Arc Atlantique ITS Corridor Evaluation Report

Arc Atlantique ITS Corridor

M60 J8 – M62 J20 Smart Motorway, England Version 1.0 1/40


Evaluation Report

M60 J8 - M62 J20

Project reference: UK - 02

Project location: Manchester England, UK

Version: 2.0



Document Information

Information contained in this document has been included to indicate potential benefits that can arise

from implementing a Smart Motorway scheme in the UK. A Smart Motorway is an ITS enables traffic

management solution primarily designed to impact congestion, safety and the environment. The

contents of this document is limited in scope due to the short time scale between project

implementation and production of this summary report and is therefore not definitive. It is advised

that further research is undertaken to obtain more in depth data before definitive conclusion are

drawn for use elsewhere. The information in this document is prepared for the purpose of the EUEIP

requirement to provide evaluations for certain ITS projects, and is not designed for wider use or

circulation.



Table of Contents

Document Information .................................................................................................................. 2

Table of Contents .......................................................................................................................... 3

List of Abbreviations/Acronyms .................................................................................................. 4

1 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................... 5

1.1 ITS Deployment Status ................................................................................................. 5

1.2 Impact on Traffic Flow, Safety and the Environment ..................................................... 7

2 Description of the Problem ................................................................................................... 9

2.1 Issues Addressed ......................................................................................................... 9

2.2 Site description ............................................................................................................. 9

2.3 Research Questions ................................................................................................... 11

2.4 Objectives for the Evaluation ...................................................................................... 12

3 Description of the ITS Project ............................................................................................. 13

3.1 ITS Selection Rationale and Objectives ...................................................................... 13

3.2 Status of the Project.................................................................................................... 14

3.3 Systems and Technologies Applied ............................................................................ 14

3.4 ITS Deployment Status (Deployment KPIs) ................................................................ 17

4 Evaluation ............................................................................................................................ 19

4.1 Research Questions Answered ................................................................................... 19

4.2 Methods ...................................................................................................................... 19

4.3 Timing and Type of Evaluation .................................................................................... 19

4.4 Technical Performance ............................................................................................... 20

4.5 Selected Benefit KPIs ................................................................................................. 20

4.6 Results and Conclusions ............................................................................................ 21

4.6.1 Deployment KPI’s Results ................................................................................. 21

4.6.2 Benefit KPI’s – Results ...................................................................................... 24

5 Cost Benefit Analysis Results ............................................................................................ 27

5.1 Example Smart Motorway Project ............................................................................... 27

6 Overall Assessment & Transferability of the Results (European Dimension) ................. 29

6.1 Overall Assessment .................................................................................................... 29

6.2 Transferability of results (European Dimension) .......................................................... 29

6.2.1 Relevance to ITS Priority Areas and Actions...................................................... 29

Annex 1 Operating Environments for ITS applications ......................................................... 30

Annex 2 ITS Priority/Benefit Codes ........................................................................................ 32

Annex 3 Deployment KPIs description summary table ......................................................... 33



Annex 4 Benefit KPIs description summary table ................................................................. 38

List of Abbreviations/Acronyms

� AA Arc Atlantique

� BKPI (Benefit Key Performance Indicator)

� CBA (Cost Benefit Analysis)

� C-ITS (Cooperative Intelligent Transport Systems)

� DGMOVE (European Union’s Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport)

� GDP (Gross Domestic Product)

� DKPI (Deployment Key Performance Indicator)

� EU (European Union)

� EIP (EU Intelligent Transport System Platform)

� HGV (Heavy Goods Vehicle1)

� IBEC (International Benefits Evaluation Community)

� IET (The Institution of Engineering and Technology)

� ITS (Intelligent Transport System)

� KPI (Key Performance Indicator)

� MSD (eCall: Minimum Set of Data )

� NPVB (Net Present Value of Benefits)

� NPVC (Net Present Value of Costs)

� SE (Speed Enforcement)

� TCC (Traffic Control Centre)

� TEN-T (The Trans-European Transport Networks in Europe)

� TIS (Travel Information System)

� TMP (Traffic Management Plan)

� UK (United Kingdom)

� US (United Sates)

� VOT (Value of Time)

1 http://www.transportpolicy.net/standard/eu-vehicle-definitions/



1 Executive Summary

The Arc Atlantique ITS Corridor is an ITS Corridor located in the western regions of the EU. It

promotes the wider implementation of ITS systems and services to increase the benefits of reduced

congestion, improved safety and reduced environmental impact. The Corridor is coincident with the

Core TEN-T network and North Sea – Mediterranean multi modal corridor.

The Arc Atlantique comprises 7 Member States and the project is coordinated by the UK.

Along the length of the corridor a series of ITS projects have been implemented each of which are

designed to improve the overall performance of the corridor, for instance through easing bottlenecks.

The M60 J8 - M62 J20 is one such project that is primarily designed to ease congestion on the

section of the ITS Corridor that is located in the north west of England in the vicinity of Manchester,

England UK. The project comprises the deployment of ITS technologies and services combined with

adaptations to the civil engineering infrastructure to form a Smart Motorway.

The project has now gone live while the systems and services will require ‘fine tuning’ during 2018.

For an evaluation to be definitive, an ex-anti and ex-post evaluation is required. This is normally

undertaken over three years to prior to, and three year post ‘go live’. This is not possible for this

summary evaluation since it has been drafted some 6 months after completion.

This document provides information on the impact or predicted impact of the project. Because the

data has been sourced from businesses cases and experience from across other similar projects,

and is often limited in scope, caution is advised when extrapolating data or using data in this report

as definitive input for other purposes.

The deployment and impact KPI’s used in this report are based on the agreed measures established

by the EU EIP Activity 5 Evaluation working group. Further details are given in this report.

1.1 ITS Deployment Status

The project is complete and ‘fine tuning’ of the project is now underway which involves adaptations

to algorithms and ITS systems to optimise the ITS solution. The table below provides a summary of

key deployment KPI.

Deployment

KPI

Description EU Priority Area Benefit

Description

Results - Km

Incident

Detection and

Incident

Management

Length road network covered

or impacted by incident

detection and incident

management.

Road safety and security

applications (Deployment KPIs –

comprehensiveness of offering of

ITS equipment to users)

Covered: 27

Potentially

Impacted*: 85

Automated

Speed Detection

Length of road network

covered or impacted by

automated speed detection.





Covered: 27

Potentially

Impacted*: 85

Traffic Condition

and Travel Time

Information

Length of road covered or

impacted by websites/over-

Optimal use of road traffic and travel

data (Deployment KPIs –

Covered: 27



Deployment

KPI


Description

Results - Km

Service (TIS

DG03_05)

the-air Services offering traffic

and travel information.


ITS data to users)

Potentially

Impacted*: 85

Intelligent

Services in

accordance to

Delegated

Regulations

under the ITS

Directive


impacted by real-time traffic

information Services

Linking the vehicle with the

transport infrastructure

(Deployment KPIs –



Covered: 27

Potentially

Impacted*: 85


impacted by road safety

related traffic information

Services






Covered: 27

Potentially

Impacted*: 85

Variable Speed

Limits


impacted by Variable

Message Signs;





Covered: 27

Potentially

Impacted*: 85


impacted by Spot Speed

Enforcement (SE) Cameras;

and





Covered: 27

Potentially

Impacted*: 85

Forecast and

Real Time Event

Information



Forecast (pre-trip) and Real

Time (on-trip) Event

Information about both

expected and unexpected

abnormal events (situations)

faced by road users




ITS data to users)

Covered: 27

Potentially

Impacted*: 85

Weather

Information

Service




Time (on-trip) Weather

Information Service.





Covered: 27

Potentially

Impacted*: 85

Hard Shoulder

Running


covered or impacted by Hard

Shoulder Running.




ITS data to users)

Covered: 27

Potentially

Impacted*: 85



1.2 Impact on Traffic Flow, Safety and the Environment

The table below summarises the impacts arising from the project for each of traffic flow, safety and

the environment as applicable. Fine tuning of the systems is likely to provide further benefits.

Benefit KPI Description EU ITS Priority

Area Benefit

Description

Results*

Change in

Traffic Flow

Change in traffic flow (e.g. vehicles

per hour/day at spot location),

measured at specific locations of the

road network affected by the

implementation of the relevant ITS

system and service.

Network

efficiency and

congestion

(Benefit KPIs)

+10% - 20%

Change in Road

Traffic Journey

Time Variability

Change in journey time variability. For

a longer period (e.g. a few weeks or a

month) the journey times should be

put into one set and then the standard

deviation should be taken.

Network

efficiency and

congestion

(Benefit KPIs)

Variability

reduction of 20%

Change in

Bottleneck

Congestion

Congestion (Lost Vehicle Hours/

Time Saving).

Network

efficiency and

congestion

(Benefit KPIs)

Decrease in VLH

22% - 26%

Change in

Journey Time

Journey time is the indicator to

determine the impact of a measure on

the road users. Measured along the


implementation of the ITS system.

Network

efficiency and

congestion

(Benefit KPIs)

4 - 8%

improvement

during peak time

Change in

Accident

Numbers and

Severity

Absolute and % change in number of

reported accidents of all severities as

well as accident rates (i.e. accidents

per vehicle-km travelled) measured

along the road network (TEN-T and/or

National) affected by the


system. Absolute number of

accidents

Improve road

Safety (Benefit

KPIs)

Collision rate (all

severities)

-20%

Change in CO2

emissions

Change in annual CO2 emissions

(Tons) (absolute and % difference)

measured along the road network

(TEN-T and/or National) affected by

the implementation of the relevant

ITS system.

Improving

Environmental

impacts (Benefit

KPIs)

-4%



Based on information that is available, it has been concluded that the project has had a beneficial

impact on flow. Levels of congestion have decreased and journey time variability become more

consistent. Journey times are also expected to have improved during certain periods of

measurement, for instance at peak time. The safety record for the road has not been impacted

negatively on what would have been expected if the road had remained a standard motorway design,

and not converted to a Smart Motorway. The profile of the accidents are likely to have changed and

the collision rate reduced. In terms of environmental performance, the impact has been shown to be

positive.

The project has contributed to delivering the EU priority areas set out in Articles 2 and 3 of Directive

2010/40/EU. This has been assessed using Deployment and Benefit KPI’s set out in EU/EIP ITS

Deployment and Benefit KPIs definitions Technical Reference v10.0, 08 February 2017.

Based on these benefits, BCR’s are positive, and predictions for similar schemes due for

implementation in England are showing strong overall economic gains. This is to the extent that a

programme for wider conversion of the network to ITS enabled Smart Motorway traffic management

solutions is now established. This project is relevant to other Member States and is largely

transferrable.



2 Description of the Problem

2.1 Issues Addressed

This project has been implemented on a stretch of the UK network that experiences significant

problems in terms of congestion, journey time reliability, safety and air quality. The M60 motorway

is the motorway that links the M6 with the conurbation of Manchester and the M62 links across to

the north east of England. The route is significant for carrying traffic destined for Scotland and

London. But more importantly forms part of an east west corridor connecting Merseyside with

Yorkshire and the Humber. It is part of the trans-European Route 22. This stretch of road also forms

part of the ‘Manchester Box’ which is the orbital motorway around Manchester. As a consequence

the route carries significant traffic flows during peak and off peak times. Peak time occurs on Monday

through to Friday generally between the hours of 05.30 and 10.30. In the evening it is between 15.00

and 20.00hrs. On Saturday, traffic tends to peak during the middle of the day. The route is typically

used by 180,000 vehicles a day.

The key issues that needed to be addressed were the negative impact on the economy arising from

unreliable journey’s and delayed journey’s resulting in a less than ideal vehicle lost hours. Further,

the adverse impacts of poor air quality, and of key importance, the need to protect and improve on

the safety record on this part of the network were also points of concern. These are all priority areas

highlighted in ITS Directive (2010/40/EU).

As such this project sought to optimise the use of road traffic and travel data, implement ITS solutions

that protect and/or enhance road safety and security; given that the hard shoulder was to be used

as a running lane, increase network efficiency through a reduction in congestion, and improve

environmental impacts.

2.2 Site description

The M60 and M62 motorways are key routes in the north west of England. It carries traffic above

those for which it was designed. The route is partly co-incident with the North Sea Mediterranean

Core Corridor and is classified as part of the Core TEN-T network route E22. The road is fed by

elements of the Comprehensive network.

Under UK definitions, the route is classified as a Dual 3 motorway – dual carriageway with three

lanes in either direction.

Under the EUEIP Operating Environment classification system, the road is T4 / S2 / P1 i.e. motorway

link with seasonal and/ or daily flow related traffic impact, potential safety concerns, / motorway

corridor or network, daily flow related to traffic impact, possibly safety concerns / peri urban motorway

or road interfacing urban environment, possibly safety concerns. A full list of Operating

Environments are given in Annex 1.

The map below indicates the location of the route within the context of northern United Kingdom.



M60 J8 – M62 J20 Smart Motoway Location, England

The road is largely sub – urban. The M62 to the north east becomes more rural in nature. In carrying

long distance traffic from east to west, the road connects the large towns close to Manchester of

Rochdale, Prestwich and Eccles and the ports in the north east and north west of England.

Typical Characteristic of the Motorway



As a consequence of each of these characteristics, the road carries local, regional and international

traffic. As this section of the road forms part of an orbital motorway, it is particularly susceptible to

traffic choosing to travel around the city of Manchester rather than travel through the centre.

The result is a problem of near continuous congestion on the peri-urban sections and less than

satisfactory journey time reliability throughout the day but also at peak times. The road is impacted

by local events rather than seasonal ones; for instance football match days. Because the road is a

near saturation it is sensitive to incidents, so a reduction in the number or severity of incident would

be of benefit.

Given the projected increase in traffic flows predicted across the UK due to increase economic

activity, particular investments in the north of England, and wider ownership of vehicles, this section

of the M60 was predicted to become even more congested, beyond that experienced before

implementation of the ITS project.

The project was therefore designed to impact current congestion as well as mitigated against

expected increases in demand in the coming years. Further, to achieve this without adverse impact

on the safety record and delays arising from incidents.

2.3 Research Questions

At the outset of this project research questions designed for the purposes of evaluation were not

postulated as such, however Highways England undertake post opening evaluations to assess the

success of projects. These evaluations seek to answer key questions that ultimately measure

whether the project has been successful and can justify the level of expenditure for their

implementation and operation. These evaluations need to be pragmatic whilst being supportable.

Implementing Smart Motorways through provision of ITS systems and services involves increasing

capacity through introducing Variable Mandatory Speed Limits and increasing the number of running

lanes by re-allocating space previously used by the hard shoulder.

The impact of directly increasing the capacity of the road and further managing capacity using

Variable Mandatory Speed Limits is that periods of congestion are expected to be less frequent,

shorter and less intense leading to reductions in journey time and better journey time reliability. The

road effectively becomes more resilient to regular and incident related congestion.

Furthermore the road is more capable of absorbing expected increases in traffic flow resulting from

increased economic activity, increased population and wider use of road network in the coming

years.

In addition, safety benefits can be realised as traffic speeds become more consistent and the speed

differential between lanes reduces. This change in flow characteristics also impacts emissions.

Finally if incidents become less frequent the time taken to manage incidents and the consequential

delays that arise through slow or stopped traffic is ameliorated.

To inform these points, pertinent research questions for which answers will be sought are:

a) What is the length of road over which the ITS is deployed?

b) What is length of the scheme over which the ITS project is likely to have an impact?

c) What has been the change in traffic flow as a result of the project?



d) Has there been a change in journey time variability?

e) Has the level of congestion changed?

f) Has there been a change in journey time as a result of the scheme?

g) Has there been an impact on accident numbers or severity?

h) Has there been an environmental impact as a result of the scheme?

Relevant KPI’s to measure the results of the above research questions are described in sub- section

3.4.

2.4 Objectives for the Evaluation

It must be noted, that full evaluations of projects of this type are not completed until at least 3 years

after opening of the scheme. Data used in this evaluation report will use actual data where this is

available. This is very limited so data obtained from similar schemes of this type is used.

The objective of this evaluation is to seek to answer the research questions summarised in 2.3 above

over the stretch of the motorway where the ITS systems and services have been deployed. The

evaluation focusses on deployment as well as impact and benefits.

Evaluation will be achieved through use of actual data where this is available, and coupling this with

data that is available from similar schemes. This will indicate concurrence with expected results. The

expected results would have been used to inform the pre implementation business case for the

project.

The results, which can only be considered as indicative because of this approach, can be used to

help form opinions as to whether ITS systems and services of the type implemented on this road

result in positive outcomes and benefits to the road user and operator.



3 Description of the ITS Project

3.1 ITS Selection Rationale and Objectives

The UK’s Highways England has been studying the effects of the introduction of various forms of

ITS and ITS enabled traffic management schemes with the objective of improving the overall

performance of the network and increasing user satisfaction. Initially, this was driven by the need to

understand whether ITS can help resolved the need for additional capacity on the network without

widening roads, specifically where there are severe engineering and political constraints. This led to

the introduction of variable mandatory speed limits with enforcement, initially on the M25 on the west

side of London. Termed ‘controlled’ motorways, maximum speeds for each lane are automatically

set using an algorithm that uses real time traffic counts and speed.

There was considerable research looking at the immediate and longer term impacts of the project.

The results from this type of scheme indicated a 1.5% increase in throughput over the 5 hour peak

periods without an increase in congestion. Furthermore, journey times were shown to decrease.

Journey time reliability also improved during the peak period. Notably, a reduction in the frequency

and severity of shockwaves was also recorded. These impacts increased the efficiency of the road.

Importantly the accident record where variable speed limits were introduced indicated a reduction of

10% in injury accidents, and the severity of accidents also reduced with fewer damage only incidents.

These metrics indicated the safety record improved, again contributing to efficiency of the road

network due to improvement in the management of incidents.

In terms of environmental impacts it was noted that there was an overall decrease in emissions of

between 2% and 8% depending on the emission measured. The reduction in stop-start driving and

improved compliance with the speed limits reduced the weekday traffic noise adjacent to the

carriageway by around 0.7 decibels. Introducing variable speed limits therefore indicated improved

environmental performance of the road.

Separate studies have also shown that user acceptability of the scheme was good with over 60% of

the drivers agreeing that the traffic management solution using Variable Speed Limits was an

improvement to the road network.

With this and other later schemes indicating similar benefits, the rationale behind introducing variable

mandatory speed limits on the M60 was to gain similar benefits for congestion, safety and

environmental performance.

However the problem of severe under capacity in the short and longer term could not be addressed

entirely through introducing variable speed limits alone. Hard shoulder running was also

implemented to provide additional capacity. Introducing hard shoulder running is only feasible when

ITS systems and services are deployed for control and safety. Hard shoulder running is therefore an

ITS enabled traffic management solution and requires comprehensive signing, real time traffic

monitoring and regional control office management.

The rationale for deploying additional and more comprehensive ITS such as those highlighted above

combined with automated and visual lane monitoring, additional communications services and lane

control, for instance Red X for closing traffic lanes, was specifically to benefit from the additional

capacity achievable through hard shoulder running.

Combining the benefits achieved from ‘controlled motorways’ and hard shoulder running was

therefore the key reason for selecting and implementing the chosen Intelligent Transport Systems

for this scheme. In the UK this combination of technology and the traffic management processes

applied is termed a ‘Smart’ Motorway.



In terms of the EUEIP ITS Level of Service Descriptions for Traffic Management, the M60 J8 – M62

J20 prior to introduction of the new ITS was classified as Level 3. Following completion of the scheme

the Level of Service would increase to Level 4.

3.2 Status of the Project

The scheme is complete with fine tuning of the systems expected during 2018.

3.3 Systems and Technologies Applied

Highways England deployed ‘Smart’ motorway systems on this road. This is part of the Highways

England’s tool kit for Smart Motorways which comprises a series of technologies which have been

developed over a number of years and are proven to meet legal, technical and outcome

requirements in terms of impact on traffic.

Of key importance to the solution is the deployment of the technologies in a predefined way to ensure

compliance with traffic regulations and also to enable enforcement of the variable mandatory speed

limits. Further, the specifications for the design ensure a consistent approach to deployment of the

technologies to make sure they remain operationally within predefined limits. Further, that road

user come to know and understand what to expect and how to drive on Smart enabled roads.

In addition to the technologies deployed on the road and at the regional traffic control centre, the

carriageway required limited reconfiguration to allow for refuge areas to be used in case of incident.

This is because the hard shoulder is predesignated as a running lane.

The diagram below shows the ITS systems deployed and a typical configuration on the carriageway.

Typical Smart Motorway Technology Configuration



ITS deployed in this scheme fall into four distinct groups:

1) Mandatory and advisory traffic information signs.

2) Traffic monitoring and enforcement systems.

3) Traffic Management Centre software

4) Communications and power systems

Mandatory and Advisory Traffic Signs

Signs used to implement a change in speed – to 50mph as opposed to the national speed limit of

70mph, are Advanced Matrix Indicators (AMI). This can be used to display mandatory speed limits,

indicate lanes are to be vacated and close lanes.

Speed limits are displayed with a red circle around them so they are mandatory. A red ‘X’ is displayed

to advise of a lane closure. This symbol usually follow signs with white arrows indicating that a lane

has to be vacated. These signs also have yellow ‘wig wag’ flashing lights to highlight hazards.

Advanced indicator signs are positioned over each lane on ‘portal gantries’ at the beginning of the

Smart motorway section of the carriageway. Portal gantries are positioned after each ‘on ramp’ within

the Smart motorway section.

In addition to the Advanced Matrix Indicators located on portal gantries, traffic information signs are

located at portal gantries and at pre-determined spacing. These are used to confirm the imposed

speed limit and provide traffic and travel information such as time to next junction, hazards and

incidents.

A further series of variable message signed are located at the roadside for use in lane closures for

maintenance and incident management.

M62 Advanced Indicator Signs Used for Variable Speed Limits



MS4 Signs Used for Traffic and Travel Information, Incident Warning

Over lane Advanced Message Signs and an MS4 Traffic Information Sign. The MS4 sign can use

pictograms for certain message categories.

Traffic Monitoring and Enforcement Systems

Smart motorways rely on acquisition of real time traffic data collected at 15 minute intervals to

monitor the volume and speed of traffic in each lane. This data is used to set speed limits, detect

incidents and input into systems that calculate travels times. This data is also used off line for the

purposes of accessing the impact of the Smart motorway solution. Data is captured using a series

of loop detectors and in some instances radar. CCTV is deployed for traffic and incident monitoring.

Speed limits within the controlled zone are mandatory. The benefits that can be gained through

modifying speed limits are only achievable if there is a high degree of compliance so laminar flow is

achieved. Digital enforcement systems are therefore deployed at pre-determined intervals. These

are located on the gantries and measure spot speed within the controlled zones. The enforcement

camera systems are ‘Type ‘Approved’ and operate under strict governance arrangements.

Traffic Management Centre Software

Software located in the Regional Traffic Control Centre processes data received from the roadside.

Using algorithms specifically developed for motorways where variable speed limits are used, levels

of congestion, speed, flow and other measures are used to calculate and initiate revised speed limits.

These are automated but control centre intervention is possible.



Communications and Power Systems

Considerable numbers of road side technologies are deployed for Smart Motorways. These all

require power supplies and communications systems between roadside devices and from the

roadside to the Regional Traffic Control Centre. This is achieved through extending the National

Road Telecommunications System (NRTS) which comprises fibre optic cabling and wireless

communications as required.

Summarising, ITS technology deployed on the M60 J8 - M62 J20 includes the following key items.

In all, over 3200 separate items of active and passive technology and infrastructure has been

installed on this section of the M60 J8 – M62 J20.

MS4 Message Sign 91 No.

Advanced Indicator Signs 262 No.

Weather Detection/stations 3 No.

Detector Radar and Loops 100 No.

CCTV 50 No.

New Power and Technology Cabling 200 km

3.4 ITS Deployment Status (Deployment KPIs)

For this project the following Deployment KPI’s (Column 1) are relevant and can be informed by data

from this project or data transferrable from similar projects of this type (see 2.4 above). Description

of the KPI’s have been shortened for brevity (Column 2). Refer to EU/EIP ITS Deployment and

Benefit KPIs definitions Technical Reference v10.0, 08 February 2017 for a full description. A

summary of all KPI is given in Annex 3. The EU ITS priority areas are given in Annex 2.

These KPI’s and descriptions are also referenced to the EU Priority Area descriptions that this ITS

project is addressing (Column 3). See above link for the full descriptions.

Column 4 references the Research Questions posed in section 2.3.

Deployment

KPI


Description

Research

Question Ref.

Incident

Detection and

Incident

Management




management.





a,b

Automated

Speed Detection








a,b



Deployment

KPI


Description

Research

Question Ref.

Traffic Condition

and Travel Time

Information

Service (TIS

DG03_05)








ITS data to users)

a,b

Intelligent

Services in

accordance to

Delegated

Regulations

under the ITS

Directive









a,b




Services






a,b

Variable Speed

Limits



Message Signs;





a,b




and





a,b

Forecast and

Real Time Event

Information








faced by road users




ITS data to users)

a,b

Weather

Information

Service










a,b

Hard Shoulder

Running



Shoulder Running.




ITS data to users)

a,b



4 Evaluation

4.1 Research Questions Answered

Not all the research questions posed in sub-section 2.3 are answerable by using information directly

from this scheme. This is because it is too early to gather data in the quantities required, and over a

reasonable period of time post opening, to derive factual and verifiable information.

However information from similar schemes can be used as an indication of the likely results that

could come from this project.

All 8 research questions posed in sub-section 2.3 have been answered to a greater or lesser extent

using the methodology described in the sub-section below.

4.2 Methods

Highways England uses best practice developed over a number of years to assess results arising

from the implementation of ITS and ITS enabled traffic management schemes such as a Smart

Motorway implemented on the M60 J8 - M62 J20.

Traffic performance is monitored for all junction to junction links on the motorway network at 15

minute intervals throughout each day and all year. Highways England’s MIDAS system uses loops

spaced at approximately 500m as well as radar detectors and floating vehicle data to produce a

comprehensive data set from which evaluations can be made.

As with all Smart Motorway projects a full set of ex-ante data is available from which the ‘as before’

implementation situation can be understood.

Because of the short time period since the project was implemented. It is not feasible to obtain post

implementation data and therefore evaluate results for this scheme with confidence. The

methodology used for this evaluation is therefore to consider results derived from similar Smart

Motorway schemes and apply these to the M60 & M62 where this can be reasonably achieved. Data

from similar schemes has been derived from evaluations that have been undertaken using Highways

England’s agreed methodological approach, modified as appropriate for the specific circumstances

and agreed scope for the evaluation. This data is therefore reliable.

4.3 Timing and Type of Evaluation

Data has been gathered prior to the implementation of the ITS scheme. This will be used as the

‘before’ ex-ante situation for the 3 year post opening performance evaluation report scheduled to be

undertaken in 2020. As there has not been enough time to gather post opening data or evaluate the

limited data that is available, this evaluation uses ex – post evaluation experience and results from

other schemes.



4.4 Technical Performance

The technical performance of the scheme does not form part of this evaluation. However based on

commissioning data it has been found to be compliant with Highways England Technical

Specifications for Smart Motorways. Technical performance of the technology must meet the

specifications for the scheme which have been developed over a number of years using a continuous

improvement methodology.

4.5 Selected Benefit KPIs

For this project the following Benefit KPI’s (Column 1) are relevant and can be informed by data from

this project or data transferrable from similar projects of this type (see 2.4 above). Description of the

KPI’s have been shortened for brevity (Column 2). Refer to EU/EIP ITS Deployment and Benefit

KPIs definitions Technical Reference v10.0, 08 February 2017 for a full description.

These KPI’s and descriptions are also referenced to the EU Priority Area descriptions that the ITS

Projects is addressing (Column 3). See above link for the full descriptions.

In Column 4 the research question reference is given. The Benefit KPI will be used to answer the

research questions. See sub-section 2.3 for the research questions and Annex 4 for the full benefit

KPI descriptions. These have been adapted for this evaluation. The EU ITS priority areas are given

in Annex 2.


Area Benefit

Description

Research

Question Ref.

Change in

Traffic Flow






system and service.

Network

efficiency and

congestion

(Benefit KPIs)

c

Change in Road

Traffic Journey

Time Variability






Network

efficiency and

congestion

(Benefit KPIs)

d

Change in

Bottleneck

Congestion






Network

efficiency and

congestion

(Benefit KPIs)

e

Change in

Journey Time




Network

efficiency and

f




Area Benefit

Description

Research

Question Ref.



congestion

(Benefit KPIs)

Change in

Accident

Numbers and

Severity









accidents

Improve road

Safety (Benefit

KPIs)

g

Change in CO2

emissions

Change in annual CO2 emissions





ITS system.

Improving

Environmental

impacts (Benefit

KPIs)

h

4.6 Results and Conclusions

The results presented below have been derived either directly from the scheme or from results

obtained from schemes that are similar in nature to the Smart Motorway implemented on the M60

J8 - M62 J20.

4.6.1 Deployment KPI’s Results

The table below presents the Deployment KPI’s and the results. This information is directly from the

M60 J8 - M62 J20 project which was complete in 2017.

Note that the Deployment KPI’s are measured in kilometres as proposed in the Grant Agreement for

the Arc Atlantique ITS Corridor.

Deployment

KPI


Description

Results - Km

Incident

Detection and

Incident

Management




management.





Covered: 27

Potentially

Impacted*: 85



Deployment

KPI


Description

Results - Km

Automated

Speed Detection








Covered: 27

Potentially

Impacted*: 85

Traffic Condition

and Travel Time

Information

Service (TIS

DG03_05)








ITS data to users)

Covered: 27

Potentially

Impacted*: 85

Intelligent

Services in

accordance to

Delegated

Regulations

under the ITS

Directive









Covered: 27

Potentially

Impacted*: 85




Services






Covered: 27

Potentially

Impacted*: 85

Variable Speed

Limits



Message Signs;





Covered: 27

Potentially

Impacted*: 85




and





Covered: 27

Potentially

Impacted*: 85

Forecast and

Real Time Event

Information








faced by road users




ITS data to users)

Covered: 27

Potentially

Impacted*: 85

Weather

Information

Service










Covered: 27

Potentially

Impacted*: 85

Hard Shoulder

Running



Shoulder Running.



Covered: 27



Deployment

KPI


Description

Results - Km


ITS data to users)

Potentially

Impacted*: 85

*Potentially Impacted. The potentially impacted measure is a figure that attempts to describe the

likely overall impact of the scheme in the context of a corridor. Where a particular location on a

corridor suffers considerable congestion it acts as a bottleneck to long distance traffic. Where this is

eased it could be considered that the corridor route has become more efficient in handling long

distance traffic on the Core TEN-T network. There is no agreed definition for ‘length of road impacted.

For the purposes of this evaluation it is taken as the total distance of the road (M62 and M60)

between motorway to motorway junctions within which the ITS project has been implemented.

4.6.1.1 Deployment KPI and EU ITS Priority Areas – Conclusions

The key conclusions that can be drawn from the results of the M60 J8 - M62 J20 ITS enabled Smart

Motorway scheme on this section of the TEN-T Core network are as follows:

The EU Priority Area of Road Safety and Security applications offered to users has increased over

27 km of the Core network with a possible impact of 85km on the wider corridor network. This has

been achieved through implementation of incident detection and incident management systems,

automated speed detection systems, deployment of variable speed limits with spot speed

enforcement and weather information services. As this information is also published via Highways

England’s data portal it could be considered that the priority area has been addressed more widely.

The EU Priority Area of Optimal Use of Road Traffic and Travel Data has increased through provision

of forecast and real time event information via comprehensive on road VMS along 27km of

carriageway as well as being published nationally via Highways England’s traffic information portal

and (National) Access Point. Further use is being made of the data to implement hard shoulder

running and implement variable mandatory (enforceable) speed limits.

Finally, the EU Priority Area of Linking the Vehicle with the Transport Infrastructure, albeit via visual

presentation or via in car mobile related applications has increased through provision of Intelligent

Services of real -time traffic information services and road safety related traffic information services

deployed in accordance with Delegated Regulations under the ITS Directive. This increase is

measured as the total length of the scheme which is 27km, but the potential impact is 85km.

Publication of this data via the portal which is made available for use by third parties, widens services

in this priority area still further.

4.6.1.2 Deployment KPI’s and Research Questions – Results and Conclusions

It can be concluded that the two relevant research questions posed these being; a) what is the length

of road over which the ITS is deployed? and; b) what is length of the scheme over which the ITS

project is likely to have an impact?, can be answered.

In respect to the first question the conclusion is 27km. However the conclusion to the second

question is likely to be in the region of 85km if the definition of potential impact as described in this

document is used. This could be much more given the density of motorways in this area. But the



impact is likely to wider still, as traffic, travel and road status information is published via Highways

England’s traffic information portal – access point, so the data is nationally available. This can be

used for pre-trip and on-trip planning via a wide variety of channels.

4.6.2 Benefit KPI’s – Results

The following table includes measurements against each of the benefit KPI’s where this can be

derived either from the scheme or via data available from similar ITS enabled Smart motorway

projects.


Area Benefit

Description

Results*

Change in

Traffic Flow






system and service.

Network

efficiency and

congestion

(Benefit KPIs)

+10% - 20%

Change in Road

Traffic Journey

Time Variability






Network

efficiency and

congestion

(Benefit KPIs)

Variability

reduction of 20%

Change in

Bottleneck

Congestion

Congestion (Lost Vehicle Hours/

Time Saving).

Network

efficiency and

congestion

(Benefit KPIs)

Decrease in VLH

22% - 26%

Change in

Journey Time






Network

efficiency and

congestion

(Benefit KPIs)

4 - 8%

improvement

during peak time

Change in

Accident

Numbers and

Severity









accidents

Improve road

Safety (Benefit

KPIs)

Collision rate (all

severities)

-20%

Change in CO2

emissions Change in annual CO2 emissions


Improving

Environmental




Area Benefit

Description

Results*




ITS system.

impacts (Benefit

KPIs)

-4%

*Results. A degree of caution needs be taken with these results due to their provenance. They should

be considered as indicative of what it is reasonable to assume could be achieved following the

implementation of this project on this section of the M60 & M62. Once the 3 year study has been

undertaken, the results could be higher or lower than those given above. The figures presented are

derived from a selection of similar schemes where evaluation is at an early or more complete stage.

These evaluations have been undertaken in accordance with Highways England agreed

methodologies.

4.6.2.1 Benefit KPI and EU ITS Priority Areas – Results Discussion & Conclusions

The EU Priority Area of Network Efficiency and Congestion can be informed by the four KPI’s of

Change in Traffic Flow, Change in Road Traffic Journey Time Variability, Change in Bottleneck

Congestion and Change in Journey Time.

Highways England uses similar KPI’s and these have been used in the above table. Figures for each

of these measures show an improvement on the ‘Before’ situation. Real benefits have therefore been

achieved in each priority area.

The EU Priority Area of Improved Road Safety is an important measure and a challenge to quantify

in the short term. At least three years statistics are required and then there might be overlying

changes such as national increases in traffic volumes that will influence the statistics. Based on

experience, a reduction in the overall collision rate could be expected. But this could mask other

impacts which have been experienced elsewhere in similar schemes such as near absence of fatal

accidents, but an increase in serious accidents.

What has been proven beyond doubt is that the safety record of Smart motorway projects as well as

roads where variable mandatory speed limits have been installed have no worse safety record than

before installation of the scheme. This takes account of the overall increase in volume of traffic

experienced over the same stretch of the road where Smart Motorways have been implemented.

The EU Priority Area of Improving Environmental Impact is in this case measured by reductions in

CO2 emissions. Where a motorway achieves better laminar flow i.e. there is less variability of speed

between each lane, and the lanes are running smoothly, CO2 emissions can fall as less fuel is

consumed. However this can be offset by higher overall volumes of traffic and changes in traffic mix.

Other measurements which disregard other influences have shown that variable mandatory speed

limits can reduce CO by 4%, NOx by 5%, PM by 10% and fuel consumption by 4%, but HC can

increase by 3%.

In conclusion, the benefits achievable from deploying ITS enabled Smart Motorways has been high

enough for Highways England to embark on a wider programme of Smart Motorway deployment. In

the following section details are given of a BCR which has been achieved from an existing scheme

– note this does not include all benefit/cost measures. Further the expected BCR results of a series



of 15 Smart Motorway schemes which are currently, or are soon to be implemented are given. All

use EUEIP KPI’s as described above as inputs to the very positive KPI’s.

4.6.2.2 Benefit KPI’s and Research Questions – Results and Conclusions

A series of six research questions were posed as part of this study. These were:

a) What has been the change in traffic flow as a result of the project?

b) Has there been a change in journey time variability?

c) Has the level of congestion changed?

d) Has there been a change in journey time as a result of the scheme?

e) Has there been an impact on accident numbers or severity?

f) Has there been an environmental impact as a result of the scheme?

These questions can be answered and the results are given in the table above. However too fully

answer these questions, with a high degree of confidence in the results, a comprehensive project

evaluation exercise is required. This would include analysing data for at least three years before and

three years after project ‘go live’. Even then there may be factors outside the control of the project

that might have a significant impact. These can range from changes in economic activity, change in

traffic mix, legislation, and changes to standards and specification for infrastructure and vehicles.

This is why it is challenging to draw immediate and definitive conclusions. However using data from

a number of projects where evaluation is at a different stage, broad conclusions can be drawn. These

have been presented in the results table. In some instances this can be monetised for the purposes

of BCR calculations.

4.6.2.3 ITS Level of Service

The EUEIP has a classification of the ‘Level of (ITS) Service. This attempts to describe the level of

ITS systems and services which would normally be expected on traffic routes defined by their

Operating Environment.

At the outset of the project, the Level of Service provided on this section of the road was Level 3.

Following implementation the Level of Service increased to Level 4.



5 Cost Benefit Analysis Results

5.1 Example Smart Motorway Project

A cost benefit analysis was undertaken for a similar scheme approximately 1 year after completion.

The short time between project ‘go live’ and the analysis being undertaken meant that the safety

benefits could not be taken into account. Nevertheless an indication of the overall Benefit Cost Ratio

could be derived. This is presented below. The prices are discounted back to 2002.

Out turn £

Journey Time Benefits 204.5

Vehicle Operating Costs -2.4

TEE impacts during construction -

TEE impacts during maintenance -

Safety Benefits -

Journey Time Reliability 77.6

Noise -

Carbon -0.7

Total Present Value benefits (PVB) £341.8

Investment Costs (ITS and Infrastructure) 272.4

Future Maintenance Costs

Indirect Tax Revenue -5.1

Total Present Costs (PVC) £243.3m

Benefit Cost Ratio 1.4

This BCR is lower than expected and forecast prior to implementation of the project. This was mainly

attributable to the Journey Time benefits being £434m less than predicted. This was due to the

overall increase in flow of traffic following opening. This could be attributable to supressed demand

and an overall increase in traffic throughout the UK due to increasing economic activity.

BCR’s have been calculated for a number of ITS enabled Smart Motorway schemes in England

which are now in the construction or pre construction phase.

The table below summarises these schemes. The benefits and costs are presented in 2010,

discounted to 2010, and cover appraisal periods of 60 years from respective scheme opening dates.

The table only includes monetised benefits for which values are included in the UK’s DfT Appraisal

Guidance.



Scheme

Description

No. of

schemes

Total present

value

benefits

Total present

value costs

Net present

value

Benefit –

Cost ratio

Smart

Motorway

including full

suite of ITS

systems and

services

15

£16.3bn

£2.8bn

£13.4bn

5.7

For England, the Ministry classifies any investment as having very high Value for Money if the Benefit

to Cost Ratio (BCR) is greater than 4.0. On this basis Smart Motorway projects in the UK are very

good value for money, and as a consequence the Smart Motorway programme is being expanded.



6 Overall Assessment & Transferability of the Results (European Dimension)

6.1 Overall Assessment

The overall assessment for this project is that it has made a positive contribution to the reduction of

congestion on this section of the TEN-T network. Using the approach to evaluation stated in this

report, there are positive results for both deployment and benefit KPI’s. Furthermore, BCR’s for this

type of project are positive.

Whilst benefits are achievable for all KPI’s used, it must be recognised that data used is a snap shot,

and wider information is required to gain a full picture as to the full implications, benefits and

outcomes arising from deploying comprehensive ITS and implementing Smart Motorways.

The experience in the UK of these types of solutions for heavily trafficked and under capacity

sections of network is positive but the general increase in traffic volumes arising from increased

economic activity often mask results in the longer term.

A question that should be considered is what would be the situation should the project not have been

implemented. In all cases this has been judged as worse, with the roads almost certainly being

gridlocked with all the negative metrics and connotations from such a situation on a key corridor

route being prevalent.

6.2 Transferability of results (European Dimension)

The results from this project and similar ones are likely to be transferrable to other European nations.

The Netherlands and Germany have experienced similar benefits. A point that must be acknowledge

is that implementing a Smart Motorway means the route becomes ‘active’ rather than ‘passive’ in

the sense that a Traffic Management solution is being adapted in real time. Further that there is

considerable technology deployed to monitor and manage the route in a safe and coordinated way.

As such there is an increased commitment to maintenance and operation of the road. This needs to

be considered in any planning or future business case.

6.2.1 Relevance to ITS Priority Areas and Actions

This project is highly relevant to the ITS Priority Areas stated in Articles 2 and 3 of Directive

2010/40/EU.

The project has contributed to the following areas in particular:

I. Optimal use of road, traffic and travel data,

II. Continuity of traffic and freight management ITS services,

III. ITS road safety and security applications,

IV. Linking the vehicle with the transport infrastructure.

(b) the provision of EU-wide real-time traffic information services;

(c) data and procedures for the provision, where possible, of road safety related minimum

universal traffic information free of charge to users;



Annex 1 Operating Environments for ITS applications

The following table provides a summary of the relevant operating environments

(source: ITS Deployment Guideline “EasyWay Operating Environments”).

Definition of Operating Environment Evaluation

Relevant

Indicator

[tick as

appropriate]

C1 critical spots, local flow related traffic impact and/or potential safety concerns

T1 motorway (link), no flow related traffic impact and no major safety concerns

T2 motorway (link), no flow related traffic impact, potential safety concerns

T3 motorway (link), seasonal or daily flow related traffic impact, no major safety

concerns

T4 motorway (link), seasonal or daily flow related traffic impact, potential safety

concerns �

R1 two lane road (link), no flow related traffic impact, no major safety concerns

R2 two lane road (link), no flow related traffic impact, potential safety concerns

R3 two lane road (link), seasonal or daily flow related traffic impact, no major

safety concerns

R4 two lane road (link), seasonal or daily flow related traffic impact, potential

safety concerns

R5 three/four lane road (link), no flow related traffic impact, no major safety

concerns

R6 three/four lane road (link), no flow related traffic impact, potential safety

concerns

R7 three/four lane road (link), seasonal or daily flow related traffic impact, no

major safety concerns

R8 three/four lane road (link), seasonal or daily flow related traffic impact,

potential safety concerns

S1 motorway corridor or network, at most seasonal flow related impact, possibly

safety concerns

S2 motorway corridor or network, daily flow related traffic impact, possibly safety

concerns �

N1 road corridor or network, at most seasonal flow related traffic impact, possibly

safety concerns



N2 road corridor or network, daily flow related traffic impact, possibly safety

concerns

P1 peri urban motorway or road interfacing urban environment, possibly safety

concerns �



Annex 2 ITS Priority/Benefit Codes

The table below provides a summary of the ITS Priority Areas or Benefit Categories which are

relevant to the EU/EIP’s ITS KPI definitions and this evaluation. These codes, as one can see by

referring to the EU/EIP ITS Deployment and Benefit KPIs definitions Technical Reference v10.0, 08

February 2017, are used to categorise both Deployment and Benefit KPIs.

ITS

priority/

Benefit

Code

ITS Priority/Benefit Code brief description

Evaluation

Relevant

Indicator [tick

as

appropriate]

O Optimal use of road traffic and travel data (Deployment KPIs –

comprehensiveness of offering of ITS data to users) �

C Continuity of traffic and freight management ITS Services

(Deployment KPIs – seamless ITS Services to Private/Public

Transport/Freight users)

R Road safety and security applications (Deployment KPIs –

comprehensiveness of offering of ITS equipment to users) �

L Linking the vehicle with the transport infrastructure (Deployment

KPIs – comprehensiveness of offering of ITS equipment to users) �

N Network efficiency and congestion (Benefit KPIs) �

E Improving Environmental impacts (Benefit KPIs) �

S Improve road Safety (Benefit KPIs) �

I Enhance modal Integration (Benefit KPIs)



Annex 3 Deployment KPIs description summary table

The table below provides a short description of the project’s Deployment KPIs, some of which may

be subject to evaluation in this document. The table below also provides summary of the

classification of the Deployment KPIs against the identified Priority Areas described in Annex 2 and

referred in Chapter 2.1 of this report. Please note that the KPIs listed below are described in greater

detail within the EU/EIP ITS Deployment and Benefit KPIs definitions Technical Reference v10.0, 08

February 2017.

Deployment

KPI Short

Name

Deployment KPI Long Name

ITS

Priorit

y Area/

Benefit

Catego

ry

Code

EU EIP CODE

Evaluation

Relevant

Indicator

[tick as

appropriate]

Incident

Detection

and Incident

Management

Length and % of road network (TEN-

T and/or National, as applicable)

covered or impacted by incident

detection and incident management.

R EUEIP-DKPI-

R1 �

Automated

Speed

Detection



covered or impacted by automated

speed detection.

R EUEIP-DKPI-

R2

�

Dynamic

Public

Transport

Traveller

Information

Number and % of urban, inter-urban

and/or rural public transport stops for

which dynamic Traveller information

is made available to the public. Stops

include those provided with dynamic

Traveller information in the form of

both physical infrastructure (variable

message signs) and virtual

infrastructure (apps and/or other

means). Report separately by public

transport mode where possible.

O EUEIP-DKPI-

O1

Traffic

Condition

and Travel

Time

Information

Service (TIS

DG03_05)




websites/over-the-air Services

offering traffic and travel information. O EUEIP-DKPI-

O2

�

Report separately:

1) Travel information

2) Traffic information



3) Integrated traffic and travel

information

4) Freight specific information

5) Traffic management plan(s)

incl. cross border TMP

6) Traffic management and

control measures / equipment

7) Infrastructure or equipment

on the network to enable

Cooperative-ITS

8) Intelligent safety Services for

disabled and vulnerable road

users

Adaptive

Traffic

Control or

Prioritisation

Number and % of signal controlled

road intersections using adaptive

traffic control or prioritisation on the

TEN-T and/or National road

networks, as applicable.

C EUEIP-DKPI-

C1

Intelligent

Vehicles

Number and % of new vehicles

including the following intelligent

vehicle features (if and when data

becomes available). Report

separately for each country:

L EUEIP-DKPI-L1

1) safety readiness

2) automated operation

3) cooperative systems

4) Public (112) systems

5) Private eCall systems

In the case of 112 eCalls, measure

also the number of annual eCalls and

the % eCalls over the total number of

emergency calls for the same period.

Report separately by vehicle types

where possible, see breakdown by

vehicle classification section.

Intelligent

Services in

accordance

to Delegated

Regulations

under the

ITS Directive

Provision of intelligent Services on

the TENT-T core and comprehensive

networks that are compliant with the

Delegated Regulations of the ITS

Directive:

L EUEIP-DKPI-L2

1) Length and % of TEN-T

network and % of transport

�



nodes covered by real-time

traffic information Services

that are compliant with the

requirements of Delegated

Regulation 962/2015


network covered by road

safety related traffic


available free of charge to

users that are compliant with

the requirements of

Delegated Regulation

886/2013

�


network and number and % of

freight nodes covered by

information Services for safe

and secure parking places for

trucks and commercial

vehicles that are compliant

with the requirements of

Delegated Regulation

885/2013.

4) Provision of EU-Wide

multimodal Travel Information

Services (to be advised,

pending publication of

Delegated Act xx/2017)

Speed Limit

Information



covered or impacted by Speed limit

information, including: R EUEIP-DKPI-

R3

1) In-vehicle systems.

Variable

Speed

Limits



covered or impacted by Variable

Speed Limits, including:

R EUEIP-DKPI-

R4

1) Variable Message Signs; �

2) Spot Speed Enforcement

(SE) Cameras; and

�

3) Average Speed Enforcement

(SE) Cameras



Forecast

and Real

Time Event

Information



covered or impacted by Forecast

(pre-trip) and Real Time (on-trip)

Event Information about both

expected and unexpected abnormal

events (situations) faced by road

users

O EUEIP-DKPI-

O3

�

Weather

Information

Service



covered or impacted by Forecast

(pre-trip) and Real Time (on-trip)

Weather Information Service

R EUEIP-DKPI-

R5

�

Co-Modal

Traveller

Information



covered or impacted by Co-Modal

Traveller Information; i.e. offering

parallel information for more than one

mode/means of transport. Inter-

modal Services offer in addition the

combination of several

modes/means of transport within one

route.

I EUEIP-DKPI-I1

Dynamic

Lane

Management



covered or impacted by Dynamic

Lane Management

O EUEIP-DKPI-

O4

Hard

Shoulder

Running




Shoulder Running

O EUEIP-DKPI-

O5

�

HGV

Overtaking

Ban




HGV Overtaking Ban

R EUEIP-DKPI-

R6

Traffic

Management

Plan Service

for Corridors

and

Networks



covered or impacted by Traffic

Management Plan Service for

Corridors and Networks

O EUEIP-DKPI-

O6



Dynamic

Information

on

Intelligent

Truck

Parking




information on Intelligent truck

parking (for ITS Parking Guidance

Systems). Number and % of rest

areas on the road network (TEN-T

and/or National, as applicable)

covered or impacted by Intelligent

Truck Parking and Secure Truck

Parking (for ITS reservation

systems). As an alternative use to

truck parking lots.

R EUEIP-DKPI-

R7

Ramp

Metering

Number and % of access points on

the road network (TEN-T and/or

National, as applicable) equipped

with Ramp Metering

O EUEIP-DKPI-

O7

DATEX II

Data

Exchange

Services

Traffic Centres / Data Exchange /

Traffic Control and Information

Centres KPIs:

C EUEIP-DKPI-

C2

1) Provision of data exchange

Services via DATEX II at

traffic centres (No. and % of

traffic centres equipped with

minimum level of service)


network covered by traffic

centre data exchange

Services via DATEX II

3) Number of: DATEX II

links/content access

points/connected nodes to

access points/nodes at TCC

Cooperative-

ITS Services

and

Applications

(road KPI)

Length and % of TEN-T and/or

National road network (in km)

covered by C-ITS Services or

applications. PLEASE ALSO refer to

DGMOVE KPI in Appendix B.

L EUEIP-DKPI-L2



Annex 4 Benefit KPIs description summary table

The table below provides a short description of the project’s Benefit KPIs, some of which may be

subject to evaluation in this document. Please note that the KPIs listed below are described in greater

detail within the EU/EIP ITS Deployment and Benefit KPIs definitions Technical Reference v10.0, 08

February 2017.

Benefit KPI

Short

Name

Benefit KPI Long Name EU/EIP

Code

Evaluation

Relevant

Indicator

[tick as

appropriate]

Change in

Traffic

Flow

Change in traffic flow (e.g. vehicles per hour/day at

spot location), measured at specific locations of the

road network (TEN-T and/or National) affected by the

implementation of the relevant ITS system. Estimates

to cover instances where changes in traffic flows are

also linked to wider re-routeing effects. Estimates to

refer to any evaluator’s specified timeframe (e.g. the

morning peak from 06:00 until 09:59 hrs, inter-peak

10.00 until 16.00, 24hr period, etc). The change in

traffic flows can easily be derived from the measured

spot/network traffic flows if the selected timeframes are

defined consistently. Report separately by vehicle type

where possible and provide clear descriptions of

adopted vehicle classifications.

EUEIP-

BKPI-N1

Change in

Road

Traffic

Journey

Time

Variability

Change in journey time variability as measured

coefficient of variation (standard deviation of the

measured travel times for a certain route or a part of a

route). Change in coefficient of variation measured

along the road network (TEN-T and/or National)

affected by the implementation of the relevant ITS

system. Estimates to refer to any evaluator’s specified

timeframe (e.g. the morning peak from 06:00 until

09:59 hrs, inter-peak 10.00 until 16.00, 24hr period,

etc). The change in journey time coefficient of variation

can easily be derived if the selected timeframes are

defined consistently. Report separately by vehicle type

where possible and provide clear descriptions of

adopted vehicle classifications.

For a longer period (e.g. a few weeks or a month) the

journey times should be put into one set and then the

standard deviation should be taken.

EUEIP-

BKPI-N2

Change in

Bottleneck

Congestion

Congestion (LOST VEHICLE HOURS / TIME

SAVING): Total delay or vehicle hours lost expressed

as the difference between the total time spent and a

weighted (with the flow) reference (free-flow) journey

EUEIP-

BKPI-N3



time. Estimates can refer to any evaluator’s specified

timeframe (e.g. the morning peak from 06:00 until

09:59 hrs, inter-peak 10.00 until 16.00, 24hr period,

etc) and a specified time period (e.g. working days,

excluding holidays).

Change in

Journey

Time

JOURNEY TIME: Journey time is the indicator to

determine the impact of a measure on the road users.

It is measured along the road network (TEN-T and/or

National Road networks) affected by the

implementation of the ITS system. Estimates to refer to

any evaluator’s specified timeframe (e.g. the morning

peak from 06:00 until 09:59 hrs, inter-peak 10.00 until

16.00, 24hr period, etc). The change in journey times

can easily be derived from the measured journey times

if the selected timeframes are defined consistently.

EUEIP-

BKPI-N4

Change in

Demand

for Travel

Difference in Vehicle-km driven: The distance travelled

or vehicle kilometres driven is a network indicator and

is defined as the product of the length of a road section

and the flow on that road section. Change in vehicle-

km travelled measured along the road network (TEN-T

and/or National) affected by the implementation of the

relevant ITS system. Estimates to refer to any

evaluator’s specified timeframe (e.g. the morning peak

from 06:00 until 09:59 hrs, inter-peak 10.00 until 16.00,

24hr period, etc). The change in vehicle-km travelled

can easily be derived if the selected timeframes are

defined consistently. The summation of all or a part of

the road sections gives the total distance travelled in

the network or study area.

EUEIP-

BKPI-N5

Change in

Mode

Share

Change in mode share (% mode share points) on

corridors where ITS has been implemented. Report

percentage mode share separately for each mode, see

breakdown by vehicle classification section.

EUEIP-

BKPI-I1

Change in

Accident

Numbers

and

Severity

Absolute and % change in number of reported

accidents of all severities as well as accident rates (i.e.

accidents per vehicle-km travelled) measured along

the road network (TEN-T and/or National) affected by

the implementation of the relevant ITS system.

Absolute number of accidents Estimates to refer to any



24hr period, etc). The change in accident and accident

rates can easily be derived if the selected timeframes

are defined consistently. Report separately by vehicle

type and severity where possible and provide clear

descriptions of adopted accident classification

EUEIP-

BKPI-S1



assumptions. Report separately by accident severity

where possible.

Change in

CO2

emissions

Change in annual CO2 emissions (Tons) (absolute and

% difference) measured along the road network (TEN-

T and/or National) affected by the implementation of

the relevant ITS system. Estimates to refer to any



24hr period, etc). The change CO2 emissions can

easily be derived if the selected timeframes are defined

consistently. Report separately by vehicle type where

possible and provide clear descriptions of adopted

vehicle classification and emission rate assumptions.

EUEIP-

BKPI-E1

Public

eCall

Timeliness

Total time taken between: accident occurrence to

initiation of public (112) eCall to the presentation of the

content of MSD in an intelligible way at the operator's

desk in the Public Safety Answering Point.

The aim of eCall is to shorten the time between the

accident and the dial of the call – not the length of the

EUEIP-

BKPI-S2

Documents

Arc Atlantique ITS Corridor Evaluation Report