TSM&O Performance Measures Plan System Management Stakeholder Meeting #2 June 2016

2 Agenda Welcome Back & Meeting Objectives Meeting #1 Recap Draft Performance Measures Group Work Session Wrap-Up

Meeting Objectives Recap Meeting #1 – Examples, baseline needs, “Dot” exercise Confirm needs for TSMO metrics Build requirements & implementation plan for metrics – Actionable plan – how & when? Identify outstanding items to address in plan 3

Meeting #1 Recap 4

“System Management” Definition Performance Measures Related to… Freeway Management (excl. TIM) Arterial Management (incl. signals) Mobility & Reliability Asset Management 5

Lit Review Recap Recommendations – Desired outcomes should drive perf. meas. – Keep it simple – Useful metrics to wide audiences – Use well-defined metrics – Data quality – Data fusion and automation 6

Lit Review Recap National examples including 7

Iteris PeMS 8

Meeting #1 Dot Exercise Results High importance (Mobility – Freeway and Arterial) – Volume – Travel time – Congestion – Planning time index (reliability) – Delay High importance (Asset) – Inventory – Condition rating 10

Meeting #1 Action Items Send ideas or comments on PMs to Chris Use the forum tab on the project website for discussions – Kittelson to combine information and rankings collected through the small group activity and dot exercise 11

Performance Measure Development Decision matrix 12

Metric Categories – Sys. Mgmt. 13 Flow Rate Speed Travel Time Travel Time Reliability Stops Delay

Example Performance Metrics per Category 14 Specific performance measure to be evaluated Has specified units

Existing? 15 Does ODOT already collect data or report on this metric? – Yes, No, or In-Process

Data source / input requirements 16 What information is needed to evaluate and report on this metric?

Issues Addressed, Sensitivity trying to capture 17 Why evaluate this metric?

Freeway vs. Arterial 18

Importance 19 Relative importance – Ranked high, med, or low Will influence… – which metrics go into the plan & – order of implementation

Data easily available? 20 Ease of accessibility and use of source data for metric? – Ranked high, med, or low

21 Group Discussion/Feedback Is the measure clear & understandable? Does ODOT have the needed data? How will the perf. meas. be actionable? Are perf. meas. missing from the list? Implementation? How would you prioritize them?

Metric Category: Flow Rate 22 Examples Freeway vs. ArterialImportance Data easily available? (data sources) veh/hr = vehicles, point, 1 hourbothhigh YES (ATR, central signal system, UDOT SPM software, PORTAL) veh/hr/lane = vehicles, lane, 1 hourbothmedium PARTIAL (ATR, central signal system, PORTAL) turning movement counts = vehicles, movement, 1 hour arterialmedium PARTIAL (TDD manual, central signal system, UDOT SPM software, GridSmart TM ) % trucks in traffic stream = truck, vehicles, point, 15 minutes bothmedium PARTIAL (ATR, AVC, Wavetronix TM, PORTAL) bikes/hr = bikes, point, 1 hourarteriallow-medium NO (PORTAL, central signal system, EcoCounter TM )

Metric Category: Speed 23 Examples Freeway vs. ArterialImportance Data easily available? (data sources) % of hour operating in congested conditions = speeds <30mph, segment, 1 hour bothmedium-high YES (NPMRDS, Iteris PeMS TM PORTAL) % of hour operating in congested conditions = speeds <15mph, segment, 1 hour bothmedium-high YES (NPMRDS, Iteris PeMS TM PORTAL) point speed (time mean speed) = speed, point, 1 hour bothlow-medium YES (ATR, Wavetronix TM, PORTAL)

Metric Category: Travel Time 24 Examples Freeway vs. ArterialImportance Data easily available? (data source) average peak period travel time = speed, segment, peak period bothmedium YES (NPMRDS, Iteris PeMS TM PORTAL, Bluetooth TM ) travel time = minutes per milebothmedium YES (NPMRDS, Iteris PeMS TM PORTAL, Bluetooth TM ) 5 th & 95 th percentile travel time = minutes per mile for 5 th & 95 th percentile condition bothmedium YES (NPMRDS, Iteris PeMS TM PORTAL, Bluetooth TM )

Metric Category: Travel Time Reliability 25 Examples Freeway vs. ArterialImportance Data easily available? (data source) Planning Time Index = ratio of 95 th percentile TT to free flow TT by unit time bothhigh YES (NPMRDS, Iteris PeMS TM PORTAL, Bluetooth TM ) Planning Time = free flow TT x planning time index bothmedium YES (NPMRDS, Iteris PeMS TM PORTAL, Bluetooth TM ) Buffer Time = difference of 95th percentile TT and average TT by unit time bothmedium YES (NPMRDS, Iteris PeMS TM PORTAL, Bluetooth TM ) Travel Time Index = ratio of average TT to free flow TT by unit time arterialmedium YES (NPMRDS, Iteris PeMS TM PORTAL, Bluetooth TM )

Metric Category: Stops 26 Examples Freeway vs. ArterialImportance Data easily available? (data source) percent arrivals on red = proportion of vehicle detection actuations on red signal indication over time. Related to Percent arrivals on green & Purdue Coordination Diagram. arterialmedium PARTIAL (ATC controllers, central signal system, UDOT SPM software) stop frequency per node, segment, or user arteriallow PARTIAL (ATC controllers, central signal system, UDOT SPM software) stop rate per node, segment, or userarteriallow PARTIAL (ATC controllers, central signal system, UDOT SPM software)

Metric Category: Delay 27 Examples Freeway vs. ArterialImportance Data easily available? (data source) hours of vehicle delay (delay magnitude) per node, segment or user bothmedium-high PARTIAL (Iteris PeMS TM, Bluetooth) phase/split failures by movement or signal phase (instances where queued vehicles must wait more through more than one green indication to proceed). Related to Split Monitoring, Purdue Phase Termination. arterialmedium YES (2070 controllers, central signal system, UDOT SPM software) average intersection delay = delay of users averaged over time arterialmedium PARTIAL / NO (Iteris PeMS TM, Bluetooth) average delay by movement or signal phase = delay of users by movement/phase over time. arterialmedium PARTIAL / NO (Iteris PeMS TM, Bluetooth)

FHWA Draft FAST/MAP-21 Mobility Rule-making 28 Examples Freeway vs. ArterialImportanceData easily available? % of the Interstate System mileage uncongested (freight) freewayrequired YES (NPMRDS, Iteris PeMS TM ) % of the Interstate System providing for reliable travel times (target is LOTTR < 1.5) freewayrequired YES (NPMRDS, Iteris PeMS TM ) % of the non-Interstate NHS providing for reliable travel times (target is LOTTR < 1.5) bothrequired YES (NPMRDS, Iteris PeMS TM ) % of the Interstate System where peak hour travel times meet expectations (target PHTTR < 1.5) freewayrequired YES (NPMRDS, Iteris PeMS TM ) % of the non-Interstate NHS where peak hour travel times meet expectations (target PHTTR < 1.5) bothrequired YES (NPMRDS, Iteris PeMS TM ) % of the Interstate System mileage providing for reliable truck travel times freeway required YES (NPMRDS, Iteris PeMS TM ) annual hours of excessive delay per capitaBothrequired PARTIAL (NPMRDS, Iteris PeMS TM ) total emission reductionsbothrequiredNo

Vehicle Counts Speed/Congestion Travel Time/Reliability Stops Delay Equipment Health Mobility Database Linkages & Implementation 29 Travel Time / Speeds (NPMRDS) Signal Hi- Resolution Data Other Traffic Count Data Asset Mgt. Real-time Status

Hourly modal flow rate (vehicles, peds) % of hour/day operating in congested conditions (speed) Percentile travel times by minute/hour/day (travel time) – 5 th ~ free flow; 50 th (median)~ average; 95 th ~ longest Planning time index (reliability) Percent arrivals on red (stops) – arterials – Report # of observations for normalization Hours of vehicle delay (delay) Highest Ranking Mobility Performance Measures Important & Easy to Access 30

31 Group Discussion/Feedback Is the measure clear & understandable? Does ODOT have the needed data? How will the perf. meas. be actionable? Are perf. meas. missing from the list? Implementation? How would you prioritize them?

Asset Management 32

Recommended Asset Mgmt. Condition Rating Score each individual device on each performance measure, normalized by 0 to 100. – Lowest = worst, Highest = best Performance Measures: – % of design life remaining – Resources spent on asset (hard & soft costs) % proactive vs. % reactive – % of asset downtime Device Communication Supporting System (e.g. Detection) 33

Define Targets for Asset Management Expected service/design life. – Target of full design life per device/system. – No device exceeding 100% of design life. Expected annual O&M cost by device type. – 70% of O&M costs are proactive 100% uptime target (0% downtime target). – What’s realistic per device/system? 34

Metric Category: All TSM&O Assets 35 ExamplesImportanceData easily available? asset condition & site ratinghigh PARTIAL (depending on asset) % asset beyond service lifehigh PARTIAL (depending on asset)

Metric Category: VMS & Drum Signs 36 ExamplesImportanceData easily available? % proactive maintenancehighyes staff resources spent per asset per year highmoderate % asset uptimehighmoderate asset conditionhighyes % detection/communication failurehighmoderate

Metric Category: Signs 37 ExamplesImportanceData easily available? % of signs beyond service lifemediummoderate % of signs meeting retro reflectivity goals mediummoderate

Metric Category: Signals 38 ExamplesImportanceData easily available? % proactive maintenancehighmoderate % asset uptimehighmoderate asset conditionhighmoderate % detection/communication failurehighmoderate

Metric Category: Illumination 39 ExamplesImportanceData easily available? % illumination beyond service lifemediumno

Metric Category: Traffic Structures 40 ExamplesImportanceData easily available? structure ratinghighyes

Mock Asset Management Summary Report Consensus on… – Metrics? – Prioritization? – Implementation? – Desired Outcomes? – Will you use it? 41

TSMO Performance Measures Plan Wrap Up Recap Discussion – Consensus items – Please contact Chris with any additional thoughts/questions/comments that come up 45

Thank you. 46

Iteris PeMS 47

Iteris PeMS 48

CalTrans PeMS 49