers and the public.

For example, a congestion pricing program might need to collect identifying information about subscribers that links individuals to specific vehicles (including license plates and vehicle identification numbers). This same data may then be provided to another government agency, such as a state department of motor vehicles, which then uses it to identify individuals holding suspended licensees or unregistered vehicles.

As a matter of public policy, such actions would appear to

be an abuse of the public trust held by government officials and agencies to do their jobs in a manner that is fair, reasonable and for the benefit the general public. Whether there could be legal liability in such situations is another, more difficult, question.

Exceptions to the ruleA governmental entity, such as a toll authority or a city government, may be protected from liability under sovereign immunity associated with the provisioning of a govern-mental service – i.e., the congestion pricing program. Most states have created multiple exceptions to sovereign immunity for personal or property damages caused, for example, by governmental actions or inaction.

Consequently, an aggrieved citizen would likely need to look to state privacy laws for a basis for liability if he or she believes that their personally identifiable information has been collected or use improperly.

California, which probably has the most comprehensive privacy laws of any state, has had in place since 1977, limits

and obligations placed on state agencies concerning the collection, use and dissemination of personal information. This statute, the Information Practices Act of 1977, most recently updated in 2001, provides that state agencies may collect only personally identifiable data that is necessary to accomplish a governmental activity authorized by law.

There are also limits on the ability of a state agency to disclose personally identifiable information to another agency, including a law enforcement or regulatory agency, unless such disclosure is necessary to accomplish the activity for which the information was initially gathered. The California statute also gives individuals the ability to sue a state agency for a failure to comply with the statute.

Too much information?State employees can be disciplined for violations of the statute, including termination. As for damages, a prevailing plaintiff is to receive an award of a minimum of US$2500, in addition to any actual damages, including for mental suffering. The California statute, however, is more the exception than the rule in the majority of states.

Regardless of whether there is a state or other law that compels governmental agencies to be circumspect on how they collect and use personally identifiable information, it is in the public interest for congestion pricing programs, any ITS project that collects personally identifiable information, to build into its architecture and processes limits on the collection and use of such information.

The potential for abuse cannot be completely eliminated, but steps should be taken from the outset to minimize that risk. TH


Xxxxx

Transurban Group pioneered full electronic tolling onits first Australian asset—CityLink in Melbourne.

Just 10 years later, we’re one of the top 10 toll road investors and managers worldwide, with major assets in Melbourne and Sydney in Australia, and in Virginiain the US.

As an active manager, we work closely with key stakeholders to deliver innovative network solutionsand real community benefits, today and into the future.

KEEPINGCITIES MOVING

TU

CM

12

16

For more information visit

www.transurban.com

Racing in the streetsIn the first of his regular columns for Thinking Highways, our new associate editor reports on the latest developments in the DARPA Urban Challenge

Harold Worrall’s Bright Ideas

Richard Bishop provides strategic consulting services for the vehicle industry and government agencies worldwide and is widely recognised as one of the world’s leading experts in intelligent vehicles. He is the editor of the online newsletter IVSource.net, which is soon to be brought under the H3B Media umbrella. Find out more about Team Lux at www.team-lux.com

Richard Bishop’s Intelligent Vehicles

If you are an Urban Challenger, June was an exceptionally intense month, as the surviving teams from last month’s downselect (from 78 to 53 teams) had to “put up or shut up” in vehicle demonstrations for the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).

The pace is ramping up for the Urban Challenge – driverless cars operating in urban environments which must handle four-lane arterials, pass stopped cars, park, and even handle four-way stop situations. All pretty simple stuff for us humans, but an amazingly complex task for a robot.

Consider a four way stop. Even at an isolated intersection, there are challenges – first, the sign must be detected reliably. Then, upon arriving at the intersection, the vehicle must stop properly at the stop line. Upon arriving, it must sense

and understand which other cars are waiting to go already, and which ones arrive after the robot arrives, so as to know when its turn comes. Not only that, be it must know what to ignore – like vehicle movements within a few feet of the intersection in a parking lot. A fully functional robot car would even read turn signals to turn right simultaneously when the opposite car is also turning right, and know all those other little “tricks” we use to get through intersections expeditiously.

Slightly simplifiedDARPA has actually dumbed it down a bit, though, for this year’s competition. The stop sign locations are encoded into a digital map which will be given to all contestants – no need to recognize the sign (although the technology to do this is reasonably mature and may be on the market within two-three years). Also, only the most basic order-of-

precedence behavior must be followed – no need to read and understand turn signals.

During the last two weeks of June, DARPA teams fanned out to review the progress of all 53 teams still active in the competition. Based on this, they will make another downselect to 30 semi-finalists on 9 August who will proceed to the National Qualification Event in late October.

So what happened at the DARPA site visits? Press reports said that the Stanford team (the one to beat as they won the desert Grand Challenge in 2005) stumbled a bit because their sensors detected a “misplaced” traffic cone – the vehicle stopped dead because it didn’t have a clear path forward. Once the cone was repositioned, it sailed through. Stanford is working with partners including Intel, Google, Volkswagen, and Red Bull. Carnegie Mellon’s team (partnered with General

8 Vol 2 No 2 Thinking Highways

Xxxxx

49ETCetc Vol x No xwww.h3bmedia.com

“Easy installation and confi guration with a vehicle presence detection

rate over 99% is the basic starting-point for our R&D team.”

— Ilse Roelants, R&D Director Trafi con

TUNNEL ROAD URBAN

VISIT US AT WWW.TRAFICON.COM

FROM THE DIRECTOR OF “THE WORLD OF TRAFFIC VIDEO DETECTION”

NO JAMS. JUST DRIVING.

U.S.A. CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS BELGIUM CITY OF BRUSSELS U.A.E. FALCON (DUBAI) U.S.A. CITY OF LYNNWOOD (WA) IRELAND CITY OF DUBLIN GERMANY CITY OF MÜNSTERU.S.A. BALTIMORE COUNTY (MD) CANADA CITY OF BRAMPTON FRANCE CITY OF DIJON MEXICO CITY OF MONTERREY POLAND CITY OF WARSAW CHINA CITY OF DAQING

A TRAFICON FILM

TR

A F F I C

P R O O

F

Paul Najarian

Motors, Caterpillar, Continental, and others) is fielding a Chevy Tahoe called “Boss.” DARPA’s Urban Challenge Program Manager Norm Whitaker was quoted as saying “Boss behaved like a good beginning driver” at their site visit. Others did not fare so well - some of the smaller teams struggled with overheated circuit boards and similar problems.

Team-LUX, sponsored by Ibeo Automobile Sensor GmbH of Hamburg, Germany, sent their car and team to the US in early June to get ready for their site visit, which was held on a test track at Auburn University (Alabama) on 29 June.

Their vehicle, called “Lynx,” is a 2006 Volkswagen Passat equipped with three advanced automotive-grade laser

scanners (similar models are used in several European research projects) which gives the vehicle a complete and detailed view of its environment – out to a 200 meter range.

As Team Leader, I joined the Team-LUX for DARPA’s visit. Testing in the prior days had gone quite well – even in very severe thunderstorms with visibility near zero the advanced laser scanner technology could still “see.” We hoped for a clear day anyway, for the sake of us humans. We got it – hot, merciless sun heating the pavement to over 100 deg F by 0800 when a white SUV arrived at the track.

Mission: possibleThree men wearing white “DARPA Urban Challenge”

shirts and red caps stepped out. Operating very formally, they introduced themselves, showed their DARPA ID badges, and then required me to present proof of US citizenship.

The other team members were required to sign liability waivers. The DARPA team then extracted tape measures from their SUV and proceeded to measure the lane widths of our track, the curve radii, the layout of our four-way stop intersection and even the dimensions of our Lynx vehicle, to certify that we were within their specifications.

After revealing and describing the electronics (which are fully integrated and not visible from outside the vehicle), it was time for some action. The chief DARPA official handed us a flash drive

Vol 2 No 2 Thinking Highways10

Richard Bishop’s Intelligent Vehicles

with GPS waypoints, which we were required to load into the car’s computer in under five minutes. Our PC co-operated, and the data was in.

Mission One: take one circuit of the track following the waypoints, so that DARPA could see if our vehicle was fundamentally functional. The Lynx started up, stopped appropriately at the intersection, and proceeded forward along its route, stopping at the end point. So far, so good.

Mission Two: Turn right at the intersection into a “stub road” in which the vehicle must determine if the path forward is blocked, turn around and go the long way around the course to another blocked point for a second turn-around.

Lynx did the first turn-around, proceeded through the intersection and then stopped to think before executing another turn-around – in apparently the wrong spot. Driving the control car behind the Lynx, I heard the DARPA official in the seat next to me yell “What is it doing?” An intense conversation ensued with the other officials over the walkie-talkies. “It should have gone on around the track! Why did it turn?” “Should we tell them to abort?” “Just let it go and let’s see what happens.” The car went back through the intersection, took a left, and ended up at the right end point – it had found a better route on its own.

Instant replayFlustered that the mission hadn’t exercised the technology as intended, the officials made a change to the waypoints and the mission was re-run, with the expected results. Next, stopped vehicles were placed in the lanes, one in the opposing lane and one in the travel lane further along the track.

Lynx detected and ignored

the vehicle in the other lane, and detected the in-lane vehicle and slowed to a stop, pointed slightly outward to check for oncoming traffic, and eased around the obstacle and back into the travel lane to complete the mission.

Finally came the four-way stop with live traffic. DARPA had predefined six carefully choreographed scenarios. One car already at the intersection, two cars already there at different points, etc. Lynx ably detected them, and took its turn very politely. Perhaps the most challenging scenario was two cars at the same point on the intersection when Lynx arrived.

The first car proceeded through the intersection, with the second car simultaneously moving up to wait at the stop line in typical fashion. For a human? Trivial. Obstacle detection software must discern, however, that what may have looked like one large obstacle originally (the two cars) seemed to have split into two pieces, and then decide what to do with the second piece. Lynx allowed the first car to pass, took a “look” at the second car but knew its turn had come, and proceeded through the intersection like a model driver.

Music, ears, etcBy this point, with everyone dripping in sweat and having swatted many a mosquito, the event was declared complete. No press quotes were offered by our government representatives, but we heard the words we wanted to hear, like “smooth” and “very nice.” Lynx “drove instinctively” – at least in this simplified environment. Much more complex scenarios (and sweat) lie ahead if we are selected as semi-finalists. Software development for the next phase is already in full swing. TH

Thinking Highways Vol 2 No 2 11

All for one...Technology’s role in the future of electronic toll collection is just as often overplayed as underplayed, but just what is AETC?


Dr Harold Worrall is president of Transportation Innovations and is past chair of ITS Florida, ITS America and the International Bridge, Tunnel and Turnpike Association (IBTTA). From 1992 until 2004 he was executive director of the Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority


Many of us would probably project the future for tolling as robust.

Certainly, tolling has become a last resort for politicians to avoid transportation tax increases and to close funding gaps and maintain our respective countries’ global competitive-ness. Policymakers realize how crucial it is to have transport-ation infrastructure second to none and tolling carries the very attractive characteristic of being voluntary because there is the option of taking another, probably slower, route.

All of these reasons highlight why tolling has experienced a renaissance as a transportation funding mechanism.

Revival of the fittestHowever, the case can be made that the revival of tolling is equally the result of the revolution of electronic toll collection, ETC. Would so

many toll road/pricing proposals have occurred without ETC? Obviously, ETC increases the throughput of tolling facilities and some would argue it also reduces transaction processing costs. It is unlikely that politicians would be promoting a widespread increase in the use of tolling if all the new tolling customers (read that “voters”) were required to stop to pay the toll. Imagine the backups that would occur on most major urban systems without ETC.

Would we be considering HOT lanes without ETC, or variable pricing or congestion charging? The fact that tolling generates a recurring and growing revenue stream is powerful but insufficient without a superior means of collecting the revenue efficiently.

So to consider the future of tolling requires that we

consider the future of tolling technology as well as financing structure. Advances in technology may be so profound that the issue of collection becomes moot, removing the remnant of objection to the use of tolling. Acceptance of tolling as a funding mechanism would no doubt be much easier to sell if the issue of collection is taken out of the debate.

What causes innovation?What is it that causes someone to develop a new technology? Is it the stuff of raw invention? Is it fundamental to a basic science or is technological innovation more about the use of an existing technology? It may not be the technology at all but rather the frame of reference that persists.

For example, the Internet was developed so that universities could communicate more fully and carry out their military research agenda.

Consider the many and varied uses that the Internet serves. It has morphed to create economic, social and political change on a wide ranging scale. Major businesses have been created. The Internet is a major match maker. Politicians use the Internet to reach their constituencies and carry out campaign fund raising. This single technological creation has become much more than what was originally intended.

A strong case can be made for the concept that invention is more a result of a revelation about the application of the

www.h3bmedia.com/thinktank.cfm

Paul Najarian

14 Vol 2 No 2 Thinking Highways

tool than the tool itself and that frequently it is a “eureka moment”. The next era of ETC innovation may develop when we begin to consider electronic toll collection in the light of all users of the system not just the commuter or repeat user.

The infrequent travelerWhen toll industry officials gather to consider ETC issues, the discussion invariably turns to the question of market penetration which is the percentage of revenue or transactions that are handled by electronic means rather than by cash. Penetration rates of 60-70 per cent are common on mature ETC systems.

This percentage however, does not mean that 60-70 per cent of the individual customers of the toll road buy a transponder and set up an account.

Recent studies at a major toll operation in the US indicate that 2 per cent of the individual users generate 30 per cent of the revenue and 11 per cent of the users generate 67 per cent of the toll revenue. Therefore to go from 67 per cent ETC market penetration to 100 per cent means that the toll operator has to deal with the remaining 89 per cent of the customers that travel the toll road in a year’s time.

Hypothetically, if 500,000 transponders were required to attain a 67 per cent market penetration rate, then another 4,545,454 (500,000/.11) transponders would have to be issued to reach 100 per cent ETC penetration. Further, some of those infrequent customers simply do not want to obtain a transponder to handle the three or four trips they might take on the system over the year.

To convert this remaining 89 per cent of the customers of a toll system requires new tools and techniques that cater to the infrequent traveler.

Prepaid video tolling techniques are just beginning to be tested but they appear to offer a significant opportunity to accommodate the infrequent traveler.

If pre-registration in some form is not chosen by the infrequent traveler, billing processes and ultimately violation processes must be applied to ensure collection. The business rules and pricing of these various techniques affect customer choices. To the extent that such techniques can address the remaining 30 per cent ETC market penetration (made up of the remaining 89 per cent of the users) all-electronic-toll-collection, AETC, can be attained.

AETC removes the traditional collection costs of labor, buildings, plazas, utilities, armored cars and other costs from the balance sheet. The result is a higher net revenue operation and one that offers even greater convenience to the entire customer base.

A new perspectiveLike many readers of this magazine, I can remember the early days of ETC. When I first became aware of ETC technology, I traveled with staff and several policymakers and reviewed ETC operations in the US. Comments were made about the risks involved in such a scheme and the potential for not collecting all the funds. We debated various technological approaches and concluded that ETC could be risky.

Without toll gates we might lose revenue and if we used toll gates, the primary objective of greater throughput might be lost. Such considerations are troubling to public agencies that are easily criticized for the loss of any revenue whether by the press or by an auditor.

Now 15 years later, the


collective perspective has changed considerably. As business rules have been defined, legislation passed and new applications of technology applied, ETC has become common to most toll operations worldwide. New loop technology, lasers, video camera equipment and digitizing equipment and software have been deployed. Toll operators speak of customer service centers, violations processing and billing systems.

Policymakers now consider congestion pricing schemes, HOT lanes, and other pricing methods. Pricing has become the word of choice to the policymaker because it is about more than raising revenue to build more roads; it is about affecting choice through economic incentives.

Demand management effects are increasingly important policy considerations. Environment-alists, transit advocates and road builders find they have agenda in common. Would this have been the case but for ETC?

Future pathOver the last decade we have witnessed the construction of several new toll facilities around the world that are AETC from the outset. Recently, several toll agencies have begun to consider converting existing facilities to AETC.

Pre-registered non transponder accounts are being tested, day passes are being implemented and billing systems are more focused towards converting potential violators into billing customers.

The result will be electronic collection systems but without transponders. Most likely the toll rate will be increased slightly to offset processing costs. These accounts contain far less data than most

being considered not only for new projects but for the conversion of existing ones. This increased efficiency should shorten the time required for a toll road to pay operations, maintenance and debt service.

A shortened time frame for “profitability” will make more toll road proposals feasible and advance the development of pricing as a transportation policy solution.

Reward does not come without risk and just as we were able to absorb the risks and criticisms of RFID based ETC in the 1990s, we will be able to do the same for AETC.

We will accomplish AETC by offering a range of ways in which toll road customers can become electronic customers without having to fit into an established ETC process. We will offer more options but to do so we must modify our concept of what Electronic Toll Collection is. TH

and required in addition to the ETC tag, it will possess minimal functionality and contain information on the vehicle registration only. The tag is permanently affixed to the vehicle during the registration process and all properly registered vehicles will be required to have such a tag.

The result is a capability that mirrors vehicle license plate recognition technology and ensures that the vehicle is quickly and efficiently identified, speeding access to registration information. Electronic vehicle registration will likely prove to be a powerful asset for those who prefer not to obtain a transponder for ETC.

A morphing ETC conceptAETC is a laudable goal for toll operators and could make toll road operations much more efficient by providing a higher net revenue solution. It is now

classical ETC accounts and are more temporary in nature as desired by infrequent users.

Technologies other than RFID are also beginning to be applied, further altering our concept of ETC. SMS messaging on cell phones is beginning to be applied to make it convenient for infrequent customers who use a cell phone to set up a temporary account for toll collection through video tolling. In this case, the toll account is established through the cell phone account.

The collection and management of the toll account is in effect outsourced from the toll operator to the cell phone company. Such a system has recently been implemented in Turkey.

Another concept that is in the planning stages in South Africa is that of using RFID not only for toll collection but also to register the vehicle. While the RFID tag will be low cost

KEVIN AGUIGUI looks at the potential for digital video for surveillance and homeland security purposes and wonders if we’ve come as far as we should have done…

The Thinker


Spreading the gospel

During the past few years, a small group of zealots, lead by PHIL TARNOFF, has been on a crusade to convince public officials in the US that transportation operations can have as great an impact on mobility and safety as the construction of new facilities. In an era of shrinking construction budgets and increased costs, the effective use of existing facilities through improved operations must receive a high priority from transportation agencies

The Thinker


At a recent meeting of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Subcommittee on System Operations and Management (SSOM), senior transportation offi-cials gave the attendees a “dose of reality.”

They indicated that the lack of emphasis on operations was not due to their failure to appreciate their value, but rather a reflection of a shortage of qualified personnel. Since operations is in its infancy as a transportation spe-cialty, experienced managers who have been promoted to senior positions within their agency hierarchies are in short supply. This problem is compounded by the fact that few if any universities provide operations-oriented curricula.

The discussions at the SSOM meeting concluded that a training process was needed for individuals with the interest and potential to assume leadership roles within the transportation operations field. Traditional short-courses, because of their limited time span cannot fill this need, because they do not provide adequate time for practice and reinforcement of the principles being instructed to ensure full understanding and retention of the subject matter.

When they exist, the offerings of colleges and univer-sities tend to be relatively theoretical, and do not con-sider the practical aspects of personnel management, organization and policy, with which an operations man-ager must be concerned. For these reasons, it became clear that a new type of training was required, that focused on the needs of transportation operations man-agers. This training became known as the Operations Academy which was funded by the I-95 Corridor Coali-tion, and developed at the University of Maryland’s Center for Advanced Transportation Technology.

The Operations AcademyAn effective traffic operations manager must be familiar with transportation policy, personnel management, organization, funding, supply/demand relationships, safety measures, traffic engineering and a host of other topics. The challenge faced by the organizers of the Operations Academy was to cover these subjects in a meaningful way.

The Academy’s program was developed with the assistance of a steering committee made up of repre-sentatives from the I-95 Corridor Coalition, State DOTs, the Institute of Transportation Engineers and private industry. The committee agreed on the following set of guiding principles:

• Emphasis on mid and senior level management: A prerequisite for organizational focus on management and operations requires internal support at mid and upper levels of management. The initial program was developed with the needs of these individuals in mind.

• Management level training: The focus on manage-ment level personnel lead to an emphasis on non-engi-neering subjects such as interaction with the public, policy, performance measures, etc. Technical informa-tion was provided in a prestudy curriculum that was defined to ensure a common understanding of the tools of operations by the attendees and reviewed during an

Table 1. Instructional StructureFormat Per cent/time HoursPrestudy 33% 40Classroom lectures 30% 35Workshops 15% 18Field visits 15% 18Dinner/lunch speakers 4% 5Opening/Closing 3% 4Totals 100% 120

initial classroom presentation. • A curriculum that emphasized retention: The devel-

opment of a curriculum that covered all essential mate-rial while providing adequate reinforcement to ensure student retention, proved to be a challenge. This require-ment was satisfied through classroom presentations with reinforcement through field trips, workshops, guest speakers, preparation of an operations template, and class exercises.

• Lasting value to participants: While the greatest reward received by attendees was the lasting value of the education they received, additional tangible rewards were also important. Rewards identified and provided include framed diplomas, paperweights, continuing education units, news releases provided to their respec-tive agencies, announcements and articles in trade jour-nals, and most important, ongoing networking with their fellow attendees.

General structureThe Operations Academy program offered attendees a mix of learning experiences intended to reinforce the principles of operations through a multi-faceted train-ing program. The two week program and the 40 hours of prestudy were allocated as shown in Table 1.

The glue that integrated these disparate formats was a process known as the operations template. This tem-plate was developed by the class as a continuing exer-cise used to identify key features required for effective operations. It included items such as customer service orientation, performance measures, organization, demand/supply balance, etc. These items were used as the basis of the workshops and for analyzing the opera-tions that had been visited during the field trips.

For example, had performance measures been identi-fied for management of the freeway service patrol oper-ation, and were all drivers acquainted with their existence?

Instructional content The prestudy and classroom lectures provided the foun-dation for the other operations academy activities. The prestudy period was a rigorous program of self-regu-lated home study using a variety of printed and on-line resources. The distance learning courses offered by the

Vol 2 No 2 Thinking Highways18 www.h3bmedia.com

Consortium for ITS Training and Education (CITE) were a major component of the prestudy program. The intent of the prestudy was to ensure that all students arrived at the Academy with a common understanding of the fun-damentals of transportation engineering, safety, transit, intermodalism and ITS. The subjects included in the prestudy are shown in Table 2. All attendees were required to successfully complete a series of prestudy exams before they could attend the academy.

The prestudy was just the beginning of the formal instruction. A series of seven general subjects identi-fied as critical for operations managers, had been iden-tified by the steering committee. The curriculum shown in Table 3 was developed by the instructors who were selected for their respective sessions based on their in- depth experience with the subject matter. At the con-clusion of each instructor’s presentation attendees were required to take a practice exam, and complete an eval-uation of the presentation. A subset of questions from the practice exams was included in the final exam, which all attendees were required to pass.

Other activities The prestudy and classroom activities by themselves, do not offer the hands-on experience essential to rein-forcing and internalizing the concepts being presented. The intent of the field studies and workshops was to pro-vide the needed repetition and practice while offering a range of learning experiences. Field studies included freeway service patrol ride-alongs, visits to two traffic operations centers (one state and one local), and a tour of the Port of Baltimore’s container facility. At the con-clusion of each field study, workshop groups were asked to complete an evaluation of the degree to which the facility employed the principles listed on the operations template.

Two workshops were included in the Academy’s agenda. The first workshop emphasized the application and analysis of technical solutions to the problem of a congested corridor. The second workshop required the definition of an operations unit for an existing Depart-ment of Transportation. The workshops were completed by each of the four workshop groups. At the conclusion of each workshop, the groups were required to prepare a brief written report and a PowerPoint presentation describing their solutions. The quality of the group’s solution was evaluated by the instructors based on this material including its comparison with a set of pre-determined criteria. The class was also asked to vote on the quality of each group’s solution,

An interesting result of the iterative instruction (class-room, field studies and workshops), is that they provided instructors with an opportunity to assess the degree to which the material was being absorbed by the students. During the academy, it became clear that the impor-tance of risk assessment had not been understood by the majority of attendees.

Fortunately, time had been intentionally reserved on the agenda to address difficulties of this nature. In this particular case, the subject of risk assessment was fur-ther reinforced through an exercise in which the class

The Thinker

The March 2007 Graduating Class, with Phil Tarnoff in the back row, sixth from the right

Table 2. Prestudy Course MaterialSubject FormatTraffic Operations On-Line (CITE) Traffic Engineering TextTraffic Safety Various ReportsPlanning and Policy On-Line (CITE) Various Reports Traffic Engineering TextITS On-Line (CITE)Freight and Mobility On-Line (CITE) Supplemental ReportOrganization and Various ReportsManagement

The Thinker


developed an actual risk mitigation plan. As a result of this exercise, an instructional deficiency was eliminated, and another level of reinforcement applied.

The Academy also included a number of lunch and dinner speakers who delivered presentations on man-agement, outsourcing, freight movement, and the roles of FHWA and AASHTO in supporting operations. The speakers provided an added dimension to the Acad-emy, through their informal interactions with the class, which encouraged in-depth class discussions. They also covered topics that could not be included in the mainstream curriculum without exceeding the available time and attention span of the attendees. The speakers were well received, and their remarks frequently gener-ated lively and interesting discussions.

The outcomeTwenty two students attended the Academy from agen-cies throughout the United States (Washington State to Florida), and with a variety of backgrounds including maintenance, traffic engineering, assistant district engi-neers, traffic operations center management, etc. All students successfully completed the prestudy and par-ticipated in the entire two-week program attending all lectures, workshops and field trips. The evaluations received were uniformly complimentary about the pro-gram. Representative comments included:

• “The Operations Academy provided a strong, rele-vant program which addressed many of the problems and issues I face on an on-going basis.” – Bill Legg, Washington State DOT

• “The Operations Academy brought the philosophy

Name Agency Tom Blaine New Mexico DOT ITS Bureau Frank Cippel, PE PennDOT Steve Clinger FHWA Patty Eason, PE North Carolina DOT Jonathan Hanson New Hampshire DOT-Bureau of Turnpikes Woody Hood MD SHA - OOTS Daniel Jacobs MTA Bridges & Tunnels Paul Jodoin Massachusetts Highway Department Tim Lattner Florida DOT Bill Legg Washington State DOT Ling Li, PE Virginia DOT Robert Limoges NYS DOT-Operations Division

Name AgencyWesley Mitchell MD SHA Scott Nazar PennDOT Michael Smith Niagara International Transportation Technology Coalition Lee Starkloff MD SHA Gregory Stone Maine Turnpike Authority Mohamad Tales, PE, PTOE New York City DOT Paul Wai Florida’s Turnpike EnterpriseJeffrey Weatherford City of Houston DPW & EngineeringAaron Weatherholt Illinois DOT Tim Wolfe Arizona DOT

of conceptual operations into clear focus. It will build future leaders that will move into decision-making posi-tions.” – Tom Blaine, New Mexico DOT

• “This was an incredibly comprehensive program. I will be able to apply concepts learned right away, not only from the country’s expert in operations, but from our peer states’ experiences as well. I will recommend the program strongly to others in my state!” – Rob Limo-ges, New York State DOT

One of the most significant outcomes of the Academy was the degree of networking that has occurred since its completion. A list server has been established on the Academy’s website reserved exclusively for interaction among the graduates. To this date, there has been a con-stant stream of messages including information on poli-cies, memoranda of understanding, sample concepts of operations, job openings, etc. The website also includes a slide presentation describing the academy which has been used by its graduates to describe their experi-ence to their own organizations. At the conclusion of the program, attendees discussed the possibility of a class reunion; an indication of the high level of networking that was to occur.

Thus the Academy has developed an initial nucleus of personnel, likely to become the senior system opera-tors and department heads of the future. It will be inter-esting to track their careers, as well as those of future graduates, to determine whether the Academy has had an impact on the integration of transportation opera-tions into the culture of today’s transportation agencies. All the signs are positive. TH

Visit www.operationsacademy.org

Table 3. Courses and PresentersSession Title PresenterOverview of Operations (Why it’s important) Steve Lockwood, Parsons BrinckerhoffOperations as a System (Supply/Demand relationships) Phil Tarnoff, University of MarylandRelevance and Leverage (Comparison of operations with construction impacts) Phil Tarnoff, University of MarylandPerformance Measures (What are they, when to use, how to use) Daniella Bremmer, Washington State DOTCustomer Service (Importance, managing conflict, evaluating customer satisfaction) Pat Noyes, ConsultantOrganization (Effective operations organizations) Connie Sorrell, Virginia DOTPlanning and Policy (Regional planning, policy, funding) George Schoener, I-95 Corridor Coalition

Graduates from the March 2007 Senior Management Program

Canada

Vol 2 No 2 Thinking Highways www.h3bmedia.com20

Balancing act

“Reaching the Mayor’s 80 per cent

reduction target implies that pretty

much all other human activities

except driving cars will need to cease”

2007, a new wave of concern is in play brought on by new-found anxiety about Global Warming.

A March 2007 report from Toronto’s Mayor on a Cli-mate Change framework targets an 80 per cent decrease from 1990 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emission levels by 2050. While the report mentions transportation, it never once mentions the words ‘congestion’, ‘traffic’, ‘pricing’ or ‘tolls’, although it does suggest the use of carpooling, a program that’s attracted few adherents in Southern Ontario.

According to the Government of Canada’s GHG emis-sions table, in 2004 all categories of Road Transporta-tion generated 19.1 per cent of GHG. Given this fact, reaching the Mayor’s 80 per cent reduction target implies that pretty much all other human activities except driving cars will need to cease in order for Toronto to reach this goal. Targets with no economic realism serve only to discourage compliance with the wishful thinking contained in such frameworks.

There have also been endless local news articles about the London Congestion Charge and even some about Stockholm’s. The authors of this article meet less than one local resident in 10 that has not at least heard of one of these congestion charging schemes (or indeed the one in Singapore) so there is constant awareness of congestion, a strong awareness of the problems it causes, and even a reasonable awareness of the solution that can be applied – but so far the dots have not been connected.

What’s the difference?Before we continue, let’s clarify the difference between revenue-raising Road Pricing and demand-managing

BERN GRUSH and JUSTIN PETERS examine the need for, and prospects of, congestion pricing in Ontario

Canada


Ontario is a big place relative to its population of cars, so you’d think congestion might not be a prob-lem. However, since 96 per cent of us live in 4 per cent of the land near the US border in what’s called the Golden Horseshoe, we have acquired some world-ranking statistics.

One of the most outstanding facts is that the urban centerpiece of all this, the Greater Toronto Area (GTA), features the second longest average commute in North America. Los Angeles narrowly wins this dubious award.

We boast one of the world’s busiest and widest free-ways, the famed 401, where crawling along during the morning and evening rush hours (note plural) is the norm. Motorists also frequently experience bumper-to-bumper, stop and start traffic on our Provincial “400-series” roads that traverse the GTA as well as other municipal roads such as the Gardiner Expressway and the Don Valley Parkway, long nicknamed the “Don Valley Parking-lot”.

Expanding on expansionIn 2000, Toronto’s then-chief planner, Paul Bedford said: “All the new growth in the [surrounding GTA] region has been 100 per cent car-dependent. That’s why we’ve got the problems of traffic congestion and lousy air we are facing now. We obviously can’t continue like that.”

Further back in 2000, conservative projections indi-cated that the GTA’s population would grow by about two million by 2030 with half of that in Toronto itself.

In the meantime, there have easily been many hun-dreds of man-years of public, private and political meet-ings about urban sprawl, traffic and congestion. Now in

Vol 2 No1 Thinking Highways22 www.h3bmedia.com

Congestion Pricing by examining an Ontario example, the 407. This “Express Toll Route” is the world’s first 100per cent free-flow highway. Motorists can either use a DSRC tag or rely on their license plates for payment.

Passenger cars pay 16.8 cents per km in off-peak hours and 17.6 cents during peak hours to use this road-way. The 16.8 cents is the road pricing part since that is in payment for use of the road. The additional 0.8 cents (a 4.8 per cent surcharge) is the congestion pricing part, since that portion is related to peak hour use.

While the 407 pricing provides a convenient way to explain the difference between the two, this is also an example of an ineffective congestion charge. It is too small, in both absolute and relative terms, to deter any-one from using the 407 during peak hours. A 20 km rush hour trip would cost an additional 16 cents on top of C$3.36. Few people would get up an hour early or work an hour later for 16 cents. In fact, few motorists are even aware of the surcharge.

Why does the 407 operator do this? Because they can – it’s just extra income. And they cannot make it a sig-nificant surcharge because that would push a percent-age of vehicles off to parallel, un-priced roadways. In this circumstance effective congestion pricing would have an undesired effect, especially since the 407 still operates under-capacity. Fundamentally, congestion pricing is meant to cause a marginal change to a trans-port network that is already out of balance, and the 407, as a network sub-system, is not out of balance – rather everything around it is.

What this also speaks to is the problem of applying congestion pricing to a link in a network that a motorist could circumvent. The three most famous congestion pricing cordons (London, Stockholm and Singapore) do not have this attribute. You can’t go around the charges to get into the CBD. So congestion pricing, to be effec-tive in moving motorists to other modalities or times, must be area-based. Even if a partially-priced network includes intended choices, such as many of the HOT lanes in the US with parallel free access roads, this tends more to sort motorists among those willing to pay and those not willing, rather than put people onto transit as happens in cordon pricing.

Ontario perspectiveWhile not a study of congestion pricing, a 2005 study by the Ontario College of Family Physicians reported on some of congestion’s consequences in the Golden Horseshoe. A partial list includes physical, mental and social health issues such as psychological adjustment, work performance, residential satisfaction, personal affect on home life, blood pressure, mood, frustration tolerance, frequency of illness, work absences, job sta-bility, job satisfaction, commitment and overall life satis-faction. It is associated with back pain, cardiovascular disease, arthritis, asthma, headaches, self-reported stress, increased caregiver stress, reduced recreation time, road rage and many others. As well, the study reports that trip delays would increase by 300 per cent and CO

2 by 42 per cent by 2032.

We often hear politicians and residents of Ontario say:

Canada

“Few people would get up an

hour early or work an hour

later to save 16 cents. In fact, few motorists

are even aware of the

surcharge”

On May 15 2007 Canada’s best-known public policy think-tank, C.D. Howe Institute, released

a study Congestion Relief: Assessing the Case for Road Tolls in Canada, authored by Robin Lindsey

which “concludes congestion is a serious and growing problem for major cities as measured

by the costs of travel delay, additional fuel consumption and GHG emissions. Canada’s nine

largest urban areas, by one estimate, face annual congestion costs of C$3 billion. Net

revenues from road charges, after deducting operating costs, can be used for various purposes, such as road construction and

maintenance, or to support other modes of transport. Direct road user charges in the form

of electronic highway tolls, area charges, or distance-based charges are not only a tool to

alleviate traffi c congestion, they confront drivers with the costs of road damage and

emissions, according to author Robin Lindsey, a Professor of Economics at the University of Alberta.” This study is a watershed marking Canada’s entry into the world community of

those advocating market pricing to battle congestion. The study is available at

www.cdhowe.org

The two faces of San Diego: a historic mission (left) and the Sky Tower (right)


“Congestion is simply different in Canada than it is in the EU.” It is true that Ontario has different density issues, planning origins and structural realties – and perhaps even a different social and political logic. It is absolutely true that we have more sprawl, and less pervasive rail transit. And it has even been suggested that Canadians tolerate congestion better – although on this last point we are unconvinced.

But just as in the EU, Canadian congestion generates a huge increment of gaseous and particulate emission, it makes us sick, it makes us late for everything and it keeps us from our homes and families just like it does for Europeans. And it costs us tremendously in productivity – currently it is estimated that the GTA loses some two billion per year as measured mostly in wasted time and fuel.

So while we see no critical differences in these core issues, at this time we do see a vastly different willing-ness between EU and Canadian leadership to do any-thing about it. The strongest indicator that Ontario is at the very beginning of this change curve can be seen in the following email interview we conducted with the Ontario Ministry of Transportation.

Q: Does Ontario have any specifi c provisions/guide-lines supporting or preventing congestion pricing or road tolling?

A: The Province has no provisions supporting or pre-venting congestion pricing or road tolling, although we do have a major tolled facility operating within Ontario, the 407 ETR. We recognize that other jurisdictions have used tolling and congestion pricing both as a way to manage congestion and to fund infrastructure construc-tion. We continue to examine the policy implications of road pricing and congestion pricing as part of our con-tinuing work on Transit Demand Management. As part of its ReNew Ontario plan, the Province recognizes alter-native financing and procurement (AFP) as a feasible way to finance and build infrastructure in certain cir-cumstances.

Q: Does the recently enacted City of Toronto Act, 2006 allow the Mayor of that city to toll any roads in Toronto?

A: Yes, the Mayor of Toronto Now has the legislative authority to levy tolls on municipal roads within the City’s jurisdiction. Municipalities across the province also have this ability through the Municipal Act, 2006. In both cases, however, a Lieutenant Governor in Council regulation is required to enact municipal road tolls. In both cases, the enabling legislation regarding munici-pal road tolling, only applies to roadways under munici-pal jurisdiction. As such, the City of Toronto only has authority to toll roads under its jurisdiction such as the Don Valley Parkway and the Gardiner Expressway, but not the 400 series of highways, as these highways are under provincial jurisdiction.

Q: What else is needed, besides political will and appropriate technology, to deploy congestion pricing in or around the GTA? i.e., would Ontario delay, pro-mote, or support this?

A: Considerable investment in public transit is critical before looking at tolling roads; similar to what was done

in London, England. The congestion-pricing program in London was successful because an alternative means for travel (significant expansion of the bus fleet) was provided for commuters before congestion pricing was introduced. The Province has already made substantial transit investments in the expanded subway for the City of Toronto, and rapid transit initiatives in Mississauga, Brampton and York Region. The province has also made significant investments to reduce congestion through High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes, and considerable GO Transit improvements. With the creation of the Greater Toronto Transportation Authority (GTTA), the province has established a body that has responsibility for creating a long-range regional transportation plan; and identifying the transit infrastructure investment pri-orities for the GTA and Hamilton.

Q: Would you expect the federal government to delay, promote, or support congestion pricing?

A: As the federal government does not have jurisdic-tion over provincial highways or municipal roads, their involvement could be in the form of working with the Province and municipalities to develop a broader strat-egy/policy for implementing road pricing regimes. Any federal involvement in this process would likely take into consideration the impacts of road pricing on high-ways/roads of national importance and on national eco-nomic competitiveness.

Q: Setting aside the 407 example, and if you had to speculate, by when do you think some form of conges-tion pricing might be put in place in Ontario?

A: We cannot answer a hypothetical scenario. Con-gestion pricing infrastructure is but one of many travel demand strategies available to government. We are monitoring the effectiveness of different approaches and will continue to evaluate what benefits they might offer in Ontario. Any congestion management tool will still have to adhere to our key planning, financial and procurement principles, which are that public interest be paramount, appropriate public control [be pre-served], value for money be demonstrated, accounta-bility be maintained, and that all processes be fair and transparent.

Q: Are there any government position papers avail-able on this, yet? Any memos expressing Ontario’s direction or intention?

A: No, we are not aware of anything.Q: What is the Ministry of Transport’s view re Toronto

or the GTA deploying value-pricing without provincial involvement?

A: The Province has no jurisdiction over municipal roads; as such, policy decisions impacting these roads are the domain of the municipality. However, as munici-pal road pricing initiatives would likely have impacts on the provincial highway network (particularly at junction points with municipal roads), other municipal roads bordering Toronto, and goods and people movement across the GTA, the Province would need to be involved with any municipal initiatives in this respect.

Q: Would the Ministry also toll any of the 400 series roadways as part of a larger, regional program?

A: The Province does not intend to toll existing 400

Canada

series highways. Ontario recognizes that infrastructure financed through alternative revenue streams could have a role to play as a congestion management tool and/or as a means to increase the capital available for investment and deliver infrastructure sooner – pro-vided the infrastructure financed in this way adheres to our defined principles and framework.

What about the Feds?To be sure we weren’t missing a link, we also inter-viewed David MacIsaac, Manager of the Urban Trans-portation Showcase Program, Transport Canada.

According to MacIsaac, Transport Canada provides leadership and assistance to Canadian TDM practition-ers to understand how congestion pricing can be applied to their particular situation and to understand how pricing can address greenhouse gas emissions and other particulate pollutants. “We have neither the mandate nor the authority to impose congestion pric-ing programs in any jurisdiction”, he said. While the feds levy fuel taxes and have a role in our national highway system, roads are generally built and maintained by Provinces.

MacIsaac pointed to a few studies relating congestion to greenhouse gases and a new C$10m EcoMobility Program to build our capabilities and knowledge base to help Munici-palities with TDM research, information and training. “We are funding and executing some work in TDM, but nowhere near what the US DOT is doing with its Con-gestion Initiative,” MacIsaac said.

That means that congestion pricing, whatever form it may take, will be initiated and deployed by provincial and municipal governments and their agencies. Unless we at least move toward interoperability standards, we risk implementing a variety of approaches that could serve to unnecessarily complicate inter-provincial travel – or worse, eventually make traveling amongst towns and cities in a region a complex affair, over-bur-dening commuters as well as tourists. Countries in Europe and States in the US face this same dilemma, but so far only the EU has addressed this.

Meanwhile, back in Toronto...There may be a new Ontario opportunity on the hori-zon, as the Golden Horseshoe is caught between two powerful forces. The first, the new politics of global warming, is faced by most municipalities and second

the fiscal crisis gripping Toronto brought on by funding withdrawals by higher levels of government and some-thing called downloading which means the City gets to take over numerous social programs without the fund-ing to accompany the responsibility.

In desperation, the newly granted tax-opportunity of “road-pricing” is being looked at by City of Toronto planning and political circles since the beginning of 2007. Coupled with the obvious connection between congestion and greenhouse gases and Mayor Miller’s promise to “make Toronto North America’s greenest city”, Toronto is now preparing a discussion paper guided by a small number of councilors willing to take on the issue, but it is far too soon to know if their thinking will be regressive road pricing or progressive conges-

tion pricing.

Waking up to pricingWe’d be remiss if we did not mention the promise shown by the newly estab-lished GTTA, referred to earlier in the email exchange with the Ontario Min-istry of Transportation. Indeed, in dis-cussion one of us had with the Minister of Transport, Donna Cansfield, she indicated that this new body is empow-ered to examine these issues.

The Chair of the GTTA, Rob MacIsaac (surprisingly no relation to Transport Canada’s David), has openly mused about the need to consider road toll-ing in the GTA. A Transportation Plan will be emerging over the next 18 months and we’ll be watching to see whether congestion pricing will play a prominent role.

We remain optimistic that Toronto (as well as Vancou-ver, BC) is waking up to the fact that congestion will not yield to carpools and government exhortations to use transit. We are also optimistic that the growing body of evidence that congestion can be managed with market pricing is slowly sinking in. And we were pleased when Toronto’s mayor, under pressure, said in February 2007, tolling “has to be a region-wide initiative”. That thinking is a good start. Unfortunately, that will require active involvement from an unprepared and currently reluc-tant Province, since the 400-series freeways under Pro-vincial jurisdiction are among the GTA’s major arteries and cannot be reasonably excluded from a balanced, network pricing regime. TH

Bern Grush is Founder and Chief Marketing Officer and Justin Peters Business Development Manager, North

America at Skymeter Corporation in Toronto. Visit the website at www.skymetercorp.com


Canada

“We are optimistic that the growing body of evidence

that congestion can be managed with market pricing is slowly sinking in”

Canada


Great North Run SUSAN SPENCER and

JONATHAN SABEAN explain how and why Canada is taking ITS to the next level

themes or “pillars”. The first pillar was called Partner-ships for Knowledge. As in many countries, there is no one player responsible for the transportation system in Canada. The federal department of transportation, Transport Canada, administers policies, regulations and programs for a safe, efficient and environmentally friendly transportation system. The provinces and municipalities build, own and operate the elements of the transportation network. Thus, in order to improve the transportation system, partnerships are essential. Under the partnership component of the plan, collabo-rative partnerships were established with the operators of ITS systems throughout the country, namely prov-inces, municipalities, transportation authorities and international agencies.

Transport Canada also developed a solid relationship with the industry’s professional society, ITS Canada, to work together to build awareness of the technologies across the country.

Under the second pillar, Transport Canada developed the ITS Architecture for Canada, in collaboration with Canadian ITS stakeholders and with the valued assist-ance of the US Department of Transportation’s (USDOT) Architecture team. The Architecture was an essential building block to the strategy because it provided a common framework for ensuring the integration and interoperability of new ITS installations.

The objective of the third pillar, Deployment and Inte-gration, was to accelerate the deployment of ITS tech-nologies throughout the country. The Department used its complementary funding program to help develop provincial ITS strategic plans, fund “off-the-shelf”

On 29 March 2007 the Canadian Federal Govern-ment announced an unprecedented C$33 billion in new and continued infrastructure funding.

This signalled a greater commitment to the predicta-bility, flexibility and accountability of federal invest-ments in infrastructure, and makes an important contribution towards the economy, the environment and Canada’s energy needs. As part of this plan, new fund-ing is envisioned to help consolidate and expand the Federal Government’s support of Intelligent Transpor-tation Systems (ITS).

On the eve of the announcement of new money, the timing is opportune to look back on the success of Can-ada’s strategic approach to introducing ITS in Canada, assess its impact, and look ahead to how the new fund-ing will be directed toward renewed ITS development in Canada.

The ITS Strategic PlanIn 1999, the federal government realized that there was a need to modernize and optimize the ground transpor-tation system to ensure the high level of mobility demanded by a global society and scheduled economy, in part by taking advantage of the advances brought on by the information revolution. To that end, a Strategic Plan called ‘En Route to Intelligent Mobility’ was devel-oped to set out the Federal Government’s strategy for stimulating the development and deployment of ITS innovations across Canada. The plan was supported by C$30 million of complementary funding under the Stra-tegic Highway Infrastructure Program (SHIP).

The ITS Strategic Plan for Canada outlined five main

Canada

www.h3bmedia.com Thinking Highways Vol 2 No 2 27

deployment projects, establish a national system of Road Weather Information System (RWIS) installations, and reserve the “511” telephone number for a national traveller information system.

In this way, a modest amount of federal funding has resulted in 125 projects that cover all regions and include systems from all ITS user service groups. Another major success of note is the fact that, through its emphasis on partnerships, the federal contribution to project fund-ing has been matched or exceeded by project partners. Indeed, statistics show that every federal dollar was able to lever three dollars from project partners. In this way, a great deal more has been achieved than would otherwise have been possible.

En Route to Intelligent Mobility also recognized the importance of innovative R&D, to ensure that new ideas and technologies would continue to be developed. Under this pillar, an ITS Research and Development Plan entitled Innovation Through Partnership was launched through which R&D projects were funded and provinces were encouraged to establish R&D pri-orities. The R&D Plan also established Centres of Excellence in the areas of traffic management, freight security and rural applications of ITS, and encouraged the development of Cana-dian academic expertise, including participation in the ATLANTIC (A The-matic Long-term Approach to Network-ing for the Telematics and ITS Community) initiative.

Finally, under the Strengthen Canada’s ITS Industry pillar, Transport Canada worked in cooperation with other Canadian government departments and ITS Canada in international trade missions to help promote Canadian expertise abroad.

Successes achievedIt is a fair conclusion to say that a strategic approach to ITS deployment has had a very positive impact in Can-ada. En Route to Intelligent Mobility established a clear framework for the advancement of ITS in Canada and encouraged other levels of governments to develop their own strategic plans. It ensured a framework for interoperability between systems through the develop-ment of the Architecture. And finally, it guided deploy-ment of a limited amount of funding to support key government objectives, partner with other governments and the industry, support R&D for continued innovation, and build capacity for ITS expertise in Canada.

The basic foundation for ITS across Canada has now been established. A vibrant and diversified community of ITS partners – from government, industry and academia – is now solidly in place and working together, both within Canada and in the global context.

Looking to the futureAfter eight years, the time has come for Transport Canada to review ‘En Route to Intelligent Mobility’ and to ask important questions regarding the future direc-

tions for ITS in Canada. The Plan has had considerable success and, with a new funding program on the hori-zon, the question arises as to how to carry forward the momentum already established.

Part of the answer lies in the domain of ITS Architec-ture. The success of the ITS Architecture to date has meant that early legacy systems retain the potential to be linked interoperatively with new investments and with emerging ITS technologies. As a consequence, the Architecture maintains its relevance and should con-tinue to be a necessary cornerstone of a renewed vision.

What is needed now, however, is an update of the Architecture. Revisions are required to existing func-tional areas. Additions are needed to reflect new func-tional areas such as Security and process mapping of the multimodal supply chain logistics for freight and new specifications and standards that have been devel-oped in the last few years. An update would also pro-vide an opportunity to include links to the US. ITS

Architecture through the bi-national Border Information Flow Architecture. In parallel with this exercise, a new bi-lingual software tool, similar to the US’s Turbo Architecture, could also be developed to make it easier to apply the Architecture while planning ITS projects. Upgrading the ITS Architec-ture in this way will ensure that it con-tinues to be an essential tool and will ensure interoperability on a continen-tal basis.

A second major theme for a renewed vision for ITS could build on successes

under the previous ITS R&D Plan. R&D projects provide the opportunity to think about our transportation sys-tem in innovative ways. They provide new knowledge through the development and application of new tech-nologies and systems, and from refinements to existing ones. These are essential underpinnings to finding new ways to maximize the efficiency of the transportation system, while at the same time improving its safety, security and environmental sustainability.

Further ITS R&D will support new policy directions and prepare for the inevitable arrival of the “intelligent infrastructure” concept that will enable vehicles to talk to each other and to the roadside. Continued support for ITS R&D Centres of Excellence should also be con-sidered as a key element to research capacity building.

These are two excellent starting points for a new strat-egy. But the question remains as to how to move even further to achieve the next level of efficiency gains from ITS. In a Canadian context, this we believe means that we will need to move towards an even greater level of integration. This belief is borne out by studies con-ducted by the USDOT’s ITS Joint Program Office that examine the effects of greater integration of technolo-gies, modes, and transportation planning and opera-tions. They report that:

‘The benefits of implementing ITS services increase with the integration of more than one implemented

“A modest amount of federal funding has resulted in 125 projects that cover

all regions and include systems from all ITS user service groups”


component. This is accomplished by creating a number of interfaces or “links” between the components. These links are used to share operational information and allow for sharing of infrastructure.’

Such “links” can be established in a number of ways to improve productivity, efficiency or safety, either through system-to-system integration, jurisdiction-to-jurisdic-tion integration, or modal integration.

Within an urban area, there may be several existing ITS systems operating independently. A new strategy could focus on integrating these systems across ITS functional areas, transportation modes, or political juris-dictions to maximize the benefits of the installed sys-tems and access additional third-order benefits. Further integration may also be contemplated in ITS applica-tions along trade and transportation corridors and at border crossings. This approach would complement the federal government’s current emphasis on improv-ing transportation infrastructure at international Gate-ways and along trade Corridors to support Canada’s economy and international competitiveness.

A new vision could also emphasize integration at the national level. ITS initiatives could be promoted to link provincial/territorial jurisdictions across Canada for the same functional area of ITS. For example, the recent regulatory approval for the use of the “511” telephone number as a national traveller and weather information service provides an opportunity to pursue a nationwide traveller information system. Another potential project of national scope could include the development of an electronic roadside clearance system for commercial vehicles to access and share credentialing and safety information.

A final note on potential themes of a new strategy relates to the relationship between further integration

and institutional cooperation. Over the course of its implementation, En Route to Intelligent Mobility has contributed to the emergence and consolidation of multi-sectoral ITS stakeholder communities. Mobilizing ITS deployments and sponsoring R&D project propos-als has fostered a climate of cooperation and partner-ship, financial and otherwise, between levels of government, service providers and operators, and researchers and developers.

While the ITS community is all the more mature for having lived through these experiences, there is little doubt that successfully taking ITS to the next level of integration will add a further challenge. Further system integration will require participation across jurisdic-tions or across functional areas, motivated by a commit-ment to a shared common goal. A renewed vision for ITS in Canada will, therefore, need to promote a culture of increased participation and sharing of information in order to maximize the benefits of further integration.

ConclusionThe solid foundation that has been built for ITS partner-ships has helped solidify and advance a nascent indus-try into a thriving, innovative, interconnected web of practitioners, researchers, users, and government authorities. It has helped lay the groundwork and set out the framework for ITS implementation and innova-tion in Canada.

The stage has been set to move to the next level of ITS integration of systems, jurisdictions and transportation networks for improved efficiency, safety, security and environmental sustainability for all Canadians. TH

Susan Spencer is Director and Jonathan Sabean, Senior Policy Advisor at Transport Canada’s

ITS Policy

Canada

Electronic toll collection on Highway 407 in Ontario

A typical (and much-needed) road weather information systems (RWIS) station

Roads Scholar

Highways are getting smarter. They look the same,

black asphalt and white lines but look a little closer.

Small weigh and speed detectors right in the asphalt,

overhead cameras and sensors to

record every move. Other more obvious

additions are there too, like message

signs that change for every vehicle!

With IRD technology, our roads can monitor, record and

communicate thousands of pieces of data every second

over wired and wireless networks. Data that you can use

to make roads stronger, faster, and safer.

Talk to the smart people at IRD,

they’ve been leading the way in ITS

for over 25 years.

i rd inc.com

INTERNATIONALROAD DYNAMICS INC.


Canada


Courtesy works!

“A prophet is not without honour, save in his own country and in his own house.” (King James Version: Matthew 13:57)

Other contributors to this issue, with more relevant experience than I, will be describing Canada’s progress and immediate future in the ITS field. I will focus on a specific, easily implemented, ITS application for motor-way safety. I will do so in the hope that this Canada-focused issue of Thinking Highways will be able to overcome the Biblical quote and thus have more suc-cess in catching the eye of Canada’s ‘public authorities’ (both provincial and federal) than I have had to date.

After taking an early pension from Environment Can-ada in 1996 I started a third career as an automotive journalist … but serendipity turned my nose toward traf-fic safety research and helped me greatly to prepare six technical papers for conferences all over the world. Over those 10 years I have made a point of going down ‘where the rubber meets the road’, both to talk with traf-fic police officers and to ‘eyeball’ the motorways from which the traffic safety data was coming.

Most of that driving was done ‘on the Continent’ [Paris to Vienna and Maranello, Italy to Kolding, Denmark with direct flights to FISITA conferences in Helsinki and Bar-

celona for a few hundred kilometers in and around those cities] with a 30-day, 9,571km trip last spring (for the SafetyNet Conference in Prague but extended to see for myself the motorways in Poland, Slovakia, Hungary and Slovenia) putting me over 50,000km on continental roadways. And in October the total went to 55,000 for Europe when I made a presentation on automotive ‘black boxes’ at the ITS World Congress in London and squeezed in an extra two weeks to do Land’s End to John O’Groats with a side trip to see the famous white cliffs of Dover.

In that same 10 year period I put 250,000km on my own car and, in 2000, paid to be chauffeured around the expressways of Osaka, Sydney and New Delhi and begged front row seats for bus trips in South Korea and Sydney to Melbourne (1500kms in total). All of this was done with comparative traffic safety on my mind.

The Absent-Minded Professor SyndromeMy first three traffic safety papers - Detroit 1997, Paris 1998 and Seoul 2000 - showed strong correlations between traffic fatality rates (per km traveled) and the ups and downs of the business cycle in a total of 17 coun-tries representing every inhabited continent. That cor-relation, when combined with the informal and

Canada


AL GULLON has advice for his beloved Canada, but how can

he persuade the authorities to listen to his plans for

making the country’s roads safer?

anonymous testimony of eight police officers in seven countries on two continents have proven that AMPS, i.e. mental distraction, is the precipitating cause of almost all collisions.

ITS professionals, whether in the private or public sectors, must now rethink both their hardware and soft-ware with the realization that they are trying to pass information and instructions to drivers whose minds are on more entertaining/profitable matters.

[Note in passing that those epidemiological investiga-tions have thus shown that this ‘bug’ in the ‘wetware’ (techie talk for the human brain) is part of the basic operating system no matter the language used, the country of manufacture or, least of all, the colour of the computer’s casing!]

Skidmarks as near-misses The most immediately practical result of all that driving was my discovery that motorway skidmarks are a valid indication of near-misses, that they accurately reflect the crash locations recorded by police and that, care-fully ‘read’, they clearly support AMPS as the precipitat-ing cause of motorway collisions. (SAE2002-01-0760: 60-90 per cent of skidmarks within plus/minus 450m of

interchange merge points in a pattern common to coun-tries all around the globe).

Since the very early days of aviation pilots have been required to record and report all ‘near-misses’. They were then analyzed as intensely as though there had been contact. In this way corrective action can be taken before someone dies rather than after. I had presumed there was no such record of near-misses in road traffic until one day on a very familiar (to me) German auto-bahn I ‘saw’ for the very first time … a ‘black-on-white’ record. In September 1998 driving north on the A5 auto-bahn from the Strasbourg interchange I noticed that the concrete roadway, bleached nearly white by the sum-mer sun, made it very easy to see the tire marks from panic braking. And, once I started paying some atten-tion to these skidmarks, a pattern seemed to emerge.

The macropatternAs I gained experience, through many months and many thousands of kilometers on motorways around the world, in understanding the ‘sign language’ of the skidmarks the analysis algorithm altered a bit. Most significantly in the length of roadway considered to be “coincident” with the interchange.

Figure 1: Typical ‘three group’ pattern of vehicle skidmarks at expressway entrance points (the long ‘semi driver looking for a hole’ marks do not occur at every entrance but often enough so that they are shown here)

Canada

The first change was to note that none of the observed skidmarks could be linked, at least in my mind, with drivers suddenly swerving for the exit. Although there were often marks on the roadway in the vicinity of the exit, they were clearly in a continuum with marks beyond the exit point.

At the other end of the interchange repeated occur-rence of a ‘clump’ of skidmarks, often up to 800 metres beyond the merge lane, caused me to associate them also with the merge activity.

In the medical field, problems which occur as a result of a previous disease or injury are called ‘sequelae’ to that original disease/injury. Thus, in the data gathering I divided the roadway length into two, sequentially paired, ‘zones’: the Mal-Managed-Merge Sequelae Zone (3MSZ) and the Between Interchanges Zone (BIZ).

Detailed analysis of data on skidmark incidence from expressway junctions in Australia-30, Germany-18, Bel-gium-14, the Netherlands-14, Italy-24 and Canada-40 strongly support the AMPS theory. Moreover, observa-tions on roads around the world (USA, South Korea, Japan and India as well as Denmark, France and Austria) and data on accident location (Verkehrspolizeiinspektion Ingolstadt) are in accordance with the detailed analysis. The overall pattern of an overwhelming clustering of skidmarks in the immediate vicinity of the access points, i.e. in the a/m 3MS Zones, is common to motorways around the world.

The micropatternI also noted a most interesting ‘three-clump’ pattern within the 3MS Zones. Although I did not attempt to quantify this pattern while doing the counts, [Multi-task-ing behind the steering wheel can be carried too far!] it too was common to all countries and, of supreme impor-tance to traffic safety, clearly recorded the major mech-anisms of collision causation.

The Merge-Point ‘Clump’ Although this group was in the expected place longitudinally (mid to end of the merge lane) it was not, as expected, in the motorway lane adjacent to the merge lane (hereafter called the slow lane). All of these merge-point skidmarks were in the ‘fast’ lane, except for those rare cases where in-coming traffic merges with the fast lane, e.g Junction 647 westbound on Ontario’s 401 motorway near Gananoque.

This suggests strongly that the initial conflict, by an oncoming with a merging vehicle, is resolved by a quick (often panic, always unsignaled) lane change. The driver of the first oncoming vehicle in the fast lane now ‘wakes up’ to discover he has a large speed differential with vehicles which are blocking both lanes. He will attempt to resolve this secondary conflict by braking.

This may result in skidmarks ending in a collision (rare), in skidmarks only (occasionally, thus generating the ‘merge-point’ clump) or (most frequently) in suc-cessful avoidance without skidmarks. Unfortunately, in

600-800m

150-300m


Canada

today’s off-peak traffic conditions (mentally distracted drivers traveling too fast and too close) even light brak-ing often starts a chain reaction, passing ever-heavier braking backwards from the secondary conflict until skidmarks are generated, which creates a much larger ‘Upstream Clump’ of skidmarks (see bottom of Fig.1) and/or one or several ‘follow-on’ collisions. When no collision occurs this phenomenon is familiar to every driver as the ‘phantom accident’. Motorway traffic comes to a sudden and complete stop but, when forward motion is restored, there is no evidence of a collision or any-thing else to explain the slowdown.

Since this needs no further explanation we can go on to the ‘Downstream Clump’. (See top of Fig.1) This clump of skidmarks, usually intermediate in size and discerni-ble almost everywhere that there was a distance of two+ kilometres between access points, was the most puz-zling of the three. However, the logic path, once recog-nized, is very convincing indeed.

The drivers are braking because of a vehicle suddenly observed to be blocking their path. There is no reason to believe that there could consistently be a stopped vehicle at a particular distance from each intersection. Thus the downstream clump is caused by entering vehi-cles which are taking too long getting to motorway speed. One could go further and note that it is unlikely to be trucks since they are expected to be slow-moving and would not therefore be likely to cause panic brak-

ing. This explanation achieves even greater plausibility when one considers the working of the visual cortex. Motion is only detected as relative motion and that spe-cifically as ‘edges crossing edges’. Our peripheral vision is very good at ‘noticing’ such motion, particularly when that motion indicates that something is moving quickly to intercept our path.

The outline of a small vehicle, contained within the roadway, the lane markings and the sky, creates an effec-tively static image in the visual cortex. There are no ‘edges crossing edges’. Thus even an alert driver is poorly equipped to ‘notice’, let alone judge, closing speed. A driver in full AMPS, staring straight ahead with-out really ‘seeing’, is simply not going to ‘notice’ the speed differential until it’s almost too late.

(The ‘saving grace’, and the reason that the skidmarks here are not nearly so numerous as in the upstream end of the 3MS Zone, is that the speed differentials are rela-tively small.)

The 5C solution to motorway collisionsAnalysis of the micro-pattern of the skidmarks at each entry point has revealed that AMPS provides the only coherent and consistent explanation of the precipitat-ing cause of these merging problems and, fortunately, also shows why and how we can “Cancel Collisions by Creating Courtesy Corridors” on our motorways: An early warning system, consisting of entry detection and electronic transmission of a ‘rappel’ to oncoming driv-ers, has the potential to both reduce collisions [by at least 40 per cent, in my estimation] and improve traffic flow substantially.

Having lived with these thoughts for several years now I naturally have some ideas on what are the most practicable means to translate this into effective action.

1. Most countries put the responsibility for a safe merge on the entering driver. This should not be changed.

2. The basic intent of any system should be to alert (and, if necessary, force) oncoming drivers to extend normal human courtesy to entering drivers, i.e. either move smoothly over to the passing lane if traffic permits or reduce speed to facilitate the merge operation.

3. There is increasing evidence that, when in AMPS, we humans exhibit an extreme form of tunnel vision. The ‘rappel’, ideally a flashing light (and/or speed limit sign) should therefore be as close to the line of sight of oncoming drivers (in the ‘inside‘ lane) as possible.

4. The transmission signal from the entry detector subsystem to the ‘rappel’ subsystem should be a stand-ardized radio signal. This would permit vehicle manu-facturers to offer in-car aural/visual ‘rappel’ systems and, as a driver-select, automatic linkage to the speed control system.

5. Working with ITS equipment manufacturers several research organizations (BASt, INRETS, TRL, VTI, NHTSA and Transport Canada spring immediately to mind), should coordinate trials in their respective countries to gauge effectiveness and public acceptance. TH

Al Gullon can be contacted via email at [email protected]


In October 2005 history was made in Primm, Nevada when four out of 23 fully autonomous vehicles com-pleted a 132 mile course within a 10 hour time limit.

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) issued a challenge which seemed all but achievable in its second attempt at finding technologies which could one day save lives on the battlefield and the street. This is the raison d’etre of the Grand Challenge. By 2015 The Pentagon is looking to field autonomous technologies in one third of active duty forces to do eve-rything from transporting supplies to direct fire mis-sions. We can already see the vision of a virtual battlefield coming to fruition with the advent of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), and the logical fol-low on is to have an autonomous land and air force work-ing in unison to take on the most hazardous duties.

Although one would not consider the daily commute to be a life and death battle, in the United States alone over 40,000 traffic fatalities are recorded every year.

DARPA Urban Challenge


Also suitable for on-roading

The DARPA Urban Grand Challenge is taking state-of-the-art to the text level, as LOUIS NASTRO reports

Meet the Boss: the Carnegie Mellon team’s Chevrolet Tahoe, Boss



goal was to follow a series of waypoints to arrive at the finish line. As depicted in the graphic above, the robot is ‘trained’ to follow areas of flat terrain given its current and projected waypoint. Flat areas in green are the desired way forward as they are considered low risk by the computers.

The vehicles needed to assess terrain and model the way forward by seeking out areas of low ‘cost’. A cost map was generated in real time to keep the vehicle out of trouble. Added to this challenge was governing the vehicle dynamics of the robot and ensuring accurate waypoint tracking even in the face of GPS drop outs. This was enabled by the use of the Applanix POS LV positioning and orientation system which provided high fidelity data in all environments. With the terrain char-acterized, the robot needed to be aware of obstacles in its intended path, thus the need for lasers and radars which form the backbone of the perception system in addition to the POS LV.

All combined, the challenge was to make sense of this data so the robot could make critical decisions in real time related to its speed, course tracking and obstacle detection and avoidance.

Train of thoughtIn order to maximize the performance of the vehicles, some Teams applied preplanning methodologies to the DARPA assigned waypoints. Basically, teams were given waypoints (GPS co-ordinates, lane width data and speed limits imposed for safety reasons) on a CD and they had two hours to program their vehicles. With preplanning, teams were able to take coarse waypoints and refine them to a degree which trained the robot to take turns at the right apex entry and exit angles to maximize speed.

Over the course of a 10 hour time limited race, the benefits of this approach were obvious with the first place finisher achieving a time of just under seven hours and the two runner ups just slightly over seven hours in what proved to be a close finish from the top two Teams Stanford Racing and Red Team Racing.

As mentioned above, the 2005 Grand Challenge pushed participants to develop solutions for terrain perception and obstacle avoidance which required obstacle detection and avoidance at ranges of 40m

This sobering statistic has spurred automakers to begin to find solutions to make driving safer. Solutions are already coming into the mainstream with the advent of lane departure warning and adaptive cruise control systems.

However, these are warning systems which still require human intervention to avoid potentially deadly situa-tions. The only way to truly reduce fatalities is to take technologies destined for the battlefield and integrate them in road passenger vehicles to truly take the driver out of the equation when situations on the street turn dire. This is one of the key benefits that will be demon-strated at the 2007 Urban Grand Challenge.

I, robotThe 2005 Grand Challenge was truly a challenge in sen-sor fusion, that is, taking data from a GPS/inertial sys-tem, lasers and radars to make sense of terrain and classify what is traversable and what is not. The main

The 2005 winners



directly in front of the vehicle. The 2007 Grand Challenge in an urban environment

will push the state-of-the-art in not only perception, but object prediction and how an autonomous vehicle will interact in a very dynamic environment. Teams will not only have to deal with extended GPS outages, but traffic and rules of the road. In essence, this competition will showcase technologies and methods which will require a significant advance in artificial intelligence and per-ception methods from 2005. For example, at an intersec-tion you may have a condition whereby four vehicles are waiting at a stop light.

The autonomous vehicle must know not only when it is safe to proceed, but deal with other vehicles which may malfunction and need to get out of the way while taking into consideration other traffic and the rules of the road. This requires a new breed of sensors which will provide the vehicle with a 360 deg field of view which will give situational awareness much like a traffic collision avoid-ance system (TCAS) for an airliner.

Trying circumstancesThe Teams will also be demanding very high perform-ance from their positioning and orientation systems. ‘Pose’ estimation as it is called, is critical to perception, planning, control and providing key data to the drive-by-wire systems of autonomous vehicles. Targets will be dynamic and the benefits of pre-planning will not be as profound as with the 2005 Challenge. Robots must do more of the thinking and planning for obstacle avoid-ance. This requires high bandwidth, low latency data to be constantly available to the system especially for dynamic data fusion. Detecting a static obstacle is a ‘simple’ process of determining where the target is located, what the lane corridor as defined by the sup-plied by DARPA is and what is the safest speed and steering angle around the obstacle to avoid it.

When the obstacle is dynamic, there are three funda-mental challenges. The first is reliable position tracking relative to where the vehicle is and where it needs to go (ie., in the local coordinate). Teams for the 2007 Grand Challenge have had to move away from the traditional two dimensional scanning lasers with fixed fields of per-ception to new 360 deg scanning lasers which provide a complete picture. Second, with accurate range and tar-get bearing the robot can determine what lane the obstacle is in from the route network definition file (RNDF) or if it is off the road. This provides vital informa-tion on what the obstacle is doing. Third, and most importantly, what is the predicted path of the obstacle. All of these functions depend heavily on highly accurate pose estimation provided by Applanix to teams such as Stanford Racing and Tartan Racing (formerly Red Team).

One of the key elements which will determine success in this challenge will be teaching the vehicles to under-stand their environment. Such a capability requires two levels of characterization, that of the robotic vehicle in relation to the road and the dynamic obstacles on it. The challenge is illustrated in above graphic where the robot is sensing the way to a waypoint, but encounters traffic

around it. The vehicle must not only track and predict where it will go, but it must do this while tracking within its lane, sensing the terrain (road radius of curvature, grade/cross fall) to ensure any maneuvers are within the performance envelope and actually predict where the obstacle will move to.

In the previous Grand Challenge robots had a choice of path candidates (in the Red team example given pre-viously, an onboard computer generates ‘s’ splines or multiple path candidates immediately adjacent to the intended path of travel, all which are viable alternate routes taking into consideration the vehicle’s dynamic state). Here, the path candidates around an obstacle need to be able to change rapidly and the vehicle will do most of the thinking.

The goal of the 2007 Urban Grand Challenge is to apply the various technologies employed to success-fully navigate the course to real world problems. Look-ing at this competition at its most fundamental level,

these autonomous vehicles are mobile mapping plat-forms. The advances made here have significant impli-cations for how mobile mapping data is used.

Base campConsider the automotive industry, one of the potential benefactors of this technology. Currently, GPS is utilized as a convenience feature utilizing GPS, map matching and odometer data to route a driver (albeit not very accurately) through GPS outages. When looking at posi-tion and orientation data in terms of driver assistance/active safety systems, the accuracy required changes dramatically. Data needs to be thought of in a layered approach for this application much like the data fusion discussed above. Base maps utilized by onboard com-puters need to be very accurate for sensors to deter-mine dynamics in relation to a vehicle’s current and predicted path so the computer can determine if a driver is making turns at unsafe speeds or passing through an

intersection without stopping. By having detailed maps along with accurate position and orientation data, vehi-cles will be able to actively ensure the safety of passen-gers. For Applanix, this is an evolving application for technology the company has pioneered since 1991. Ini-tially the product line was focused on high precision mobile mapping for GIS and engineering clients. Now, Applanix solutions are enabling potentially life saving technologies. From sponsoring one Team in 2005, a growing number of organizations competing in the Urban Grand Challenge have chosen Applanix to pro-vide position and orientation systems for their vehicles. Very accurate and reliable position and orientation in any GPS environment will be a key requirement for showing how this technology will one day power solu-tions for use in automotive safety. TH

Louis Nastro is Director of Land Products at Applanix Corp. He can be contacted via email at

[email protected]



When I was asked if I wanted to be this edition’s Thought Process contributor, I was honored. I enjoy and respect the magazine and saw this as an opportu-nity. But I was not sure how to approach it. I was certain, though, that I’d rather not have a full face-shot on the opposite page [Sorry Tim - Ed]. Firstly, I might need more space to express my thoughts and secondly, I wasn’t sure I wanted people to recognize me so easily after reading what I wrote... and third, I’m not as hand-some as Pete Costello. In addition to this, I questioned if I could concisely organize my thoughts into a coherent and readable piece. But then, if they asked me, they must think I have something to offer and I believe I do. It’s about my professional passions – the USDOT Vehicle Infrastructure Integration (VII) Program, the OmniAir Consortium, and the deployment strategy for the 5.9GHz DSRC technology on which VII is based.

VII is DSRC is VII. Right? OmniAir was founded by DSRC developers and users for one reason: to advance the full implementation of 5.9GHz DSRC technology. Our members want standards-compliant, multi-sourced, interoperable, and reliable technology and applica-tions. To them, VII is 5.9GHz DSRC (plus a GPS compo-nent for location-specific applications). That is why they join and support the consortium and view 5.9GHz as quite the ‘ultimate.’ But perhaps it’s not.

I have been somewhat surprised about the VII com-munity’s recent consideration of surrogate technol-ogies for VII deployment. To OmniAir members at least, 5.9GHz DSRC was developed to provide a stable platform that could be used reliably and consistently for years. To the organizations who value this – right now I’d say the top three would be toll operators, car companies and CVO – I think it is risky to allow those with undis-closed agendas to co-opt the VII term to advance pri-vate platforms.

For one, it threatens support for the bedrock technol-ogy by the above groups. If there is risk it will fall out of favor, they won’t get behind it. Second, by going down this technology-independent VII route, we could risk recreating the conditions that lead some of top DSRC service providers - toll operators – to the issues they live with today. In the USA, toll operators are wed to systems that are only regionally compatible, have proprietary restrictions, and as such, a stubborn level of price

Tim McGuckinExecutive Director, OmniAir Consortium, Washington, DC

The Thought Process


inelasticity despite high adoption rates. The truth is the toll industry is not to blame. As a genuine innovator, it didn’t have any national standards to adopt and had lit-tle need for national interoperability. But with VII, we have standards, and an acute need for I-O.

Support the brand. I am a bit concerned about an idea forming within the public relations and outreach activi-ties of VII: renaming the term. VII, accept it or not, repre-sents a brand. And it has a value. Talk, like I did, to anyone with experience managing one (Amex, E-ZPass, Thinking Highways, etc.), and they’ll tell you this: when a brand is identified, you had better think hard before changing it. To hundreds of people in the VII community today, it is identified. To those familiar with “VII-the-term,” change will bring into question, in their minds, the legitimacy of it.

Actually, according to brand experts, it will reduce the legitimacy of it in the eyes of this critical group that, thanks to the efforts of organizations like ITSJPO, ITS America, and OmniAir, is growing everyday. These people will ask, “Why are they changing it?” “Is it not working?” “Is it not succeeding?” In other words, unless there are so many negatives associated with VII, then there is little reason to change the name. And if some-one can think of real negatives, please tell.

Another question: if and when a new name is chosen, will someone own it? I have mixed feelings. Doing so would preclude others from abusing it or using it disin-genuously, outside of set bounds. But it would also con-vey ownership of VII to the group who invented the term. I’m not sure if that’s healthy either. Now, if we were to somehow perform an evaluation of the term ‘VII’, it prob-ably would not score so highly in branding terms (see Brand Awareness Evaluation). But I believe this would have less to do with the term itself being deficient rather than the effort to properly market it.

Thoughts on VII Deployment – a ‘Light’ Strategy. ‘VII’ is progressing well – 2007/early 2008 will end with a sound demonstration of the basic technical feasibility of the platform. Credit this to good management and a lot of hardworking people. But I’ll get right to it: the policy work required to reach the comfort levels that individual stakeholders need to support a VII Viability Decision is great. The congressional reauthorization schedule

“What ITS can do is support policy objectives and improve knowledge,

information and management”

“Unless there are so many negatives associated with VII, then there is little

reason to change the name. If someone can think of real negatives, please tell”

begins next year and its timing could be better. Election cycles and potential leadership changes make advo-cacy efforts uncertain. Combined, a national VII deploy-ment is subject to a lot of ‘ifs.’ But that is ok. The ITSJPO recognizes this. There is a fine, but growing recognition that there may be other ways to ‘do’ VII - something along the lines of a VII ‘light’ deployment strategy, or Plan B. Credit (or blame) for this thinking also goes to OmniAir member Walt Fehr of WFET Group.

We (and others in the VII community, independently so, we are learning) think that VII Plan A, the 250,000-RSE/US$5billion/100 per cent OEM-embedded OBE route – is a large switch to pull. So substantial that no one will wish to pull it. Rather, VII, like other consumer digital technologies, may more likely be manifest as a viral deployment that begins smaller, in terms of appli-cations, geography, and stakeholders. Based on DSRC technology, it’d be built more on the cooperation of application interest groups rather than modal or organi-zational silos dominant today. An interim deployment strategy absolutely supports and would set the condi-tions for a fuller-scale Plan ‘A’ deployment to follow. It may even be a natural step that makes Plan ‘A’ feasible at all.

The Pareto Principle for VII. I believe that the “80:20 rule” applies to VII deployment. In this context, eighty-percent of what the transport community wants to deploy VII for can be provided by 20 per cent of its capabilities. Or, a 20 per cent-capable VII system could most likely satisfy 80 per cent of the ‘market’ for VII applications. The general ITS goods and services industry supports this assertion: ITS suppliers estimate that 80 per cent of their sales come from the top 10-15 metropolitan mar-kets – a small percentage of the nation, geographically (20 per cent maybe?). VII could be the same. The market focus of a Plan B deployment strategy would address the lower-end customer base and ‘low-hanging-fruit’ appli-cations. While this is a large group of users, they are rep-resented by a smaller, and more manageable, set of interest groups. They need just a handful of applications related to mobility/safety improvements and the pay-ment of tolls, parking, and other services, to satisfy them.

From the technology side, an interim deployment strategy requires an interim technology form factor too, basically not an embedded DSRC OBE, but either a) a carry-on unit, or b) a mild-retrofit device. The latter type’s form could be a device placed in the headliner area of the vehicle, a location that already has power in autos dating back 15 years. RSEs would remain the same as what is envisioned for national deployment. This interim strategy begs questions of course. Most immediately may be one for car companies and tier one suppliers: the viability of the basic equipment, or how the 20 per cent-capable OBE will operate in the vehicle. We’d need a feasibility study and reference design. The rest of the questions pertain to how to satisfy the core constituencies and how they would see clearly, and

agree to, this interim path to full deployment. This requires some staged studies, experiments, and per-haps some small scale deployments: Plan B deployment would work through application interest groups, coop-eratively so, to meet both the mobility/safety applica-tion and transaction-based interest groups first, paving the way for the other VII applications later:

Say a Plan B model deployment occurred for a popu-lar application like tolling: it would provide valuable operational data for such applications as Electronic Brake Light and intersection warnings too. How? If for instance, an authority wanted to build-out a regional VII EPS system (and via an EPSNIS standard, they or some financial entity distributed the carry-on devices), one of those things the basic units as we see them could do would be to also send safety messages/data either to other cars or infrastructures around them. The collision avoidance interest group would use this info even though it stemmed from an EPS deployment initially.

Likewise, the mobility group – State DOTs – would be able to gather the probe data from this tolling experiment. Long-haul trucks could be outfitted with perhaps additional components and serve as ‘super-probe’ collectors of weather data, which would please state and city DOTs and again, trucking companies. More examples of this synergy are probably not hard to find. You can probably detect a bias by now: tolling may hold the most promise for starting the benefit cycle. Operators could be the most likely early adopters to justify the installation of the equipment and could real-ize immediate benefits and seed the ground for other users who would be able to get into it for little incremen-tal cost. The thing is, payment and transactions won’t stand alone and safety & mobility won’t stand alone. It has to be cooperatively and collaboratively done. This could be the hardest part though, given all the extremely strong private interests that cause each camp to grouse about everything the other parties do.

We need some outside-the-box-thinking here. If we would consider moving the program to a more applica-tion-oriented interim VII strategy rather than the large scale, factional orientation it has now, each time we ask, “How does VII support the Safety-Mobility applica-tions,” or “How does VII support the Transaction appli-cations,” you move one more step away from the narrow-minded limits of the question, “How does it sup-port my faction?”

The last thought I’d like to offer concerns the Omni-Air Consortium and its members. I offered these thoughts because I believe they may help. A strong brand is important. A Plan ‘B’ approach could work. A restructuring of VII requires a plan capable of produc-ing the results, clearly. But these are just one part. The capacity to take them and persuade people to find com-mon ground in it is critical. Here, OmniAir has some real experience. It was founded by members to advance the full implementation of DSRC and has spent a lot of resources working to create that common ground. TH

The Thought Process


Inte

rvie

w b

y Ke

vin

Borr

as

CARE, COMPASSIONAND CONCERN ON THE FREEWAY

Some of the differences between Samaritania Incorporated’s service patrol programs and others:

01 Our patrol vehicle operators have state and national public safety certifications.02 We provide a complete turnkey program at not cost to motorists.03 Provide Internet based Fleet Management Systems.04 Provide public safety grade AVL/GPS incident recording/reporting systems.05 Personnel, vehicles, equipment, AVL/GPS, patrol dispatch centers, and public relation programs.06 The most experienced provider. Over 27 years providing service patrol programs throughout the U.S.

07 Provide the widest variety of quick clearance, motorist, and public safety assistance.08 Provide a variety of different custom service patrol vehicles with and without tow capabilities.09 Endorsed by Departments of Transportation and State Governments.10 Endorsed by State Police, Fire/Rescue, and other public safety agencies.11 National award winning programs.12 Consistent media recognition.13 Rural, remote area, and urban program applications.

14 All program service costs included in single patrol hourly billing rate.15 Operators adhere to detailed conduct policies16 Standard Operation Procedure Development17 Local office and project management18 Provide Complete Indemnification and hold harmless agreements.19 Provide audited financial resources.20 Operators have perfect no-fault safety records. Zero fatalities.21 Private Sector funding available to offset costs.

Samaritania Incorporated,10 Riverside Drive, Lakeville, MA 02347, USATel: +1-508-947-3700Fax: +1-508-947-5544www.freewayservicepatrol.cominfo@freewayservicepatrol.com


Home

The numbers of people expected to work ‘virtually’ is set to sky-rocket but, asks AMY ZUCKERMAN, will this trend affect traffic patterns?

In 2008, as the first wave of 76m baby boomers reaches official retirement age in the United States, traffic engineers are already anticipating a poten-tial shift in driving patterns that could well have enormous impact on the need for traffic technology over the course of the next 20 years.

Imagine 20m people in the US exiting the workplace in five-year segments over the course of the next two decades. In total, that’s half of today’s work force. In Can-ada, the boomers represent a third of the work force, according to the Canadian Census.

Although many boomers will undoubtedly settle down to traditional retirements, clogging golf courses and

The Virtual Workplace


front

rushing to “early bird specials” at local restaurants, polls in the US and Canada indicate that a large percentage of college-educated boomers may continue working in non-traditional ways. Sources as diverse as Newsweek’s “Boomer Files,” Yahoo and surveys published in Com-monwealth Magazine, based in Boston, MA, have reported as many as 70 per cent of boomers want to build their own enterprises. The 2005 MassINC survey (A Generation in Transition: A Survey of Bay State Boomers), reported that almost two-thirds of adults aged 40 to 58 expect keep working after they reach the tradi-tional retirement age of 65, but only 6 per cent plan to keep a full-time work schedule.

There are indications from staffing and recruiting companies like global giant Robert Half that corpora-tions are preparing to fill the gap retiring boomers will create with subcontractors rather than full-time employ-ees – many of them boomers operating virtual busi-nesses from homes or small office settings close to their residences. In March, The Daily cited a new study, New Frontiers in the Research on Retirement, that predicts the rate of self-employment will grow in Canada by more than 20 per cent as the baby boomers leave organiza-tions only to work for themselves.

Already, major corporations such as IBM and CISCO are hiring more home-based workers, creating “hybrid”

The Virtual Workplace


companies with full-time staff augmented by subcon-tractors.

Michael Teitz, professor emeritus at the University of California at Berkeley in city and regional planning, believes that the baby boomers are redefining the notion of retirement and, in doing so, “change the eco-nomic base of communities all over the place. We’re seeing whole chunks of the regions and sub-regions becoming lifestyle regions.” He says it’s easy to dismiss the virtual company trend “as pretty small and not amounting to much, but the world has changed. It’s just not the way it was.”

A pattern is emergingSo, how will the rise of the virtual workplace, where workers operate in small-office settings with PCs and communication technology as key back up tools, affect traffic patterns?

The experts interviewed for this article agree that it depends on whether corporate North America will fill the gaps, in part, with subcon-tractors or hire new employees to crowd highways during rush hour. And it depends a great deal on where boomers settle post-retirement and whether they choose to run their own operations or telecommute to former jobs. Already, the virtual work place trend is apparent in college towns across the US like Amherst, MA and lifestyle locales like Asheville, NC and Belling-ham, WA that are quickly becoming quality of life desti-nations for boomers developing their own virtual companies. Rather than experiencing clog-ups during

rush hour, quality-of-life locales like Amherst are expe-riencing far more traffic congestion at meal times – par-ticularly lunch – as the self-employed virtual company owner heads to commercial districts for business meet-ings and to conduct errands. In these sorts of places, it’s the return to 19th century where people live and work close to a town or village center.

OK commuterJohn Collura, Director of the UMass Transportation Center and a professor at the University of Massachu-

setts in Amherst, MA, has joined the virtual work place as a telecommuter who travels between a home office and the university several days a week. He also maintains what career expert Barbara Reinhold calls a “sidecar company” from his home, so he per-sonally encompasses two types of vir-tual workers. Like many teleworkers, he has some choice in what times he commutes, whenever possible avoid-ing peak traffic hours on highways or arterial roads. Collura notes that vir-tual company owners have even more choice as they can tackle work in a

flexible fashion and have the most choice about when to drive. When analyzing his own travel behavior, Collura says he commutes to campus two or three days a week from a community about five miles away using arterial roads. Like many virtual workers, he also travels long distances to visit clients once or twice a week. Usually, these trips are to airports via highway networks, which he times as much as possible to avoid peak traffic and avoid highway congestion.

Virtual impactAccording to Collura, the evolving virtual workplace, which includes everything from self-employed entre-preneurs to teleworkers and people like himself who both telecommute and operate sidecar companies, may

alter “those old travel/demand forecasting models. The whole notion of the virtual work place has a

connection, both direct and indirect, with trans-portation that’s very intriguing,” said Col-lura, who has been studying the impact of teleworkers on traffic with his PhD students for the last 15 years. Where the

telework trend had an impact on parking required for employees and the amount of office space a company maintains, Collura thinks the larger trend of the virtual work will require a different approach to travel/

demand modeling.Pat Mokhtarian, a professor of civil and envi-

ronmental engineering at the University of Cali-fornia at Davis has been focusing on the impact of telecommuting among salaried employees for the last 25 years. She believes that the growing virtual work place is “changing travel patterns, but not reducing travel. It’s certainly redistributing traffic in time and

“It depends a great deal on where boomers settle

post-retirement and if they run

their own operations or

telecommute to former jobs”

space, and sometimes in profound ways, “ she says. “It’s true that the virtual worker has more choices of when to travel rather than the bad old days when an employee had to travel at a set time.”

As for the impact of the baby boom retirement figures, Mokhtarian says the issue will be who remains actively employed and who works remotely. She and Al Gullon, principal of ACEs in Ottawa, Canada – an expert in the automobile and the environment – agree that not much will change if the corporate world hires newcomers in the same numbers to replace their ageing work force.

“Only to extent that the same jobs are being con-ducted by (boomers) in semi-retirement, working from remote settings, do I see this trend taking people off the road,” says Mokhtarian.

“I agree this is an important demographic to watch,” said Gullon, who is witnessing some firms in Canada “establishing headquarters in accommodations not big enough for all employees and allowing people to oper-ate from home.” Some of these spaces are being reduced by as much as 25 per cent to reflect a reduction in full-time staff traveling to an office, he notes.

However, Gullon doesn’t see “a noticeable or measur-able reduction in traffic volume as a result of the virtual office.” For one, some people return to work after a period of self-employment. And he isn’t certain the trend will be widespread enough, and have the heft, where it will make a measurable difference.

Collura, on the other hand, is witnessing changes in driving habits already, which are contributing to traffic congestion in the western Massachusetts region, par-ticularly at mid-day along arterial roads and downtown commercial districts. “If I was a transportation planner I’d make sure that officials in my agency recognized that people are changing how they travel. Fixed routes and fixed schedule like bus services won’t meet their needs like they did 50 years ago, because what’s inherent in the virtual world is there are no predictable schedules.”

Instead of looking at traffic demand only two years out, which is common among those planning highways today, Collura says the planners need to look five to 10 years out. “They need to be cognizant that these trends are taking place and we may not see peak-hour travel increase in the same way that it has.”

Pattern pendingCollura sees the need for objective data to explore the impact of the virtual work place on traffic patterns that could alter how highways are built and where tomor-row’s technology is deployed. For example, there could be more need for technology along arterial routes, town centers and suburbia than anticipated. But he says today’s surveys that focus on weekday traffic patterns based on full-time employment won’t capture those in the virtual work place whose driving can be erratic and many vary over a period of weeks and months, not days. Other issues that need addressing, he says, will be the rate of change over a period of years along with analysis of annual changes starting now. “We’ll need activity-based models rather than trip-based models to answer these questions in an objective way,” he added. TH

www.h3bmedia.com

Traffic Management

I’ve recently relocated from Orlando to San Diego and am so impressed by the wonderful climate, environment and the dynamic transportation scene, but what do you think of when you hear the words“San Diego”?

From Sea World to sea-faring cargo to Navy fliers, water has characterized the second largest city in Cali-fornia for most of its history. San Diego is a major tourist destination that attracted almost 4m beach-goers in 2006. Its military complex employs 91,398 in the US Navy and US Marine Corps (as of 2000) and the Port of San Diego processes 100,000 40ft (13m) equivalent containers each year, drawing major traffic in trucking and rail freight.

Second only to Los Angeles in population (3.5m in the city limits), San Diego grew from 1,233,415 in 2000 to 1,311,162 in 2006. Accompanying its population growth is an increased demand for the region’s roadways. In 1990, the region’s daily travel demand included 9m trips involving some form of motorized travel. By 2003, the demand had grown to 13.5m trips and this is expected to grow to 16m trips by 2030. This growth, together with redevelopment and suburban sprawl, has made traffic congestion top of the San Diegans’ concerns about qual-ity of life.

My goal in moving to San Diego is to help and advise San Diego regional transportation agencies, and in par-ticular the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), on how to keep San Diego a liveable, “move-able” community by harnessing advanced transporta-tion technologies and management solutions to reduce congestion and improve mobility. Citizens want new highway infrastructure, transit and commute alterna-tives. And naturally they want accountability and results. They have made amazing progress and it seems that even better things are on the way.

A portfolio approachCongestion happens when demand exceeds capacity. SANDAG is addressing both by taking a “portfolio” approach to solutions: a balanced application of man-agement techniques for both the demand side and the capacity side. Investors strategize on how to build their portfolios to get the best return. Transportation agen-cies can do much the same thing by investing in a broad array of mutually compatible solutions to congestion.

On the demand side, SANDAG is exploring the use of pricing options and congestion pricing techniques, coupled with decision quality travel information and flexible transit alternatives to better manage demand.

Man on a mission

Vol 2 No 2 Thinking Highways www.h3bmedia.com45

As San Diego explores the potential applications for its multifaceted ITS Porfolio, including much-needed

congestion-busting measures, new resident BOB McQUEEN explains why ( in his own words, we might add) a proud

Scotsman is happy to trade his kilt for a surfboard

Additional incentives can be used to further influence travel behavior to shift travel time or mode.

On the capacity side, SANDAG is building on its high-powered TransNet infrastructure development program (driven by a sales tax generating US$14billion over 40 years) that is already providing increased managed lanes, highway and transit system capacity, and world-class operational management of the infrastructure. The combined effects of new infrastructure and more effec-tive use of available transportation assets provide an excellent complement to the demand management activities.

Available hard assetsThe San Diego transportation network includes high-ways, transit, rail, and trolleys. The automobile-highway system is the primary mode of travel. The existing system consists of over 300 miles of freeways and about 7,150 miles of local streets and roads. Over 68m vehicle miles are traveled daily, with an average vehicle trip length of 5.8 miles. At present, the capacity of the high-way system is being exceeded in a number of corridors during the peak commute hours when most people are going to and from work.

The region’s public transit service is provided by nine

bus operations, 12 demand-responsive systems, the Coaster express rail service and the San Diego Trolley bus. The region’s transit systems provide about 33m miles of annual transit service, carrying over 70m total annual passengers. SANDAG shares public transit planning and decision-making responsibilities with the California Department of Transportation, the Metropoli-tan Transit System, the North County Transit District and other transit partners. There is strong regional partner-ship on major transportation investments and opera-tions and they are building on this by providing technology support for information sharing and opera-tional management decision-making.

Powered by ITSSANDAG is working with PBS&J (which just happens to be my employer) in identifying international “best prac-tices” in transportation management to take SANDAG to the next level in advanced technologies.

Following an inventory of current ITS systems in use by SANDAG, we will document international practices in congestion pricing, integrated transportation man-agement and transit fares to develop an action plan to enhance current ITS initiatives to take account of base lining and international benchmarking results. The


Traffic Management

The far-from uncommon sight of a US Navy ship

docked at the Port of San Diego

Traffic Management

project will include a catalog of ITS technologies that could be part of implementing the strategic plan, includ-ing sensing and data collection, wireless technologies, information delivery and performance management technologies.

Surveying international best practices for transporta-tion management will result in a library of plans - from such cities as London, Stockholm, San Francisco and Seoul - detailing integrated transit fares, congestion pricing, tolling and freeway service patrols, 511 sys-tems, light rail and suburban transport, among other systems.

One of SANDAG’s strengths is its regional approach to solving transportation issues, according to Gary Galle-gos, SANDAG’s executive director. We want to know how San Diego’s ITS program aligns with the Regional Trans-portation Plan and what international market imple-menting that would make sense in San Diego. How can ITS better support regional transportation goals? What does SANDAG need to do to deliver new technologies via public-private partnerships that can be a “win-win” for both parties?

The end goalSANDAG’s regional transportation plan calls for the agency to implement seven policy goals – improve mobility of people and freight; improve accessibility to employment and regional centers; improve the reliabil-ity and safety of the transportation system; maximize the system’s efficiency; promote livable communities; mini-mize effects on the environment and ensure an equita-ble distribution of benefits. SANDAG is currently working to define metrics and target values to help monitor progress in satisfy these goals, but how will using advanced transportation technologies help?

SANDAG will use advanced transportation technolo-gies to enhance freeway, arterial and transit manage-ment, as well as provide reliable traveler information. The cornerstone of its strategy is the Regional Intermo-dal Network that interconnects all local transportation management centers. Among its initiatives:

• Freeway management – installing vehicle detection systems, cameras, communications and new computer hardware and software to improve incident detection and clear accidents, and to better coordinate freeway and arterial operations.

• Arterial management – utilizing new hardware and software for local jurisdictions to improve traffic signal timing, optimize traffic flow on regional arterials, and coordinate signals with freeway ramps, bus rapid transit

service and rail crossings.• Transit management – providing new in-vehicle

equipment and computer hardware and software to improve route planning, scheduling and on-time per-formance.

• Universal transportation account – offering a pack-age approach to transit tickets ,tolls and parking fees by making use of a single account structure and integrated back office operations. This will also encompass the use of customer relationship management techniques across all modes of transportation.

• Traveler information – using real-time data collected from freeway, arterial and transit systems to deliver decision quality information to travelers so they can better plan trip times, modes and routes.

• Integrated performance management – develop-ment and agreement of a unified set of operational man-agement performance measures and adoption of a sophisticated data collection and information analysis system for management decision support

Vol 2 No1 Thinking Highways48 www.h3bmedia.com

ProgressHow can SANDAG measure progress – the “before” and “after”? As an example, one gauge that shows immedi-ate results is the introduction of the region’s new 511 system in February 2007. After one month in operation, 511 recorded more than 500,000 Web views and more than 50,000 phone calls to the free telephone and Web-based service for traffic, transit and travel information. Having access to the information means that San Diego travelers are being empowered to make better travel decisions regarding mode, route and timing choice for journeys.

As the 511 system develops, users will be able to tap into up to the minute toll information for the I-15 man-aged lanes, find toll rates, and compare driving times to the regular highway lanes. By summer 2007, local gov-ernment access television will broadcast 511 traffic information.

SANDAG issues a quarterly transportation progress report to its Board of Directors to keep them informed

Traffic Management


about the projects underway in the region. It includes progress reports on highway, transit, bikeway and arte-rial projects, and a status marker on reduced traffic con-gestion and air pollution achieved as a result of traffic and demand management programs.

The latest update reports that these programs averted an estimated 79,200 lbs (36,000kg) of smog-forming pollution during the second quarter of FY 2007, a posi-tive improvement of two percent over the last quarter. During this same time period, the Freeway Service Patrol assisted approximately 12,500 motorists, about 16 per cent fewer than last quarter. This decrease is con-sistent with previous years at this time and is generally associated with decreases in peak period traffic due to the end of year holidays.

It also states that the SANDAG Vanpool Program participation rate continued to increase, growing 3.8 per cent in the last quarter, from 532 vanpools to 552 vanpools. Vanpools originating in Riverside County continued as a large and fast-growing component of the program, accounting for 44 per cent of all the regional vanpools. Average ridership per vanpool was approxi-mately 8.3 passengers, with 4,581 daily passengers par-ticipating in the program.

In another measurement tool, SANDAG issues a quar-terly “State of the Commute” report to its Board to track transportation progress in the region.

Congestion happens when demand exceeds capac-ity. SANDAG’s “portfolio” using intelligent transporta-tion systems to invest in solutions for congestion relief means the area will benefit by the impact of new tech-nologies that will help build capacity, control demand and provide a more mobile and livable community for its citizens.

San Diego has always been a leader in the delivery of world-class transportation infrastructure and innova-tions in transportation technologies. Being part of the new momentum to build on this and take the San Diego region to the next level in integrated operations and transportation optimization, is well worth trading in your kilt for. TH

Bob McQueen is an internationally recognized expert in the field of ITS with more than 30 years of experience.

He is currently serving as Senior Advisor to the San Diego Association of Governments, providing consulta-

tion and advice on the application of advanced technolo-gies to transportation and the development of innovative

business models for technology operations. He can be contacted at [email protected]

The two faces of San Diego: a historic mission (left) and the Sky Tower (right)


Telematics


There is view that I have encountered among auto-motive OEMs that call center service delivery to vehicles equipped with telematics systems is extremely complex and difficult to master.

The incumbents who are delivering vehicle-centric call center services today to systems like BMW Assist, Volvo On Call or OnStar have had a strong incentive to convince their OEM customers that the specific serv-ices they have developed for each of them are so spe-cialized that only they are uniquely qualified to offer these services, and that switching to another call center service provider is not only unwise, but unthink-able. OEMs that have not yet initiated telematics serv-ices cite as reasons for delaying system introductions the lack of choice of call centers, due to high barriers to entry, and high switching costs.

While the qualifications for handling voice calls from telematics system users are certainly not commodi-ties, they can be mastered by professional call center

Your call is important to us...

operators who are used to working with stringent requirements and are prepared to invest the time and money in both systems and operator training to adapt their operations to the specific requirements of telemat-ics services and become as capable as any incumbent. Automotive companies should not feel that they are cap-tive to any system or service supplier with whom they have chosen to initiate a service, or that the only choice is to terminate services in a market if the call center service provider is unsatisfactory. Volvo Cars switched to a new call center service provider in Sweden after working with another provider for over three years, and no changeover problems appear to have been encoun-tered.

Let’s explore what it really takes to be a telematics call center, what the OEM can do to make sure there will be the widest possible choice of call center providers who can deliver the services designed into their telematics systems, and how to design a service delivery package

What does it really take to be a telematics call center? MIKE SENA has the answer(s)

Telematics



Telematics

to make the first implementation of, and possible future migration from, a telematics call center as easy and pain-free as possible. We will start by looking at the Telematics Value Chain.

Telematic service functionsIn the Telematics Value Chain, a position-enabled com-munications device in a customer’s vehicle connects via a telecoms network to a set of providers who deliver the desired services and content to the customer. How each of the links in the chain are executed, and by whom, is the result of many OEM decisions, including:

• Design of the in-vehicle system; • Which services to deliver; • Whether there is a billing component to customer

management; and,• Whether the full complement of services is delivered

in multiple countries.For the customer in the vehicle, the voice on the other

end of the line is the most evident part of the service chain. The call center operator is also the “face” of the OEM to the customer. In the following section I have identified the specific functions provided by the call

center, the relationship the call center has with the other parts of the value chain, and the impact the delivery of the other components in the value chain has on the ease or difficulty of initiating a telematics call center service or moving from an incumbent to a new call center or centers.

Call center operationCall Center operations involve the service and content delivery component of the value chain. A call center receives voice calls from the vehicle, processes infor-mation (e.g., position, incident type, requested service) that is delivered via a data channel - either directly from the vehicle or indirectly via a telematics service pro-vider - and delivers a service or connects to another service provider who delivers the service.

In combination, the range of services that the system in the vehicle can deliver, the regulations in the country in which the services are provided, and the qualifica-tions of the call center team determine whether there is one or multiple call center operations involved in serv-ice delivery. A single call center is possible if the call center is qualified and allowed to deliver all services.

For example, in most European countries, and in the US, it is possible for an emergency assistance call made from a vehicle to be directed to a private call center, who then contacts the emergency authorities on behalf of the customer in the vehicle. This same call center can also be the first line call center for roadside assistance services, directing a call to the OEM’s roadside assist-ance provider.

In contrast, in the UK, it is illegal for a vehicle to send an emergency assistance call to a private call center; it must be sent directly to the emergency authorities, the Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP). However, the UK PSAP may not handle calls for vehicle assistance or any other types of non-emergency services. Therefore, in the UK there must be a separate call center to handle vehicle and information assistance services, while the emergency calls are directed to the UK PSAP. BMW and Volvo Cars have implemented this solution for their telematics systems in the UK.

Country regulations affect the delivery of other serv-ices. For example, theft notification and stolen vehicle tracking may be provided by a “general” call center in most European countries and in the US, but not in all

countries. In The Netherlands and Belgium, there are strict regulations on what type of company can deliver these services. They must be specially certified and have specific types of facilities and equipment. There-fore, if a vehicle OEM wants to deliver theft notification and stolen vehicle tracking in these countries, along with the roadside assistance and emergency services, the OEM must engage a separate authorized security services company and create specific connections to this company’s systems. Figure 2 overleaf shows how such a service might be delivered if a secure operating center were required.

Call center operation functionsAn exhaustive table listing the functions that an OEM should expect its telematics call center (TCC) to pro-vide and the specific functions that need to be per-formed to deliver a satisfactory service can be found at www.h3bmedia.com/sena.cfm. Many of these are func-tions are not specific to telematics. A competent, well-run call center should be able to perform the telematics-specific functions following a suitable period of system integration and staff training.

It is the system and service design, not call center capabilities, that are the critical factors in determining how easy or difficult it is to redirect calls and/or data to the various call centers as required by a country’s regu-lations. Professional call centers are used to adapting their systems and processes to the specific require-ments of their customers, and have the telephone and IT technology make the necessary adaptations. The extent of these adaptations depends to a great degree on whether there is a separate Telematics Service Provider in the value chain.

Telematics service providerA Telematics Service Provider (TSP) delivers, at a minimum, the Data Connectivity and Service Integra-tion components in the Telematics Value Chain. The TSP can also provide Customer Management. The TSP’s main responsibility is directing data messages from a vehicle to the appropriate call center or information services center. The TSP can also provide connectivity to non-call center information services.

TSPs, like other participants in the value chain, can attempt to extend their services into adjacent responsi-bility areas. GM/OnStar and ATX North America in the US, and PSA and Fiat in Europe, established models for telematics service provision in which the call center and TSP functions are combined. OnStar functions as a vir-tual network operator as well, providing calling services in addition to the standard telematics services. In con-trast, Volvo in all European markets, and BMW in all European markets except Germany, have separated the task of TSP and call center, with WirelessCar and ATX Europe respectively serving in a “pure” TSP role.

The presence or absence of a special TSP in the value chain is one determinant of the degree of specialized IT services that need to be provided by a call center. The other major factor is the presence or absence of a cen-tralized operator workstation server. If there is TSP pro-

Telematics


“A single call center is possible if the

call center is qualified and

allowed to deliver all services”

viding a central data management center (e.g., WirelessCar in the Volvo On Call service delivery chain), and if there is a central workstation server that is accessed as a web service (as is also the case with the Volvo On Call system), then the call center requires a minimum amount of IT infrastructure.

If, on the other hand, there is no specialized telematics service provider, as is the case with the PSA telematics service, then the data messages are transferred directly to a local call center. In this case, the call center must build a system that can store all required vehicle and/or customer data, convert the data messages, and display all the information, including position of the vehicle, to the call center operator. The more work done by a telematics service provider, the less the dependency will be on the local call center, the easier it will be to switch call center providers, and the faster it will be to introduce new services to all markets served.

Telematics


Platforms and service deliveryThere is normally an inverse relation-ship between the dependency a vehi-cle manufacturer places on a Telematics Service Provider and the degree to which the Telematics Call Center must provide complex mes-sage translation and message transfer services.

The more non-call center tasks per-formed centrally by the Telematics Service Provider (such as data message translation), the fewer non-call center tasks that need to be performed by the Telematics Call Center. For example, the GM/Opel solution implemented as OnStar Europe in Germany at the begin-ning of the 2000s was based on a personal SIM-card (Subscriber Identify Module) from the customer, and both the phone call and the SMS data messages were sent to ADAC in Germany. There was no way to obtain services outside Germany, and OnStar-equipped cars were sold only in that country. ADAC handled all data and voice services for OnStar.

At the other end of the spectrum, Fiat has a telematics system also based on the cus-tomer’s SIM-card that can be sold in any European country, but all calls and data messages are directed to the Elda/Targa TSP/Call Center located in the outskirts of Milan.

Figure 3 overleaf illustrates the relationship between local call center dependency and TSP dependency. It is possible to reach a happy balance between the two extremes of full dependency on either the local call center or the TSP. By creating a balance, the OEM can ensure that there is flexibility in being able to move to a new TSP or call center if good business practices indi-cate a move. What makes the BMW and Volvo systems more independent from call centers is their on-board systems combined with their central TSP.

Network operatorThe network operator’s place in the value chain is to pro-vide the technical means for the in-vehicle system to communicate with the service providers, and for the service providers to communicate with the vehicle. For those systems that have embedded SIM-cards (i.e., Volvo and BMW), the network operators (Telenor Swe-den and T-Mobile Germany respectively) organize the roaming agreements and deliver the SIM-cards for installation in the telematics systems.

As services are expanded beyond the home country of the SIM-card provider (e.g., Germany for T-Mobile Germany) the network operator needs to ensure that Short Message Service (SMS) messages are not blocked at the Mobile Switching Center in the foreign network, and needs to provide for fast and dependable access

Figure 2: How a stolen vehicle tracking service might be delivered if a secure operating center was required

from its own SMS-C to the TSP server. In addition, the operators must know the telephone numbers and SMS-C account number(s) that are used by the systems if these numbers are placed on the SIM-card, and they must keep track of the delivered SIM-cards in their own database even if there are no usage fees - just in case something goes wrong and the subscription must be terminated.

With an embedded and pre-programmed SIM-card with the call center telephone number on the SIM-card, the main implication for call center operations is that this telephone number must either be easily changea-ble on the SIM-card (e.g., over-the-air re-programming), or it must be owned by the OEM so that if the OEM decides to change call center providers, the change can be made easily and smoothly.

Public safety answering pointsBased on the eCall (emergency call) services that have been implemented to date, most PSAPs appear to be satisfied to have a private call center receive the initial phone call or data message from the vehicle and to have the private call center provide them with the informa-tion about the location of the emergency and the condi-tion of the vehicle’s occupants.

There are no PSAPs who currently have a system that can communicate directly with any vehicle’s emergency

alert system, nor are there any PSAPs that can accept a data message in one of the format used by the OEMs, such as GATS, ACP or GST, or the Minimum Data Set message proposed by the eSafety Working Group for a European eCall Minimum Data Message. The PSAPs and the TCCs communicate over the phone, or in rare instances, with fax messages.

If the call center is the first line response to emergen-cies, the call center’s operators must be trained to receive calls from individuals in extreme emergency situations. Their principal job will be to make a connec-tion as quickly as possible to the PSAP that will actually attend to the accident victims. However, they must also be able to help to calm the accident victims and to understand how to respond to different types of emer-gency situations. This is a service that needs to be pro-vided by call takers who are specifically trained to handle emergency tasks.

The first line call center providing connections to emergency authorities must have the necessary infor-mation for placing a phone call to the correct emer-gency service (police, fire, ambulance) that is serving the region where the customer requires assistance. The boundaries of the service regions must be part of an operator workstation application, and since these boundaries are subject to frequent change, they must be constantly maintained.

Telematics


Figure 3: The relationship between local call center dependency and TSP dependency

Roadside assistance providersOEMs have sometimes tied their telematics services and roadside assistance services together, hoping for synergies and cost-saving advantages. OnStar Europe (though not OnStar US), PSA and Fiat did this. Volvo and BMW each have a few markets in which their telematics system call center is the same company as their road-side assistance provider. This can be a problem if the OEM wishes to cancel one service agreement because another service provider offers lower prices and better quality, while the other service is delivered in a superior and low-cost manner.

Both BMW and Volvo in Europe, and the automotive OEMs that offer systems in the US, have apparently determined that there are no significant advantages to combining their warranty roadside assistance services with their telematics call center services.

Security and tracking servicesCompanies like Securitas, ADT, and Group4 have call-taking centers to handle house and business alarm services. ATX North America, the second largest call center for telematics systems after OnStar, actually began life as a security service com-pany, Westinghouse Security Services, and participated in the development of the first telematics system called RESCU, which was developed by Ford Motor Company. Security services companies have some advantages compared to general call centers and roadside assistance providers.

These advantages include Secure Operating Center facilities, authoriza-tion to make direct contact with the police, and staff who are trained to track stolen vehicles. These capabilities are not easy or inexpensive to estab-lish. However, if an OEM does not wish to offer security services with its telematics system, rather than as an aftermarket fitted option - Volvo is the only company in Europe that does - these capabilities are unnecessary.

In those markets in which an authorized stolen vehicle tracking service with secure operating center facilities is required, it is possible for the OEM who wishes to offer security services to engage such a company to supple-ment the services of its primary call center. This is exactly what Volvo has done in The Netherlands, Bel-gium, and Spain, where there are regulations on the type of company that can provide security services.

Initiating telematics call center servicesFor an OEM, initiating or moving from the incumbent telematics call center in a particular market, or espe-cially in all markets, can seem like an formidable task, even when good business judgment or the performance of the incumbent make it desirable. It is a more difficult job when the call center is expected to perform other services in the value chain, but it can be done no matter how deeply the telematics call center seems to be embedded in the process.

A table providing a migration strategy made up of a

Telematics


number of individual steps that directly relate to each of the call center’s responsibility areas can be found over-leaf. The most important step is to select a new Telemat-ics Call Center partner. Local, country-based call centers offer the best possibility for direct connection to the local emergency services, roadside assistance services, and security services. Select a new call center provider that has staff who are customer service ori-ented and have multiple language skills. The new com-pany should also be strong in IT to offer flexible but robust connections to the communications network.

SummaryWhen markets are young and standards are non- existent, value chains tend to be controlled by single players. This is often the only way to create the neces-sary connections between the various systems, and the best way to extract profits. OnStar and ATX are exam-ples of highly integrated operations which operate as full TSPs and call centers simultaneously. These solu-tions lock customers in to an all-or-nothing service. So, for example, when OnStar North America decided to close its service offering to its non-GM customers, like

Toyota Lexus, the OEMs that had been using OnStar’s service were forced to develop their own end-to-end solutions.

Although telematics components are still not standardized, it is possible, even desirable, to develop a partially disaggregated model that uses the best-of-breed approach to selecting different service providers who meet specific requirements better than a generalist company trying to perform

all the tasks in the telematics value chain. BMW has done this to a limited extent in Europe, and Volvo has adopted this approach totally for its pan-European solution.

Volvo has two companies at present providing first-line call center services (Viking in Sweden, Denmark, and Norway) and Mondial Assistance in the other 11 countries where the system is supported. Volvo also has three secure operating centers in three countries inter-faced to the country’s Volvo On Call call center, and it has connections to the official Volvo roadside assistance providers in each of the countries. And Volvo has switched call center operator in one of its markets, and moved from a local server to a central server in this same market.

Working with a new supplier is never an easy task unless the component or service is completely stand-ardized. This is definitely not the situation today with telematics services. Nevertheless, this does not mean that initiating or changing a telematics call center - or any supplier in the telematics value chain - has to be so difficult and painful that the OEM avoids it even when it otherwise makes good business sense to go ahead. TH

Mike Sena is Principal of Michael L Sena Consulting AB, based in Åsa in Sweden. He can be contacted

via email at [email protected]

“When markets are young and

standards are non-existent, value chains tend to be

controlled by single players”

Telematics


Basic TCC FunctionsVoice and Data ReceiptVoice and Data Sending Language Handling

Matching Voice and DataIdentifying Nature of Call Maintaining Connection between TCC and Customer

Display of Vehicle Position Matching of Vehicle Position to Location

Notification of Service Provider Delivery of Position to the Service Provider Call Forwarding to Service Provider Maintaining Connection between Service Provider and Customer Verification of Service Provision

Call RecordingCustomer Records

Customer Activation and Deactivation

Service Quality ManagementReportingService Delivery DesignInformation on New and Modified Services

Invoicing of Telematics Customers

Agreements with Service Providers

StrategyFocus the new staff training on delivering the core services in a superior fashion. Prepare the switch-over to the new center well in advance and test it rigorously before the final move. If the current solution is built around country-based TSPs, move to a central TSP solution to de-couple the voice and data processing from the call center. Once the central TSP solution is in place, it will be relatively easy to select country-based call centers that can be interfaced to the TSP. Deliver a web-based workstation solution to the call center that has pre-defined screens and commands for all services that are delivered to and from the on-board system.

A single Computer/Telephone Integration system (CTI) solution for all call centers would be ideal, but the choice of CTI software is dependent on many factors, and there does not appear to be a single package that runs in all environments. The new call center will need to implement the CTI and test it thoroughly before the switch-over of services can be completed.

If the service currently uses multiple map visualization tools provided by each call center, establish a single, web services-based map processing solution that can be used by all call centers prior to moving, or select a TCC that has a robust map server that can be accessed simultaneously using web services by multiple call centers. There are private web services solutions, such as the one offered by PTV, or there are commercial solutions, such as Microsoft’s MapPoint/LiveLocal. The selected TCC must demonstrate that it can access the correct PSAPs in each region where they are delivering services. If the selected TCC does not have this capability prior to selection, it can acquire it during the changeover phase. Special consideration needs to be given to the following:• Emergency services generally prefer to have a town and street address or kilometer marker referenced to an exit number or name on a highway. • The call center mapping application should clearly display the administrative area in which the vehicle is located, the street and the closest address. • The call center application should also display the geographic coordinates of the vehicle, ideally in both WGS84 and the country grid reference coordinates.

The call center chosen to replace the incumbent should have a call recording facility that its call taking operators are familiar with using. To reduce dependency on a specific call center, customer records should be stored centrally, either at the TSP or the OEM, and accessed by the call center via a web-based server. Minimize the involvement of the call center in the activation and deactivation process by automating the process between the vehicle and the TSP.

The OEM should have direct access to customer service records so that service statistics can be viewed directly, without having to depend on reports from the TCC or TSP. This will minimize dependency on the call center’s need to keep records and submit reports. A central customer/vehicle database in which all service records are stored, plus an easy-to-use interface, will allow the OEM to access the information directly. Access can also be provided to the TSP and call center services provider so that they can monitor the quality of their service. Build the invoicing process as much as possible into the OEM payment flow process for parts and services.

Direct contracts by the OEM with third party providers will reduce the dependence on the call center and allow contracts with these providers to remain in place even if the call center operator is changed.

Data Collection



An important function performed by numerous highway agencies worldwide is the collection of traf-fic data for input to future facility planning.

Vehicle count, classification, and weight data is collected for a variety of functions. Agencies at the State, Provin-cial and Federal levels develop databases with this highway information that includes volume, classification and load spectra rates and trends, as well as other trend func-tions per highway and road functional class.

The data is used for forecasting future traffic volumes to address capacity concerns, design and management of pavements and the design and management of bridges. It is not uncommon for several different departments within an agency to require access to variations of the data depending on the function of that department.

Traditional methods of collection of this data have typically involved a team of agency employees pur-chasing the equipment and supplies and deploying this equipment to provide the raw data for the agency model. Agencies have purchased a variety of equip-ment for the task, ranging from portable counters and classifiers, to equipment and sensors for permanent installation. For the larger permanent data collection sites, some agencies have used contracting mecha-nisms for the supply of the systems, the installation or both. Under this traditional approach, the agency is ulti-mately the owner of the systems and equipment. Within the department, the typical approach is to have a number of technical people who install and operate equipment, including the collection of the data, report generation and storage and archiving.

Bid aim

The manpower to staff these departments may be quite large, as a typical agency may collect data from several hundred temporary and permanent count sta-tions, a hundred or more classifications stations and

Data Collection


all number of staff in the departments, including

the data collection groups. Governments of all types

have been focused on down-sizing and optimization, and

many have enacted hiring freezes. Early retirement pack-

ages have seen the loss of many seasoned traffic data collection

specialists. Overall staff levels have been reduced. If the agency is

allowed to rehire for vacated positions as a result of retirement, new staff is typ-

ically younger and less experienced. Many agencies have also seen significant

turnover in the younger staff as the econ-omy increases the chances for higher pay-

ing positions in the private sector. In all this has generally caused a lower level of overall

staff in the departments, and the staff that exist are relatively new to this business.At the same time, technology in collection of this

data has changed. It is becoming increasingly dif-ficult for these agencies to manage the technology

that they need to collect this data. Most government agencies have long budget cycles, and the acquisition of capital equipment is a difficult task. The requirement for low bid makes it possible that a variety of vendors supply equipment, making service training and the inventory of spare parts difficult. Significant advances in technology can occur between budget cycles. This usually puts the agency at a disadvantage in the deploy-ment of cost effective technologies. Differences in equipment type and operations may create difficulties in the uniformity of sensor types, installation methods

BRIAN TAYLOR discusses a new method of data

collection

low, high

dozens of weigh in motion (WIM) data collection sites.Over the past several years, events and circumstances

have significantly changed the traditional approach. Many agencies have been required to reduce the over-

Data Collection


and layouts. These difficulties have been handled in a number of different ways by several agencies. Some agencies have simply reduced the scope of data collec-tion efforts to fit the available budgets. Some have out-sourced certain aspects of the collection. For example, the maintenance of some higher value weigh in motion (WIM) sites has been outsourced to service companies or the vendor supplying the systems. Agencies have hired consultants to manage the verification and archiv-ing of the collected data. Others have outsourced the collection of certain short-term temporary count data collection.

Different strokesHowever, several other key agencies in North America have decided to manage the collection of this vital data in a dramatically different manner. Some pioneer agen-cies have outsourced nearly all the data collection func-tions of the department. The extremes of this shift can be summarized as follows:

There have been agencies that have started the move to an outsourced approach by having a contractor pro-vide maintenance of the equipment, or an outside con-sultant verifying the data, or a combination of these phases. In other instances, agencies have simply devel-oped a terms of reference for a complete outsource solution, and have contracted as such after a competi-tive process.

In some cases, these agreements require a contractor to take over the data collection efforts using the existing data collection sites and portable equipment that the agency has, with the agency retaining ownership. In other cases, agreements between the agency and con-tractor include the contractor buying back the existing equipment from the agency and from that point forward using that and whatever other equipment is deemed necessary to continue the data collection efforts. How-ever these agreements are structured, the overall inten-tion is that the contractor is responsible for the collection and verification of the data, and the agency (the cus-tomer) is buying data.

The outsourcing optionIt makes sense for an agency to consider an outsourcing approach if there are issues with staffing and continuity. However, not all agencies have had the same success rates in outsourcing. There are a variety of reasons for some succeeding and some being less than satisfied. Several points to consider:

The traditional low bid approach may not be well suited to selecting a contractor. Most agencies have the ability to request proposals that include an evaluation of the proposal in conjunction to the overall cost of deliver-

ing the proposed work. The financial and technical capabilities of the contactor can be included in the eval-uation, as well as relevant past projects including other customer references.

The Request for Proposal (RFP) approach as well pro-vides the ability to include incentives in the proposals to accommodate new technology or new approaches. There is the ability in most RFP processes to have oral interviews, request clarifications, modify and change terms, and ask for revised or best and final pricing.

In considering a move to outsourcing, some individu-als question the verification and data quality methods. Is the contractor competent or trustworthy in providing accurate and complete data sets? In many cases, a third party consultant working for the agency can be involved in verifying the accuracy of the data through random sampling and comparisons to the contractor provided data. In other cases, the contractor can be required to subcontract this task, much like a financial audit.

Careful consideration must be given to requirements and standard specifications for installation and infra-structure to support the equipment being installed. If the contractor is required to own the equipment, then installation requirements that apply to agency-owned equipment may be onerous, this increasing costs. A clear understanding of future ownership may affect these requirements. If a large number of sites are involved, the agency may want to consider breaking up the overall project into several regions. In this manner the overall risk of a single contractor will be reduced, the projects become a more reasonable size (thereby opening up the competition), and regional differences can be taken into account (like the inclusion of a large metropolitan area in a particular zone).

Untried and relatively untestedConsideration must be given to any arrangement involv-ing the shift of ownership of equipment, especially from the agency to a private concern. This is a relatively new and untested area for most agencies and some have processes in place to accommodate the concept and some do not. As many agencies have experienced, the outsourcing of the data collection functions can provide a very complete and accurate data set for a reasonable cost, increasing the value. While some agencies have had issues arise in these arrangements, and a wealth of best practice methods are being seen and disseminated in the traffic data collection community (and as man-power pressures increase in many departments), the opportunities associated with the outsourcing model may increase. TH

Brian Taylor is Vice President of Technical Solutions & Business Development of International Road Dynamics

Traditional State Approach Outsourced ApproachState Owned Equipment Shifts to Contractor Owned EquipmentState Installed Equipment Shifts to Contractor Installed EquipmentState Staff for Maintenance Shifts to Contractor provided maintenanceState Staff for Operations Shifts to Contractor provided operationsState Data Verification Shifts to Contractor provided data verification

Don’t even think of speeding.

Autovelox 105 SEDigital Video Laser Speed Enforcement Device

Simple, reliable, smart. Autovelox 105 SE is an outstanding device that makesspeed detection easier and more effective. The system which signaled thedefinitive change to digital imaging uses the most advanced eye-safe non-interceptable laser technology and an intuitive user graphical interface developedunder Microsoft Windows XP™.Feel the experience of an extremely flexible tool, detecting cars, trucks andmotorcycles 24 hours a day, from left or right side of the road, both attendedor unattended via ADSL or fiber optic.If you choose the best solution, you will never wonder why.

Telephone +39 055 886861www.sodi.com - [email protected]


Standards


Holding up the process

Almost 15 years have passed since efforts were started to develop standards for ITS. Standards that work in the real world are developed by participation of all stakeholders including users and producers of the associated products and technology and are based on review or existing standards that may be adapted to meet requirements. BRUCE ABERNETHY, who has authored many articles criticizing standards as well as the process used to develop them, wonders if this is really the case with ITS?

Standards


It is important that industry buys into a standard and competition evolves resulting in affordable products incorporating the standard. It is also important that the primary standards organization developing the ITS standard be one that represents a leadership role, from a professional standpoint, related to the technology associated with the standard.

It is obvious that the Institute of Electrical and Elec-tronic Engineers (IEEE) should address standards asso-ciated with communications at Open Systems Interconnection (OSI) layers below the Application Layer (7).

In communications, all seven OSI layers must be com-patible either directly or through a translation approach. It took years before the ITS Digital Short Range Commu-

nications (DSRC) standard finally adopted a proven, wireless communications standard (i.e. IEEE 802.11) that made sense. We saw hand-picked and paid consult-ants developing ITS standards in an effort to accelerate the ITS standards release.

This totally destroys the proven process of interaction between experts from industry and users and generally results in bad standards. Bad standards are those that are not adopted by competitive suppliers, do not fully meet users and/or manufacturers needs, and are thus unaffordable to deploy without a major Federal Govern-ment investment.

A complex issueWe saw aerospace engineers developing standards and bringing their Department of Defense (DoD) perspec-tive to the ITS market. One only has to review DoD MilStd documents to see the complexity and issues. For DoD, cost associated with standards deployment are not a major issue; however cost is a major issue for city and county governments trying to deploy ITS and for the local tax payers that are paying for the required local match of funds. DoD has even seen the light and now is emphasizing commercial off the shelf (COTS) in an effort to make their equipment more affordable and supportable.

One example of an ITS standard which was non-competitive was the high-speed digital FM sub-band communications, focused on providing en-route trave-ler information, that was developed exclusively by a large company and far exceeded the cost of an industry developed standard for FM digital sub-band communi-cations that was in operations and being offered by car manufacturers. ITS has many times forgotten that things that go into vehicles must be paid for by the people that purchase the vehicles.

A car manufacturer will not put things in his vehicle that make the vehicle unaffordable unless it is mandated by the Federal Government (or perhaps the StateGovernment as related to pollution equipment in some states).

In fact the cost of the high-speed digital FM sub-band communications unit, dictated for use by the Federal Government for the project, killed a project in which I was involved, because the car rental companies that were private partners in a public/private partnership refused to pay the high cost on the non-competitive product. Equally important in standards is to be sure the ITS standard is open and is not considered proprietary by some company. The whole objective of ITS standards is to create an open systems solution allowing competi-tion for components and thus keeping cost to a minimum and extending the life cycle of the products and tech-nology through larger markets and user demands.

What is working in ITS standardsOne of the major ITS standards developed was the National Transportation Communications ITS Protocol (NTCIP). NTCIP addresses a number of ITS devices including traffic signal controllers, weather sensors, dynamic message signs, CCTV control, etc. NTCIP for

Standards

Vol 2 No 2 Thinking Highways64

traffic controllers and DMS continue to be deployed. There was a slow start in deployment because initially, only the 2070 type controller could support processing needed to service the NTCIP protocol. Thus the devel-opers of the ITS standard did not consider the business case associated with cost of replacing traffic controllers with processors capable of supporting the NTCIP proto-col. Furthermore, for jurisdictions operating with a poll rate of once per second per multidropped controller, new communications modems were required to accom-modate the additional protocol overhead of NTCIP.

Since the cost of 2070 controllers were considerably more expensive compared with cost of 170 and NEMA TS-1 and TS-2 type controllers, jurisdictions were reluc-tant to change to 2070 type. Now, more capable proces-sors and additional memory have been added by manufacturers to some of the less expensive controller types facilitating more affordable and implement NTCIP protocol for DMS and certification of compliance to the standard was required. CCTV control protocol has more slowly transitioned to NTCIP and many systems still employ PELCO and Cohu protocol.

Software has emerged, such as Cameleon available from 360 Surveil-lance Inc. that is browser-based, understands the proto-col required by a specific IP address, and can thus accommodate multiple protocol devices attached to a system. Thus, with Cameleon software installed in a TMC server, a jurisdiction can progressively migrate to NTCIP and not have to change out older ITS devices uti-lizing non-ITS standard protocols. A manufacturer must provide non-ITS protocols to 360 Surveillance for inclu-sion into their software.

With NTCIP as a standard incorporated into ITS, we are now seeing jurisdictions willing to mix manufactur-ers of ITS field devices (such as traffic controllers, DMS, CCTV, etc., thus getting much more competitive bids and thus saving tax payers money. This is especially true with jurisdictions that have transitioned to 2070 type controllers; seeing NAZTEC, Econolite and Eagle 2070 controllers operating in a single arterial traffic manage-ment system is becoming more common.

Obviously one of the major benefits of open standards is the ability for a jurisdiction to compete each procure-ment phase of ITS devices that results in a procurement cost savings. Since 2070 controllers are required to com-ply with the CALTRANS TEES, all controllers are sup-posed to comply with both the mechanical and electrical standards as published in the standards, thus facilitating maintenance of mixed manufacturers’ equipment.

What is not working in standardsCenter-to-Center protocol has not successfully pro-gressed. NTCIP included DATEX and CORBA standards. XML looks to be preferred standards to be utilized for center-to-center communications. However the real problem is at the applications layer. While it is true the IEEE 1521 addressed the application layer between EMCs and TMCs, the decision-makers associated with

emergency management do not recognize ITS gener-ated standards as their own. Again, FHWA does not fund emergency management; it is primarily funded by Department of Justice (DoJ) and Department of Home-land Security (DHS) and professional organizations such as APCO and NENA are their primarily standards groups.

Unless the EMC/EOC within a jurisdiction imple-ments IEEE 1512, it is of little benefit if the TMC imple-ments it. Thus IEEE 1512 is off to a slow deployment start. TCIP, which was originally started by NEMA, tran-sitioned to ITE and recently transitioned to APTA, is perhaps to a slower start. While both FHWA and the Federal Transit Administration are under USDOT, only in the last few years has FTA been focused on comply-ing with ITS architecture and standards.

TCIP is supposed to provide standards for interoper-ability between the TMC and Transit Management Center at the applica-tions level. Little is being done to develop standards for TMC-to-TMC standards at the applications level. This includes applications layer mes-saging to support coordinated imple-mentation of signal timing on a contiguous corridor, coordinated con-

sistent DMS messaging on a contiguous corridor, coor-dinate special event traffic routing, and so on.

On top of ITS standards implementation issues, there are major issues with the incorporation of national and international open standards such as network proto-cols above layer 1, standards for digital video streams, standards for digital voice, etc. Even though Ether-net is becoming the defacto standard for ITS, net-works must incorporate RFCs that will interoperate. Recent standards change, such as IP V-6 that increase address field of IP pro-tocol to 128 bits and facilitate increased unicast and multicast addressing capa-bility, is an example of standards ver-sion compatibility issue that is emerging. MPEG 2 has three pro-files, including elementary, transport and program, all of which have different digital streams. MPEG 4 Part 2 has 12 profiles.

Unless a system has adaptive protocol capability (which is rare in ITS deploy-ment), then there will be an issue with sharing

www.h3bmedia.com

“We are now seeing jurisdictions willing

to mix manufacturers of ITS field devices”

video between ITS centers. Again, regional ITS stand-ards must consider compatibility at all seven OSI layers or systems must have provisions for adapting to differ-ences (which can become costly).

Certainly, ITS video is in significant demand by trave-lers. This follows the old saying ‘a picture is worth a thousand words’. There are many ways for travelers to view ITS surveillance video including Internet via port-able computer devices,

3-G cellular telephones with multimedia capability, and portable TVs (viewing traveler news). TV News Stations prefer MPEG 2; cellular companies and Inter-net utilize MPEG 4. Still frame video will utilize JPEG. Video may be real-time streaming, fixed-time period stream, or JPEG encoded, captured frames of ITS CCTV video. Thus, transcoders, which are available today, may be necessary to provide the appropriate coding and data rate for the video stream requested by travel-ers. Some States are considering distributing multi-media traveler information from a central 511 Center that supports transcoding and transrate con-version facilitating reception by travelers on a variety of devices.

The bottom line is that a major problem facing juris-dictions is the development of appropriate standards and sub-standards required for regional interoperabil-ity to support distribution of traveler information to user devices. While emerging, multi-core processors may support transcoding of video streams, this may not be possible in devices such as cellular telephones and PDA devices. Data rates for devices that utilize cellular and even those that still utilize dial up modems to access internet, also become an issue and transrate conver-sion of ITS surveillance CCTV digital video will most likely be necessary.

SummaryOpen standards are beneficial; however they must be developed considering the business case for deployment. With many stakeholders

Standards


“It is a totally different

electromagnetic environment with

thousands of vehicles trying to communicate

on corridors where volume exceeds

capacity”

participating in the development of a standard, the busi-ness case is considered. Businesses send representa-tives to the standards development process considering their business perspective.

Through interaction during the development process, the standard emerges supporting the majority of the participants’ needs. Rushing stand-ards through the development proc-ess or developing standards by a small, handpicked group usually results in a standard that has a sig-nificant inertia for deployment by industry. Review of existing stand-ards should be the starting point to assure that a new standard is needed as compared with modification of an existing standard.

Furthermore, selecting one com-pany to develop the prototype for deployment of the standard, results in providing that company with an unfair competitive advantage, further adding inertia and cost of additional deployments of the standard. If a company is funded to develop the prototype deploy-ment, then the design should be provided to other man-ufacturers to eliminate the unfair advantage, thus encouraging further deployments.

For instance, the 2070 traffic controller is based on

Standards

“Selecting one company to develop

the prototype for deployment of the standard, results in

providing that company with an

unfair competitive advantage”

standards and a standard NTCIP firmware package could have been developed, tested and made available to jurisdictions thus saving deployment cost.

Jurisdictions still pay US$400-$500 for firmware. For ITS devices that will become part of vehicles, the public that purchases the vehicle becomes a major stake-

holder. Perceived cost and benefit of the ITS device by the purchaser of the vehicle will play an important role in the success of the standard.

One major concern is electro-magnetic compatibility of the den-sity of radio frequency emitting devices envisioned on vehicles. It is one thing to demonstrate a few VII configured vehicles operating on a test track; however it is a totally different electromagnetic environ-ment with thousands of vehicles trying to communicate on corridors where volume exceeds capacity as

it does during peak morning and evening traffic in most major cities. TH

Bruce Abernethy is Senior Principal of Vector Alpha Systems, Inc, based in Dallas, Texas.

He can be contacted via email at [email protected]



Congestion Pricing

TIM McGUCKIN, JACK OPIOLA and NEIL GRAY identify the difference between two oft-confused concepts – tolling

and congestion pricing – and suggests why it is hazardous for policymakers and the public to see them as the same

thing. It also provides an opinion of the technologies and approaches that, when implemented, can make both tolling and congestion pricing easier to deploy and

more efficient to operate.

One of these things is not

like the other ones...

quizzically and probably not agree. He would say that charging for a meal is not a ‘strategy’ of his, but a fact – something his business does to recover the cost of pro-viding the service. On the other hand, if the proprietor offered an early-bird discount for dining before 5:00pm, then he would probably agree as to whether that deci-sion is a policy. Why? Because though he still requires the diner to pay a cost for the service, the dynamic price was a strategy employed to attract people outside of normal dining hours.

All of this may seem to be semantics, but applied to the subject of the article, toll purists believe that the terms ‘tolling’ and ‘congestion pricing’ are not only two different things, but that it is hazardous to use the terms interchangeably. To see why, it’s important to move from the analogy and begin with explicit definitions:

• Toll - a sum levied on users for access on certain facilities such as roads, highways, canals, bridges, tun-nels, ferries, and other such conveniences, primarily to pay the construction, operations and maintenance costs for those structures(1).

• Congestion pricing - sometimes called value pricing and a way of harnessing the power of the market to reduce the waste associated with traffic congestion. Congestion pricing works by shifting purely discretion-ary rush hour highway travel to other transportation modes or to off-peak periods(2).

As stated above, the growing concern over transpor-tation needs and inadequate funding has created a spate of interest in both toll-financing as well as a slew of “innovative” financing methods such as area charging (London) and variable and/or congestion pricing. In many arenas the terms “tolling” and “congestion pric-ing” are used synonymously which the authors consider unfortunate. This is because a broader public under-standing of how the revenues derived from either proc-ess are used can and will evoke distinctly different public reactions.

A bit of historyIn the United States, there is a long history of dedicated fuel taxes to support highway development. The pub-lic’s understanding of this mechanism (however vague it tends to be) is that this is how all roads are developed. As a result, toll agencies in the US have had an equally long history of explaining to the public (and politicians) that a toll is not a tax but a direct user fee charged for recovering the construction and operating costs of a discrete road, bridge or tunnel (or a system thereof).

In essence, a toll then, is a relatively simple financial mechanism with a clear relationship between the driv-er’s use of the facility and their payment for that use.

Congestion pricing is vastly more complicated. It affects individual driver behavior and travel decisions through a mechanism that seeks whatever price point is needed to achieve an impact, i.e. reduced demand, and affect a certain traffic level. The price associated with attaining that traffic level has no particular relationship to the care and maintenance of the facility, and at the end of the day the revenues generated could be used for any purpose that a government might think of, from building

Congestion Pricing


Every article that talks about transport funding begins with the same standard preface. The growth of alternative fuels and resulting slower rate of increase in fuel tax revenue; higher average vehicle fuel economy, and the political aversion to fuel taxes combine to create a situation where the resources available to supply roadway capacity are outstripped by the demand for it. The result is congestion.

The response has become routine too: to keep pace with future needs for mobility and for the competitive economies which depend on it means finding additional revenue sources, funding mechanisms, and pricing strategies. The new revenue source is clear – user fees. The funding mechanism is fairly apparent too – tolling. But to us, the interesting thing is that in the last few years, the mechanism to address a funding issue is being offered by political leaders as synonymous with a policy strategy to mitigate congestion.

Tolling is a tool – but is it policy?If you said “yes” to that then that is the same as saying that charging for a meal in a restaurant is a policy. The proprietor, unless a philanthropist, would look at you

new infrastructure to pursuing environmental projects. In fact, most applications of congestion pricing have,

so far, earmarked revenues for transit or other projects within or near the facility being priced. But just as we see “dedicated” fuel taxes transferred to education or other good public uses, it isn’t hard to predict covetous eyes looking at applying these predictable revenue streams to their “higher” purposes. A cynical person (perhaps the authors) might even envisage cases where the revenue demands of these “other” needs could be rationalized to perpetuate certain levels of pricing or even congestion itself.

The degree to which a driver’s payment for a facility moves away from the immediate and direct use of it, the “toll is not a tax” argument begins to fail and ultimately collapses. Historically, it has. For example, the Con-necticut Turnpike was tolled at one point, but had its tolls removed in a governatorial election when people realized tolls were being used to support maintenance of other state highways and the Turnpike itself had rut-ted lanes, potholes and poor maintenance. This shows that drivers must experience a premium driving expe-rience for the fee. If not, the “value” of the facility is degraded to just another road. You can extend this to

understand why variable tolls, i.e., congestion pricing, are being considered by many operators: if congestion during peak periods reduces flow to a standstill, then the public may view the toll facility as just another clogged road, undermining the toll concept in general.

Again, though it may be marketed or pitched as a “user fee,” if the public believes that “congestion pric-ing” is a euphemism for a different type of “shadow tax,” you damage the practice and application of tolling as a valid means to build and maintain infrastructure. But, when done right, as it has to date in Singapore, London and Stockholm, congestion pricing works! Congestion is reduced, traffic moves more freely and drivers who stay and pay the charge save time and flow freely on pre-viously clogged streets. In fact, in Stockholm’s pricing test, one wonders if the success of the test was realized during the six months of the trial when congestion all but disappeared or when the trial ended and conges-tion returned.

In the cases above, we see that the driving experience is a value-related proposition. Both tolling and conges-tion charging impose a fee, but what does the driver get for it? What value is derived for his payment?

From the singular perspective of economics, or trans-


Congestion Pricing

“It isn’t hard to predict covetous eyes looking at applying these

predictable revenue streams to their

“higher” purposes”

portation management, tolls and congestion pricing make eminent sense. They provide choice and options for individuals in choosing how to make the trips they need or whether they need to make them at all. But we must be very aware and careful with the political issues these mechanisms are subject to.

Tolling, congestion pricing and technologyWhether you employ tolling or congestion pricing, what is clear is that while the supply of transportation facili-ties has only inched forward in the last 20 years, demand has leaped past it (see graph). With limited funds and limited space for new capacity, technology has to fill the gap. And the gaps are large. For example, the Puget Sound Region of Seattle, Washington has identified US$40billion of local transportation needs. At the state level, it is nearly US$8billion(3).

To meet the funding needs, various traditional means are suggested: sales, motor vehicle and gas excise tax measures. They could generate a part or all of the fund-ing necessary. But compounding these funding prob-lems is the unwillingness to raise taxes, uncertainty of fuel costs (exceeding US$60 a barrel), inflation, and material and construction costs that together erode the ability to deliver projects within estimated budgets.

What’s necessary is some “out-of-the-box” thinking. Rather than taxing goods and services in an unending stream of incremental increases to meet portions of the need, tolling and congestion charging are proven alter-natives to achieving a sustainable transport system.

The concepts of tolling and congestion charging place responsibility for travel choices squarely in the hands of the individual where they can best be managed and decided. Further, there is considerable scope in the pricing approach to encourage people to make smarter choices. The ability of the network to implement an effective pricing strategy, one that manages demand and reduces congestion, depends on technology. Com-bined with it, usage and access fees can build a fund that supports a sustainable transport system while decreas-ing congestion.

System technologyTechnology is not the limiting factor in the decision to move to tolls or congestion charging today. It exists today. And tomorrow, like any of our personal comput-ers or other digital devices, it will be smaller, faster and more reliable (and probably cheaper). Candidate tech-nologies are thus based on considering a combination of a) currently operating systems, b) developing new technologies, and c) the scale of the proposed project. The candidates may include the following:

1. Dedicated Short Range Communications (DSRC) Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) Schemes (with license plate recognition for compliance and enforce-ment): DSRC is the most common form of primary elec-tronic road pricing technology in general use and is the standard on most open road toll (ORT) facilities. Exam-ples abound – E-ZPass in the North East is a great regional case amongst many such systems operating in many countries today. The technology is based on the

use of electronic tags/transponders, which communi-cate with gantry-mounted equipment at defined charge or check points.

In some parts of the world, the units can also incorpo-rate a smart card feature for payment. The roadside equipment identifies and verifies each vehicle’s on-board equipment (OBE) and, depending on the type of system, either processes a charge from its designated account or confirms its rights of access. In most systems, the DSRC system also locates the vehicle within its detection zone by using an array of DSRC transceivers.

2. Vehicle Positioning Systems (VPS) use a satellite location system (generally, a GPS receiver and compu-ter) to determine the vehicle’s position and measure location and distance traveled for the purposes of charg-ing and access control. An example is the German sys-tem for charging trucks along autobahns. A limitation of vehicle-based systems is that, in addition to the position system itself, they require an external communications system to periodically report the vehicle’s required charges. Germany’s TollCollect truck toll system (the only adopted GPS-based system currently in operation) uses cellular telephone technology, and its associated charges, to perform this task.

3. Image-Based or license plate-reading systems: Image-based optical character recognition technology is based on images taken of vehicle license plates and processed through optical character recognition soft-ware to identify the vehicle.

4. Other RFID Systems (including passive, cellular tel-ephone, and other technologies): In-vehicle RFID iden-tifiers are read by roadside detectors to record vehicles passing defined points. These are similar to the OBEs described above but do not use the DSRC standards in existence or being developed by the USDOT. Instead, they use other communications protocols and have dif-ferent price, performance, and capabilities in compari-son to the DSRC-based RFID systems.

Any technology solution should be based on current industry standard devices and communications tech-nologies to best capture their cost and security benefits. Because the technologies that can be used to perform the required transaction processing are evolving rap-idly, costs for system changeover to emerging national standards should also be considered.

At present, CEN-278 standard units use a 5.8GHz fre-quency in Europe and most locations around the world. In the USA currently, the 915MHz frequency technology base with several standards is used regionally. There is a USDOT movement to adopt a new standard and poten-tially shift to a higher 5.9GHz frequency called “DSRC WAVE”, or Wireless Access in Vehicular Environments. As evidenced by interest in Japan, China, Australia and even Europe by the Intelligent Vehicle Project, WAVE may become a new international standard. This stand-ard is specifically designed for multi-lane, free-flow applications and differs from other technologies and currently used in dedicated toll lanes.

Although a DSRC package using tag/transponders linked to account-based payments has been identified as the most suitable for toll and congestion charging

Congestion Pricing


Congestion Pricing


applications, this could soon be changed to a system that uses OBEs with integral smart card facilities. This combination could reduce back-office processing, improve user convenience, and benefit from smart card payment facilities being developed for multi-modal transportation systems and the banking industry. Such a solution is not new: it has been used in Singapore since 1999. In this system, the smart cards are bank-issued devices fully interoperable not only for transportation but for every day purchases of goods and services.

The USDOT’s DSRC WAVE system may also use VPS signals in the future of the application. This would pro-vide a more effective means of measuring location and distance traveled for the purposes of charging – an important requirement. A VPS-enhanced system could provide greater flexibility to how a region would vary charges which in turn could influence more travel and transport choices.

DSRC WAVE with VPS may also provide a better fit and a more equitable solution in a regional transport net-work. If one were to add payment by a bank-issued con-tact-less credit-card, then a complete solution could be realized in the near future. Such a system could also address privacy issues through the use of cash-based “top-up” cards that allow road user fees without identi-fying the user or his account information. Although, to date, the cost of VPS units has limited their use to major heavy vehicle applications, their costs are decreasing. Once they have been established, VPS-based systems have the advantages of wide coverage and far fewer checkpoints than other technologies. They could be added alongside the existing DSRC units and integrated with same smart card accounts and payment systems for a more complete, multi-modal solution.

Current strategy is limitedThe strategy for the road network has tended to focus on three key elements:

• Providing more road space where that makes sense;• Improving the way roads are managed;• Promoting smarter journey choices through improved

Public Transport.Good personal journey choices and traffic manage-

ment can help ensure that the maximum number of peo-ple can complete their journey in a reasonable time. Traffic management measures can range from the sim-ply changing priority at signalized intersections and phasing traffic lights, to more vigorous interventions such as active traffic management to restore traffic flows after accidents.

But these work only as long as the supply of the avail-able road space is not exceeded by our individual demand for that same space. Under current and future traffic forecasts, without demand management, these measures will not solve the problem alone.

Even with the funding approaches identified above, current trends suggest we will not stop congestion from getting worse. That is why the authors believe that tolls and congestion charging offer the best potential to man-age demand. The two concepts provide a package of measures to help individuals make the best choice, sup-ported by price incentives for their actions.

Why user fees? A well designed local “user fee” package of tolls and congestion charging has the potential to reduce con-gestion significantly in a local area. Drivers can expect reduced journey times, improved journey time reliabil-ity and even significant improvements in public trans-port. This is good for every user, whether they be shoppers, workers or businesses. On a more regional level, although the Federal Government is looking at the feasibility of introducing a national road pricing mecha-nism, local communities, regions and States needn’t wait

for a national policy to begin accruing some of the benefits suggested above. As the US DOT Urban Partnership (UP) Program(4) suggests, local demand management pilots will be invaluable in learning les-sons for the design and implementation of any future State or National approach to the subject.

When implemented, any local “user fee” concept needs to be well-designed. This means developing more sophisticated solutions. As suggested by the Stockholm solution, demonstrating the benefits of user fees as part of building public acceptance, as well as improving our understanding of the system design and technology, can help to gain greater acceptance of and confidence in the fact that technology can not only achieve the benefits, but also protect privacy.

Act now or forever be stuck in trafficWe are entering a period of consequences. Dithering, baffling, half-measures to produce incremental solu-tions to our transport problems are eroding confidence in public stewardship and trust. The application of elec-tronic tolling and payment services on new facilities or congestion charging programs on the wider networks is a value proposition to solve local transportation and sustainability problems. It provides the necessary fund-ing that allows the opportunity to solve the urban or regional transportation issues without state or national funding. The amount of the toll or fee would mean that the region could immediately address its transport projects with confidence and determination. It would

Congestion Pricing

also mean that further gas tax, sales tax or motor vehicle registration and licensing fees increases are not neces-sary now or in the future. We have to think and act boldly to produce sustainable transport solutions to grow our economy and quality of life simultaneously. The one-two punch of smartly applied tolling technology and congestion pricing program delivers that solution. TH

Tim McGuckin is Executive Director of the OmniAir Consortium, Inc.

Jack Opiola is a Principal of Booz Allen Hamilton in London, and a pioneer in advancing state of the art

tolling, congestion charging and road pricing programs throughout the world.

Neil Gray is Director of Legislative Affairs at the International Bridge Tunnel & Turnpike Association in

Washington, DC.

References 1 Toll. (2007). In Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved May 25, 2007, from

Encyclopedia Britannica Online: http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-

9072804

2 Congestion Pricing: A Primer (HTML) - Publication Number: FHWA-HOP-

07-074, Section II, “What is Congestion Pricing?” http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.

gov/publications/congestionpricing/index.htm

3 Destination 2030 – Via an Alternate Route, Washington State

Transportation Center & Booz Allen Hamilton, March 2007.

4 For information on the program, visit http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/tolling_

pricing/value_pricing/resources/documents/upa.htm.



A new goldrush?Many European companies are opening offices in the US - but what prompted them to do so and why now? In the first of this two-article focus, DANIEL ZAYDMAN, managing director of UK-based RedSpeedTM International details the thinking behind his company’s foray across the Atlantic

Business Matters


In the world of pop music, success is measured by the impact of the band on the American charts. They can only truly say that they arrived when it have con-quered the Billboard charts.

Such aspirations of US success have moved many European companies to look west to the US market. In the field of automated enforcement, RedSpeed™ USA, daughter company of UK-based RedSpeed™ Interna-tional, dreams of American domination have been tem-pered by a careful and measured approach and realistic expectations of what can be achieved.

There is no that building a successful organisation within America requires hard work and total commit-ment. So with a successful company operating in the UK selling digital speed and red light enforcement systems around the World, why take the risk?

As we see it timing is everything. We have been watch-ing the developing market in the States with interest for a while now looking for the right opportunity to make our move. With the market still in it’s infancy in America, there are very real risks for anyone looking to develop in the field of photo enforcement. Laws passed are being challenged and tested all of the time.

In some cases the plug has been pulled on programs following the expensive installation of equipment as happened in Virginia. Interestingly, Virginia has since reviewed their policies and there will be a further change in the law as of 1 July 2007.

Enforcement fits the BillThe passing of a State Senate Bill in Illinois presented an ideal opportunity for a new company such as RedSpeed bringing new enforcement technology. Moving into vir-gin territory certainly presents challenges - however, there are no historical relationships with existing busi-nesses to overcome. Such relationships would prove irrelevant with the new technologies that are available. With no existing contracts in place, infrastructure sys-tems can be moulded from day one to fit the new tech-nology rather than having to adapt to existing systems.

Once the opportunity was identified, there was a need to move quickly. Plans had to be drawn up to put the location, people and procedures in place to be able to present a credible option for the municipalities to do business with. To achieve this aim, Illinois became like a second home for me flying out on a two weekly basis with the task of putting a team together was the highest priority.

Lombard, Illinois was finally selected as a prime loca-tion for the company because of its accessibility. A core team were selected based on the knowledge and expe-rience they could bring to the company. This core of staff has grown with the company.

Flexibility has been a key factor in all areas of the growing business. There is no question that in the form-ative months everyone has been required to pitch in and help in areas outside of their traditional roles, but such flexibility has built a much stronger bond within the team and there is no doubting their commitment to the cause. Existing systems have also had to be adapted to meet the needs of the municipalities.

Video evidence is required in Illinois so the Red-Guard™ system was changed to include a 12 second video clip to accompany the traditional three images captured by the system. RedCheck™ the back office offence processing software has also been adapted to fit the legal processes of the State. With violations reviewed by RedSpeed employees and approved by a member of the police force before being posted on a secure web-site for the offender to view every effort is made to ensure that all parties get the best possible service available.

Significant inroadsIn a little over six months, RedSpeed has installed sev-eral systems into the State which are now fully opera-tional processing violations and has over 20 contracts requiring more than 150 cameras. We have just proc-essed and collected the first million dollars in fines for our clients, a real milestone for the company. This all represents a fantastic achievement in such a very short space of time and a testimony to the efforts made by a very professional team.

Having quickly captured and dominating the enforce-ment market in Illinois there is no room for competition, however there are no plans for the company to sit back and enjoy the fruits of such early success. Continuous investment in the company is the long term strategy in place to grow the business. Exhibiting at the ITS Amer-ica Annual Meeting in Palm Springs this June has put the company name on the map and shown us a serious con-tender in the US market. Further plans to grow the busi-ness outside of Illinois have been discussed with key States being identified for expansion.

It is clear that moving into the USA has been a major risk for RedSpeed™ but the rewards of working in a pro-gressive and exciting market place have made it too good an opportunity to walk away from. In Illinois, Red-Speed is already topping the charts in the enforcement market – it is just a matter of time before this new star shines over the whole country. TH

RedSpeed Illinois CEO Robert Lieberman



The second of our two-article focus on European companies identifying openings in the US market sees PAULO ANDRE of SICE explaining the rationale behind this proudly Spanish entity opening an office in Austin, Texas

Roots and branches

“Technology never was the problem, the problem was not knowing how

far we wanted to go with it or who we wanted to reach”

Business Matters

SICE’s presence in the USA is our latest and greatest commitment into one apparently single market, involving unprecedented investments and a very careful preparation for a soft landing, taking into account the fact that we are involved in the most attractive and competitive marketplace in the world.

One historical and curious fact: SICE was founded in 1921 as a branch company of General Electric and 86 years later SICE has returned to his roots, now as part of ACS, the huge Spanish economic group. SICE is bringing to the USA the ultimate experience in Free Flow tolling and transaction management (back office), together with our portfolio of ITS and conventional tolling solutions.

More and more infrastructure projects are demanding financial resources from the capital markets: only com-panies and consortiums with great experience are able to bid in such a specific environment and this is the rea-son why we are seeing these companies growing every day, feeding the ravenous mergers and acquisitions market around the world.

The key performance indicators of these private com-panies are far beyond expectations when we take a ret-rospective look at the same market 15 years ago. The need to make provision of real warrantees for the project’s finance and the amount of risk involved in each one of them compels and indeed propels each one to higher and higher levels of expertise and maturity.

Erroneously, many owners of infrastructures don’t provide enough assessment of the projects they want to launch and the deadlines are always too short to do any-thing about it. They need to provide solutions for the eminent dryness of resources in government budgets to face the increasing needs for the transportation sector, build new and maintain the old.

Popular misconceptionsOn the other side of the coin there are a few politicians whose populist words will easily find a place in the hearts and minds of the people. Slogans like “No tolls” are music to the ears of voters, as are the vaguely nation-alist outcries against foreign investment or ownership, such as “Foreign companies are buying our roads!”

In this brief scenario we are able to make an evalua-tion on the huge amount of risk-taking happening in these arenas. One of the most valuable differentials that

SICE is bringing to the market is the capability to share part of this risk with our future partners, considering three main factors: business itself, time frame and state -of-the-art technology.

Transport operators sometimes spend valuable time and energy trying to develop technologies that are capable of supporting core activities and solving cor-porate problems that are the result of an absence of innovative and continuous evolution of their business and operational models. These new technologies are already here and as ready to be consumed as any “of the shelf product”. Based on the last 19 years of working in this business I can say with my hand on my heart that technology never was the problem, the problem was not knowing how far we wanted to go with it or who we wanted to reach.

Two worlds collideBesides the acknowledgement of this principle, SICE strives hard to bring to our clients the best of both worlds - advanced technology and comprehensive, innovative tailor-made solutions for transportation. Adding a share of risk results not only in a simple product but also in a value-added proposal to a long-term partnership, much like our recent projects in Santiago de Chile and Melbourne, Australia.

SICE’s presence in the USA doesn’t necessarily mean in all 50 States, but much more a strategic approach to those States in which the policies and political environ-ment seem to be better equipped to make decisions on a PPP basis. This justifies having our US office in Austin, Texas as it gives us an excellent vista on the whole North American continent. We started this new era with a firm belief that first we needed to do a lot of hard work over the next two or three years until we consolidate our operations. This strategy includes, most probably, at least one acquisition of an American company.

Change is inevitable and SICE is also contributing to a major change in the transportation market, proposing new business models to our client/partners, suitable end-to-end solutions capable of answering not only “big bang” projects but also sustained step-by-step flexible and scalable architectures.

Last but not least we will share risks and concerns with our partners in advance, in order to win our license to operate for many years on merit. TH

[email protected]


Market Intelligence


Solving the

solution

ITS is loosely defined as the application of different technologies and field devices for the transporta-tion system.

However, it is not uncommon to get lost in technologi-cal realm of discussion where we try to match the latest and greatest innovations with problems that system owners are experiencing, i.e., the old “a technology solution in search of a problem” approach. We have become so inundated with continuous advancements in technologies for ITS that with such advancements, it’s hard to believe that there are any problems left to solve.

We have communications networks that can take all of the video and data that any agency can generate and shove it down a single fiber, or software packages that can identify whether an accident has occurred, predict the amount of congestion that will result, make intelli-gent decisions as to which routes are the best ones to take to avoid the congested area and even inform the proper personnel about the accident so they can carry out their specialized functions to respond to the accident.

Network intelligence?All of this sounds wonderful. But what if the ITS network has marginal reliability and uptime? All of these great features would be useless for the end users. It is not uncommon for ITS networks to have limited availability due to faulty network connections, lack of personnel skilled in maintaining the system, lack of virtual tools to help diagnose the problems or even automatically cor-rect any connection problems.

As ITS networks evolve into the mainstream, this also involves utilizing the more widely deployed main-streamed technologies. One mainstream approach to making ITS networks more available is through the use of packet-switching (e.g., IP-based), or the use of a more ‘intelligent network’ – an irony considering it should already be an Intelligent Transportation System.

We are in a networked world with IP-based systems having the largest installed base, but in comparison most of our ITS networks are not based on IP technolo-gies or standards. There are, however, Ethernet-based ITS networks, but most of these tend to be completely standalone without any connections to other networks. These networks are also typically designed, operated and maintained by ITS staff or even traffic engineers. While there are many successful deployments of such systems, there still appears to be the mindset that ITS is an island unto itself with its own set of “specialized” needs and requirements. This mindset is set to change as the concept of converged networks becomes more the standard.

What are the business requirements?There are several key steps that should be part of any network design. Besides the fundamental Concept of Operations, determining the business requirements is essential. Simple questions such as

• Who will have access to the network and what will be their functions?

• What are the data delivery priorities?

Market Intelligence


KEVIN AGUIGUI on how intelligent transportation

systems need to be planned, operated and integrated

intelligently

“With the continuous

advancements in ITS technologies

it’s hard to believe that there are any problems left to

solve”

Market Intelligence


• What are the network security requirements and who will enforce them?

• What is the desired system availability/uptime both in terms of the network and the data delivery?

Understanding the business functions of the system as it relates to the network will lend itself to a better design of the network. One should also understand the specif-ics of each different device to be connected over the network, i.e., high bandwidth, low latency, interfaces, monitoring applications.

For example, high bandwidth video feeds from a cam-era may only be served up on the network when an operator needs to view the video images whereas a traf-fic controller will be serving up low bandwidth data on the network continuously.

Consider convergenceOne important consideration in the design of an ITS net-work that may be based on Ethernet/IP standards is the integration into an agency’s enterprise network. This can be thought of converging the ITS network such that it is transported like any other piece of data on the enter-prise network. This is possible since an ITS network based on Ethernet/IP standards is no different that any other IT network. However, the design approaches are very different. When an IT network is being designed, the concept of providing services is at the core of the system.

The types of services will most often dictate the shape of the network. Comparatively, when designing an ITS network the items typically discussed first is where the physical infrastructure will be placed to achieve the connectivity to the field devices. All too often this is predicated on the implementation of a dedicated and exclusive ITS network with ties to no other network within the owning jurisdiction. This also leads to opera-tions and maintenance being performed by the ITS staff.

A key part of convergence between IT and ITS net-works is the use of Layer 3, or in nearly all cases, the Internet Protocol (IP). Once the business requirements have been developed and refined, one will most likely find that the types of services and their various needs tend towards using Layer 3 routing to the edge of the network rather than just in the core, which is most com-mon in ITS.

In other words, thinking beyond just Ethernet (Layer 2) with its limited end-to-end routing of data is becoming more necessary. How does this make the data more available one might ask? Well, given that Layer 3 is the single key factor in an IT network, by enabling services to be carried over an IT network by utilizing Layer 3 routing, there are opportunities for more IT per-sonnel resources and tools to be involved in ensuring that the network and the services are available to the end user, or the operators.

Virtual mainstreamingWhen thinking of mainstreaming ITS, it is most common to incorporate ITS into larger improvement projects such as roadway or freeway improvements. There is

another part of mainstreaming that also involves the vir-tual aspects of ITS. Taking an ITS network and making it an integral part of an agency’s enterprise network is one such approach of virtual mainstreaming. Another approach may be to engage IT staff to be part of the operations and maintenance crew for the ITS network. It makes sense to have IT staff involved in the activities of what is essentially an IT network. However, it is usually not as simple as calling IT personnel to troubleshoot an ITS network when there are problems.

There should be some pre-planning efforts to ensure that all involved personnel have their designated roles and responsibilities.

Plan it rightLike any other kind of IT network, ITS networks require a substantial amount of upfront planning. Several steps to consider when planning an ITS network includes:

• Hire a consultant to help develop and evaluate the specific needs and to develop the system requirements (business and technical);

• Develop an ITS Master Plan;

• Involve IT staff in the beginning when planning the system and developing the requirements;

• Have discussions with other agencies who have simi-lar types of networks deployed;

• Conduct a Pilot Project if funding and schedule permit.

Perhaps the most important of these steps is the involvement of IT personnel. They have the expertise and experience in planning, operating and maintaining computer networks. In addition, their input during the needs and requirements can be valuable especially when considering the different types of services for the entire network.

Examples of the different types of services may include:

• Wireless (Wi-Fi) systems;• Cameras for traffic and security functions;• Traffic controllers;• Traffic detection systems;• Center-to-Center Systems;• SCADA systems;• Business applications: e-mail;

• Voice over IP;• Mobile Communications for public safety, fleet

vehicles, public works, command centers and portable systems.

Once the services for the network have been deter-mined, the delivery of these services including the operations and maintenance can then be determined. This approach can be very beneficial to any type of agency wishing to deploy ITS devices that require a high degree of reliability. Involving the skill sets of IT per-sonnel is valuable in that they can maintain ITS devices as just another set of appliances and services that are transported over a converged IT network. This model is working successfully in many small and large agencies where both the IT and the ITS networks are integrated, some even on the same physical infrastructure.

Consider that an ITS network that has less reliability and uptime (e.g. 80 per cent of the devices are commu-nicating) is commonly accepted as typical. Now, imag-ine the same for your own agency’s network with your desktop computers as having the same level of reliabil-ity and uptime. This would be totally unacceptable.

Technically speakingDuring the network planning efforts of an IP-based ITS network, there are several key factors to consider. First, it is important to develop a VLAN plan and IP address scheme upfront. This includes pre-planning elements such as carving out the VLANs by service types, device locations, or even types of devices, planning the span-ning tree root bridge/switch, and laying out the IP addresses for future expansion and adding in future net-works.

It will be key to control the broadcast domains and plan the network shape optimally and effectively. Should one desire to integrate the IP-based ITS network into an enterprise network, work with the IT personnel to develop an IP routing plan including the routing between VLANs, use of classless routing protocols if possible, multicast routing schemes and subnetting. The key to a converged network is to utilize Layer 2 VLANs in combination with Layer 3 protocols for a com-plete network.

Summing it upThe success of ITS depends on the availability and reli-ability of the delivery mechanisms for the data. As more and more ITS networks are IP-based, we need to start thinking of virtual mainstreaming of these networks. This involves planning the network based on the deliv-ery of data and services of which IT personnel would play a crucial role during the network planning efforts.

With IP-based networks for ITS, there are very feasi-ble opportunities for integrated agency networks where ITS/Traffic communications is viewed as another net-work element and ITS devices are viewed as another end appliance. TH

Kevin Aguigui, PE, CSEP, is Senior Systems Engineer at Kimley-Horn & Associates. He can be contacted via email

at [email protected]

Market Intelligence



Beginning in November of 2005, a team of ITS Amer-ica members have been involved in a cross-country tour. Its primary goal has been to showcase the ben-efits of Vehicle Infrastructure Integration (VII).

Why are they on this nationwide “showcase” tour? Essentially they are looking for confirmation that VII, as it is proposed today, makes sense. Is there finally a sure-fire way to make roads safer and less congested?

The showcase dares to ask the question: “Can lives be saved by using a dedicated communications network to empower the United States’ ever evolving intelligent transportation system?” As the showcase continues to travel across the country, the unscientific consensus indicates a groundswell of support increasing for VII and the benefits it will bring to the current transporta-tion system. Phrases like “The Internet for Vehicles,” a

“Collision-Free Intersection,” and the new “Cool” driv-ing experience are often spoken in reference to the VII Showcase.

The showcase tour idea was born during the week of 6 November 2005, when nine transportation companies and government agencies teamed to reveal the future of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS). Econolite man-aged an intersection exhibition that combined a variety of VII demonstrations at the 12th Annual ITS World Con-gress’s Innovative Mobility Showcase (IMS) in San Fran-cisco. These “Intelligent Intersection” demonstrations featured a variety of ITS technology applications, which highlighted the future transportation communications initiatives being developed by the United States Depart-ment of Transportation (USDOT) VII Initiative.

The Vehicle Infrastructure Integration Initiative began

Showcase to successVII is a surefire way to make our roads safer and less congested, says FRANK PROVENZANO

VII

when the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) licensed the 5.9GHz Dedicated Short Range Communi-cations (DSRC) frequency for the exclusive use of the transportation industry, to propagate the use of en-hanced safety applications and more efficient mobility solutions. The VII Coalition, with members including US federal and state transportation agencies, and private sector automotive manufacturers, joined forces to estab-lish a framework of study to evaluate the feasibility of creating a communication infrastructure to support Vehicle-to-Vehicle and Vehicle-to-Infrastructure com-munications – a DSRC nationwide wireless network.

A new driving experienceThe showcase exhibitions draw attention to the capa-bilities of technologies that support the future of “smart” traffic management systems that speak to the roadside and communicate directly with vehicles, through inno-vative wireless communication applications. Viewers are provided with a unique driving experience, designed to tweak their imaginations, giving them a window into a future where interactive wireless commu-nications is the norm.

This new driving experience provides the driver with more information that tells them why traffic is blocking the road ahead and aids the driver in making an informed decision to exit the freeway and take an alternate route, or to stay put and wait because the traffic situation is not serious enough to warrant a detour. This new wireless environment provides the drivers with information to keep them more in tune with their surroundings, alert-ing them of unsafe or dangerous events that might hap-

pen, and advises the driver of safe alternatives to maneuver through a potentially harmful incident.

VII Technology Showcase evolutionThe objective of the first “Intelligent Intersection” exhibit was to combine the expertise of a variety of ITS America members and to explore the possible safety and mobility applications of the VII Initiative. DSRC’s ability to exchange information between the vehicle and the intersection was examined and found to be a technically viable solution for future roadway users.

The next evolution of the VII Showcase took place in June 2006, while celebrating the 50th anniversary of federal legislation being given the “green light” to begin engineering one of the greatest projects ever undertaken -- The Interstate Highway System. To observe the 50th anniversary of the highways, Econolite again teamed with ITS America and a number of its members to illustrate the “Intelligent Intersection” of the future. Econolite and its partners refurbished a dem-onstration “ITS CamVan,” creating a mobile VII Technol-ogy Showcase, which is now capable of traveling across the country to display the latest VII applications.

That month was punctuated by the stops made by the procession of vehicles re-enacting President Eisenhow-er’s initial 1919 military convoy from Washington DC to San Francisco. The future of vehicle travel, using VII technologies, was repeatedly demonstrated to commu-nities in California, Utah, Nebraska, Wyoming, Illinois, and Washington, DC, and gave them the opportunity to participate in the American Association of State High-way and Transportation Officials’ (AASHTO) commemo-


VII

Left: the VII Technology Showcase hits Nebraska. Above: Merrill Eisenhower Atwater is interviewed at the Lincoln Highway Monument

VII

ration of the 1956 Interstate Highway Bill.Today, the VII Technology Showcase is still traveling

across the country, visiting ITS America state chapter organizations and showing local stakeholders the VII driving experience. The VII Showcase has traveled over 10,000 miles to date, crisscrossing the country several times (visiting 14 States in the process) and providing the local transportation agencies and the general public an introduction to the prospects of vehicle travel to come.

Showcase demonstrations are pres-ently scheduled through to the ITS America World Congress in New York City in November 2008. Thus far, the Showcase has made VII presentations to over 7000 key transportation profes-sionals and stakeholders, and an esti-mated number expected to grow to over 20,000 by the end of 2008. Not included in attendance estimates are the reporters who are ardently featuring VII experi-ences in hundreds of newspaper articles, and television and Internet featured stories.

Driving the debate to decision 2008The ITS America team has been actively introducing VII to transportation industry professionals and elected government officials in an attempt to engage in a larger VII discussion. At this stage in the development of VII, it is important to consider the input voiced by stakehold-

ers and the general public before automakers and the federal government proceeds in the deployment of a nationwide VII transportation network. The milestone decision of whether or not such a system is economi-cally and socially viable will take place in late 2008.

The good news is that the initial reaction to the VII Showcases has been positive, up to levels impressive even to VII enthusiasts. It seems as though there is a

groundswell of support for VII among the various parties participating in its exposition. It appears that the benefits that VII will bring to our transportation system are being communicated, accepted, and embraced by the trans-portation community.

It is believed that the technology showcases furnish the VII Coalition with the valuable information needed to make the right decision – a dedi-cated transportation communications

network that will contribute to a better overall driving experience for everyone, by making roads safer and congestion-free.

The VII Technology Showcase experienceThe backbone of the VII Technology Showcase is a fully-operational traffic control system, which demonstrates the capabilities of an interactive VII network, in synchro-nization with ITS technology that is in use today. Using a typical traffic controller, which can be found at any US


The IMS Showcase was the star attraction of the 2005 ITS World Congress in San Francisco

“The VII Showcase has traveled over 10,000 miles to

date, crisscrossing the country several times, visiting 14

States”

signalized intersection and standard DSRC roadside equipment, the showcase demonstrates how a traffic management system can interactively communicate with the vehicle and the traffic control system. All of the traffic system data that is collected and distributed through the system is real-time, designed to be viewed by the spectator while driving in a demo vehicle.

The VII Showcase experience includes an In-Vehicle Traffic Signal Violation Warning System to effectively reduce intersection collisions and an In-Vehicle Signing application to show how work zones can be made safer. Users get a view of how a future Public Safety Vehicle Priority Signal Activation System can work in the future.

Traffic Signal Violation Warning: an “Intelligent Inter-section” distributes instantaneous traffic signal infor-mation to nearby vehicles. The vehicle uses this data, vehicle position, and speed to determine the risk of an unsafe passage through the intersection. The applica-tion produces advisories when needed, cueing the driver to perform corrective actions and consequently reducing their risk of an intersection collision.

Public Safety Vehicle Priority Signal Activation: a pub-lic safety vehicle issues a request to the intersection to receive traffic signal priority. The traffic signal state is changed to a green light if recognized as an authorized response vehicle, allowing the vehicle fast, safe passage through the intersection.

In-Vehicle Signing: dynamic road condition data is received from the DSRC roadside equipment. Audible and visual advisories are presented to the driver as the

VII


vehicle approaches an active work zone, avoiding a potentially dangerous situation. TH

VII Technology Showcase partnersThrough the time that the Showcase has been providing demonstrations, the list of ITS America member part-ners includes:

California PATH (Partners for Advanced Transit and Highways), www.path.berkeley.edu

Caltrans (California Department of Transportation), www.dot.ca.gov

Connexis, www.connexis.comDaimlerChrysler Research Engineering and Design,

www.dcrtna.com/index.html Eberle Design, www.editraffic.com Econolite, www.econolite.com GDI Communications, www.sgdi.com ITS America, www.itsa.org/viitechdemos.html Mark IV, www.mark-iv.comNAVTEQ, www.navteq.com Raytheon, www.raytheon.com Shel Leader, ITS/CommunicationsTechnoComWireless, www.technocom-wireless.com Wireless Technology Inc., www.wirelesstech.com

Frank Provenzano is Director of New Business Development at Econolite and is Chairman of the ITS

America VII Technology Showcase Subcommittee. He can be contacted at [email protected]

or visit the website at www.econolite.com

ITS America’s President and CEO Neil Schuster addresses the press in Arizona

Increasing traffic density and requirements to have intelligent transportation solutions has made it necessary, to create flexible sys-tems to guide traffic more effi-ciently.

Lane control signalization is one important factor contributing to traf-fic safety. Some tragic incidents in tunnels for passenger vehicles has showed how important it is to keep safety within tunnels at the highest achievable level.

New tunnel architectures and traf-fic technology designs take the information based on the past trag-edies into consideration, but the rebuilding of existing tunnels would cost the operators and traffic organi-zations.

A critical element is that too many old tunnels do not have the appro-priate height to install the normal 18” x 18” lane control sign. The ceil-ing height of these tunnels is too low

to mount regular LED signs or to use other technologies. The usage of even smaller signs using the same vertical display, would not be a sub-stitutive solution.

These signs would be too small to be recognized by the driver, or they could not display the arrows or red crosses to indicate lane closings appropriately.

Dambach’s research department developed a new and innovative solution for such safety related traf-fic situations. The problem the devel-opers had to solve was to create an LED sign, which is flat enough to be installed in low ceiling tunnels or other low ceiling buildings and at the same time, to fulfill all quality requirements in the sense of reada-bility and light output and achieve easy maintainability, and to inform the driver with a dynamic sign of lane closings or the necessity to change lanes.

To see the lightsThe patented display technology for Dambach’s LIFETM sign is the result of development work, which lasted several years. The outcome of this effort is the new MA-Technology (Multi-Angle-Technology).

The light emitting diode rows are not arranged below each other, they are now displaced in the driving direction (see illustration). The LED pixels are automatically directed towards the driver, creating a clear and legible perception.

Caused by the enlargement effect, the Life sign attracts the motorist’s attention using high intensity LEDs, and while approaching the sign, the driver gets the impression that the message height is actually growing larger and larger in size. This feature increases driver attention and improves safety. For the driver it is important to have a clear readable message at a good distance .


T-Focus

Light at the beginning of the tunnel

Dambach’s ANDREAS FRIEBOLIN on a new generation of LED tunnel sign systems

Clear and presentSingle LEDs within the sign are bun-dled and are powered with low volt-age. The LEDs of different bundles are arranged in a staggered order. In this way, even in case a defect occurs and one bundle is not functioning, the sign message is clearly readable.

Another feature is the differentia-tion between the sign and the mount-ing rack. The sign is hung and clamped into the rack, but for main-tenance, it can easily be unhinged or replaced, without the necessity to demount the attachment rack.

It was impossible to realize these before mentioned safety require-ments previous to the invention of this new technology. Nowadays it is possible to retrofit existing tunnels with LED signs. The LIFE sign is a viable option to plan tunnels from the beginning in a more cost efficient

way. Every additional inch, which has to be excavated through a mountain or below a river, costs millions of dollars. The employ-ment of this new advanced tech-nology could lead to a significant reduction of dollars spent on

future traffic projects.

Text educationThe initial idea was to create lane control signs to inform drivers if a lane within the tunnel was closed, due to construction work, an acci-dent or other occurrences. But this technology also makes it possible to display predefined text and inform the driver about dangerous situations.

In case of an emergency, messages like “Danger”, “CO-Alarm”, or “Stop” are just some examples of what can be done by a tunnel opera-tor to increase the security of drivers when traveling through tunnels.

The size of the message is limited only by the width of the sign. Differ-ent colors can be used to point out immediately what the current safety situation is. Red color LEDs can be used to inform the driver about a dangerous situation, whereas green

suggests that everything is normal.LIFE technology is already in oper-

ation. The Seelisberg tunnel in Swit-zerland is a main arterial road to connect several of the most impor-tant ski resorts in the European Alps. The conceptual design focused on an increase in safety for travelers when passing through the tunnel and traveling through Switzerland’s mountains and tourism areas.

The project utilized several hun-dred LIFE signs above all lanes of the tunnel. The city of Berlin has a tunnel in operation where they are using this sign technology as an integral part of their tunnel safety system.

Better quality of LIFEUsing this new patented technology, safety within existing tunnels can be increased for drivers and also for the maintenance workers.

Costs for a new tunnel project could be reduced by employing this newly developed technology. Deploying this unique technology can mean a lower ceiling profile to complete a comprehensive safety system for tunnels combined with outstanding readability and clarity for users. TH


T-Focus

low profile housing

view

ing h

eigh

t

MG2 ...........................................................67OSI Laserscan .............. inside front coverPBS&J .........................................................88RedSpeed International .........................13Samaritania ...............................................41Sodi Scientifi ca.........................................61Trafi con .....................................................09Transurban ...............................................07Vitronic .....................................................25

For more information on advertisers in this issue ofThinking Highways

go to www.h3bmedia.com and click on READER ENQUIRIES

Advertisers’ Index

Dambach ..................................................25Diamond Traffi c Products......................73EIS ..............................................................15Gatsometer .............................................45H3B Media TransPortal ... inside back coverImage Sensing Systems ..outside back coverInternational Fiber Systems ..................02International Road Dynamics ...............29Iteris ..........................................................05

thinking highways north america june 2007

Documents