Welcome. I would now like to turn the call over to Ms Jocelyn Bauer. You may begin. Welcome to talking operations hosted by the national transportation operations coalition. The title of today's webinar is active transportation and demand management: international perspectives. Today's seminar will last approximately one hour and a half with the last 30 minutes allocated to questions and answers. During the presentations, if you think of a question, we encouraging you to type it into the smaller chat box on the left side of your screen. Make sure you send your question to everyone rather than just the presenters much the presenters will be unable to answer your questions during the presentations but Beverly Kuhns will answer them in the last 30 minutes of the webinar. A file containing the audio and visual part will be posted within the next week. I'll type that address into the chat box shortly. Aten des will be notified of the availability of the presentation and the closed captioning of the seminar. We direct you to ask others who were not able to attend it access it online. The presentation will be used for download in the Nile download box in about five or 10 minutes to download a file click with your mouse the name of the file and click the name at the bottom that says save to my computer. Dr. Beverly Kuhn is a division head and research engineer with the Texas Transportation Institute. A part of the texas a&m system, especially in the areas of active transportation demand management and management lanes. Beverly, would you like to start us off? Yes. Thank you, Jocelyn. Welcome everyone. I think we're going to have a great webinar. We're pleased you were able to join us. This webinar is being hosted by intalk and being prepared by the federal highway administration. We have four speakers. I will introduce each of them. Our first speaker is Jim hunt, trans poration specialist on the pricing team in the office of operations where he develops and promotes methods for evaluating transportation operating strategies and implementing them into the planning process. Jim will give us an flax -- an introduction of the concept. Our first international hall presenter is Lucy wick couple with Michelle in the united kingdom. She is the director of technology and develops the management and on the management program. It is now being applied in a review of approaches aloe cat -- allocatable to Australia. We'll love into our second international presenter, Gordon demu nusmed k. He has a masters in urban planning in the Netherlands. He has condition doubted evaluation studies and sharing knowledge among projects. Some of the current projects are building cost benefit tools, working on a partnership with the national railway company and creating a new standard framework. After we hear the experience from the united kingdom, we'll hear from Eric Shrekler, a transportation specialist in San Diego. Eric is an independent consultant and as over 30 years of experience with planning to address congestion, air quality and energy issues. He's widely recognized need for his work in integrating demand management into hair quality met gages, and use planning and highway systems operations. So with that I want to turn this over to Jim. He's going to give you plan introduction of the contents. Thanks very much. Pleased to be able to present you with our vision for the active transportation deep and concept -- demand concept. It's evolving. The program is sure to evolve was we go forward. We this it's a great time to take a look at the system and what would the next face and evolution of our program look like. What I will do briefly is provide an overview of how we got to this point, touch briefly on what the conceptual framework looks like. It is a snapshot. We'll take in the feedback from the practitioner community going forward and touch on some of the national program initiatives that we have underway to support the program. So what is active transportation and demand management. It's moving more toward as pro active approach from a reactive approach. It's addressing congestion needs before the system breaks down. We're focusing probably or than ever on the integration between supply and demand management and elevating the liability as a core tenant of evaluations. What inspired us to move forward? We're seeing pockets of encouraging signs, quite a number of acronyms up there. Apologize for that. We have deployments. We have a glimpse of some of the active transportation management. Dallas, San Diego and others moving forward with very interesting, integrating approaches, and a variety of other regions are moving forward with several of the initiatives that we would consider actively managing their S we also had the fortune of taking a lack at international experience, sponsored three international scanning tours. You'll hear more from the UK and the Netherlands. We thought this was a good time to integrate those into the U.S. transportation system management approach. So I mentioned the scanning tours. Each of the three scanning tours that helped drive our program is a synthesis report that's available for you to look at there. Was one in 2005. One in 2006 on the active traffic management. One of the most recent scanning tours looked at some of the design issues and feasibility from a design perspective of active transportation management concepts and that was documented in the last report. I like to stress we're not talking about specific strategies but how they're being deployed. It's an approach, a philosophy a concept to have agencies lack more in terms of real time monitoring and dynamic actions to sport needs on the system. We view it more as a continuum from say a static or fixed mindset moving into the ability to forecast and rely on historical data and look at patterns moving more into the proactive role of management operations. One of the waist we like to -- ways we like to present the paradigm shift is to consider the traditional view of the way we design and plan our infrastructure. That's to look at the volume to capacity ratio and try to build capacity to satisfy a fixed or a known predicted volume. That's the conventional view from a traffic engineer standpoint of how a lot of the announcements are doing today. With ATDM we're recognize that demand varies and we have the ability to influence demand. That capacity is not fixed as well due to events that we need to think more holistically about. On the demand side the way we chose to view it is not overall but looking at demand throughout the scope of the trip chain. So then decisions are made. That moves into transportation demand. Finely, that transportation demand might find its way on to specific facilities and routes, more in the realm of facilities demand. Take a look at the model from the Netherlands and adopted it for the United States. Hour thinking is to present a framework that looks at the entire thought process that goes into making a trip. We have to think how the user experiences the system and how to they interact with the system. The various steps along the chain would typically stop with a destination choice, a time of day would follow. The route choice and finally, we get into specific lane or facility choices, and -- excuse me. It jumped ahead a little bit. So we have that notion of the trip chain. What can we do as system operators, as planners to influence decisions along the chain. We think we can characterize it with the supply side and de and side. Supply size looking at capacities and speeds and demand that would influence the time of day. We're moving forward with a concept that -- pardon me. You can read some of the sub categories that we've come up with now, access control, facility control, supply side, pricing and multimodal traffic. I'm not going to go into specifics at this point in the interest of time but just to show you where Rae looking at these -- we're looking at these various tools. If we start with the concept of looking at the various stages of demand management, we can think about the front end parts of that cycle as focusing more on the traditional travel demand programs. The middle we consider more brought and mode decisions. That's the realm where management helps supports the program. At the end of the trip chain we start thinking about specific management of facilities, park facilities, lane facilities. We think that holistically those three di mentions encompass what would be under the ATDM umbrella. Quickly walk through a couple of examples of the types of things -- types of strategies or active management applications that might follow. The team of day choice you see representation that shows real data, the number of trips taken and the time it originated in the metropolitan area. What we're trying to do is through some of the demand management issues, is to try to encourage the shifting of some of those peaks to the shoulders of the peak period to help smooth the traffic flow, stay ahead of the curve and preclude breakdown more defer it to a later time. We have the ability to influence mode and brought choice. That's where the management approach comes into play where we try to shift demand or encourage load balancing across the network, across facilities when the trip is already underway. Finally, what can we do after those choices are made to help influence and manage and monitor specific facilities. Here you see a couple pictures of active traffic management. The one on the left from the one in Seattle with the various speed limits and cue warning systems and the I-35 shoulder in conjunction with that active traffic management as well. Hopefully, that gives an overview of the tools available and how we see those folding into the conceptual framework. What are we doing about this? We're trying to develop a comprehensive program. We have six tracks -- operational testing, evaluation. Quite a bet of commitment has gone into it. This week in Seattle, leaders have given us recommendations on how to work this in the planning process. How do we consider the policy issues, whether the provide needs to move -- provide needs to -- research needs to move this forward. One of the things that came up this week, what kind of tools and we're thinking about that to give a tool, an assessment tool that would allow agencies, depending on where they reside, traffic, freeway operations or operations management center or instant management program or public transportation system, just where are they now in the spectrum and how can they move forward. And then, of course, because we are promoting a holistic approach, we got to think about the institutional issues, technical issues linking across the functional disciplines to support this. Just to conclude, you saw the framework as it exists today. It is evolving. We welcome feedback from practitioners on their experiences with this. We're developing tools, research and guidance, trying to track and evaluate the current deployments. It's multidisciplinary in scope. It relies on transit, planning, infrastructure and quite a bit of opportunity for feedback. I think I'll close with that. There's my contact information if you have any follow-up questions or wish to get involved and be part of the group that Shepherds this through with the highway administration. Thank you. Thanks, Jim. We're now going to turn it over to Lucy wick couple, who is going to give us her perspective on what's happened and evolved in the united king do. So Lucy. Good morning, everybody. I'm going to talk briefly about concept which I think it's an important word to use. It's not about control. We have to get the users onboard with what we're doing. Very briefly, I put together a journey through a personal perspective. I put this up for two reasons. One to show it takes over a decade, 15 years to get from where we started through to 2011 where we are now with a much more specific and wider program, so just to make people aware there are no easy quick answers when going through stakeholders and bureaucracy sometimes. There are no particular quick fixes but we've been able to take a safe approach, and that has been a very successful one over the years, culminating in 2011, in Jan vie of -- January of this year. It has new been able to report the three-year results, and that has been very successful. We'll come back to that later, but that is a very important point to make that it does take time to gather the evidence to produce the base upon which one is able to reliably and statistically bring one stakeholder onboard . There we go. This is for me one of the most important slides. If I can get across to everybody who's listening to this one really needs to stop at the and of the process. It's critically to start by understanding the problem you're trying to solve and try to define what success looks like. I encapsulated is that which we'll move on to in a moment. It sounds very, very simple. It's not about standardized engineering when a typical engineer might pick up the rule book, start at rule one and go through it. It's important that the people or designing these schemes understand how the network is intending to operate in the finalized estate. From our experience safety is absolutely key to this process and very much drives the design and the stakeholders, it cannot be overemphasized. They can make it or break it. It's also terribly important to minimize the point of failure, particularly from a maintenance perspective. It's producing, modifying assets that someone has to keep running on your behalf. I think maybe a quick way of encapsulating it is that we need to treat the disease, not the symptoms, maybe a useful way of thinking about it. And I think it's really important to create the evidence base in order to gather that evidence and create the base. That comes important in all these kinds of projects. The work that we've done concluded that there are primarily four outcomes. Those outcomes being compliant driver behavior, reliability. The maintenance of safety and political accessibility. Thus far, that is proven to be, reasonably -- would make an observation that possibly I'm considering adding sustainability. If we start with something of that nature, we'll be there or thereabouts. In terms of agreeing to the operational principles, I've outlined there in the slide a process that one can go through, which is very -- very much mirrors the narrative I've been through. In terms of articulation of it and spending the last few days in Seattle, it's interesting how you can lose an awful lot to get tide new it. It's very easy to get diverted from what the common understanding is all about. In the UK, it as fair to say one of the outcomes that we have observed is the behavior of the driver is driven by the provision of the right information and the right place at the right time. One could have a long debate on the manner and with increasing body of research that might well result in that information being changed as the body of evidence gets great are. It's important to pry the right information -- right right information to derive an intuitive response. Self-explaining highway would be one way of describe that. The overall result is a -- overall result is a controlled environment. I put down the four e's. There's certainly elements of education, elements of encouragement, elements of engineering, a very important place for enforcement and a critical path through evaluation in the development of all these products and projects. In terms of management motor ways, we started out with the pilots. The basic principles, the project, the best use of existing network. There's no money. It's fiscally challenged, another way for saying broke. We don't have the and space in order to have any large scale widening on new bumped projects. Making best use of the project has become a important consideration. In terms of the results we have hoped that we would be able to zel straight reduced congestion, that we would demonstrate improved journey times in terms of real terms and their reliability and that we would have a safety benefit as well as providing improved driver information and better performance. In terms of reliability the driver's ability to predict weekday journey times is improved by over 22%. In terms of environmental impact we've been able to demonstrate a reduction of fuel con suggestion and -- consumption and emissions. It's in the safety side of things that the results have been really most astounding. We've been able to demonstrate 60% reduction in risks to motorists. Thus far, nobody has been killed in the operation of this scheme on the M42 motor way. I think it's the safety performance that has driven the decision makers to look so favorably on the concept and it's become part of the investment program going forward in the UK. It's very much a pea sis of management motor ways and the design version of the M42 pilot. I mentioned at the start the safety I thought was the key. We've been able to develop a comprehensive analysis in order to predict accidents, behavior and that is also -- put us in good stats of understanding the form of mitigations that they should take. It's interesting to note that only six types of accidents account for over 80% of the total risk. Most accidents are caused by speeding and weaving. It isn't very complicated. Accidents are caused by speeding and weaving. You will see on that slide that contention is born out by the type of accidents we've been looking at. Terms of the individual hazards, it's very interesting to note that a very, very small number make up a vast majority of the risk. It's therefore critically important the project's focus on the hazards, mitigation of hazards that will make a difference in the raising of the scheme. As the management motor ways concepts are developed, a until about of tweaks and new operational regimes, for example, are running in particular, been introduced in the network. In you like a standardized generic provision of motor ways, control through junction running, concept, all lane running. Metering is an option. We've looked at high occupancy vehicle lanes. It hasn't all been applied with great gusto in the UK. I think it's also worth noting there's tremendous synergy between the technology infrastructure and the manner in which you operate. I mentioned earlier, I think a lot of it has to do with the controlled environment that we've been able to create on the project which is a significantly different driving environment for the motorist. That has to do with the timely provision of the right information at the right place in the right form. Worth you have to see the next signal or whether one has to be able to see this within a reasonable time frame is the subject of a lot of debate and research at the moment. Certainly we feel that it's quite likely, if not for political perspectives very, very -- the schemes are going to have to move forward with less technology and infrastructure. We saw where we typically had them spaced at 500 meters and the subsequent rolled out projects are at 800-meter spacing. That's from TRL. There has to be a balance with the risk-reward ratio. I'll put that up again on the basis of the evidence and the information given to you and I think it's also important to think about these intervention first at the strategic level but at the project level. I'll try to change your slide here. Thank you very much. That's perfect. He asked me to speak about smarter travel. We have a program in the UK, specifically at the company I work for called motivate. Can I now move this forward? No? Could you move it forward, please. Yes. Oh, back one. It always takes longer to go moving forward. You have to go back one, but not the end of the world. I will talk briefly about -- forward one. There we go. Thank you. I'm going to mention very briefly to the interventions that have been tried in the UK. First in norfolk. It incorporates smarter choices and the need for longevity, the need for all stakeholders for both public and private side of things. This is one that has been loudly championed. Can we move on a bit. It's a tool kit. It's a building block approach. Can we go forward? Yes. One's able to use the staged approach to full filth objectives. Can we go forward again. The benefit, it has a longevity as I mentioned before. It goes through the entire crisis of operation, particularly moving from the private -- moving from the public to the private. Can we move it again. The focus of the initiative is developing a program to reduce car travel and also the reduction of travel related carbon emissions and to increase the number of users of more sustainable modes of travel. Within the first year of operation you'll see at the bottom of the screen, a number of achievements were able to be realized. Again, moving on. The final example is traffic park in the northwest of England. It covers about 3,000 acres and home to 1400 companies, workplaces, approximately 35,000 people employed in this district. The census data from 2001 indicates 80% of the people all travel by car. That's a challenge in the introduction and realization of this program. Can we go again? I'm using the same staged approach, particularly in public, private partnership. One was able to achieve significant results. It's not my area of expertise but one or two examples. It is being able to take it forward, even in the current fiscal planning with increasing buy-in from the private sector, oh,s, have ago -- organizations, having a positive e fact -- effect with the ATDM concept. Thanks, Lucy. Gordon demoongus will give us the Dutch perspective. Good morning. I will give some examples of the Dutch experience. I see some examples, I will skip because it's just 15 minutes now but use them for inspiration in the U.S., I will say. And the next slide. Are you able to click on those arrows at the lower left of your slide? Yes. I'm to give you a brief overview. This is the Netherlands. 3,000 kilometers. We have rush hour lanes and a lot of water. We need a lot of tunnels and bridges. We have lots of ITS. A lot of cameras for incident management and also some red metering. The mane goals are -- main goals are to reduce congestion have reliable transportation team and predictable travel times. To do this in a regional approach and give people their own responsibility and take our responsibility because of roadwork. Very important that you Mrs. saw in -- also saw in Lucy's presentation, the user. It's not only focused on time but the use ser very important as well. We need to have user satisfaction score of 7.5 out of 10. This is basically the model we think of. We start to think from the user's point of view and we try to put this in level agreements, work with other parties like regional authorities and also bigger companies, make good promises with them and also let people know what we are doing. The results in this model, it's like the -- the results are what do I get. How do I get it and how do I feel with it. You can look at the use are feedback. What can you expect from the user, what the route authority is doing and they really want to have predictable travel time. They don't want to get stuck in traffic when they don't expect it. Late at night from a con sort or a match and there's no warning. They don't want unnecessary hassle. If the road is empty and you suddenly see you have to drive 70-kilometers an hour, that's not what people expect. From this we define golden rules. Make logic traffic signs, tell the road use are what they could do or should do but in the so many messages that he can't understand it anymore. So some challenges we were facing and why we had to do something with travel management. Mainly because there was a big backlog in our maintenance program. We need to do 500 extra projects since 2006 within two and a half years. From 2010 on we had priority projects. The most important thing we had there is we made a promise to parliament that we don't have extra congestion like 6% added congestion. With the priority project the most interesting part came when we need to finish them within a two-year time. So that meant for the normal procedure it would have taken at least three years and we made the procedure off the -- softer. Also, these weren't necessary projects. These are the projects you can see in very congested areas. Yet, it meant new that we have 60% less congestion in those areas. So on to more traffic management, this is what the traffic management looks like. You can see the rush hour lane and on the right top you can see one of our information panels sharing a road and some congestion on the left. We have some focus point. First, we have the traffic management centers. Of course control the motor way. Look at what's happening. Rush our lanes. We have some special teams. It basically sets up traffic signals. Of course we do lots of internet management to prevent extra congestion and some innovation. If you look at the sustainable traffic management we have a hand book based on the regional corporation. It takes you from initiation and this all has to do with operational traffic management. Look at the rush hour lanes as I've seen here in Washington state as well. We have a couple of lanes, 16 lanes in the Netherlands which -- [Speaker/Audio Faint or Unclear] They are design guidelines of course. A picture of this. It should be the next slide. Also, you can see some youtube links in my presentation thanks to somebody who films most of them. The one which is -- got a red X, or we have one on the left as well. Another interesting thing we tried out last year our dynamic speed limits. We also put some special things with it. We have three types. One is for -- to prevent congestion. One is for safety and one is for air quality. We did research, so I think about this. Air quality looks like low support. In this case people had to drive 80-kilometers an hour where they usually drive 100 kilometers an hour and people didn't slow down in those cases. The case where you increase the speed, so if you increase the speed from 100 to 120 kilometers you get much more support. In this case there was an increase in pollution, no other effect except one where we had 80-kilometers around the city which increased to 100-kilometers an hour and we saw a big improvement with all the traffic jams going away when we started this project. We have projects where we increased it to 130. Places where it's quiet on the road, mainly for air quality and noise. And synchronized traffic signals. It means a big improvement in the places where we use this. We saw a 75 year been filth incident management speaks for itself. This is what it looks like if it's a really big problem on the roads. We have the yellow on the road, trying to help people get incidents off the road as soon as possible as well as our automatic incident detector with cameras. We saw 4% to 5% increased capacity in ideal circumstances. 2% to 3% on average but you really need the right circumstance for this. If there's a bottleneck further down the road it wouldn't work but it can be very cost efficient. Now changing to mobility management as we call it in Europe. This is laid out in the mow belt document in 2005 where it need the to be done together with the private coact -- sector. We were not causing extra congestion because have the many roadworks. So we have three approaches at these road works. Usually we have a general approach, which is open for everybody, cheaper train tickets which you can buy at the train station, and we have a regional approach where weigh work together with bigger companies. To the employees we give cheaper transport or give them a personal travel website. We try [Speaker/Audio Faint or Unclear] Give them a custom made individual choice for them or an alternative to use, for example for public transport or inform them on what's going to happen on their piece of road which they're usually driving. One interesting thing is we talked about integrate being traffic management, travel management, so I take you to this methodology which is a focus on challenges. We basically looked together with the private sector, with other road authorities to what can we actually achieve during road works to get people to do other things, so to choose an alternative, choose an alternative route. Go to other place. For example, stay at home for evening working or go to a different zoo or choose another mode. These are the five steps. The input is the traffic model. After that we can go more into the model where we have, a workshop session. That has everybody together and it asks for their commitment. What we would like to see and what they can achieve themselves as well. Then it starts with an educated guess on what could be successful. By doing so, you get more commitment from companies. I'll skip this. Another interesting one, some incentives. So basically we paid people to stay out of rush hour. So we gave them four Euros if you would not drive between 7:00 and 9:00 in the morning or 6:00 and 10:00 in some places. What we saw here is the same in Jim's presentation, about 35% of the people can change their travel behavior. These are some examples of our larger projects. I will skip those. You can read through those later. This is the graph I was looking for. In blue, the typical rush hour for the people involved in the program of rush our avoidance and in the orange dotted line is where you can see what they were doing when they got paid for staying out of the rush hour. One last thing I would lick to cover -- like to cover, we have a lot of freight trucks but we do have special interest for it. So we really have to focus on safety prevention. So take a look at where the truck drivers can have a safe spot to sleep and not stop on the hard shoulder. Drivers stop on the hard shoulder and go and sleep there. It's good to have information that they shouldn't do that but also very easy things to prevent accidents from blown tires and to save fuel. So some results we have from travel management, our road users really understand more about with we are doing and that there are problems with congestion and that they have a Joyce. We have seen higher appreciation. The project we did, people give us a nine out of 10 for doing those things, which is really high. A very positive coverage in the media. The media is very happy with us and gave rise to more partnerships with the railway company and with bigger companies in certain regions so, this was a quick overview of TDM in the Netherlands. Thanks, Gordon. Are Rick Strepler will wrap up things and where we're moving in the U.S. So, Eric? We have an exciting couple of days. We hope you'll be able to learn from the international experience. We're here in e at -- Seattle. They use the term traffic revision for any construction. One of the takeaways from our European scans there's a difference between traffic management and travel management, so with the bus lane and a bis traveling by. What I'm going to do is talk to you about the history of the anti see dents about ATDM not talk about the Dutch or UK experience and give you takeaways from our experience. I've already heard there's been three scanning studies that were done. I was the reporter for the TDM study in 2005 and Betty in 2006. So the evolution of ATDM. We have multi medical corridor management transportation demand management has been around for a long time. It brought to bring together the three T's, things like hot lanes, pricing. B pr. T, active traffic management, demand management. You've heard some of the examples of what's been going on in the UK and the Netherlands. There are interesting definition still going on. One of the things that sets ATDM apart we're looking to manage it an active dynamic integrated system. Whether weigh call it travel, managing travel demand, it's looking at getting the best efficiency and reducing demand or shifting demand to different place or time. Together we have active transportation and demand many of you know active transportation is a term that refers to bike and walk and we're dealing with those definitional issues as well and there was discussion of that here in Seattle. I'm not going to go over this again. All I want to say from my perspective, the thing that the UK has done that's different from the net they are lands and -- net they are lands and the U.S. S, Lucy's pose -- point it's all about the process. One of the concepts to come out of the UK that has been deemphasize S. integrate demand management. Sorry . The philosophy behind ATDM is to use act testify traffic management while reducing overall demand. And here is a definition ill a let you -- I'll let you read. One of the places that has a vision of integrating TDM is surgery. The county's long-range plan, it includes active traffic management which they have in surgery. I love the term inspirational mobility, a comprehensive and integrated approach creating smarter travel. Here's a plan that incorporates the two. Integrated demand management has evolved to focus from this larger thing to coordinating traffic management and syncing note works and recent changes in leadership in the UK have deemphasized this and other programs. In the Netherlands when we said Dow -- do you have an ATDM program, they said we just do it. I'm going to try to reconnect here with apologies.