Integrated Corridor Management

(ICM)

Brian P. Cronin, P.E.

What is ICM?

• ICM is a promising tool in the congestion

management toolbox that combines advanced
technologies and innovative practices.
• ICM is the proactive, joint, multimodal
management of transportation
infrastructure assets along a corridor by
transportation system operators and
managers.
• ICM seeks to optimize the use of existing
infrastructure assets, making transportation
investments go farther.
• With ICM, the corridor is managed as a
system—rather than the more traditional
approach of managing individual assets.
Example ICM Corridor

Local Jurisdiction 1 — Traffic Signal System

Regional Rail Agency — Train Management System

State DOT — Freeway Management System

Bus Company — AVL System

Local Jurisdiction 2 — Traffic Signal System

 ICM System

Freeway Arterial
Systems Signal
Systems

Rail Bus
Systems Systems

An ICMS is the set of procedures, processes, and information systems that

support transportation system managers in making coordinated decisions involving the
optimal performance of all transportation networks in a corridor.
4
ICMS Context

“ICM is about management of a corridor. Management implies more than monitoring.

Management implies planning for, and responding to what is happening.”

Operational Objectives – Provide the Tools To:

– Optimize performance at a corridor level
• Improve utilization of existing infrastructure
• Reduce travel delays
– Achieve load balancing across the networks
• Facilitate mode shifts
• Facilitate route shifts
• Facilitate departure/arrival shifts
– Respond to events with coordinated multi-agency actions
 High-Level ICM Program Plan
FY 04 FY 05 FY 06 FY 07 FY 08 FY 09 FY 10 FY 11

Stakeholder Working Group

Phase 1:
Foundational Research
Phase 2: Corridor Tools, Strategies & Integration

Site Development Feasibility

Site Applications Feasibility
Development Feasibility

Phase 3: Stage 1 - ICM Phase 3: Stage Phase 3:

Pioneer Site Concept of 2 -Analysis, Stage 3 - Pioneer
Operations and Modeling & Demonstration Projects
Requirements Simulation of
Selected
Pioneer Sites

Phase 4: ICM Operations Concept Knowledge and Technology Transfer

Standards Completion and Deployment

6
September 2005 March 2008 July 2009
 3 Stages for the Pioneer Sites:
Eight USDOT ICM Pioneer Sites
• Stage 1 – Concept of Operations, Sample
Data, and Requirements
• Stage 2 – Analysis, Modeling, and Simulation
• Stage 3 – Demonstration and Evaluation
Seattle Minneapolis

Montgomery
County

Oakland
San Diego

Dallas
San Antonio
Houston

7
 ICM Pioneer Site Corridor Assets

8
 A Systems Engineering Approach

9
 ICM AMS Focus: Integrated Performance Measures

Improved
Corridor Management

10
Short-term prediction
Data Needs Analysis

ICMS introduces needs that were not present when we were

only dealing with one network at a time.
– Data collection needs time stamps so data from different sources can be
aligned
– Data granularity is different for ICMS (we need finer spatial and temporal
detail)
– Data latencies that were acceptable for reporting will not work for
operational modeling and control
• Decisions about how to respond to current situations should not
be based on data that is days or weeks old.
• Observational data needs to be collected often enough to
represent the current situation.
• Observational data needs to be available quick enough to
facilitate a useful response
– Challenges: Data sharing limitations: proprietary data, agency policies,
incompatible data systems
ICM Data Requirements

• Transit Networks - We need data that represents the current

situation
– Vehicle location and speed every 30-120 seconds
– Vehicle passenger count every pull-out
• Arterial Networks – We need data that represents what is
happening at the lane level
– Vehicle volumes, by approach lane, collected every 1-5 seconds
& reported every 30-300 seconds
– Signal phase data, by approach lane, collected every 1-5 seconds
& reported every 30-300 seconds
– Link volumes and average speeds every 30-300 seconds
Corridor Performance Measures

• Travel time
• Travel delay time and predictability
• Incident duration and frequency
• Fuel consumption and pollution reduction
• Corridor capacity utilization (vehicle & traveler
throughput)
 Sample ICMS Concept

14
 Multi-level Analysis Tools Provide
Comprehensive Insight

Regional patterns and mode shift;

Transit analysis capability

Traveler information, HOT lanes,

congestion pricing and regional
diversion patterns

Traffic control strategies such as

ramp metering and arterial traffic
signal control
15
 Test Corridor Analysis Provides Preliminary Insights
and Enabled Modeling of Discrete Strategies

Macro-Level Meso-Level Micro-Level

16
 Test Corridor Analysis Provides Preliminary Insights
and Enabled Modeling of Discrete Strategies
ICM Strategy Description Models Used to Test
Conventional transportation infrastructure without
Intelligent Transportation Systems (advanced traveler
Zero ITS Baseline • All
information systems, ramp metering, signal
coordination, TMCs, etc.)
Highway Traveler Pre-trip and en-route traveler information at 20%
• DynaSmart-P (DSP)
Information market penetration + Variable Message Signs
• Travel demand model
Transit Traveler
Impact of incident information on mode shift • DynaSmart-P
Information
• Pivot-point mode choice model
• DynaSmart-P
HOT Lane Conversion of existing HOV lane to HOT lane
• Pivot-point mode choice model
Local adaptive ramp metering (Not corridor-adaptive
Ramp Metering • DynaSmart-P
ramp metering)
Arterial Signal 157 traffic signals were optimized for medium • Synchro
Coordination demand/no incident • DSP

Combination The above five ICM strategies combined • All

17
 Test Corridor AMS
Overall ICM Benefit under Different Operational Conditions

18
 Summary of Benefits vs. Cost
Medium Demand with Major Incident

19
 Summary of Benefits vs. Cost
High Demand with Major Incident

20
 Test Corridor AMS
Overall ICM Benefit under Different Operational Conditions

21

San Diego, CA
• Popular freight, tourist and
commuter corridor
• Lengthening peak travel
periods
• Integrated management
• Coordinated incident
management
• Dynamic ramp metering
• Reversible HOT lanes
• Increased transit ridership
• Congestion avoidance
rewards
Three AMS Sites
Dallas, TX Minneapolis, MN
• Major employers • Busy commuter corridor
• Limited expansion capacity
• No ability to expand
• Major construction planned
• Surrounding construction
planned
ICM Strategies
• Integrated management • Integrated management
• Coordinated incident • Coordinated incident
management management
• Integrated operational • Multi-agency data exchange
systems
• Managed lanes
• Increased park and ride
• Transit signal priority
capacity
• Signal timing
• HOV
 San Diego, California

San Diego’s Rancho

Bernardo Transit Center
before ICM…

…With ICM

1 Main Lanes

2 Managed Lanes
4
3 Drop Ramps 6
2
4
5
4 Park-and-Ride
3 3
5 BRT Station

Direct Access 1 1
6 Road to Arterial

23
 Dallas, Texas

24
 Minneapolis, Minnesota

25
ICM KTT Mission

Equip corridor managers and

operators across the country
to implement and use ICM.
Searchable/Browseable: “ICM Knowledgebase”

• Resources Available Now in the

ICM Knowledgebase:
– Pioneer site CONOPs and
Requirements Documents
– AMS Resources and Findings
– Technical Integration/Data Gap
Technical Resources
– Lessons-Learned from ICM
Pioneer Sites
• KTT Resources Coming Soon:
– Pioneer Site Webinars and peer
exchanges
– New fact sheets
– Resource guidance documents
Next Steps

• Complete Analysis, Modeling and Simulation results from

Three Pioneer Sites
• Select demonstration sites – October
• Conduct demonstration and evaluation
– Operational in 18 months
– Evaluation for 18 months
 Questions? – www.its.dot.gov/icms/index.htm

• Brian Cronin, RITA

brian.cronin@dot.gov
202-366-8841

• Steve Mortensen, FTA

steven.mortensen@dot.gov
202-493-0459

• Dale Thompson, FHWA

dale.thompson@dot.gov
202-493-3420

• Bob Sheehan, FHWA

robert.sheehan@dot.gov

29