SHRP 2 TOOL EXAMPLES Minnesota Pilot Test Site 1

Project L02 – Example I-94 Maple Grove to Rogers Travel Time Reliability Evaluation Measures/Data Sources –Corridor Traffic Volumes (VMT) –Average Travel Times Analysis Timeframe/Location –Every 5-minute period during 2012 –I-94 westbound from I-494 to TH 101 2

Project L02 – Surface Plot 3

4

Project L02 – CDF Curve 5

Project L02 – Analysis Surface Plots of Non-Recurring Factors 6

Project L02 – Results 7

8 I-94 Westbound – Downtown Minneapolis Lowry Hill Tunnel I-35W SB On Ramp to 11th Street TH 280 On Ramp to Huron Blvd Project L07– Example

9 TH 280 On Ramp to Huron Blvd Project L07 - Analysis Location 1 (upstream of bottleneck)

10 I-35W SB On Ramp to 11th Street Project L07 - Analysis Location 2 (at bottleneck)

11 Lowry Hill Tunnel Project L07 - Analysis Location 3 (downstream of bottleneck)

Project L05 Total of 39 participants –4 DOTs –3 Counties –3 Universities –Met Council (MPO) –FHWA –TRB *Including 16 remote participants Presentations on: –Technical tool details –Utility of tools –Reliability project examples –Before-and-after participant survey 12 Minnesota Reliability Workshop

LESSONS LEARNED Minnesota Pilot Test Site 13

Lessons Learned – Input Data 14 DMS Logs Message Time Deployed Time Cleared MnCMAT Records 2 Time Location Severity RTMC Incidents Time Type Code Response Code Road Work 1 Time/duration Location Impacts Crashes Time/duration Location Severity Incidents Time/duration Impact Type/cause Road Work DB Time Start/End Impact Details Crash Database Time Start/End Impact Details Incident Database Time Start/End Impact Details Data SourcesPre-ProcessingDatabase Inputs 1 Construction and maintenance activities also being identified through MnDOT news releases. 2 Crash records also contain weather and road conditions data will be referenced to weather data.

Lessons Learned – L02 15

Lessons Learned – L02 16 Note: not all analyses completed due to software limitations

Lessons Learned – L02 Alternative Time Intervals Ideal time interval appears to be in the 10 to 15- minute range Optimizes trade-off between accuracy of aggregate performance measures and staff/computing resources Intervals over 5 minutes may help to smooth loop detector speed data at lower volumes Intervals over 15 minutes may result in omission of short-duration incidents and special events 17

Lessons Learned – L02 18 Basic summary of VMT and Travel Time Multiple year summary of VMT and TT Breakdown of non-recurring factors Multiple year breakdown of non-recurring factors

Lessons Learned – L07 Calibrates well for bottleneck segments –Upstream segments impacted by queues –Downstream segments choked by bottleneck Modest sensitivity to weather inputs –2x difference in rain and snow in observations in TTRMS gives <15% difference High sensitivity to crash and incident duration –Use duration data available from L02 database for more accurate local conditions 19

Project L05 – Survey Results 20

Project L05 – Survey Results 21

Project L05 – Survey Results 22

Moving Forward… MnDOT, Met Council, and other stakeholders have found value in reliability evaluation as part of corridor and project analysis –Desire to use reliability evaluation in project and program-level decision making processes Seeking opportunities to implement reliability tools in a wide range of other agency functions –Approaching clarity on appropriate level of analysis for planning, operations, and performance measurement Identifying opportunities to educate staff, streamline and automate analysis process, and apply statewide 23