E N T E R P R I S E

1. Developing Consistency in ITS Safety Solutions – Intersection Warning Systems E N T E R P R I S E Project Overview December 2011

2. Agenda • Project scope • Design and evaluation guidance • Roadmap to standardization • Questions E N T E R P R I S E

3. Project Scope Bring together organizations that have developed and deployed intersection warning systems to develop a consistent approach for accelerated, uniform deployment and further evaluation of intersection warning systems, and to recommend preliminary design and evaluation guidancefor MUTCD consideration. E N T E R P R I S E

4. Project Scope • Anticipated results • Increase awareness of systems deployed • Develop design guidance to support accelerated and more consistent deployment • Establish evaluation framework • Create roadmap for reaching standards in MUTCD and Highway Safety Manual E N T E R P R I S E

5. Project Scope • Webinar (June 23) • Shared knowledge and educated each other on systems deployed • Missouri, North Carolina and Minnesota • Identified challenges with future deployments • Warrants/Function • Liability • Placement • Failsafe/Reliability • Design • Capital and Operating Costs • Effectiveness • Connected Vehicle • Quality Control E N T E R P R I S E

6. Project Scope

7. Project Scope • Workshop #1 (July 28-29) • Discussed content of a preliminary standard • Shift to design and evaluation guidance • Discussed roadmap for reaching standardization • Engage further human factors research • Support further evaluation across state boundaries • Identify what may be required for interim compliance with existing MUTCD standards • Allow for continued deployment and evaluation • Brief the NCUTCD and AASHTO SCOTE to initiate formal processes E N T E R P R I S E

8. Project Scope

9. Project Scope • Workshop #2 (September 15-16) • Review preliminary design guidance • Develop an evaluation framework that may be used in future deployments • Establish measures of effectiveness and data needs for each system type to facilitate comparison of systems • Discuss plans for future deployment and coordination plans • Refined roadmap for standardization E N T E R P R I S E

10. Design and Evaluation Guidance • Introduction • Purpose • Typical system components • Glossary of terms

11. Design and Evaluation Guidance • Design guidance • Four typical layouts based on warning direction and intersection configuration • Preliminary illustrations • Offer technical insight and recommended practice • Do not limit engineering judgment or agency discretion • Conditions, intended driver use, layout, options, notes and references • More details conditions (warrants) • Anticipated benefits and costs E N T E R P R I S E

12. Design and Evaluation Guidance • Evaluation guidance • Not all systems have been formally evaluated • Acknowledged various evaluation approaches • Establish a common framework for evaluation • Individual and national • Based on ITS Evaluation Guidelines • Goal • Strategy • Hypotheses • Test plan parameters E N T E R P R I S E

13. Roadmap to Standardization 2000 – 2011 Jun 2011 Jul 2011 Sep 2011 2012-13 2014 E N T E R P R I S E

14. Roadmap to Standardization • ENTERPRISE: Jon Jackels, MN • Monthly board meetings; next is October 6, 2011 • Summarize webinar/workshop proceedings and guidance document • Request consideration of supporting national evaluation or ongoing coordination role • Design and Evaluation Guidance for ICWS: Athey Creek • Develop and distribute second draft week of October 17, 2011 • Develop support materials for summarizing webinar/workshop proceedings and guidance • FHWA MUTCD Team and Office of Safety: Jon Jackels, MN • Small group webinar in late-October 2011 • Summarize webinar/workshop proceedings and guidance document • Identify what may be required for interim compliance with existing MUTCD standards

15. Roadmap to Standardization • NCUTCD RWSTC: Tom Heydel (Matt Rauch), WI • Meet January 18-19, 2012 during TRB in Washington, DC • Summarize webinar/workshop proceedings and guidance document • Request consideration of task force to evaluate MUTCD prospects • Key members include Tom Heydel, WI and Bruce Ibarguen, ME • AASHTO SCOTE: Bob Koeberlein (Gary Sanderson), ID • Likely to meet in January 2012 during TRB in Washington, DC • Summarize webinar/workshop proceedings and guidance document • Request consideration of a recommendation to NCUTCD • Key members include Bob Koeberlein, ID and Sue Groth, MN • ATSSA ICWS Industry Workshop: Jon Jackels, MN • Proposed during ATSSA Annual Meeting, February 12 - 16, 2012 in Tampa, FL • Summarize webinar/workshop proceedings and guidance document • Request industry response to key questions about ICWS product development

16. Roadmap to Standardization • Traffic Control Devices Transportation Pooled Fund 5(065): Julie Stotlemeyer, MO • Annual meeting in April 2012 in KS • Summarize webinar/workshop proceedings and guidance document • Consider human factors research of sign placement and message set • Members include IA, KS, MO, NC and PA • Evaluation of Low Cost Safety Improvements Transportation Pooled Fund 5(099): Shawn Troy, NC • Annual meeting in March or April 2012 • Summarize webinar/workshop proceedings and guidance document • Consider coordination of national evaluation • Members include IA, KS, MN, MO, NC, PA and WI • Others? • ITE, International Municipal Signal Association, etc. • Cooperative Transportation Systems TPF and Connected Vehicle • FHWA-NCHRP Unsignalized Intersection Information Guide in 2012

17. Questions? E N T E R P R I S E