Office of Operations
21st Century Operations Using 21st Century Technologies
Table of Contents

Integrating Travel Time Reliability into Transportation System Management: Final Technical Memorandum

Chapter 5. Technical Expert Group Workshop

On June 28, 2018, the team held an expert group workshop for this project in Arlington, Virginia, at the National Highway Institute. The purpose of the workshop was to assess advancements made by several agencies in the use of travel time reliability within transportation system management and obtain feedback on a strawman methodology to incorporate travel time reliability into transportation system management at various levels.

Workshop participants included nine transportation planning and operations professionals from State departments of transportation (DOT) and metropolitan planning organizations (MPO) across the United States to discuss their experiences and the project's methodology.

Representatives from the following State and regional organizations attended:

  • Colorado DOT (CDOT)
  • MetroPlan Orlando
  • California DOT (Caltrans)
  • Atlanta Regional Council (ARC)
  • San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG)
  • Pennsylvania DOT (PennDOT)
  • Minnesota DOT (MnDOT)
  • Iowa DOT (IDOT)
  • Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP)
Map of the United States highlights the States and individual cities of the technical expert group. The locations highlighted include Colorado; Orlando, Florida; California; Atlanta, Georgia; San Diego, California; Pennsylvania; Minnesota; Iowa; Chicago, Illinois.
Source: FHWA
Figure 13. Diagram. Map of the United States with geographic locations of technical expert group participants.

Table 2 contains the agenda and objectives for the workshop.

Table 2. Technical expert group agenda.
Workshop Objectives
  • Gain insight into the application of reliability analysis at expert agencies.
  • Test methodology for applying transportation operations reliability program analysis.
  • Identify additional tactical programs or application scenarios that methodology should encompass.
  • Begin a dialog on integrating travel time reliability analysis into transportation system management.
9:00 AM Welcome and Introductions
  • Federal Highway Administration welcome.
  • Participant introductions.
  • Workshop overview.
9:30 AM Project Background and Motivation
10:00 AM Presentations from Peers on Use of Reliability Analysis and Concepts in Transportation Systems Management and Operations (TSMO) Program Activities and Planning for Operations
  • Examples of system-level goals and objectives.
  • Examples of tactical program areas.
11:30 AM Presentation and Discussion of Strawman Methodology for Applying Reliability Analysis to Translate System-Level Goals down to Tactics for System Management
12:30 PM Lunch
1:30 PM Small Group Activity: Applying Methodology to Hypothetical Scenarios
2:30 PM Report Back and Feedback from Breakout Groups
3:00 PM Methodology Review
  • Discussion and review of core components of methodology in light of feedback from breakout groups.
4:00 PM Adjourn

Integrating Reliability Analysis and Concepts into System Planning and Transportation Systems Management

The project team led a presentation and discussion on the reliability data and analysis tools that are available to help agencies and MPOs examine alternative strategies for addressing reliability issues and forecast impacts. Participants discussed needing specialized modeling staff to use some of the tools and the challenges to using many of the tools this presents. The representative from one organization said that his agency tried mesoscopic modeling, but applying the tool to 50 or 200 projects took too much effort and time, and they had to abandon the practice pretty quickly. Vendors are starting to incorporate these tools into their modeling packages, but in the long term, reliability thinking and analysis need to be incorporated into the standard tools, according to workshop participants.

The State and local agency participants reported on their experiences integrating reliability analysis into systems planning and transportation systems management. Participants were asked to provide information about how their agencies have used reliability analysis and concepts in TSMO program activities and planning for operations and to provide examples of using system-level goals and objectives to influence the selection of operations activities within their agency.

Notable examples of reliability in plans include Caltrans using travel time reliability in the strategic objectives, performance measures, and targets (buffer time index) presented in the 2015 Caltrans Strategic Management Plan.71 IDOT developed a TSMO strategic plan that included reliability as a goal, and then connected those strategic goals and objectives to its TSMO service layer plans. MetroPlan Orlando is planning to include new performance measures, including reliability, as part of the update of its long-range transportation plan.

The participants in the workshop are also making progress on developing or using analysis tools that incorporate reliability or operations. Caltrans is working with the University of California, Berkeley, to develop a tool similar to FREEVAL. MnDOT developed a travel time analysis system for the Twin Cities metro area with the University of Minnesota, Duluth. MnDOT tested many of the Second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP2) tools with a consultant but it is having challenges implementing the tools themselves in their agency. PennDOT is developing a tool similar to the SHRP2 L02 tool to supporting monitoring reliability.

There was also a discussion of using reliability measures and data for project evaluation. MetroPlan Orlando will be giving projects that improve reliability more weight during future prioritization processes. CMAP uses reliability measures as part of its reliability evaluation processes in a number of activities, including Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funding. State partners at Illinois DOT have started to do this for their freight plan as well. CMAP has identified some of the procedures using the SHRP2 L07 project to support evaluations on the regional plan. CMAP is mainstreaming this as well as analytics into its regular processes. This has resulted in more TSMO activities on the ground, according to the CMAP representative. CDOT relies heavily on local knowledge and experience to identify operational needs and strategies, but they are not yet measuring these things or depending on performance measures.

Strawman Methodology for Applying Reliability Analysis to Translate System-Level goals to Tactics for System Management

The project team presented a strawman methodology for applying reliability analysis to translate system-level goals down to tactics for system management and discussed the relationship between goals, objectives, strategies, and tactics. The strawman methodology starts with the goals, which are translated into objectives, which are realized by strategies, which are deployed through tactics. To evaluate how well the operational tactics satisfy the goals, data collection and monitoring are important.

The strawman methodology is outlined as follows:

  1. Establish system-level goals. These are mission statements of what the agency wants to do.
  2. Develop system-level objectives and set targets. The goal is made more robust and includes a target.
  3. Develop corridor/network-level objectives and set targets. When defining tactics, it is necessary to circle back to the objectives to see if the objectives are realistic and achievable given the tactics. Circling back allows agencies to see what is feasible to achieve.
  4. Define management strategies to realize corridor- or network-level objectives.
  5. Select tactical program areas and tactics to implement management strategies.

Participants observed that many agencies do not apply steps 3 (developing corridor/network level objectives and setting targets) and 4 (defining management strategies to realize corridor- or network-level objectives); instead, they jump straight to selecting tactics. This also led to a discussion about the need to create a plan (or a milestone within a 20-year plan) that has a shorter time horizon (e.g., 10-year) so as to align better with the shorter term timeline of TSMO projects and objectives.

The participants were divided into two groups to work through a different hypothetical scenario with the strawman methodology. Participants discussed system goals, system-level objectives, and data for analysis; defined management strategies; and selected tactical program areas and tactics.

Methodology Review and Key Takeaways

The participants discussed the methodology in light of the small group activity. Participants mentioned that they thought this methodology would be helpful, although one participant mentioned that he did not think it was much different from the congestion management process.

Key takeaways from the discussion and exercises can be summarized as follows:

  • There is a benefit to having both traffic engineers and operations engineers as part of the planning process, and this methodology helps them find a place to meet in the middle.
  • Participants viewed it as more of a new way of thinking versus a new process.
  • The methodology can be tailored for different audiences or projects, and likely will not be used for every individual project.

71 California Department of Transportation. 2015. Caltrans Strategic Management Plan 2015 – 2020. Sacramento, CA. Available at http://www.dot.ca.gov/perf/library/pdf/Caltrans_Strategic_Mgmt_Plan_033015.pdf, last accessed February 15, 2019. [ Note 71 ]

Office of Operations