Pittsburgh_Smart_Spines_Concept_of_Operations_Report_.pdf

City of Pittsburgh Smart Spines

Concept of Operations Report

February 16, 2021

Prepared for:

City of Pittsburgh

Prepared by:

Whitman, Requardt & Associates, LLP

Drive Engineering

In Association With:

Federal Highway Administration

Pennsylvania Department of Transportation

Port Authority of Allegheny County

City of Pittsburgh Smart Spines - Concept of Operations i

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

1.1. Project Scope

1.2. Document Overview

1.3. Overarching Vision and Goals

1.4. System (Smart Spines) Overview

1.5. Procurement

2. References

2.1. Referenced Documents

2.2. Definitions and Acronyms

2.3. Peer Review Research

2.4. Technology Research

2.5. System Architecture

3. Current System or Conditions

3.1. Background

3.2. Operational Polices and Constraints

3.2.1. Policies

3.2.2. Constraints

3.3. Description of the Current System

3.3.1. Controller and Central Software

3.3.2. Surtrac Smart Traffic Signals

3.3.3. Devices and Technology Deployed

3.3.4. Data Systems and Applications

3.4. Modes of Operation of Current System

3.4.1. Signal Operations

3.4.2. Transit Technologies

3.4.3. Emergency Preemption

3.4.4. Western Pennsylvania Regional Data Center

3.5. User Classifications and Other Involved Personnel

3.6. Support Environment

4. Justification and Nature of Changes

4.1. Justification for Changes

4.1.1. Pittsburgh and Stakeholder Engagement

4.1.2. Expert Collaboration

4.2. Description of Desired Changes

4.2.1. User Needs

4.3. Changes Considered but not Included

4.4. Performance Metrics

ii

5. Concept of the Proposed System (Smart Spines)

5.1. Background, Objectives, and Scope

5.2. Operational Policies and Constraints

5.2.1. System Constraints

5.2.2. Policies and Regulations

5.3. Description of Proposed System (Smart Spines)

5.3.1. Interfaces

5.3.2. Smart Spines Components

5.3.3. The Smart Spines System and Deployment Generations

5.3.4. Proposed Applications

5.3.5. Operational Risk Factors

5.4. Modes of Operation

5.4.1. Normal Operation (TBC or AMASS)

5.4.2. Central Priority System

5.4.3. Special Event/Incident Plans

5.4.4. Outbound Data, System Performance Metrics, and System Health Reports

5.5. User Classes and Other Involved Personnel

5.6. Support Environment

6. Operational Scenarios

6.1. Normal Operation

6.2. Traffic Management Center

6.2.1. Interoperable with PennDOT TMC system

6.2.2. Data Collection

6.3. Failure Events

6.3.1. Signal Equipment

6.3.2. Communication System

6.3.3. Field to Pittsburgh TMC

6.3.4. Pittsburgh TMC to External Entity

6.3.5. Power Failure In-field Devices

6.3.6. Power Failure at Operations Center

6.3.7. Network Accessibility

6.3.8. Network Connectivity Issues

6.3.9. Congested Network Issues

6.3.10. Network Troubleshooting Best Practices

6.4. Information Systems Security Breach

6.4.1. Virus and Malware

6.4.2. Contractor Compromised Equipment

6.4.3. Unsecure Hardware/Information Disposal

6.4.4. Application Vulnerabilities/Unwarranted Software Installation iii

6.4.5. Improper Sensitive Information Storage/Transmission

6.4.6. Outdated Software

6.4.7. Loss of TMC Property

7. Summary of Impacts

7.1. Operational Impacts

7.2. Organization Impacts

7.2.1. Staffing Impacts

7.2.2. Maintenance Impacts

7.3. Impacts During Development or Deployment

8. Analysis of the Proposed Smart Spines System

8.1. Summary of Improvements

8.2. Disadvantages and Limitations

8.3. Alternatives and Trade-Offs Considered

8.4. USDOT Goals

Table of Figures Figure 1: Smart Spines Corridor Map Figure 2: Pittsburgh TMC Interface with PennDOT RTMC Figure 3: Existing Surtrac and Proposed BRT Corridor Map Figure 4: Smart Spines Internal Interfaces Figure 5: Smart Spines System: External Interface Context Diagram Figure 6: Smart Spines System: External Interfaces Figure 7: 2070 Intelight Controller Figure 8: Example of a TMC Video Board courtesy of Cranberry Township TMC Figure 9: Smart Spines Communications Infrastructure Figure 10: Transit Signal Priority - Next Generation Implementation Figure 11: System Establishment and Baseline Metrics Figure 12: Performance Metric – Cluster Analytics Figure 13: Modal Preemption/Priority Connection Figure 14: Central Preemption/Priority Vehicle Generation Implementations Figure 15: Generation Zero through 2nd Generation Deployment Figure 16: 3rd Generation Deployment iv

Table of Tables Table 1: Smart Spines System Corridors/Intersections Table 2: References Table 3: Acronym List Table 4: High-Level Peer Review Cities Table 5: Existing Data Systems and Applications Table 6: Shared Data Systems and Application Information Table 7: Levels of System Operations Table 8: User Classification Table 9: DOMI - Traffic Signal Staff Table 10: Decision Makers Table 11: Priorities Among Changes – Essential Needs Table 12: Priorities Among Changes – Preferred Needs Table 13: Priorities Among Changes – Optional Needs Table 14: Existing Policies to be Revised Table 15: Interfacing Systems Table 16: Existing Communications Along Smart Spines Corridors Table 17: Additional CV Message Use Cases Table 18: Proposed RSUs Table 19: RSU Location Criteria Table 20: Potential OBU Technology Interfaces Table 21: Performance Measures for Essential User Needs Priorities Table 22: Performance Measures for Preferred User Needs Priorities Table 23: Performance Measures for Optional User Needs Priorities Table 24: Key Performance Indicators of the Smart Spines System Table 25: Existing and Future External Data Sources for Performance Monitoring Table 26: Device and Sensor Deployments for Smart Spines System Table 27: Proposed Early Rollout Applications of the Smart Spines Table 28: Proposed Later Generation Rollout Applications of the Smart Spines Table 29: Operational Risks & Mitigation Strategies for the System Infrastructure & Interfaces Table 30: Public Outbound Smart Spines System Data Table 31: Proposed System User Classification Table 32: Sample Corridor – Mode Priority Hierarchy Table 33: Causes of Network Connectivity Issues Table 34: Common Causes of Network Congestion Table 35: Common Network Troubleshooting Techniques Table 36: Preliminary Proposed DOMI Staffing Requirements

Appendices

Appendix A: Smart City Peer Review Technical Memo

Appendix B: Smart Spine Intersection List

Appendix C: Project Meeting Minutes

Appendix D: FHWA ConOps Checklist

Disclaimer

This material is based upon work supported by the Federal Highway Administration under Agreement No.

DTFH6116RA00012. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the Author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the Federal Highway

Administration.

1. Introduction

This Concept of Operations (ConOps) document is the first part of the Systems Engineering Process, which provides an interdisciplinary approach for planning, designing, implementing/deploying, and operating of the Smart Spines corridors. The purpose of the ConOps is to convey a high-level view of the Smart Spines System to be implemented from the viewpoint of the City of Pittsburgh and of each stakeholder, the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) and the Port Authority of Allegheny County (Port Authority). The ConOps describes the current state of operations, establishes the reason for change, and defines the Smart Spines in terms of features/functions that support the goals and needs of Pittsburgh and the stakeholders.

1.1. Project Scope

In 2016, the United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) – Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) awarded a $10.89 million Advanced Transportation and Congestion Management Technologies Deployment (ATCMTD) grant to the City of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania to implement a robust system of intelligent technologies across multiple corridors throughout Pittsburgh. This ATCMTD grant is being matched by Pittsburgh with $10.89 million. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is contributing an additional $7.00 million for a total estimated budget of $28.79 million. These corridors are referred to as Smart Spines as they are critical arterials that connect Pittsburgh neighborhoods, universities, hospitals, adjacent municipalities, and the Central Business District (CBD) in Pittsburgh. The neighborhoods that these corridors traverse are experiencing unprecedented economic development and include a very diverse mix of travel modes with limited ability to increase automobile capacity through traditional roadway widening, although there are significant investments in transit and other modes of travel underway. There are eight initial Smart Spines, with additional corridors reserved for future deployments as funding becomes available. These eight corridors consist of approximately 140 signalized intersections. This ConOps is intended to enable Pittsburgh to expand beyond the initial Smart Spines corridors identified in this document as funding becomes available. It will also serve as a template to allow for connectivity between Smart Spines and corridors outside of Pittsburgh. Two of the planned corridors overlap with the Port Authority’s planned Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) corridors. The BRT projects are dependent on the Smart Spines project to provide transit signal priority (TSP).

The anticipated scope of work includes creating an advanced signal system which can also serve as a communication backbone for Pittsburgh’s larger vision of a truly connected city. The concept will include installing a hybrid signal priority/adaptive signal system with advanced performance metrics that will allow the system to learn and improve operations over time. The Smart Spines System will be able to prioritize travel by mode by time of day and dynamically change priority levels based upon information gathered by the Smart Spines System while continually moving pedestrians, bike (+), transit vehicles, new mobility modes, and automobiles as efficiently as possible through an advanced signal system. The Smart Spines System will elevate non-motorized modes, referred to as active transportation modes, by allowing them to be passively detected similar to the way traditional motorized modes of travel are detected. The real-time performance measurement and monitoring system will allow stakeholders to understand system performance from the perspective of all modes of travel.

Development of this Smart Spines System will require complete reconstruction of existing signals where needed, installation or expansion of communication capabilities, addition of vehicular, bike (+), and pedestrian detection, Accessible Pedestrian Signal Signals (APS), countdown pedestrian signals, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant curb ramps, and incorporation of a new Pittsburgh Transportation Management Center (TMC). Pittsburgh’s communication system will be further improved by the addition of a Broadband Ethernet Radio System on top of the 64-story (841 feet) U.S. Steel Tower in downtown Pittsburgh. The project will expand Pittsburgh’s current deployment of connected vehicle technology by expanding into the Smart Spines corridors.

1.2. Document Overview

The ConOps is the foundational document for detailing the user needs and potential operational capabilities of the Smart Spines System. Specifically, it will outline how the Smart Spines and associated communication network will operate to meet the needs of Pittsburgh, PennDOT, and the Port Authority as well as additional stakeholders within Pittsburgh and regionally. The ConOps will be used to develop the System Requirements Document to provide detailed technical specifications and the Implementation Plan to make the Smart Spines System concept a reality.

The intended audience of this ConOps document are the agencies who assisted with the development of the ConOps as well as internal and external stakeholders who will have an active role in managing and using the Smart Spines Corridors and communication infrastructure. The intended audience also includes the FHWA, Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission (SPC), Transportation Management Associations (TMA), advocacy organizations, universities, colleges, and researchers. The intended audience also includes future implementors of the Smart Spines System and potential private partnerships that can leverage the technology and communication infrastructure to further advance the ability to meet the current and future mobility goals of Pittsburgh.

The subsequent sections of the ConOps are organized as follows:

Section 2: References. Documents data sources and reference documents used in the development of the ConOps and provides information on the status of peer cities’ Smart Initiatives and Smart Technology.

Section 3: Current System and Conditions. States and describes the condition and users of the existing transportation system along the Smart Spines Corridors and applicable communication network. Discusses the technologies, policies, and constraints of the stakeholders. This section lays the groundwork for what problems need solved by the Smart Spines.

Section 4: Justification and Nature of Change. Describes the stakeholder outreach and the users’ need for implementing the Smart Spines System and an enhanced communication network in Pittsburgh. This section builds on the description of the existing system and details the system shortcomings.

Section 5: Concepts of the Proposed System (Smart Spines). Describes the components, interfaces, deployments, and modes of operations for the Smart Spines System required to meet the users’ needs.

Section 6: Operational Scenarios. Details the user-oriented description on how the Smart Spines System operates.

Section 7: Summary of Impacts. Identifies the operational impacts of the proposed Smart Spines System on the users, developers, implementors, and maintainers.

Section 8: Analysis of the Proposed System (Smart Spines). Describes the benefits, limitations, and evaluation methodologies considered for the Smart Spines System.

Refer to Appendix D for FHWA ConOps Checklist.

1.3. Overarching Vision and Goals

The Smart Spines project will help advance the goals and principles of several of Pittsburgh’s current plans and policies.

Pittsburgh Complete Streets Policy (1) (Adopted November 2016) includes principles and requirements that directly relate to the Smart Spines. The policy’s vision calls for the creation of a safe, accessible, and livable mobility network for users of all ages and abilities including, but not limited to, pedestrians, bike (+), people with disabilities, motorists, transit riders and freight carriers. A key principle includes Multi-Modal Efficiency…incorporating intelligent technology in Complete Streets, when appropriate, in order to improve the way that intersections and streets function for all road users. This principle specifically calls for incorporating TSP, passive bike (+) and pedestrian detection, and connected and autonomous vehicle technology.

Pittsburgh Climate Action Plan 3.0(2) (Adopted June 2017) includes a goal of reducing on-road transportation emissions by 50% by 2030, reducing vehicle miles traveled per capita by 50%, increasing the shift in vehicle electrification, and reducing freight emissions by 25% by 2030. The plan includes many strategies that support the Smart Spines project: synchronize traffic signals to ensure a smooth traffic movement, prioritize buses, prioritize after hours freight, increase bike commute rate to 10% of trips, increase walking commute trips by 50%, increase Port Authority Ridership, and implement a BRT system.

Pittsburgh Bike (+) Master Plan(3) (Adopted June 2020), focuses on bicycles plus other personal lightweight mobility devices, and includes 3 goals that relate to the Smart Spines: 1 – No one dies traveling on city streets; 2 – All households can safely access fresh fruits and vegetables within 20 minutes travel of home, without requiring a private automobile; 3 – Walking and bicycling are the most joyful mode for short trips.

In addition, the plan includes a network of existing and proposed bike facilities that overlap many of the Smart Spines Corridors.

With these plans and policies in mind, the vision for the Smart Spines is:

Pittsburgh will be more livable, focusing on providing improved mobility and mode choice for people and promoting economic development by leveraging advanced technology and new applications of existing technology while promoting high-density development.

Specific goals and objectives include using technology along Smart Spines to:

Goal 1 – Increase the use of bike (+) and walking for short trips by improving safety, comfort, and convenience

Objective 1.1 – Improve the ability of intersections to detect bike (+) and pedestrian traffic

Objective 1.2 – Reduce bike (+) and pedestrian delay at intersections

Goal 2 – Improve bike (+) and pedestrian safety

Objective 2.1 – Log and track crashes to determine intersections in need of safety countermeasures

Objective 2.2 – Reduce the frequency and severity of bike (+) and pedestrian crashes

Goal 3 – Improve convenient access to food, health care, jobs, and recreation without the need for a private automobile

Objective 3.1 – Improve travel time and travel time reliability for transit, bike (+), and pedestrians

Goal 4 – Increase the use of transit for trips along the Smart Spines

Objective 4.1 – Improve on-time performance and reduce travel time for transit vehicles

Goal 5 – Reduce greenhouse gasses by promoting the smooth flow of traffic

Objective 5.1 – Reduce the frequency and duration of stops for each mode of motorized travel

Objective 5.2 – Encourage freight deliveries during non-peak periods

Objective 5.3 – Expand the use of Connected and Autonomous Vehicle Technology

Goal 6 – Prioritize person-throughput

Objective 6.1 – Account for real-time detection of people by mode

Objective 6.2 – Change modal priorities by corridor in real-time

Goal 7 – Improve response times for emergency vehicles (Fire, EMS, and Police)

Objective 7.1 – Reduce travel time for emergency vehicles

Goal 8 – Leverage technology and other Pittsburgh initiatives to improve communications and reliability

Objective 8.1 – Create an infrastructure with separate data planes utilizing shared physical and management infrastructure that allows for applications beyond transportation and mobility while coalescing with the Pittsburgh Broadband Plan (in development)

Objective 8.2 – Install architecture enabled with edge computing, wireless telecommunications, and wired infrastructure that is monitored and is private, secure, and protected using cybersecurity tools

Objective 8.3 – Provides data to researchers, third party developers, and others to promote innovation

Objective 8.4 – Develop a system that is capable of future expansion and evolves as technology improves

Goal 9 – Improve operations for the traffic conditions which change throughout the year due to weather, school, incidents, special events, time of day, and seasons

Objective 9.1 - Provide real-time performance measures by mode and by person so that operations of the system can be monitored cycle-by-cycle

Objective 9.2 – Develop a system that can be compared year over year based upon varying conditions to improve operations for all modes under all conditions

Objective 9.3 – Provide meaningful performance reporting to decision-makers, stakeholders, and the public

Objective 9.4 – Promote interoperability with other regional and statewide TMC and Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) devices

1.4. System (Smart Spines) Overview

This project will enable Pittsburgh to leverage new and emerging technology to improve the ability of its transportation system to efficiently move people using all modes of travel. This Smart Spines System will be a departure from traditional transportation systems by prioritizing active transportation modes, such as bike (+) and pedestrians, opposed to existing modes that focus only on moving single occupancy motorized vehicles. This approach will improve the livability of Pittsburgh, accommodate economic development, reduce emissions, and operate transportation infrastructure more sustainably and efficiently. The communications system and Pittsburgh TMC will be designed to accommodate future enhancements and uses, manage data, and interface with other systems in order to make Pittsburgh a truly Smart City.

The Smart Spines will serve as a System made up of the following components:

o Signal Priority/Preemption System – cloud based and expandable using Application Program Interface (API) and existing Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) systems.

o Central Signal System – compatible with the PennDOT system so that the intersections can be controlled and monitored by the PennDOT Reginal Traffic Management Center (RTMC) and Pittsburgh TMC o Pittsburgh TMC – ability to control intersections, monitor maintenance, refine operations, and share data with Western Pennsylvania Regional Data Center (WPRDC) and third parties. Open data channels will be established at the outset at both the intersection and system level in order to encourage innovation in developing future applications and further solidify Pittsburgh’s place as a leading testbed for connected and autonomous vehicles (AV).

o Advanced Multimodal Adaptive Signal System (AMASS) – use enhanced system-level data such as pedestrians, bike (+), and transit usage as well as route-based data from AVL systems and Origin-Destination (O-D) data to improve operations and conditions for all modes of travel.

In addition, the system will allow system overrides for variable optimization schemes that can be schedule driven, user overridden, or data driven.

o Traffic signal hardware upgrades – include passive detection for pedestrians and bike (+), devices to capture O-D data, and environmental pollutant sensors.

o Enhanced communication network with redundant backhaul - broadband communications, such as ethernet radios and/or fiber optic connections will also be installed along the Smart Spines to allow for uninterrupted communications along each corridor. The installation of the broadband ethernet radio on top of the U.S. Steel Tower will improve the reliability and redundancy of the communication network across Pittsburgh. The U.S. Steel Tower radio will be able to fully communicate to each of the Smart Spines Corridors.

o Advanced performance metrics suite – real-time observations to provide cluster-based season seasonal and annual comparisons. This approach will ensure that the Smart Spines outcomes meet stakeholder goals and objectives while allowing continual improvements to adaptive signal optimization.

o Connected Vehicle hardware and applications – expand on Pittsburgh’s current connected and autonomous vehicle (CAV) testbed with communication technology such as Dedicated Short- Range Communications (DSRC) or 5G Roadside Units (RSUs) will be installed along the corridors to allow Pittsburgh to welcome and grow the Connected Vehicle (CV) environment.

The nine Smart Spines Corridors (Figure 1, Table 1,and Appendix B) include 143 signals along the primary Smart Spines with an additional 40+ signals along two ConOps only corridors included for future system expansion. None of the initial grant funding will be dedicated to corridor 8b and 9.

Table 1: Smart Spines System Corridors/Intersections

Smart Spine

Corridor Corridor Name

Number of Intersections*

Primary Smart Spines

1 Bigelow Blvd/PA 380 5

2 Centre Ave 13

3 Fifth Ave and Washington Blvd 42

4 Forbes Ave 36

5 Second Ave and Irvine St 20

6 Saw Mill Run Blvd/Route 51 12

7 West Liberty Ave 9

8(a) Penn Ave (Linden Ave to Braddock Ave) 6

Total 143

Future Expansion

Smart Spines

8(b) Penn Ave (16th St to Centre Ave) 23

9 Liberty Ave 19

Total 42

Grand Total 185 *Number of Intersections may vary after final budget/implementation plan.

Each of the Smart Spines represents a unique set of multimodal operational conditions that can vary significantly by time of day, day of the week, or month of the year.

1. Bigelow Boulevard/PA 380

Bigelow Boulevard/PA 380 is an east to west corridor with 5 signals that connects Downtown Pittsburgh to the eastern neighborhoods of Bloomfield and Shadyside and the Centre Avenue and Baum Boulevard arterials. The western limit is the Washington Place intersection and the eastern limit is the Bigelow Boulevard at Craig Street and Baum Boulevard intersection.

There are two Port Authority routes along Bigelow Boulevard. The Washington Place, Herron Avenue, Bloomfield Bridge, and Baum Boulevard intersections are congested and have high vehicular demand.

Bigelow Boulevard has more pedestrian and bicycle demand near the Bloomfield area compared to the limited access section that runs parallel to the Allegheny River.

2. Centre Avenue

Centre Avenue is an east to west corridor with 13 signals that connects Downtown Pittsburgh to the Hill District and Shadyside neighborhoods as well as the Bigelow Boulevard and Baum Boulevard arterials. The western limit is the Washington Place intersection and the eastern limit is the Craig Street intersection. PPG Paints Arena, home to the Pittsburgh Penguins with 18,000+ seating capacity, is located on the western limits of the corridor.

There is substantial Port Authority traffic along Centre Avenue with three routes and peak buses operating at roughly three-minute frequency. The Washington Place intersection is congested and has high vehicular demand. The land west of PPG Paints Arena is currently being redeveloped and the land use could drastically change over the next 5-10 years.

A portion of this corridor is included in the SPC’s Congestion Management Process (CMP)(4) as Corridor

34. This corridor has information available from the Regional Integrated Transportation Information System (RITIS), including the Travel Time Index (TTI) and the Planning Time Index (PTI). The TTI represents how much additional time a driver should account for when traveling during congested conditions when compared to traveling during periods of light traffic. The PTI represents how much additional time a traveler should account for in order to be on-time 95% of the time. The PTI is a measure of travel time reliability, while the TTI is a measure of average congestion throughout the year. According to RITIS, average afternoon peak direction weekday congestion increases travel time by approximately 30% when compared to travel during light conditions. The Centre Avenue corridor is one of the least reliable Smart Spines according to the PTI which indicates that motorists need to plan for 27 minutes to only be late 5% of the time for a trip that would take 10 minutes during low traffic conditions.

The SPC 2019 Regional Operations Plan (ROP) (5) recommends providing transit improvements along this stretch of Centre Avenue. Recommendations include TSP signal and transit related geometric improvements.

3. Fifth Avenue/Washington Boulevard

Fifth Avenue/Washington Boulevard is an east to west corridor with 42 signals that connects Downtown Pittsburgh to multiple eastern neighborhoods, and it serves as an alternate route to I-376 Parkway East.

The western limit for Fifth Avenue/Washington Boulevard is Fifth Avenue at the Washington Place intersection and the eastern limit is Washington Boulevard at the Allegheny River Boulevard (SR 130) intersection. Fifth Avenue is a westbound only route from the Bellefied Avenue intersection to the Liberty Avenue intersection in the CBD.

Duquesne University, Chatham College, Carlow College, University of Pittsburgh, and Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) are all located on or adjacent to Fifth Avenue. There is high pedestrian and bicycle traffic due to the proximity to the universities. Pedestrian activity is considerable during university class changes, where these corridors experience a 10 to 15-minute surge in pedestrian traffic. The proximity to multiple hospitals on or adjacent to this corridor makes it susceptible to emergency vehicle traffic.

The Bike (+) Plan proposes a bike network on Fifth Avenue from the CBD to Neville Street and Morewood Avenue to James Street. The plan also proposes a shared use path on Washington Boulevard from Negley Run Boulevard to Allegheny River Boulevard.

Port Authority routes along Fifth Avenue include 28X, 54, 58, 61A, 61B, 61C, 61D, 67, 69, 71A, 71B, 71C, 71D, 75, 81, 83, 93, and P3. The corridor is also part of the planned Downtown-Uptown-Oakland-East End BRT project.

This corridor is included in the CMP as Corridor 12. According to RITIS, average afternoon peak direction weekday congestion increases travel time by approximately 35% when compared to travel during light conditions. The PTI indicates that motorists need to plan for 19 minutes to only be late 5% of the time for a trip that would take 10 minutes during low traffic conditions.

A portion of this corridor is included in the SPC 2019 ROP, where it recommends an East End (SR 8, SR 380, SR 130) traffic signal improvement project.

4. Forbes Avenue

Forbes Avenue is an east to west corridor with 36 signals that connects Downtown Pittsburgh to multiple eastern neighborhoods and serves as an alternate route to I-376 Parkway East. The western limit for Forbes Avenue is the 10th Street (Armstrong Tunnel) intersection and the eastern limit is the Braddock Avenue intersection. Forbes Avenue is an eastbound only route that originates at Stanwix Street in the CBD and becomes a two-way street at the Craig Street intersection.

Duquesne University, Chatham College, and University of Pittsburgh, and CMU are all located on or adjacent to Forbes Avenue. There is high pedestrian and bicycle traffic due to the proximity to the universities. Pedestrian activity is considerable during university class changes, where these corridors experience a 10 to 15-minute surge in pedestrian traffic. The proximity to multiple hospitals on or adjacent to this corridor makes it susceptible to emergency vehicle traffic.

The Bike (+) Plan proposes a bike network on Forbes Avenue from Magee Street to Moultrie Street in Uptown. The Bike (+) Plan also proposes to complete the bike network gaps between Bigelow Boulevard and Braddock Avenue.

Port Authority routes along Fifth Avenue include 28X, 58, 61A, 61B, 61C, 61D, 67, 69, 71A, 71B, 71C, 71D, 81, and 83. The corridor is also part of the planned Downtown-Uptown-Oakland-East End BRT project.

This corridor is included in the CMP as Corridor 13. According to RITIS, average afternoon peak direction weekday congestion increases travel time by approximately 35% when compared to travel during light conditions. The PTI indicates that motorists need to plan for 21 minutes to only be late 5% of the time for a trip that would take 10 minutes during low traffic conditions.

5. Second Avenue and Irvine Street

Second Avenue is an east to west corridor that runs parallel to the Monongahela River and contains 20 signals. The western limit is the Ross Street intersection and the eastern limit is the Glenwood Avenue intersection. Portions of this corridor also serve as an alternate route to I-376 Parkway East, but it primarily connects Downtown Pittsburgh to southern neighborhoods such as Hazelwood and Glen Hazel. This corridor is adjacent to the Hazelwood Green Development as well as the Pittsburgh Technology Center which could radically change the nature of the corridor as development continues.

Hazelwood Business District has heavy pedestrian activity and the corridor includes key multimodal connections such as the Junction Hollow Trail, Duck Hollow Trail, and Eliza Furnace Trail which recent counts indicate produces over 2,000 bicycles and pedestrians per day near the Hot Metal Bridge.

The Second Avenue corridor has an extensive bike network on or adjacent, but the Bike (+) Plan proposes continuing the infrastructure in the Hazelwood and Glen Hazel neighborhoods.

Port Authority routes along Second Avenue and Irvine Street include 56, 57, 58, and 93 with moderate ridership.

This corridor is included in the CMP as Corridor 42 and 51. According to RITIS, average afternoon peak direction weekday congestion increases travel time by approximately 37% when compared to travel during light conditions. The PTI indicates that motorists need to plan for 23 minutes to only be late 5% of the time for a trip that would take 10 minutes during low traffic conditions.

The SPC 2019 ROP recommends providing transit improvements along a portion of Second Avenue.

Recommendations include TSP signal and transit related geometric improvements. The ROP also recommends geometric improvements to the Bates Street interchange at Second Avenue.

6. Saw Mill Run Boulevard

Saw Mill Run Boulevard is a north to south corridor that contains 12 signals and connects the South Hills communities of Allegheny County to either the Liberty Tunnel/Bridge and I-579/I-279 Parkway North or to the I-376 Parkway West, West End Circle, and SR 65 and the western Allegheny County communities. The southern limit is the SR 88 jug handle intersection and the northern limit is the Woodruff Street intersection.

Port Authority transit does not utilize Saw Mill Run Boulevard due its proximity to the Southern Busway.

This corridor is included in the CMP as Corridor 18. According to RITIS, average afternoon peak direction weekday congestion increases travel time by approximately 65% when compared to travel during light conditions, which makes it the most congested Smart Spine. The PTI indicates that motorists need to plan for 34 minutes to only be late 5% of the time for a trip that would take 10 minutes during low traffic conditions, which makes it the least reliable Smart Spine. This lack of reliability may be due to the proximity to the Liberty Tunnel and Fort Pitt Tunnel which create congestion during incidents. Incident management is particularly important for this Smart Spine.

The SPC 2019 ROP recommends a Pilot project for PennDOT ownership of the SR 51 signals within city limits.

7. West Liberty Avenue/Liberty Bridge

West Liberty Avenue/Liberty Bridge is a north to south corridor that contains 9 signals and connects the South Hills communities of Allegheny County to the same interstates and western and northern communities as Saw Mill Run Boulevard. The southern limit is West Liberty Avenue at Wenzell Avenue/Brookline Boulevard intersection and the northern limit is the Liberty Bridge at the Boulevard of the Allies/I-579 ramp intersection.

Port Authority operates Route 41 along West Liberty Avenue and the Liberty Bridge.

This corridor is included in the CMP as Corridor 20. According to RITIS, average afternoon peak direction weekday congestion increases travel time by approximately 41% when compared to travel during light conditions. The PTI indicates that motorists need to plan for 22 minutes to only be late 5% of the time for a trip that would take 10 minutes during low traffic conditions.

8a. Penn Avenue

Penn Avenue is an east to west corridor that contains 6 signals and connects the eastern Pittsburgh neighborhoods with the municipalities east of Pittsburgh. The western limit is Linden Avenue intersection and the eastern limit is Braddock Avenue intersection.

The SPC 2019 ROP also recommends a project to improve bike connectivity from Lawrenceville to East Liberty.

8b. Penn Avenue (ConOps Only)

This section of Penn Avenue connects the Strip District (residential, industrial, and commercial) to the eastern neighborhoods of Bloomfield, Shadyside, and East Liberty and includes 23 additional signals along Penn Avenue, with the western limit at the 16th Street intersection and the eastern limit at the Centre Avenue intersection.

Port Authority routes along Penn Avenue (8a and 8b) include 54, 64, 71C, 74, 77, 88, 89, 91, and 93 with significant ridership. The Penn Avenue corridor has an extensive bike network that connects the CBD to Chestnut Street through the Strip District.

According to RITIS, average afternoon peak direction weekday congestion increases travel time by approximately 27% when compared to travel during light conditions. The PTI indicates that motorists need to plan for 17 minutes to only be late 5% of the time for a trip that would take 10 minutes during low traffic conditions.

9. Liberty Avenue (ConOps Only)

Liberty Avenue is an east to west corridor with 19 signals. The western limit is the 16th Street intersection and the eastern limit is the Baum Boulevard intersection.

The Liberty Avenue corridor has an existing bike network between Herron Avenue and Baum Boulevard.

Port Authority routes along Liberty Avenue include 54, 64, 86, 87, 88, 89, and 91.

This corridor is included in the CMP as Corridor 44. According to RITIS, average afternoon peak direction weekday congestion increases travel time by approximately 26% when compared to travel during light conditions. The PTI indicates that motorists need to plan for 19 minutes to only be late 5% of the time for a trip that would take 10 minutes during low traffic conditions.

The SPC 2019 ROP recommends providing transit improvements along a portion of Liberty Avenue.

Recommendations include TSP signal and transit related geometric improvements.

1.5. Procurement

The details of the procurement process will be established during the development of a phasing and implementation plan. The procurement process will need to account for software services, system integration, and construction as well as the project schedule for the Smart Spines and BRT projects.

Figure 1: Smart Spines Corridor Map

2. References

This section documents all the various data sources that assisted in the development of the ConOps document (Table 2). This section also includes a synopsis of the relevant peer Smart City deployments, technology deployment history, and SPC’s Southwestern Pennsylvania Regional Intelligent Transportation System Architecture (SPARITSA).

2.1. Referenced Documents

The following table lists the references used to develop the concepts in this document. References throughout the ConOps are indicated as (#).

Table 2: References

(#) References

(1) Complete Streets Policy, Pittsburgh City Council (2016, November 21) https://apps.pittsburghpa.gov/redtail/images/5307_Attachment_Exhibit_A_2016-0935__1_.pdf

(2) City of Pittsburgh. (2017, June) City of Pittsburgh Climate Action Plan 3.0.

https://apps.pittsburghpa.gov/redtail/images/7101_Pittsburgh_Climate_Action_Plan_3.0.pdf

(3) City of Pittsburgh. (2020, June 15) City of Pittsburgh Bike (+) Master Plan.

https://apps.pittsburghpa.gov/redtail/images/9994_Pittsburgh_Bike+_Plan_06_15_2020.pdf

(4) Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission. (n.d.) Congestion Management Process.

https://www.spcregion.org/resources-tools/cmp-at-spc

(5) Wassom, B. (2018, July 23). DSRC vs. 5GLTE: Which Will It Be for Connected Vehicles? Wards Auto.

https://www.wardsauto.com/industry-voices/dsrc-vs-5glte-which-will-it-be-connected-vehicles

(6) Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission. (2019, July) 2019 Regional Operations Plan for Southwestern Pennsylvania. https://www.spcregion.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/ROP_Final_2019.pdf

(7) Alleven, M. (2017, November 1). Report: DSRC mandate moving off the table for automakers. Fierce Wireless. https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/report-dsrc-mandate-moving-off-table-for-auto-makers

(8) Alleven, M. (2017, April 14). 5GAA, NGMN argue for cellular, not DSRC, in NHTSA proposal. Fierce Wireless. https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/5gaa-ngmn-argue-for-cellular-over-dscr-nhtsa-proposal

(9) Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission. (n.d.) Southwestern PA Regional ITS Architecture.

https://local.iteris.com/spc/index.htm

(10) Pennsylvania Department of Transportation. (2016, February) PennDOT Traffic Signal Remote Communication Policy and Guidance Document.

http://www.dot.state.pa.us/public/Bureaus/BOMO/Portal/PennDOT_Remote_Communications_Policy.pdf

(11) Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Office of Operations. Petrella, M., Chajka-Cadin, L., Rainville, l., Pierce, S., Keen, M., Nodine, E., Noel, G., Zitzow-Childs, S., Machek, E., Eilbert, A., Litvack-Winkler, M.

(2019, December). Evaluation Methods and Techniques - Advanced Transportation and Congestion Management Technologies Deployment (ATCMTD) Program.

https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop19053/fhwahop19053.pdf

(12) 23 CFR 940 - Intelligent Transportation System Architecture and Standards, P.L. 105-178. (2011, April 1)

(13) Wiggers, K. (2019, April 26). 5 companies are testing 55 self-driving cars in Pittsburgh. Venture Beat.

https://venturebeat.com/2019/04/26/5-companies-are-testing-55-self-driving-cars-in-pittsburgh/

(14) Self-Driving Vehicle Testing and Operations, City of Pittsburgh Mayor Executive Order (2019, March 4) https://apps.pittsburghpa.gov/redtail/images/5134_Self_Driving_Vehicle_Executive_Order_03_01_19.pdf

(15) Anderson, Paul, Walk Michael J., Simek, Chris. (2020) Transit Cooperative Research Program Synthesis

146 - Transit Signal Priority: Current State of Practice

(16) US Department of Transportation. (2018, February) US Department of Transportation Strategic Plan for FY

2018-2022.

https://apps.pittsburghpa.gov/redtail/images/5307_Attachment_Exhibit_A_2016-0935__1_.pdf https://apps.pittsburghpa.gov/redtail/images/7101_Pittsburgh_Climate_Action_Plan_3.0.pdf https://apps.pittsburghpa.gov/redtail/images/9994_Pittsburgh_Bike+_Plan_06_15_2020.pdf https://www.spcregion.org/resources-tools/cmp-at-spc https://www.wardsauto.com/industry-voices/dsrc-vs-5glte-which-will-it-be-connected-vehicles https://local.iteris.com/spc/index.htm http://www.dot.state.pa.us/public/Bureaus/BOMO/Portal/PennDOT_Remote_Communications_Policy.pdf https://apps.pittsburghpa.gov/redtail/images/5134_Self_Driving_Vehicle_Executive_Order_03_01_19.pdf

2.2. Definitions and Acronyms

The Concept of Operations document will be using acronyms and abbreviations throughout the document (Table 3).

Table 3: Acronym List

Acronym/Abbreviation Definition

ADA Americans with Disabilities Act

AMASS Advanced Multimodal Adaptive Signal System

API Application Program Interface

APS Accessible Pedestrian Signal

ATC Advanced Traffic Controller

ATCMTD Advanced Transportation and Congestion Management Technologies Deployment Program

ATMS Advanced Traffic Management System

ATSPM Automated Traffic Signal Performance Measures

AV Autonomous Vehicle

AVL Automatic Vehicle Location

BOMO Bureau of Maintenance and Operations

BRT Bus Rapid Transit

BSM Basic Safety Message

CBD Central Business District

CCTV Closed Circuit Television

CERT CMU Computer Emergency Response Team

CMP Congestion Management Process

CMU Carnegie Mellon University

ConOps Concept of Operations

CAV Connected and Autonomous Vehicle

CV Connected Vehicle

D11-0 District 11-0

DMS Dynamic Message Sign

DMZ Demilitarized Zone

DOMI Department of Mobility & Infrastructure

DOT Department of Transportation

Drive Drive Engineering Corp.

DS Data Security

DSRC Dedicated Short-Range Communications

DSS Decision Support System

EOC Emergency Operations Center

EV Electrical Vehicle

EVP Emergency Vehicle Preemption

FCC Federal Communications Commission

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

GHz Gigahertz

GPS Global Positioning System

Homeland Security Pittsburgh Office of Homeland Security

Acronym/Abbreviation Definition

I&P Department of Innovation and Performance

ICM Integrated Corridor Management

ISP Internet Service Provider

IT Information Technology

ITS Intelligent Transportation System

IoT Internet of Things

KB Kilobyte

KPI Key Performance Indicator

LED Light-emitting Diode

MAC Media Access Control

MAP Intersection Map

MB Megabyte

MIB Management Information Base

MMITSS Multi-modal Intelligent Traffic Signal System

NTCIP National Transportation Communications for Intelligent System Protocol

O-D Origin-Destination

OIT Pennsylvania Office of Administration for Information Technology

OBU Onboard Unit

PID Personal Information Device

PennDOT Pennsylvania Department of Transportation

Port Authority Port Authority of Allegheny County

PTI Planning Time Index

Public Safety Pittsburgh Department of Safety

RITIS Regional Integrated Transportation Information System

RMDID Risk Management and Defense in Depth

ROI Return on Investment

ROP Regional Operations Plan

RSU Roadside Unit

RTMC Regional Traffic Management Center

SE System Engineering

SOP Standard Operating Procedure

SPARITSA Southwestern PA Regional Intelligent Transportation System Architecture

SPaT Signal Phase and Timing

SPC Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission

SR State Route

SRM Signal Request Message

SSM Signal Status Message

TBC Time-Based Coordination

TBD To Be Determined

TIM Traveler Information Message

TMA Transportation Management Association

TMC Traffic Management Center

TOD Time of Day

Acronym/Abbreviation Definition

TSP Transit Signal Priority

TTI Travel Time Index

UPS Uninterruptible Power Supply

USDOT U.S. Department of Transportation

V2I Vehicle to Infrastructure

V2P Vehicle to Pedestrian

V2V Vehicle to Vehicle

V2X Vehicle to Device

VPN Virtual Private Network

WAN Wide Area Network

WPRDC Western Pennsylvania Regional Data Center

WRA Whitman, Requardt and Associates

2.3. Peer Review Research

Pittsburgh completed a scan of peer Smart City initiatives across the country in order to understand the status and lessons learned from the implemented Smart City Technologies and pilot programs (Table 4 and Appendix A). As of October 2019, there are multiple cities across the country that share Pittsburgh’s core goals. The peer cities also have varying levels of Smart City implementation, varying from planning to test pilots to full implementation.

Table 4: High-Level Peer Review Cities

Location Implemented Smart Technologies

Los Angeles, California IoT and Smart LED Lights with EV Charging

San Diego, California EV, CV, IoT, Smart LED Lights w/ Smart Parking, Air Quality, Gun Shot Detection

Denver, Colorado Connected Pedestrian, Signal Priority/Preemption, EV, Pena Station Smart CityNow

Gainesville, Florida AV Shuttle, Iteris VantageLive!

Orlando, Florida CV, PedSafe, GreenWay, AV Shuttle, EV, Adv Parking, Bluetooth Tracking

Tampa, Florida CV – Alerts (Ped, Various Warning) & TSP

Portland, Maine Surtrac Adaptive, Smart LED Lights, Public WiFi

Detroit, Michigan Public WiFi, Miovision CV

Kansas City, Missouri Rhythm Adaptive and TSP, Public WiFi

Las Vegas, Nevada IoT, Audi CV, DSRC CV, AV Shuttle

New York City, New York

CV with Vehicle and Pedestrian applications (visual impaired), C2Smart Server

Columbus, Ohio CV deployment in 2020, EV, AV, Smart Columbus Operating System

Dublin, Ohio CV Alerts

Portland, Oregon Planning stages of Smart Technology and data collection, storage, and analysis

Texas Planning stages of CV in the Texas Triangle

Arlington, Texas DSRC/SPaT & CV-Alerts, Enlighten Application (non-DSRC CV Technology)

Austin, Texas Bluetooth Sensors, DSRC Communications, dockless bikes, and EV

Frisco, Texas Audi CV

Houston, Texas Planning stages of Smart Technology

Salt Lake City, Utah AV Shuttle, Max Bus Rapid Transit, MMITSS, CV

Wyoming CV-Alerts

Washington, D.C. Planning stages of Smart Technology

2.4. Technology Research

Pittsburgh completed a technology scan in order to understand the state of technology at the time of initial development of the ConOps that will be critical to achieving Pittsburgh’s vision of a Smart City. Similar to the peer review, the technology review provides insights on where, when, and what ATCMTD initiatives are easily deployed versus the initiatives that would require further research and development. The following technologies were analyzed for application in the Smart Spines System:

• Central Software;

• Signal Priority and Emergency Vehicle Preemption;

• Multimodal Operations Systems;

• Adaptive Signal Technology;

• Passive Pedestrian Detection;

• Internet of Things; and

• CV Communications.

Central Software

Central Software is the system-wide or multi-intersection software that allows a user to observe, manage, and change signal timings and traffic patterns dynamically and in real-time. Central software technology can provide system health, performance metrics, and failure alerts at the signalized intersection and is typically deployment ready. Signal controller manufacturers have developed software that allows municipal agencies and State Departments of Transportation (DOTs) to monitor their traffic systems and signals through a central location, whether through a TMC or through a cloud-based server. These systems enable agencies to not only observe real-time traffic but to make timing adjustments and commands in near-real time.

TransCore TransSuite, Intelight MaxView, Econolite Centracs, and Siemens Sitraffic are examples of vendors and central software technologies that allow agencies to monitor traffic from a central location.

Signal Priority and Emergency Vehicle Preemption (EVP)

Signal Priority and EVP are two strategies for a signalized intersection or corridor to advance either the transit, maintenance, freight, or emergency vehicles through intersections quicker and with a greater hierarchy in relation to other modes of traffic. Both TSP and EVP utilize detection to request signal priority or preemption. If the signal accepts the request it will then adjust the signal timing and phasing to accommodate the priority or preemption call.

EVP can be operated using audible systems (triggered by sirens), optical systems (light emitters mounted in vehicles), or Global Positioning System (GPS) transmitters. Innovations in EVP technology include utilizing cloud-based software that can trigger EVP from an Emergency Operations Center (EOC) and/or through onboard units (OBUs) and RSUs for emergency CV applications. Similar to EVP, TSP can be triggered via cellular networks, OBUs/RSUs, or through a central operation center and communication such as fiber or radio to the intersection.

Both TSP and EVP have been deployed across numerous locations around the country and world.

Multimodal Operations Systems

Multimodal Operations System is an application or process that enables signals to consider all transportation modes traversing the corridor. These systems tie in with modal priorities (transit, freight, emergency, etc.) to give designated modes priority based on a defined hierarchy.

Multi-Modal Intelligent Traffic Signal System (MMITSS) is a proprietary system that is in its third generation of development and deployment. MMITSS is a process or application implemented at the signal controller that receives multiple priority requests from approaches and modes and…