Concept of Operations for the I-880 Corridor in Oakland, California March 31, 2008 6
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
USDOT Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) Initiative Concept of Operations for the I-880 Corridor in Oakland, California March 31, 2008 FHWA-JPO-08-003 EDL Number 14389 I-880 INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT Concept of Operation Final Submittal Submitted to U.S. Department of Transportation Submitted by Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) – District 4 Alameda County Congestion Management Agency (ACCMA) Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District (AC Transit) Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Prepared by California PATH Program, University of California at Berkeley California Center for Innovative Technologies, UC Berkeley Cambridge Systematics Inc. DKS Associates Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. System Metrics Group Notice This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the use of the information contained in this document. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. The U.S. Government does not endorse products of manufacturers. Trademarks or manufacturers’ names appear in this report only because they are considered essential to the objective of the document. Quality Assurance Statement The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) provides high-quality information to serve Government, industry, and the public in a manner that promotes public understanding. Standards and policies are used to ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its information. USDOT periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its programs and processes to ensure continuous quality improvement. Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. FHWA-JPO-08-003 EDL Number 14389 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Concept of Operations for the I-880 Corridor in Oakland, California March 31, 2008 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Oakland Pioneer Site Team 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Oakland Pioneer Site Team 11. Contract or Grant No. 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered U.S. Department of Transportation Research and Innovative Technology Administration ITS Joint Program Office 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Washington, DC 20590 15. Supplementary Notes RITA Contact: Brian Cronin FHWA Contact: Dale Thompson FHWA Contact: Robert Sheehan FTA Contact: Steve Mortensen 16. Abstract This report describes the draft Concept of Operations that has been developed for the Integrated Corridor Mobility (ICM) program by the I-880 corridor team. The I-880 corridor team has defined this Concept of Operations (ConOps) based on two primary principles: (1) it must improve overall corridor performance by meeting the needs of the local stakeholder agencies, within their practical operational, institutional and financial constraints; and (2) it must focus on integration of pre-existing systems rather than on implementation of new equipment or infrastructure. The I-880 corridor is a truly multimodal corridor, including a robust freeway network, major arterials which carry high volumes of local traffic as well as absorb diversion from the freeway networks, a transit network which includes the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) rail system and multiple AC Transit bus transit lines, and heavy freight movements with trucks comprising between 4% and 11% of the average annual daily traffic in the corridor. Transportation management systems (TMS) have been widely deployed in the corridor for many years including: a) ramp metering on I-880; b) HOV lanes and HOV bypass lanes for ramp meters; c) incident and emergency management systems on all freeways; d) changeable message signs on freeways; e) electronic toll collection systems (FasTrak); f) coordinated traffic signal systems on major arterials; g) BART transit management system; h) bus transit with signal priority capabilities and AVL; and i) transportation management centers for freeways, arterials, BART, bus transit and the Port of Oakland. Transportation facilities in the corridor are highly instrumented with real-time data collection systems. An institutional integration/coordination setting is already in place: the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), California DOT (Caltrans), Alameda County Congestion Management Agency (ACCMA), BART, Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District (AC Transit), and cities in the corridor have a history of cooperation. 17. Key Word 18. Distribution Statement ICM, Integrated Corridor Management, Con Ops, I-880, Oakland, Freeway, Arterial, Transit, bus, rail, Intelligent Transportation Systems, ITS, ramp metering, HOV, electronic toll collection, performance monitoring system, PeMS 19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price Unclassified Unclassified 290 Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized I-880 ICM Concept of Operation Contents 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................... 1 1.2 SCENARIOS AND STRATEGIES .................................................................. 4 1.3 EXPECTED BENEFITS AND COSTS ............................................................... 7 2. REFERENCES......................................................................................... 8 3. EXISTING CORRIDOR SCOPE AND OPERATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS 10 3.1 CORRIDOR BOUNDARIES AND NETWORKS .............................................................. 10 3.1.1 I-880 Freeway .................................................................................... 10 3.1.2 Arterial Highways ................................................................................ 14 3.1.3 AC Transit Bus Routes.......................................................................... 15 3.1.4 Transit Rail (BART) .............................................................................. 18 3.1.5 Water Transit Authority........................................................................ 19 3.2 CORRIDOR STAKEHOLDERS ............................................................................... 20 3.2.1 Caltrans............................................................................................. 20 3.2.2 MTC .................................................................................................. 21 3.2.3 ACCMA .............................................................................................. 24 3.2.4 Local Jurisdictions ............................................................................... 25 3.2.5 AC Transit .......................................................................................... 25 3.2.6 BART................................................................................................. 26 3.2.7 The San Francisco Bay Area Water Transit Authority (WTA) ....................... 26 3.2.8 Port of Oakland................................................................................... 27 3.2.9 Emergency Responding Agencies (CHP, Police, fire and paramedics)........... 27 3.3 EXISTING OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS, CHARACTERISTICS AND STRATEGIES OF 880 CORRIDOR AND INCLUDED NETWORKS .................................................................................... 28 3.3.1 Performance Measures ......................................................................... 28 3.3.2 Existing Operation Conditions and Characteristics .................................... 33 3.3.3 Cross-Network Coordination Strategies Already Implemented .................... 39 3.3.4 Summary........................................................................................... 43 3.4 EXISTING NETWORK-BASED TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT/ITS ASSETS ....................... 45 3.4.1 Freeway............................................................................................. 45 3.4.2 Arterial Highways ................................................................................ 57 3.4.3 AC Transit .......................................................................................... 62 3.4.4 BART................................................................................................. 65 3.4.5 Regional ITS Systems and Services........................................................ 67 3.4.6 Information Sharing Capabilities............................................................ 70 3.4.7 Summary........................................................................................... 74 3.5 PROGRAMMED NEAR-TERM NETWORK IMPROVEMENTS................................................ 76 3.5.1 Highways ........................................................................................... 76 3.5.2 Arterials............................................................................................. 77 3.5.3 AC Transit .......................................................................................... 77 3.5.4 BART................................................................................................. 78 Page i 3.6 CURRENT NETWORK-BASED INSTITUTIONAL CHARACTERISTICS ..................................... 79 3.6.1 Summary of Existing Institutional Agreements......................................... 80 3.6.2 Description of Existing Institutional Agreements ...................................... 82