2007 National Traffic Signal Report Card

The 2007 NationalThe 2007 NationalTraffic Signal Report CardTraffic Signal Report Card

• Assess traffic signal operations across Assess traffic signal operations across the country the country

• Provide benchmarking tool for agenciesProvide benchmarking tool for agencies• Publicize current state of systemsPublicize current state of systems• Promote benefits of good signal operationPromote benefits of good signal operation• Make case for additional resourcesMake case for additional resources• Present changes from the 2005 Report CardPresent changes from the 2005 Report Card• Highlight success storiesHighlight success stories

What Is the Traffic SignalWhat Is the Traffic SignalReport Card?Report Card?

• ManagementManagement• Signal Operation at Individual IntersectionsSignal Operation at Individual Intersections• Signal Operation in Coordinated SystemsSignal Operation in Coordinated Systems• Signal Timing PracticesSignal Timing Practices• Traffic Monitoring and Data CollectionTraffic Monitoring and Data Collection• MaintenanceMaintenance

An assessment of traffic signal operationsin the following six areas:

How Was the Traffic Signal How Was the Traffic Signal Report Card Developed?Report Card Developed?

Based upon responses to a Based upon responses to a self-assessment survey tool self-assessment survey tool (50 questions) (50 questions)

Scoring system for each section and overallScoring system for each section and overall Working group consisting of transportationWorking group consisting of transportation

professionals and NTOC members: professionals and NTOC members: American Association of State Highway and American Association of State Highway and

Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Transportation Officials (AASHTO) American Public Works Association (APWA)American Public Works Association (APWA) Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Intelligent Transportation Society of America (ITS America)Intelligent Transportation Society of America (ITS America) International Municipal Signal Association (IMSA)International Municipal Signal Association (IMSA) U.S. DOT - Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) U.S. DOT - Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)

How Was the Self-Assessment How Was the Self-Assessment Tool Distributed?Tool Distributed?

• Significant advertising of the project Significant advertising of the project through NTOC associationsthrough NTOC associations

• Accessible to everyone via ITE’s Web Accessible to everyone via ITE’s Web site (still posted for anyone to use)site (still posted for anyone to use)

• E-mailed to more than 500E-mailed to more than 500 individualsindividuals

Who Actually Participated?Who Actually Participated?

• At least one agency response (state or local) in At least one agency response (state or local) in 47 states47 states

• 276 local jurisdictions276 local jurisdictions• 67 counties67 counties• 28 Canadian agencies28 Canadian agencies

…………417 agencies participated in 2007…..up from 417 agencies participated in 2007…..up from 378 in 2005378 in 2005

Representing DifferentRepresenting DifferentSize Signal SystemsSize Signal Systems

Less than 50 SignalsLess than 50 Signals 98 (24%)98 (24%)

50-150 Signals50-150 Signals 134 (32%)134 (32%)

150-450 Signals150-450 Signals 97 (23%)97 (23%)

450-1,000 Signals450-1,000 Signals 51 (12%)51 (12%)

More than 1,000 SignalsMore than 1,000 Signals 36 (9%)36 (9%)

These agencies maintain about 45% of the nation’s 272,000 traffic signals

What Are the National Results?What Are the National Results?

Figure 1: National Traffic Signal Report Card

58

73

61

53

67

60

72

61

54

70

N/A

70

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Man

agem

ent

Sig

nal

Op

erat

ion

at

Ind

ivid

ual

Inte

rsec

tio

ns

Sig

nal

Op

erat

ion

inC

oo

rdin

ated

Sys

tem

s

Sig

nal

Tim

ing

Pra

ctic

es

Tra

ffic

Mo

nit

ori

ng

and

Dat

a C

olle

ctio

n

Mai

nte

nan

ce

Sc

ore

2005 Results 2007 Results

Figure 2: Results by Signal System Size

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Man

agem

ent

Sig

nal

Op

erat

ion

at

Ind

ivid

ual

Inte

rsec

tio

ns

Sig

nal

Op

erat

ion

inC

oo

rdin

ated

Sys

tem

s

Sig

nal

Tim

ing

Pra

ctic

es

Tra

ffic

Mo

nit

ori

ng

and

Dat

a C

olle

ctio

n

Mai

nte

nan

ce

Sc

ore

National <50 50 - 150 150 - 450 450 - 1000 1000+

Figure 3: Results by Agency Type

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Man

agem

ent

Sig

nal

Op

erat

ion

at

Ind

ivid

ual

Inte

rsec

tio

ns

Sig

nal

Op

erat

ion

inC

oo

rdin

ated

Sys

tem

s

Sig

nal

Tim

ing

Pra

ctic

es

Tra

ffic

Mo

nit

ori

ng

and

Dat

a C

olle

ctio

n

Mai

nte

nan

ce

Sc

ore

National State/Province County City/Municipality

Noteworthy FindingsNoteworthy Findings

• Major improvement not realized on national Major improvement not realized on national basis…but only 2 years since last surveybasis…but only 2 years since last survey

• Some agencies experienced significant Some agencies experienced significant improvementimprovement

• Individual intersections section scored highest, Individual intersections section scored highest, except for systems with less than 50 signals except for systems with less than 50 signals

• Maintenance section was second highest score Maintenance section was second highest score – indicates a basic level of operation to ensure – indicates a basic level of operation to ensure safety and protect the agency from liabilitysafety and protect the agency from liability

More Noteworthy FindingsMore Noteworthy Findings• Traffic monitoring and data collection section Traffic monitoring and data collection section

lowest score across all agency types and lowest score across all agency types and system size – indicates significant focus is system size – indicates significant focus is neededneeded

• Very small systems (<50 signals) scored Very small systems (<50 signals) scored markedly lower in all categoriesmarkedly lower in all categories

• Overall, systems with 150-450 signals scored Overall, systems with 150-450 signals scored the highest – generally indicates balance of the highest – generally indicates balance of system size/complexity with resourcessystem size/complexity with resources

Section 1 – Management – Section 1 – Management – D-D-Summary:Summary:

Overarching, documented philosophy for how agency Overarching, documented philosophy for how agency operates and times signalsoperates and times signals

Overseeing traffic operations outside of normal Overseeing traffic operations outside of normal working hoursworking hours

Coordination and information sharing with the public, Coordination and information sharing with the public, emergency service providers and event managersemergency service providers and event managers

Findings:Findings: The overall low score for this section is the most The overall low score for this section is the most

noteworthy findingnoteworthy finding Only half the agencies reporting have resources Only half the agencies reporting have resources

monitoring/managing traffic on a regularly scheduled monitoring/managing traffic on a regularly scheduled basisbasis

Figure C-1: Management Results by Signal System Size

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Average

Question Number

Scor

e

National <50 50 - 150 150 - 450 450 - 1000 1000+

Figure C-2: Management Results by Agency Type

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Average

Question Number

Scor

e

National State/Province County City/Municipality

Section 2 - Signal Operation at Section 2 - Signal Operation at Individual Intersections - Individual Intersections - CC

Summary:Summary: Regular review of signal timingRegular review of signal timing Review includes consideration of coordination, operations Review includes consideration of coordination, operations

and safetyand safety Develop and implement timing plans efficientlyDevelop and implement timing plans efficiently

Findings:Findings: Close to half of the agencies reported having little or no Close to half of the agencies reported having little or no

documented process that triggers a timing reviewdocumented process that triggers a timing review Once timing developed, installation and management of timing Once timing developed, installation and management of timing

setting is goodsetting is good Limited consideration and process to support other concurrent Limited consideration and process to support other concurrent

safety or operational changessafety or operational changes

Figure C-3: Signal Operation at Individual IntersectionsResults by Signal System Size

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Average

Question Number

Scor

e

National <50 50 - 150 150 - 450 450 - 1000 1000+

Figure C-4: Signal Operation at Individual IntersectionsResults by Agency Type

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Average

Question Number

Scor

e

National State/Province County City/Municipality

Section 3 - Signal Operation in Section 3 - Signal Operation in Coordinated Systems - Coordinated Systems - DD

Summary:Summary: Regular review (3 years) of signal timingRegular review (3 years) of signal timing Implementing updated timings quickly, once the need is Implementing updated timings quickly, once the need is

establishedestablished Developing timings using a well-defined processDeveloping timings using a well-defined process Including timing plans outside weekday peaks (off-peak, Including timing plans outside weekday peaks (off-peak,

holidays, events and incidents)holidays, events and incidents) Coordinating with adjacent jurisdictionsCoordinating with adjacent jurisdictions

Findings:Findings: Only 2/3 of the reporting agencies are:Only 2/3 of the reporting agencies are:

Conducting area-wide or corridor based signal timing review Conducting area-wide or corridor based signal timing review within 3 yearswithin 3 years

Have strong processes to develop signal timingHave strong processes to develop signal timing Coordinating across jurisdictional boundariesCoordinating across jurisdictional boundaries

Figure C-5: Signal Operation in Coordinated Systems Results by Signal System Size

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Average

Question Number

Scor

e

National <50 50 - 150 150 - 450 450 - 1000 1000+

Figure C-6: Signal Operation in Coordinated Systems Results by Agency Type

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Average

Question Number

Scor

e

National State/Province County City/Municipality

Section 4 - Signal Timing Practices – Section 4 - Signal Timing Practices – C-C-

Summary:Summary: Applying time-space diagrams, timing parameters, queue Applying time-space diagrams, timing parameters, queue

discharge and turn bay capacity to signal systemsdischarge and turn bay capacity to signal systems Field-reviewing timing plansField-reviewing timing plans Adjusting timings for periods of light traffic (i.e. night-time) Adjusting timings for periods of light traffic (i.e. night-time)

and special eventsand special eventsFindings:Findings:• Nearly 60% of reporting agencies perform comparative Nearly 60% of reporting agencies perform comparative

analysis of cycle, offset, phase sequence, etc.analysis of cycle, offset, phase sequence, etc.• About 2/3 of the reporting agencies adjust timing for light About 2/3 of the reporting agencies adjust timing for light

traffic periodstraffic periods• About 2/3 of the reporting agencies have strong processes for About 2/3 of the reporting agencies have strong processes for

timing actuated controllerstiming actuated controllers

Figure C-7: Signal Timing Practices Results by Signal System Size

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

31 32 33 34 35 36 Average

Question Number

Scor

e

National <50 50 - 150 150 - 450 450 - 1000 1000+

Figure C-8: Signal Timing Practices Results by Agency Type

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

31 32 33 34 35 36 Average

Question Number

Scor

e

National State/Province County City/Municipality

Section 5 – Traffic Monitoring Section 5 – Traffic Monitoring and Data Collection - and Data Collection - FF

Summary:Summary: Regular process for gathering and analyzing traffic Regular process for gathering and analyzing traffic

volume datavolume data Quality assurance policies to review accuracy of Quality assurance policies to review accuracy of

surveillance datasurveillance data Archiving and sharing data with other jurisdictionsArchiving and sharing data with other jurisdictions

Findings:Findings: Greatest potential for improvementGreatest potential for improvement 43% reported little or no regular on-going program for 43% reported little or no regular on-going program for

collecting and analyzing traffic data for signal timingcollecting and analyzing traffic data for signal timing Half reported that they do not assess data qualityHalf reported that they do not assess data quality

Figure C-9: Traffic Monitoring and Data CollectionResults by Signal System Size

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

37 38 39 40 Average

Question Number

Scor

e

National <50 50 - 150 150 - 450 450 - 1000 1000+

Figure C-10: Traffic Monitoring and Data CollectionResults by Agency Type

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

37 38 39 40 Average

Question Number

Scor

e

National State/Province County City/Municipality

Section 6 – Maintenance – Section 6 – Maintenance – C-C-Summary:Summary:

Adequate staffing and policies for signal techniciansAdequate staffing and policies for signal technicians Regular assessment of the condition of traffic control Regular assessment of the condition of traffic control

equipmentequipment Asset management system to track maintenance, Asset management system to track maintenance,

infrastructure and softwareinfrastructure and software

Findings:Findings: More than 2/3 of agencies have process in place to have More than 2/3 of agencies have process in place to have

a technician at an intersection within 1 hour (business a technician at an intersection within 1 hour (business hours) to 2 hours (non-business hours)hours) to 2 hours (non-business hours)

Almost 70% have regular preventive maintenance and Almost 70% have regular preventive maintenance and operations review to assess condition of traffic control operations review to assess condition of traffic control systemsystem

Figure C-11: Maintenance Results by Signal System Size

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 Average

Question Number

Scor

e

National <50 50 - 150 150 - 450 450 - 1000 1000+

QU

ESTI

ON

OM

ITTE

D

Figure C-12: Maintenance Results by Agency Type

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 Average

Question Number

Scor

e

National State/Province County City/Municipality

QU

ESTI

ON

OM

ITTE

D

Where Do We Go From Here? Where Do We Go From Here? Improving The ScoreImproving The Score

GOAL: Performance excellence in traffic signal GOAL: Performance excellence in traffic signal operation.operation. Proactive program managementProactive program management Substantial traffic monitoring and Substantial traffic monitoring and

data collectiondata collection Routine timing updatesRoutine timing updates Sound maintenance practicesSound maintenance practices Reasonably current traffic signal hardwareReasonably current traffic signal hardware

* Benefits of investing in signal timing often * Benefits of investing in signal timing often outweigh costs by 40:1 or more!outweigh costs by 40:1 or more!

Traffic Signal Program Traffic Signal Program ManagementManagement

Essential Components:Essential Components:

Leadership focusLeadership focus Strategic planningStrategic planning Customer and market focusCustomer and market focus Measurement, analysis and Measurement, analysis and

knowledge managementknowledge management Workforce development and trainingWorkforce development and training Process managementProcess management Focus on outcomesFocus on outcomes

The Benefits of Improvement— The Benefits of Improvement—

We Would See:We Would See: Reduction in traffic delay up to 40% and Reduction in traffic delay up to 40% and

reductions in travel time up to 25%reductions in travel time up to 25%

Reduction in fuel consumption of up to 10%Reduction in fuel consumption of up to 10%

Reduction in harmful emissions Reduction in harmful emissions (carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, (carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, volatile organic compounds) up to 22%volatile organic compounds) up to 22%

What Can Agencies Do to Make What Can Agencies Do to Make the Case for More Resources?the Case for More Resources?

• Complete the traffic signal self assessmentComplete the traffic signal self assessment• Review their scoreReview their score• Perform traffic signal system auditPerform traffic signal system audit• Pursue additional funding – local, MPO, state, Pursue additional funding – local, MPO, state,

federalfederal• Talk with their agency’s leadership and public Talk with their agency’s leadership and public

information officerinformation officer• Publicize the efforts they are making to improve Publicize the efforts they are making to improve

traffic signal management and operationstraffic signal management and operations

Success StoriesSuccess Stories

Results for several agencies showed significant Results for several agencies showed significant improvement. Characteristics of these programs improvement. Characteristics of these programs include:include: Used 2005 self assessment to evaluate programs and Used 2005 self assessment to evaluate programs and

focus on critical areasfocus on critical areas Made targeted life-cycle capital investments to reduce Made targeted life-cycle capital investments to reduce

maintenance costsmaintenance costs Placed emphasis on a program of regular timing Placed emphasis on a program of regular timing

updates and arterial coordinationupdates and arterial coordination Sought independent peer reviewSought independent peer review Facilitated regional coordinationFacilitated regional coordination

City of Austin, TXCity of Austin, TXScore Improvement: C to AScore Improvement: C to A

Specific Actions:Specific Actions:• Utilized 2005 self assessment tool as a benchmark to Utilized 2005 self assessment tool as a benchmark to

identify deficienciesidentify deficiencies• Proactive management vs. reactive fixesProactive management vs. reactive fixes

- Scheduled the retiming of signals to every 3 years- Scheduled the retiming of signals to every 3 years- Staff assigned to zones, creating sense of ownership- Staff assigned to zones, creating sense of ownership

Results:Results:• Reduced maintenance calls from 5,000 to 2,500 in one yearReduced maintenance calls from 5,000 to 2,500 in one year• 10% overall reduction in travel time for all arterials10% overall reduction in travel time for all arterials• 28% reduction in number of stops28% reduction in number of stops• 3.5% reduction in gallons of fuel3.5% reduction in gallons of fuel

City of Alpharetta, GA City of Alpharetta, GA Score Improvement: F to CScore Improvement: F to C

Specific Actions:Specific Actions:• Regular timing maintenance programRegular timing maintenance program• New technologyNew technology

Ethernet communicationsEthernet communications Internet-based application softwareInternet-based application software

Results:Results:• 23% reduction in stops23% reduction in stops• 8% reduction in fuel consumption8% reduction in fuel consumption• 17% reduction in trip times17% reduction in trip times• 31% reduction in delays31% reduction in delays• Significant reductions in HC, NOx and CO emissionsSignificant reductions in HC, NOx and CO emissions

What if My Agency Did Not What if My Agency Did Not Participate in the Participate in the Self Assessment?Self Assessment?

• Complete the self assessment now Complete the self assessment now http://www.ite.org/selfassessment/http://www.ite.org/selfassessment/

• Review the 2007 National Traffic Signal Report Card Review the 2007 National Traffic Signal Report Card Technical Report Technical Report http://www.ite.org/reportcardhttp://www.ite.org/reportcard

• Baseline your agency against the national scoresBaseline your agency against the national scores

• Perform a traffic signal system audit, Perform a traffic signal system audit, (see Traffic Signal Audit Guide)(see Traffic Signal Audit Guide) http://www.ite.org/reportcard/traffic_audit_FINAL.pdfhttp://www.ite.org/reportcard/traffic_audit_FINAL.pdf

Questions?Questions?

• For additional information contact:For additional information contact:

Lisa Fontana TierneyLisa Fontana TierneyTraffic Engineering Senior DirectorTraffic Engineering Senior DirectorInstitute of Transportation EngineersInstitute of Transportation Engineers1099 14th Street, NW1099 14th Street, NWSuite 300 WestSuite 300 WestWashington, DC 20005Washington, DC 20005

Phone: (202) 289-0222Phone: (202) 289-0222Fax: (202) 289-7722Fax: (202) 289-7722

ltierney@ite.orgltierney@ite.org

Traffic Signal ToolsTraffic Signal Tools

• 2007 Traffic Signal Operations Self 2007 Traffic Signal Operations Self Assessment. Washington DC: NTOC, 2006 (Assessment. Washington DC: NTOC, 2006 (http://http://www.ite.org/selfassessmentwww.ite.org/selfassessment//))

• Traffic Signal Audit Guide (Traffic Signal Audit Guide (http://www.ite.org/reportcard/http://www.ite.org/reportcard/))

• And more…..And more…..

Traffic Signal Resources (ITE)Traffic Signal Resources (ITE)• Philip J. Tarnoff and Javier Ordonez. Philip J. Tarnoff and Javier Ordonez. Signal Timing Practices Signal Timing Practices

and Proceduresand Procedures: State of the Practice.: State of the Practice. Washington, DC: Washington, DC: Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2004.Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2004.

• Traffic Signal Timing: Moving State-of-the-Practice Closer to Traffic Signal Timing: Moving State-of-the-Practice Closer to State of the ArtState of the Art.. Intelligent Transportation Systems for Traffic Intelligent Transportation Systems for Traffic Control, pg.1. USDOT ITS Joint Program Office. January 2007.Control, pg.1. USDOT ITS Joint Program Office. January 2007.

• Benefits of Retiming Traffic SignalsBenefits of Retiming Traffic Signals. Washington, DC: ITE, . Washington, DC: ITE, 2005.2007. 2005.2007.

• Assessment of Puget Sound Regional Traffic Signal Operations Assessment of Puget Sound Regional Traffic Signal Operations ProgramProgram (www.ite.org) (www.ite.org)

• Mid-America Regional Council Transportation Department’s Mid-America Regional Council Transportation Department’s “Operation Green Light” (www.ite.org)“Operation Green Light” (www.ite.org)

• Overview of the 2007 National Traffic Signal Report Card Overview of the 2007 National Traffic Signal Report Card PowerPoint (www.ite.org)PowerPoint (www.ite.org)

• Reno, Nevada’s Traffic Signal Retiming Project (www.ite.org)Reno, Nevada’s Traffic Signal Retiming Project (www.ite.org)

Organizations/Training• American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials• (www.transportation.org)• American Public Works Association (www.apwa.net)• Consortium for ITS Training and Education (www.citeconsortium.org)• Federal Highway Administration Resource Center, Peer-to-Peer

Program (www.fhwa.dot.gov)• Arterial Management Program

(http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/arterial_mgmt/index.htm)• University Transportation Centers/Local Technical Assistance Program

(LTAP) Centers• Institute of Transportation Engineers (www.ite.org) – Technical

Councils• Intelligent Transportation Society of America (www.itsa.org)• International Municipal Signal Association (www.imsasafety.org)• Transportation Research Board (www.trb.org)• National Cooperative Highway Research Program

(www.trb.org/crp/about/divd.asp)

TRAFFIC SIGNAL TRAFFIC SIGNAL OPERATIONS SPECIALIST™ (TSOS)OPERATIONS SPECIALIST™ (TSOS)

• The Traffic Signal Operations Specialist™ (TSOS) The Traffic Signal Operations Specialist™ (TSOS) certification program is intended for candidates without certification program is intended for candidates without licensure who have a wide range of education and licensure who have a wide range of education and experience with traffic signals, such as engineers and experience with traffic signals, such as engineers and technicians/technologists. This certification compliments technicians/technologists. This certification compliments the Professional Traffic Operations Engineer™ (PTOE) the Professional Traffic Operations Engineer™ (PTOE) certification and will not substitute for appropriate certification and will not substitute for appropriate professional licenses when they are required for specific professional licenses when they are required for specific responsibilities or jurisdictions.responsibilities or jurisdictions.

• http://www.tpcb.org/tsos/http://www.tpcb.org/tsos/

Arterial Management – Traffic Arterial Management – Traffic Signal FHWA Web SiteSignal FHWA Web Site

http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/arterial_mgmt/traffic_sig.htmhttp://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/arterial_mgmt/traffic_sig.htm

• Traffic Signal Management Traffic Signal Management • Traffic Signal Operations & Maintenance Traffic Signal Operations & Maintenance • Traffic Signal Timing Traffic Signal Timing

• Awareness & Outreach, Publications, Awareness & Outreach, Publications, Training, ResearchTraining, Research

2007 National Traffic Signal Report Card