by syd bowcott, urs corp bayne smith, urs corp. purpose of this presentation overview of project...
TRANSCRIPT
SAN MATEO COUNTY SMART CORRIDORS PROGRAMSYSTEMS ENGINEERING PROCESS
BySyd Bowcott, URS CorpBayne Smith, URS Corp
Agenda
Purpose of this Presentation Overview of Project Area Background Project Goals Stakeholders Proposed System System Engineering Process Institutional Issues Technical Issues Lessons Learned
Purpose of this Presentation
Quick overview of the Project Discuss the system engineering process
used to develop the project
San Mateo County
Population 712,000 450 Square Miles Two major north/south freeways Two major east/west freeways 14 cities 3 traffic signal systems in 3 cities
Most signals are uncoordinated
Background
Major Incident on Highway 101 Freeway closed both directions 31 hours Extensive diversion to local roadways Estimated similar incident 2% of time/year
Project Goals
Traffic Incident Management Proactively manage traffic already diverted from the
freeway to minimize impacts on local arterials, and return regional traffic back to the freeway as soon as possible
Interagency Coordination Provide the capability for shared control and operation
of the Smart Corridors components by the agencies Traffic Operations and Management
Improve traffic flow within the corridor during normal operation. Share traffic information between the agencies to improve coordination and management of traffic during normal operations
StakeholdersStakeholder Current Role(s)
C/CAG Project Management
Caltrans Technical Lead/Incident Operations
SMCTA Funding/Administration
CHP Law Enforcement/Incident Commander
MTC Funding/Data Source
San Mateo County Operate and maintain arterials within its jurisdiction.
SamTrans Operate bus service on the arterials and freeways.
Caltrain Operate heavy commuter rail service and support private shuttle service
Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Operate commuter rail service. Maintains fiber trunk link
Dumbarton Express Operate bus service on the arterials and freeways.
Local Emergency Response and Public Safety Agencies
Incident Responders
Local Cities/Towns (14) Operate and maintain arterials within its jurisdiction.
Consultants Design.
Project Statistics
Estimated Cost $25m (phases 1 and 2) Length of initial implementation-13 miles Upgraded Traffic Signals (180 in initial
phase) CCTV (170) Trailblazer Signs (110) DMS (4) Blankout Signs (no left turn) System Detectors Communications Network (fiber, wireless,
copper)-Ethernet Based
Methodology of Operation
Normal conditions owning agency operates their system Cross jurisdictional signal coordination
Incident conditions (approx 2% of time) No active diversion from US 101 Caltrans assumes control of all Smart Corridor
elements Local jurisdictions can monitor
System Engineering Process
How did we get there??????
System Vee Diagram
Smart Corridor Process
Stakeholder Involvement Ranged From Widescale Outreach to Focused
Emphasis Steering Committee Document Distribution to all Stakeholders Workshops
Joint Reviews of Comments Traceability Matrix Updating Previous Documents
Smart Corridor Process (cont’d)
Identify alternate routes Traffic engineering versus politics
Develop ConOps Develop SEMP Develop Functional Requirements Develop High Level Requirements Develop Detailed Design Document Develop Interface Control Document Detailed Design Requirements Test Plan
Challenges/Issues
Institutional Technical
Institutional Issues
Breakdown Fiefdoms Needed to show benefits:
Cities would now have a coordinated signal system
Upgrading onstreet equipment Cities could use equipment in non incident times No money out of their pockets (capital or
maintenance)
Institutional Issues (cont’d)
Unease With Higher Levels Of Government Overcome by:
Retaining local control 98% of time Open invitations to meetings Ability to review documents Fallback if there are problems
Joint Operation Developing a MOU
Defines ownership Defines maintenance responsibility/costs
Institutional Issues (cont’d)
Design Coordination Caltrans, Two Consultants
Joint development of specifications Submission of plans at 30%, 65% and 95% levels Extensive emails Forced to coordinate due to road ownership and
technical oversight by Caltrans
Technical Issues
Integrating Multiple Controller Types Ranged from NEMA to 170 to 2070 Replaced incompatible controllers/cabinets Required new system to work with controllers
Locating TBS in Residential Areas Limit sign size Place on property lines Place next to existing poles
Constructing an Extensive Communications System Used wireless extensively Utilization of existing conduit Trenched roadway near face of curb
Minimal closures
Technical Issues (cont’d)
Provision of a Central System Existing statewide CNET to be replaced Interim-use existing Caltrans ATMS Develop RFP for San Mateo/Statewide
Having Control in Oakland 20 miles away BART fiber
Integrating Existing Signal Systems Replace existing system Integrate with new system
New system used only during incidents
Next Step
Develop PS&E (June 2010) Advertise/Construction Develop System Update System Engineering Documents