Traffic Control Strategies at Toll Plazas - International Bridge, Tunnel ...

Facilities Management Workshop 

May 14-18, 2005 • Toronto, Ontario 

Traffic Control Strategies 

at Toll Plazas 

FHWA Study Update 

by 

Richard Smith – WSA 

Philip Miller – PBS&J



Study Team 

• Manager: Linda Brown (FHWA Office of 

Traffic Operations), 

• Steering: Kerry Ferrier (Ohio Turnpike), 

Neil Gray (IBTTA), 

• First round reviewers: Roxane Mukai 

(Maryland Transportation Authority), Pete 

Gustafson (New York Thruway) & Susan 

Chrysler (TTI), 

• Consultants: Battelle Institute, 

Wilbur Smith Associates (Study Lead), 

PBS&J, and Terry Geohegan. 

Slide 2



Presentation Outline 

• Study Objectives, 

• Purpose and Need, 

• Study Approach, 

• Some Key Findings, 

• What Happens Next. 

Slide 3



Study Objectives 

• A consistent plaza traffic strategy, 

• Enhanced plaza safety and operations, 

• Improve plaza efficiency, 

• Improve driver recognition and reaction. 

Slide 4

• Identify and define current practices, 

• Develop guidelines based on multiple 

sources of information, 

• Strive to achieve consensus (amongst toll 

agencies) by soliciting comments to draft 

report, 

• Prepare Best Practices Report that 

identifies the state of the practice and 

presents guidelines for selecting and 

installing traffic control devices. 

Slide 5 



Purpose and Need



Purpose and Need (Cont.) 

• No uniform standards or guidelines. 

Individual agencies employ their own 

designs to meet individual needs, 

• Introduction of ETC dedicated and express 

lanes adds complexity by increasing 

payment options and speed variation, 

• Higher-speed traffic diverging at express 

lane gore, and then merging and weaving 

before entering a toll lane and merging after 

exiting the toll lane. 

Slide 6



Study Approach 

1. Literature Search on Toll Plaza Design and 

Traffic Control Devices, 

2. Toll Agency Survey, 

3. Expert Panel Workshop to assess 

applicability of research and efficacy of 

survey data in initiating guideline 

development, 

4. Consensus Building to Develop a Best 

Practices Report. 

Slide 7



1. Literature Search 

• Sources of data included: 

– NCHRP Synthesis of Highway Practice # 

240: Toll Plaza Design (1997), 

– Plaza Design research in the Journal of 

Transportation Engineering, 

– Operations research printed in the ITE 

Journal, 

– Toll plaza design standards from several 

toll agencies. 

Slide 8

• 260 questions per facility type on plazas, 

lane assignments, signing, traffic control 

device placement, 

• Scripted questions using JAVA and hosted 

on Wilbur Smith Associates Web site 

requiring access authentication, 

• Agency survey response period was May – 

July 2004, 

• Initial responses came from 28 agencies (19 

highway, 10 bridge, one also operates 

tunnel crossings). Slide 9 



2. Toll Agency Survey



3. Expert Panel Workshop 

• Held in Illinois in August 2004, 

• In addition to project team, attended 

by: 

– Sam Wolfe (Indiana Toll Road), 

Mike Davis (Florida’s Turnpike), 

– Consultants David MacDonald, Greg 

LeFrois, Glenn Havinoviski, Raghu 

Kowshik, George Scheuring. 

Slide 10



4. Best Practices Report 

• Synthesis of input from earlier activities, 

• First draft in December 2004, 

• First review comments by selected FHWA 

panel were received and addressed in 

second draft, 

• Second draft to be distributed for review 

comments by toll agencies and others in 

May 2005, 

• Agency review comments reconciled and 

addressed with final report issued in 

August 2005. 

Slide 11



Key Findings: Plaza/Lane Configurations 

• ETC Dedicated Lanes: 

– 92% of respondents have ETC dedicated lanes, 

– 83% of respondents have multiple ETC dedicated 

lanes, 

– 46% of respondents with ETC dedicated lanes in 

opposing direction of traffic, separate that traffic with 

concrete barrier, 

– 13% of respondents with multiple ETC dedicated 

lanes restrict those lanes to cars, 

– ETC dedicated lane posted speeds range from 5 

mph to 45 mph (8 to 70 kph). 

Slide 12





Slide 13





– Dedicated lane location must consider many 

factors that vary based on plaza type and location 

– in this picture, in an interchange area. 

Slide 14




• ETC Express Lanes: 

– 91% of agencies responding to questions about 

express lanes have ETC express lanes (39% of all 

respondents to any questions), 

– Of respondents with express lanes, 91% locate their 

express lanes to the left, 

– All express lane operators allow all classes of 

vehicles to use express lanes – with one exception. 

– Express lanes are typically posted at speeds greater 

than or equal to 55 mph (90 kph). 

Slide 15





Slide 16





Slide 17

• Greater use of lane type (i.e., manual, 

automatic, ETC dedicated) clustering, 

• Use of branch / satellite plazas is 

decreasing (only 7% of respondents), but 

• 41% of respondents use reversible lanes, 

– Needed for constrained plazas, such as those on 

ticket system interchanges, 

– Facilities with reversible roadways, 

– Insufficient ETC market penetration resulting in 

need for more cash lanes during peak traffic 

periods. Slide 18 



Key Findings: Plaza/Lane Configurations



Key Findings: Approach Signing 

• Needed for plazas with separated express lanes, 

• Desirable for plazas with ETC dedicated lanes, 

• Currently not addressed in MUTCD, 

• Existing types, colors and legends vary 

substantially from agency to agency, 

• Most agencies attempt to differentiate between 

express lanes and conventional plaza lanes, 

• Report guideline recommends an approach signing 

sequence similar to that for an interchange. 

Slide 19



Key Findings: Approach Signing 

Slide 20



Key Findings: Toll Lane Signing 

• 87% of responding agencies use canopy signing 

for identifying ETC dedicated lanes, 

• 71% of responding roadway agencies use fixed 

panel signs, 43% of responding bridge agencies 

use fixed panel signs. Others are variable, 

• Changeable message signs are used by some 

agencies, ranging from full deployment above all 

plaza lanes to partial deployment above lanes 

supporting multiple forms of payment, 

• Flashing yellow beacon is most commonly used 

method for highlighting ETC dedicated lanes. 

Slide 21



Key Findings: Toll Lane Traffic Control 

• 42% of responding agencies use stop signs in 

attended or automatic coin lanes, 

• 4% of responding agencies use speed display 

signs to control traffic speeds through the toll lane, 

• Majority of agencies use an Island traffic signal to 

control travel through the toll lane and a patron toll 

display in attended lanes to display toll due, 

• 25% of responding roadway agencies use gates in 

ETC dedicated lanes. 

Slide 22



Key Findings: Geometrics 

• The average taper rate reported by the responding 

agencies is approximately 1:10 for both the 

approach and departure zones, 

• The average length of both the approach and 

departure zones reported by the toll agencies is 

approximately 500 feet, 

• For 91% of the responding agencies, the express 

lanes are a continuation of the mainline lanes. At 

least 64% of the responding agencies use concrete 

barrier on both sides of the express lanes, 

• The average lane width for manual, automatic and 

ETC dedicated lanes 11 feet and 12 feet for express 

lanes. 

Slide 23



Key Findings: Geometrics 

• The average width of a toll island 

supporting manual collection is 6.5 feet, and 

5.5 feet for a toll island supporting an 

automatic coin machine (ACM) or ATIM, 

• 52% of the responding agencies use a 

standard pole, mast arm and luminaire to 

light the plaza approach and departure 

zones. 

Slide 24



Key Findings: Equipment 

• ETC equipment is installed in all ACM & 

ATIM lanes for 55% of the the respondents, 

• 63% of the responding agencies purchased 

an ACM with an integral fare display, 

• In attended lanes, the average distance 

from the centerline of tollbooth to the island 

traffic signal is 15 feet. The average 

mounting height of the ITS is 4.5 feet and a 

8 inch diameter signal head is used by 69% 

of the responding agencies. 

Slide 25




• 58% of the responding agencies include a 

yellow/amber signal head with the ITS to 

display ETC account balance information, 

• 75% of the responding agencies use a PTD 

in their attended lanes and 50% use a PTD 

in their automatic lanes, 

• Although a wide distance range was 

reported, a distance of 4 feet from tollbooth 

centerline to PTD was selected the most. 

Slide 26




• A PTD size of 12”X 12” was the most commonly 

reported size. The average mounting height of the 

PTD above the island is approximately 4.5 feet. 

54% use LED and 38% use flip disk technology, 

• Approximately one-half of the responding agencies 

use barrier gates in both their automatic and 

attended lanes. 79% use loops to monitor gate 

closure that is supplemented by a photoelectric 

beam for 60% of the agencies, 

• VES cameras are used to capture violator license 

plates for 78% of the agencies in dedicated lanes 

and 83% of the agencies in express lanes. 

Slide 27



What Happens Next 

• Distribution of Best Practices Report to Agencies 

and Others: May 2005 

• Agency review and comments returned: May – July 

2005 

• Team reconcile and address review comments: 

July – August 2005 

• Final Report preparation and distribution: August 

2005 

• Report Presentation to FHWA: August – September 

2005 

Slide 28



Thank You!

Traffic Control Strategies at Toll Plazas - International Bridge, Tunnel ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?