Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) Program: Major Achievements, Key Findings, and Outlook

Chapter 3. Overarching Findings and Outcomes of the ICM Program

Below are some of the overarching findings and outcomes of the ICM Program that have been identified throughout the evolution of the program. Some findings are anecdotal. For example, one original cynic of the ICM program, a network operator in Dallas, later conveyed his frustration that he knew ICM had made improvements in his corridor, but it was hard to prove that quantitatively. Another anecdotal statement heard was along the lines of "how much better our respective agencies are in understanding each other's strengths and weaknesses." Measuring objective ICM benefits may be one of the larger problems to solve in promoting ICM deployment. However, there is no denying the subjective anecdotal successes that agencies are reporting.

Guiding Deployment of ICM Supporting Infrastructure

ICM brings a new level of corridor cooperation and data sharing that helps involved stakeholders coordinate the operations of their individual systems to achieve regional goals. Most of the supporting ICM infrastructure (coordinated ramp metering, real-time transit information, traffic signal timing improvements, parking management, 511, etc.) are designed to improve traffic conditions as stand-alone systems. By enhancing or upgrading these systems to support ICM, regions will likely make incremental improvements to corridor operations, even before an ICMS is turned on. This may result in a reduction in delay and duration of corridor incidents prior to the ICMS implementation, which may then ironically reduce measurable benefits when the ICMS is implemented. Deployers need to be aware of this, because a lack of measurable benefits may ultimately influence decision-making. While these stand-alone ICM support systems can make improvements in the corridor even without ICM, the collaboration and coordination among network operators brings an extra level of corridor management that could not be achieved without ICMS planning and implementation.

ICM promotes a change towards proactively managing corridor traffic considering the traveler first, instead of agency systems or jurisdictional boundaries. With the focus being on travelers, rather than just drivers, emphasis should be placed on determining methods for comparing and measuring traveler-focused, multi-modal performance metrics and information.

Collaboration among ICM partners planning to implement an ICMS provides a deeper understanding of corridor infrastructure needs and offers supporting data that can be used to upgrade their corridor infrastructure in a well-organized and efficient manner. These types of capital improvements are likely to improve corridor operations even before the ICMS is implemented. Additionally, once the ICMS is operational, it can assist operators in further isolating corridor trouble spots that may need additional capital improvements.

Locally-funded ICM Planning and Deployment

Based on initial USDOT ICM efforts, various States and regions throughout the country have begun funding their own ICM planning and implementation projects and have begun applying USDOT concepts on their own corridors. Identifying funding for ICM has been a challenge, however the surveyed regions have realized value in the ICM initiative, and they are working to insert ICM funding into their normal planning processes. In California, transportation agencies are actively planning to deploy ICM in several "Connected Corridors" throughout the State. One example is the U.S. 50 corridor from the City of West Sacramento into El Dorado County¹⁰. Another example is in Pennsylvania in the I-76 integrated corridor management project¹¹ between the Pennsylvania Turnpike and the U.S. 1 interchanges. These self-funded activities provide another indication that the ICM concept is becoming more accepted as good practice and represents another important outcome of the program.

What have we learned from ICM?

What makes corridor management "integrated"? Does the collaboration among corridor partners make the system institutionally integrated or does the DSS make the system operationally integrated? A technical (hardware and software) solution is not always the most reliable metric in measuring system problems. The human interaction in developing the logic of the system is also necessary for system development. The New York City ICM stakeholders - one of the thirteen deployment planning grant sites — cited the decades-long success and example of TRANSCOM in emphasizing the human centric viewpoint of ICM for their corridor. TRANSCOM developed organically, by rote, and over time, beginning in 1986. A coalition of sixteen (16) transportation and public safety agencies, spanning NY, NJ, and CT, and including bridge, subway and port authority agencies, needed to integrate and cooperate to enable everyone's success, because one major impacting event in one silo would reverberate to all. In such cases, it can be a more feasible option to maintain human interaction to make the system work more efficiently and fulfill requirements in a more cost-effective manner.

Promoting Additional ICM Research Activity

An important outcome of the ICM program is that it has stimulated research activity, including non-federally funded research to be conducted by outside organizations and researchers. For example, several NCHRP projects have been funded to research various aspects of ICM. Examples include:

• NCHRP 03-81 [Completed]: Strategies for Integrated Operation of Freeway and Arterial Corridors
• NCHRP Project 20-68A, Scan 12-02 [Completed]: Advances in Strategies for Implementing Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) (Domestic Scan)
• NCHRP 03-121 [Active]: Incorporating Freight, Transit, and Incident Response Stakeholders into Integrated Corridor Management (ICM): Processes and Strategies for Implementation
• NCHRP 708-124 [Anticipated 2018]: Quantifying the Impacts of Corridor Management

In addition, State DOT's have partnered with universities to research various ICM topics, including evaluation and analysis modeling and simulation activities. The I-210 pilot ICMS project, which includes a partnership between Caltrans, PATH, and LA Metro, is an example of a project that meets these criteria. The I-210 Pilot is located on a 22-mile section of the I-210 freeway (the Foothill Freeway) in the San Gabriel Valley in Los Angeles County.

The DSS topic has received a lot of research attention, because it can be complex, yet is so fundamental to ICM. The research on DSS expands beyond the ICM context into the general transportation management environment. Several workshops have been held on this DSS topic. One recent workshop¹² produced notes that included a prioritized list of recommendations for research on the topic of DSS. DSS for ICM is a challenging and important topic with many facets. Appendix A provides more detail on some of the issues and challenges associated with DSS for ICMS and offers some suggested research and areas for improvement.