Pinellas Countys Intelligent Transportation System Program

1
Pinellas Countys Intelligent Transportation
SystemProgram

• Peter J. Yauch, P.E.
• Bureau Director
• Public Works / Transportation
• December 7, 2004

2
Pinellas County, Florida
3
Pinellas County
Tarpon Springs
Dunedin
Population (2003) 926,146Area 280 Square
MilesDensity 3,307 Persons / Sq.
MileTourism 12.9 Million Visitors /
YearMunicipalities - 24
Clearwater
Largo
Seminole
Pinellas Park
St. Petersburg
4
Population
5
Area Population Growth
Pinellas County is Nearly Built-Out, Nearby
Counties are Booming
6
Vehicle Miles Traveled
7
Existing Systems

• Existing systems installed in 1991, designed in
  1988
• Three independent, identical UTCS-based systems
• Pinellas County, Clearwater and St. Petersburg
• Leased communications in St. Petersburg and
  Pinellas County
• Total cost was 11.4 million

8
Existing Systems

• Leased telephone line communications
• Approximately 4.7 million have been spent for
  systems communications since installation.
• Major re-timing project completed in 1998
• Congestion Mitigation / Air Quality (CMAQ)
  Funding 1.35 million
• Total of 17.5 million spent on system

9
Existing Systems

• Minicomputers no longer supported
• Communications equipment no longer supported
• Cannot integrate new technology
• The three signal systems were not interconnected

10
Existing Systems

• Operational Limitations of Existing Systems
• Side street delays
• Roadway network in County not conducive to good
  timing patterns
• Major arterials approaching saturation

11
Existing Systems

• In 1999, Pinellas County applied for a Congestion
  Mitigation / Air Quality (CMAQ) grant for initial
  system replacement
• Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) approved
  and prioritized CMAQ grant
• Provided funds for system replacement studies
• Provided direction and oversight to the project

12
MPO Direction

• Corridor Management
• Regional Transportation Management
• Integration of applicable Intelligent
  Transportation System technology

US 19 travels through 9 jurisdictional boundaries
13
MPO Study Results

• Signal systems needed Technological Refreshment
• Existing systems operate well, but are internally
  focused (need a regional perspective)
• Incorporate Intelligent Transportation System
  technologies
• Study provided direction on new system
  configuration

14
Pinellas Countys Plan

• New Countywide Traffic Management System
• Centralized Operations of System
• Inter-jurisdictional Operation for Corridor
  Management Adaptive Signal Control
• Incident Management and Traveler Information
• Parking and Special Event Management

15
ATMS Traffic Control Software

• Examples include
• SCOOT
• SCATS
• OPAC
• RHODES
• Utilizes real-time information from the field to
  develop optimal signal timings

Adaptive Control
16
Adaptive Control Software

• Benefits
• Can adapt to changing traffic conditions
• No need for developing new coordinated timing
  patterns
• Good for accommodating unexpected traffic
  conditions
• Addresses side street delay issues from UTCS

17
Adaptive Control Software

• Concerns
• Extensive detection requirements
• Most existing systems developed outside United
  States
• Typically sacrifices progression for optimal
  intersection operation
• Limited US installations and evaluations

18
Adaptive Control Software

• For Pinellas County
• Review Committee chose two FHWA-developed and
  supported adaptive algorithms
• OPAC (operating on MIST platform)
• RHODES (operating on I2TMS platform)

19
Adaptive Control Software

• Central Florida will be a haven for adaptive
  control system visitors
• SCATS in Pasco County (US 19)
• SCOOT in Orange County (International Drive)
• OPAC in Pinellas County (US 19)
• RHODES in Clearwater / Pinellas County (SR 60)

Plus golf, fishing, beaches, Disney, etc.
20
Central Control Software

• Distributive System to replace central control
• Adaptive Control Algorithms to be included in new
  software
• Adaptive control should be an optional method of
  control not the only method
• Open architecture for data sharing

21
CCTV Cameras

• Traffic monitoring for arterials and
  intersections
• Verification of incidents
• Video shared with other agencies

22
Dynamic Message Signs (DMS) and Dynamic
Trailblazer Signs (DTBS)

• Used to communicate information to the motorist
• Route diversion
• Evacuation information and guidance
• Special event and parking information and
  direction

23
Preemption / Priority Systems

• Fire preemption approximately 200 intersections
  currently equipped with Opticom receivers (Fire
  Department use only)
• Transit priority none implemented, two arterial
  routes currently being considered

24
Project Funding

• Total Funding to Date
• 7.5 million CMAQ Grant
• 3.8 million Federal Earmark grant (1.1 million
  local match) for City of Clearwater SR 60
• 7.0 million FDOT County Incentive Grant Program
  (CIGP) (3.5 million local match)
• 4.2 million Federal Earmark grant for Pinellas
  County - US 19
• Total 22.5 million

25
ATMS / ITS Phase 1 Stage 1North US 19 / SR 60

• 11.3 Million
• 38 Adaptive Control Intersections
• 20 RHODES, 18 OPAC
• 4 Dynamic Message Signs
• 23 CCTV cameras
• 19 Miles of fiber optic trunk cable
• Central software and hardware deployment
• Under construction complete mid-2005

26
ATMS / ITS Phase 1 Stage 2McMullen-Booth Road
(CR 611)

• 7 Million
• 27 Adaptive Control Intersections
• 5 Dynamic Message Signs
• 21 CCTV cameras
• 26 Miles of fiber optic trunk cable
• Under design
• Construction estimated complete mid-2006

27
ATMS / ITS Phase 1 Stage 3South US 19

• 4.2 Million
• 15 Adaptive Control Intersections
• 4 Dynamic Message Signs
• 12 CCTV cameras
• 13 Miles of fiber optic trunk cable
• Under design
• Construction estimated complete mid-2006

28
Phase 1 Funded Totals

• 80 Adaptive Control Signals
• 13 Dynamic Message Signs
• 56 CCTV Cameras
• 58 miles of Fiber-Optic Communications Cable
• Total 22.5 million - 4 out of every 5 dollars
  are from grants

29
Proposed Operation

• Pinellas County to oversee ATMS and ITS Corridors
  (approximately 450 signals)
• Provide a Regional Traffic Management Center in
  proposed Central Communications Center
• Co-located with 911 Center, Fire and EMS
  Dispatch, Sheriff Dispatch, and Emergency
  Operations Center

30
Next Steps

• Identify funding for future phases
• Possible Local Option Gasoline Tax
• Federal Earmarks
• Other funding sources
• Continued deployment of system phases

31
Questions?