- Campuses :
- Twin Cities
- Crookston
- Duluth
- Morris
- Rochester
- Other Locations
Roundtable, Minneapolis Marriott City Center, July 9, 2010.
Opening Remarks by Professor and Associate Dean Greg Lindsey, Humphrey School
Dr. Greg Lindsey: Dr. Lindsey opens the meeting by welcoming everyone and thanking them for taking time out of their busy schedules to learn about research being conducted under the TechPlan program. New this year to the TechPlan Roundtable is a Twitter feed, being streamed live from those in the room as well as those from satellite locations. Twitter is appropriate to use at this event since the TechPlan program focuses on advancements in technology, and Twitter is an up-and-coming technology.
SLPP Research Assistant Sarah Aue: Sarah gives a description of how to use the Twitter feed, and states that it will allow attendees in the room to draw attention to key points of presentations, post questions or follow-up topics for presenters, and respond thoughtfully to ideas being shared by other audience members by tweeting. This quick feedback loop will not only provide information to those in the room, but will also create an accessible summary of the day's events to those who are unable to attend.
Dr. Greg Lindsey: Dr. Lindsey describes how TechPlan is an arm of ITS, encompassing economic, policy, and social issues related to intelligent transportation issues. The research funded by the TechPlan program is exploratory, generally 5-10 years ahead of implementation. Each research project is peer reviewed by an independent individual who is knowledgeable on that topic. That being said, Dr. Lindsey encourages the audience to ask “really tough questions” of the presenters to foster an active learning environment.
Presentation session was moderated by Jan Lucke from the Center for Transportation Studies
Each presentation of research was started by presenting the audience with a couple “brainstorming” questions for them to discuss for 5 minutes with their tablemates in order to facilitate conversation about the upcoming presentations. Brief reactions were then gathered from each table before the presentations commenced.
"Benefit-Cost Analysis of Value Pricing: Case Study For MnPASS," by Jason Cao, Assistant Professor, Humphrey School of Public Affairs.
Quick Audience Reactions:
Presentation
Dr. Cao ’s research considers the cost-effectiveness of the MnPASS HOT (high occupancy toll) lane on I-394 from the western suburbs to downtown Minneapolis by examining its net incremental societal benefits and costs compared to its previous use as a non-tolled HOV (high occupancy vehicle) lane. This research is unique in that it uses the empirical Bayes approach to estimate safety benefits as well as actual time-dependent values of time and reliability from toll data and loop detectors instead of constant values.
Q: There is a significant transit benefit on I-394 since the HOV corridor was already available. However, on I-35W, a lane is being constructed for transit advantage. Would you count this as a benefit?
A: With I-394, the base scenario was the existence of an HOV lane. With I-35W, the base scenario is quite different because the shoulder is being converted to a HOT lane. In this approach, the bus could drive on the shoulder both before and after the construction of the HOT lane. Therefore, the main benefit is to solo drivers, which will lead to an increase in traffic volumes.
Q: The toll rate on I-394 is often at the minimum amount. What’s the average cost of this minimal time savings?
A: We are working on a TRB paper on this topic. For travelers who are willing to pay a toll, it has been determined that the average value of time is $100 per hour. $1.25 is not a lot of money, but it does provide some assurance of reliability. This is generally what drivers pay for, not mean travel time savings.
Q: Safety benefits are key to the whole calculation. Why did the number of crashes decrease? Somehow traffic was smoothed down. Why exactly?
A: Good question. The previous HOV lane had a speed limit of 55 mph with 15-20 mph speed differentials. There were sudden entries and exits into the lane, which increased hazards. This was amplified by illegal users who would make a quick exit if they spotted the police. The pattern at this time was a U-shaped speed/accident ratio, during which crashes decreased during peak travel periods. With the new HOT lanes, there is a double white line that only permits vehicles to enter and exit at specific access points and has smoothed out the travel speeds.
"Implementing Distance-Based User Fees as a Replacement for the Fuel Tax," by Lee Munnich, Senior Fellow and Director, State & Local Policy Program, Humphrey School of Public Affairs.
Quick Audience Reactions:
Benefits of the fuel tax: Easy to identify and implement since a flat rate is collected at the pump. Only fuel vendors have to deal with getting the tax money to the government.
Drawbacks: This is a corroding tax base as mpg of vehicles improves. In addition, the fule tax is not indexed in any way and inflation erodes the buying power.
Presentation
There have been two national commissions from Congress advocating replacing the current system of fuel tax with adistance-based user fee system. The consensus among transportation leaders is that the gas tax is no longer a good way to finance transportation infrastructure, but the public understanding og this issue is very weak. This study examines fuel tax on the basis of tax policy principles, including efficiency, equity, revenue adequacy, and sustainability.
The political feasibility of implementing a gas tax is not easy, as states and the Federal government have had a difficult time raising taxes. The next steps of the research will focus on comparing mileage based user fees on tax-financing, examining mileage-based user fee technology options, and outreach and education with stakeholders and public policymakers. Based on experience with congestion pricing, it takes time for people to digest new ideas. Engaging political and transportation thought leaders in this discussion will lead to a better chance of things happening in the future.
Peer reviewer Paul Sorenson commented that the Deepwater Horizon oil spill will lead to a political will to tax fuel; but first there need to be efforts to reinstall trust in government and how it’s going to use the revenue, not just investing in the politically popular projects.
Peer reviewer Mark Burris commented that some drivers are not paying their share or any share of roadway expenses. Alternative fuel vehicles are considered sacred cows because they’re not polluting, but they're sill not paying their fair share. The population of drivers with these vehicles is small population, so we should learn from Australia, which outlawed driving while talking on the phone before most voters had cell phones.
"From Start to Finish: Cross-Sector Collaboration and the Urban Partnership Agreement," by Melissa Stone, Gross Family Professor of Nonprofit Management, and Emily Saunoi-Sandgren, Research Fellow, Humphrey School of Public Affairs.
The Urban Partnership Agreement (UPA) is a Federal program initiated to challenge urban areas to find ways to relieve congestion through 4 key tactics. The "4Ts" to relieve urban congestions consist of: Tolling, Transit, Telecommuting, Technology. Through the UPA, $1 billion was originally distributed to 5 cities (Minneapolis-Saint Paul, Miami, Seattle, San Francisco, and New York; Los Angeles and Atlanta later added in lieu of New York) to address these goals. The objective of Drs. Bryson, Crosby, and Stone's research are to address cross-sector collaboration and technology as tools for solving public problems. This will produce new knowledge and guidance for practitioners and scholars in the transportation and collaboration fields. The research approach comprises interviews of MN UPA stakeholders (50) and UPA stakeholders in NYC and Miami (13), archival research, media content and outreach materials. In addition, the research utilizes an advisory group consisting of representatives from key agencies engaged in the UPA.
The researchers have found that in all three cases (Minnesota, NYC, and Miami), technology was a motivator to get people to the table. In Minnesota, collaboration and politics were pushed down to local levels as leadership needs shifted. This story was less about champions, and more about project managers with technical expertise and entrepreneurial spirit ("The Nick and Craig Show" - Nick Thompson from Mn/Dot and Craig Lamoth from Metro Transit). These working relationships led to the success of the project in Minnesota. In Miami, however, the case is very different. UPA there is considered successful simply because it got built - a high level of contrast from Minnesota. Miami's was a much simpler project than Minnesota's, however. New York's UPA was classified as a failure, but they’ve continued to convene people and work on improving transit and the broad base of support for UPA goals still exists.
In conclusion, the researchers found that with the UPA, collaborative research is central and should include a broad number of stakeholders. Of the 4 Ts, Technology is the most important because it is the enabler of the others to work. Technology doesn't know organizational boundaries and can facilitate integration across silos to build relationships.
Peer reviewer Dr. Stepen page commented on the interactive and dynamic nature of technology on roadways by asking, "what happens when you inject something interactive and dynamic into what is otherwise a system with fewer dimensions?" He stated that was is interesting about this study is that goes beyond traditional leadership work that focuses on champions or personalities.
Peer reviewer Jennifer Dill stated that universities need to think about what skills they’re teaching our future planners. In addition to highway capacity and quantitative skills, what are we teaching them about collaboration, negotiation, and organizational theory? Are we sending them out without the skills to participate in these kinds of processes?
Q: In the comparison of Minnesota, NYC, and Miami, what was happening in the projects to lead to the element of why they worked or didn’t work?
A: In Minnesota and Miami, the UPA was adding something new that people can pay for if they want, whereas in New York it would have taken something away (no more free trips into lower Manhattan).
Q: Research shows that the public always opposes congestion pricing right before it’s implemented, and then sees it work and supports it. However, if anybody perceives any loss at all, it’s hard to move forward. How did this play out in NYC?
A: In addition to the loss of free roadways, New Yorkers didn’t have faith that the MTA was actually going to be improved. Bloomberg has a poor public image and therefore this project was well recepted.
"ITS and Transportation Safety: EMS System Data Integration to Improve Traffic Crash Emergency Response and Treatment – Phase III," by Tom Horan, Associate Professor and Executive Director of the Claremont Information and Technology Institute, Claremont, California.
Presentation
Why EMS and ITS? There are 40,000 traffic fatalities every year and 60% occur rural roads (70% of all roads in Minnesota are rural). The rural response time for crashed is 52 minutes, versus 35 minutes in urban areas. Research shows that survival rates improve when the response time less than 30 minutes.
Since 2004, this research has focused on developing a conceptual model called CrashHelp that provides time-critical information services for EMS encompassing 911-dispatch, geographic coordinates, and medical care. The model isn't only about timeliness, but providing quality services during vehicle crash responses. This study utilizes an action-design research methodology: study it, design a prototype, and get reactions. This is needed becasue there is a gap in ambulance/hospital handoff and during the imperfect situations of EMS response, technology can play a very helpful role.
The research has prompted the CrashHelp system to be very visual, fast, and scalable. It must also be humanizing since it is dealing with real victims. Along with a laptop in the hosptials, CrashHelp consists of a mobile device for the responders with a secure server and encrypted data. When a new incident arises, CrashHelp can be used to take pictures, record audio notes, note basic patient information, and list the GPS location of the crash. This inforamtion is then sent to the emergency room to better prepare medics to respond to the ambulance before it arrives.
Peer reviewer Jane Lappin stated she staffed an ER during college and has a lot of experience with this. She was impressed with the insights that are being generated by the geospatial representation of emergency events. She also commented that EMS providers would like to know what has happened to the patient they brought in and the feedback loop would be helpful to them as care providers and affect the way they care for accident victims from the beginning.
Peer reviewer Dorothy Glancy commented that she is concerned about the information bein g collected by CrashHelp and the extent to which it will be used in legal/malpractice issues, both for EMS Responders, car companies, and owners of damaged property. The short response to this is that there’s going to be a design decision about how long to hold the data, which is currently slated for deletion every 24 hours.
"Understanding Use of Nonmotorized Transportation Facilities," by Greg Lindsey, Associate Dean and Professor, Humphrey School of Public Affairs.
Brainstorming Questions
Quick Audience Reactions:
Presentation
Dr. Lindsay’s research focuses on understanding and detecting the use of non-motorized transportation facilities. The current project uses magnetic and infrared loop detectors as well as manual (human) counters to estimate the levels of use on bicycle and pedestrian facilities in the Twin Cities. Perhaps due to lack of previous interest or the difficulty in collecting data, not much research has been conducted in this area. Despite this dearth of information, billions of dollars have been invested in pedestrian and bicycle facilities.
240 observation locations were purposefully chosen based on high levels of traffic. Over 450 manual counts, in addition to three years of loop detector counts, were conducted over 2- and 12-hour observation periods. Factors such as time of day, day of the week, season, daily weather, neighborhood characteristics, trip purpose, and infrastructure type were taken into account in this research. Initial conclusions show that bicycle traffic is more affected by weather than are pedestrian levels. Considering bicyclists and pedestrians, density seems to have no influence on traffic levels; however, employment accessibility, land use, education level, age, and crime prevalence all have an effect on traffic levels.
Peer reviewer Dr Jennifer Dill commented that this is an important area of study that can apply existing data that is currently not being used. She stated it is important to involve students in this type of work, as Dr. Lindsey has been doing, particularly because this type of research requires many hours of observation. She suggested that other variables such as sidewalk width and urban design amenities be taken into account for further analysis.
Q: What impact do bicycle sharing facilities and their proximity to observation sites have in this research?
A: Since the bicycle sharing program in Minneapolis is brand new, no correlation has been determined.
Q: A new bike center, funded by a program that incentivizes healthy living, will soon be opening on the University of Minnesota campus. How will use of this facility and bicycling levels be tracked?
A: Each bike enrolled in the program will have a radio ID tag that can be detected by receptors located throughout campus. This will document the use and levels of riding.
Q: Have advancements in technology led to greater, more accurate counting?
A: The latest technologies are being used in this research project; however, limits in deployment still exist due to operational issues. For example, loop detectors only detect cyclists, not pedestrians, and infrared detectors only recognize that an object has passed, but cannot differentiate between pedestrians or cyclists. We are using models to account for these technology limitations. In the future, a combination of infrared and magnetic loop detectors could work to provide more comprehensive results.
Q: What, if any, are the roles of video technologies in this project?
A: These systems have not been deployed for very long, but they have shown to be 80% accurate in distinguishing between pedestrians and bicyclists.
"ITS and Locational Privacy: Suggestions for Peaceful Coexistence," by Frank Douma, Associate Director, State & Local Policy Program, Humphrey School of Public Affairs.
Brainstorming Questions
Quick Audience Reactions:
What do you want to do with the data? If all you want is to tax to provide revenue, you don’t need any identification information; but if you want it for policy/implementation, then you need more. For collecting driving habits of teenagers, maybe you should also be collecting in formation on the eldery as well?
Presentation
ITS technologies have privacy implications since they gather, store, and transmit data. This can lead to political as well as legal issues. Examples include VMT revenue collection, toll transponders graduated drivers' license enforcement, and monitoring seat belt usage. The public perceives a right to be left alone, but a car on a public street should have no reasonable expectation of privacy in its movement. Another issue arises in that traffic laws vary from state to state and in some states implementation of these program can feel like big brother.
Through the research, it is apparent that public acceptance is as important as legal scrutiny and that limitations exist among who collects, maintains, storesthese types of private information. The development of a "privacy toolbox" is a key take away from the study.
Closing Remarks by Professor and Director Max Donath, Intelligent Transportation Systems Institute
Dr. Max Donath: Dr. Donath comments that he enjoyed every presentation and picked up on several interesting ideas. For example, within a cost-benefit analysis, measuring safety is extremely important and has likely not been researched much in the context of adding HOV/HOT lanes. In addition, a challenge to effectively communicate with "grasstops" presents itself as we look at distance-based user fees. Furthermore, the Urban Partnership Agreement has been met with both successes and failures, and can be used as a tool for understanding best practices. Additionally, he comments that putting sensors on buses with bike racks could alert the riding public when these racks are full and work to improve intermodal transportation. Finally, Dr. Donath states that we must build tools for parents to more effectively monitor their teens on the road, as has been emphasized by parents who have lost children in automobile crashes.
Dr. Donath expresses his hope that the presentations were useful for everyone and thanks the peer reviewers for their input. He also addresses the uniqueness of TechPlan due to its wide range of research areas all based in areas of technology and transportation. He stresses that it is important that we engage in conversation with those from multiple disciplines, as areas of policy and technology continually overlap.
Humphrey School of Public Affairs | 130 Humphrey School, 301 19th Ave. S., Minneapolis, MN 55455