Next Generation Arterial Operations Program AC … 14...Next Generation Arterial Operations Program . AC Transit – South County Corridors Line 97 Project . Final Concept of Operations

Next Generation Arterial Operations Program AC Transit – South County Corridors Line 97 Project Final Concept of Operations

Project Sponsors:

Project Partners:

September 29, 2015

AC Transit MTC Next Generation Arterial Operations Program Page | i

Final Concept of Operations | Deliverable 4.3

DOCUMENT VERSION CONTROL

DOCUMENT NAME SUBMITTAL DATE VERSION NO.

Draft Concept of Operations (internal review release) 08/07/15 v1 Draft Concept of Operations (MTC release) 08/18/15 v2 Draft Concept of Operations (Stakeholders release) 08/19/15 v3 Final Concept of Operations (internal review release) 09/28/15 v4 Final Concept of Operations (Stakeholders release) 09/29/15 Final

AC Transit MTC Next Generation Arterial Operations Program Page | ii


TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 SCOPE ........................................................................................................... 1 Document Purpose and Scope................................................................................... 1 Project Purpose and Scope ........................................................................................ 1 Procurement .............................................................................................................. 2

2 REFERENCED DOCUMENTS ............................................................................ 6

3 USER-ORIENTED OPERATIONAL DESCRIPTION ............................................... 7 Existing Situation........................................................................................................ 7

3.1.1 Network Characteristics .......................................................................................... 7 3.1.2 Traffic Characteristics ............................................................................................. 9 3.1.3 Signal Grouping .....................................................................................................13 3.1.4 Land Use Characteristics .......................................................................................15 3.1.5 Existing System Architecture .................................................................................15

Limitations of the Existing System .............................................................................17 Proposed Improvements to the Existing System .......................................................18 Vision, Goals and Objectives for the Proposed System .............................................18 Strategies Applied by the Improved System ..............................................................19 Alternative Non-Adaptive Strategies Considered .......................................................19

4 OPERATIONAL NEEDS .................................................................................. 20 Adaptive Strategies ...................................................................................................20 Network Characteristics ............................................................................................20 Coordination across Jurisdictional Boundaries ..........................................................21 Security .....................................................................................................................21 Queuing Interactions .................................................................................................21 Pedestrians ...............................................................................................................21 Non-Adaptive Situations ............................................................................................22 System Responsiveness ...........................................................................................22 Complex Coordination and Controller Features .........................................................22

Monitoring and Control ..............................................................................................23 Performance Reporting .............................................................................................23 Failure Notification ....................................................................................................24 Preemption and Priority .............................................................................................24 Failure and Fallback Modes ......................................................................................24 Constraints ................................................................................................................25 Training and Support .................................................................................................25 External Interfaces ....................................................................................................26 Maintenance .............................................................................................................26

5 ENVISIONED ADAPTIVE SYSTEM OVERVIEW ................................................ 27 Adaptive System Architecture ...................................................................................27 Size and Grouping ....................................................................................................27 Operational Objective ................................................................................................28 Fallback Operation ....................................................................................................29

AC Transit MTC Next Generation Arterial Operations Program Page | iii


Crossing Routes and Adjacent Systems ...................................................................29 Operator Access .......................................................................................................29 Complex Coordination and Controller Operation .......................................................30 Organizations Involved ..............................................................................................30

6 ADAPTIVE OPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENT ................................................... 31

7 ADAPTIVE SUPPORT ENVIRONMENT ........................................................... 32

8 OPERATIONAL SCENARIOS .......................................................................... 34 Overview ...................................................................................................................34 Peak Period Operation ..............................................................................................34 Midday Operation ......................................................................................................34 Transit Signal Priority ................................................................................................35 Preemption................................................................................................................35 Fault Conditions ........................................................................................................36

TABLES

Table 1: Project Intersections .................................................................................................... 3 Table 2: Signalized Intersection Spacing ................................................................................... 8 Table 3: Hesperian Boulevard | Existing Travel Speed (mph) ................................................... 9 Table 4: Existing Signal Coordination .......................................................................................14 Table 5: Existing Signal Infrastructure ......................................................................................17

FIGURES

Figure 1: Project Area and Intersections .................................................................................... 5 Figure 2: Hesperian Boulevard Traffic Characteristics (North Section) .....................................10 Figure 3: Hesperian Boulevard Traffic Characteristics (Mid Section) ........................................11 Figure 4: Hesperian Boulevard Traffic Characteristics (South Section) ....................................12 Figure 5: Adaptive System Configuration .................................................................................27

AC Transit MTC Next Generation Arterial Operations Program Page | 1


1 SCOPE

Document Purpose and Scope As part of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s (MTC) Transit Performance Initiative (TPI)/Next Generation Arterial Operations Program (NextGen AOP), AC Transit’s South County Corridors Line 97 Project was selected as one of four program-sponsored projects to implement advanced technologies to better manage and operate arterial roadways. The project was developed in coordination with the cities of Hayward, San Leandro, and Union City, the County of Alameda, and Caltrans. The scope of the overall project includes the deployment of transit signal priority (TSP) along the entire corridor of the Line 97 route, from the Bayfair BART station to the Union City BART station, and the deployment of adaptive signal control technology (ASCT) along the Hesperian Boulevard portion of the route from the Bayfair BART station to the Hayward-Union City border. The scope of this document covers the Hesperian Boulevard portion of the project where adaptive signal control technology (ASCT) is being considered. This document describes and provides a rationale for the expected operations of the proposed adaptive system. It documents the outcome of stakeholder discussions and consensus building that has been undertaken to ensure that the system that is implemented is operationally feasible and has the support of stakeholders. The intended audience of this document includes: system operators, administrators, decision-makers, nontechnical readers and other stakeholders who will share the operation of the system or be affected by it.

Project Purpose and Scope The project corridor, along AC Transit’s Line 97 route, is 13 miles long and is made up of arterial segments on Hesperian Boulevard, Union City Boulevard, Alvarado Boulevard, Dyer Street, Alvarado Niles Road, and Decoto Road, and includes 61 signalized intersections as listed in Table 1 and shown in Figure 1. Transit Signal Priority (TSP) technology will be deployed at all 61 signalized intersections along the Line 97 route running from the Bayfair BART station to the Union City BART station. The project will also deploy adaptive signal control technology (ASCT) on the Hesperian Boulevard portion of the route consisting of 34 signalized intersections from San Leandro to Hayward. The proposed project will improve transit operations and overall transit customer experience as travel time and schedule reliability improves, by way of reducing traffic congestion and improving intersection operations. The project’s improvement to traffic signal operations will also result in reducing fuel consumption and vehicle emissions. Upgrading the corridor infrastructure will produce cascading benefits that include ridership growth, that results in a reduction in auto trips and improve air quality. These benefits and goals are consistent with AC Transit’s strategy to maximize operational benefit and efficiency and achieve MTC’s Transit Sustainability Project performance metrics. The TPI/NextGen AOP seeks to deploy and evaluate next generation arterial management solutions to improve user travel experience by reducing travel time and enhancing travel time reliability for transit vehicles and automobiles while improving safety for transit users, motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists. The TPI/NextGen AOP Project includes elements of FHWA-eligible Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) improvement activities, such as:



• Traffic monitoring and management, • Improving traffic flow, • Improving transportation systems management and operations, • Mitigating congestion and improving air quality, • Implementing Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), • Real-time traffic, transit and multi-modal traveler information, • Increasing vehicle occupancy rates, and • Increasing transit investments.

Currently, buses serving the Line 97 route require approximately 134 minutes to complete a round trip. Through this project, a 15 percent reduction in travel time is anticipated resulting in Line 97 buses completing round trips in 114 minutes, or a reduction of 20 minutes of running time per round trip. The expected time savings would reduce the operation requirement of Line 97 from eight buses to seven buses on weekdays and from five buses to four buses on weekends, a significant cost savings to transit operations. The project corridor collectively carries a large number of auto trips, including transit service. The Hesperian Boulevard corridor carries more than 30,000 vehicles per day and 8,650 transit passengers per day. There are three at-grade railroad crossings, serving Capitol Corridor and freight trains along the project corridor. In addition to Line 97, the project corridor is served by Lines 22, 75, 85, 93, Transbay Lines, S, and all nine Union City Transit routes.

Procurement The adaptive system will be procured using a combination of best value procurement for software, equipment, and integration services, and a low-bid procurement for construction services. A Request for Proposal (RFP) will be issued to all potential adaptive system vendors. Proposals received will be reviewed to develop a short list of acceptable systems. An interview and/or system demonstration will be conducted with the short-listed adaptive vendors to determine the final system that provides the best value and meets user needs. Field elements to support both adaptive and TSP systems (i.e., detection, communications, installation of equipment in cabinet, etc.) will be procured using a low-bid public works contract process based on detailed plans and specifications. The TSP system will be procured under a sole-source contract by AC Transit. MTC will lead the adaptive system procurement through the RFP process and AC Transit will lead the procurement of the field elements through the low-bid public works contract process. AC Transit will also lead the procurement of a design consultant and construction management consultant.



TABLE 1: PROJECT INTERSECTIONS

INT. NO AGENCY INTERSECTION PROPOSED SYSTEM

1 City of San Leandro Hesperian Blvd. at Thornally Dr. ASCT & TSP 2 City of San Leandro Hesperian Blvd. at Drew St. ASCT & TSP 3 City of San Leandro Hesperian Blvd. at Springlake Dr. ASCT & TSP 4 County of Alameda/Caltrans1 Hesperian Blvd. at College St./I-238 on-ramp ASCT & TSP 5 County of Alameda Hesperian Blvd. at Sycamore St. ASCT & TSP 6 County of Alameda Hesperian Blvd. at Lewelling Blvd. ASCT & TSP 7 Caltrans2 Hesperian Blvd. at I-880 NB off-ramp ASCT & TSP 8 County of Alameda/Caltrans1 Hesperian Blvd. at Grant Ave./I-880 SB off-ramp ASCT & TSP 9 County of Alameda Hesperian Blvd. at Post Office Rd. ASCT & TSP

10 County of Alameda Hesperian Blvd. at Paseo Grande ASCT & TSP 11 County of Alameda Hesperian Blvd. at Via Mercado ASCT & TSP 12 County of Alameda Hesperian Blvd. at Hacienda Ave. ASCT & TSP 13 County of Alameda Hesperian Blvd. at Bockman Rd. ASCT & TSP 14 County of Alameda Hesperian Blvd. at Bartlett Ave. ASCT & TSP 15 County of Alameda Hesperian Blvd. at Golf Course Rd. ASCT & TSP 16 City of Hayward Hesperian Blvd. at W A St. ASCT & TSP 17 City of Hayward Hesperian Blvd. at Sueirro St. ASCT & TSP 18 City of Hayward Hesperian Blvd. at Skywest/Longwood Ave. ASCT & TSP 19 City of Hayward Hesperian Blvd. at W Winton Ave. ASCT & TSP 20 City of Hayward Hesperian Blvd. at Middle Ln./Southland Dr. ASCT & TSP 21 City of Hayward Hesperian Blvd. at West St./La Playa Dr. ASCT & TSP 22 City of Hayward Hesperian Blvd. at Turner Ct. ASCT & TSP 23 City of Hayward Hesperian Blvd. at Chabot College ASCT & TSP 24 City of Hayward Hesperian Blvd. at Depot Rd/Cathy Way ASCT & TSP 25 Caltrans2 Hesperian Blvd. at SR 92 WB on/off-ramps ASCT & TSP 26 Caltrans2 Hesperian Blvd. at SR 92 EB on/off-ramps ASCT & TSP 27 City of Hayward Hesperian Blvd. at Sleepy Hollow Ave. ASCT & TSP 28 City of Hayward Hesperian Blvd. at Aldengate Way ASCT & TSP 29 City of Hayward Hesperian Blvd. at W Tennyson Rd. ASCT & TSP 30 City of Hayward Hesperian Blvd. at Arf Ave./Panama St. ASCT & TSP 31 City of Hayward Hesperian Blvd. at Industrial Pkwy. ASCT & TSP 32 City of Hayward Hesperian Blvd. at Eden Shores Blvd./Tripaldi Way ASCT & TSP 33 City of Hayward Hesperian Blvd. at Eden Park Pl. ASCT & TSP 34 City of Hayward Hesperian Blvd. at S Pepsi Dr. ASCT & TSP 35 City of Union City Union City Blvd. at Kohoutek Way TSP 36 City of Union City Union City Blvd. at Whipple Rd. TSP 37 City of Union City Union City Blvd. at Bettencourt Way TSP



INT. NO AGENCY INTERSECTION PROPOSED SYSTEM

38 City of Union City Union City Blvd. at Cambridge Way TSP 39 City of Union City Union City Blvd. at Horner St. TSP 40 City of Union City Union City Blvd. at Alvarado Blvd. TSP 41 City of Union City Alvarado Blvd. at Fredi St. TSP 42 City of Union City Alvarado Blvd. at New Haven St. TSP 43 City of Union City Alvarado Blvd. at Fair Ranch Rd. TSP 44 City of Union City Alvarado Blvd. at Dyer St. TSP 45 City of Union City Dyer St. at Santa Susana Way TSP 46 City of Union City Dyer St. at Smith St/Alvarado Niles Rd. TSP 47 City of Union City Alvarado Niles Rd. at Union Landing/Santa Maria Dr. TSP 48 Caltrans2 Alvarado Niles Rd. at I-880 SB Off-Ramp TSP 49 Caltrans2 Alvarado Niles Rd. at I-880 NB On-Ramp TSP 50 City of Union City Alvarado Niles Rd. at Almaden Blvd. TSP 51 City of Union City Alvarado Niles Rd. at Medallion Dr. TSP 52 City of Union City Alvarado Niles Rd. at Hop Ranch Rd. TSP 53 City of Union City Alvarado Niles Rd. at Dowe Ave. TSP 54 City of Union City Alvarado Niles Rd. at Central Ave. TSP 55 City of Union City Alvarado Niles Rd. at Western Ave. TSP 56 City of Union City Alvarado Niles Rd. at Hartnell St. TSP 57 City of Union City Alvarado Niles Rd. at H St./Royal Ann Dr. TSP 58 City of Union City Alvarado Niles Rd. at Nidus Ct./Meyers Dr. TSP 59 City of Union City Alvarado Niles Rd. at Decoto Rd. TSP 60 City of Union City Decoto Rd. at Union Square/Meyers Dr. TSP 61 City of Union City Decoto Rd. at Station Way TSP

1 Signal owned by Caltrans and County. Operated and maintained by Alameda County. 2 Signal owned, operated, and maintained by Caltrans.

ASCT = Adaptive Signal Control Technology TSP = Transit Signal Priority



FIGURE 1: PROJECT AREA AND INTERSECTIONS



2 REFERENCED DOCUMENTS The following documents have been used in the preparation of this Concept of Operations and stakeholder discussions. Some of these documents provide policy guidance for traffic signal operations in this area, some are standards with which the system must comply, while others report the conclusions of discussions, workshops and other research used to define the needs of the project and subsequently identify project requirements.

• “Systems Engineering Guidebook for ITS”, California Department of Transportation, Division of Research & Innovation, Version 3.0, November 2009.

• “Model Systems Engineering Documents for Adaptive Signal Control Technology (ASCT) Systems”, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, FHWA-HOP-11-027, August 2012.

• “Systems Engineering for Intelligent Transportation Systems, An Introduction for Transportation Professionals”, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, January 2007.

• “Systems Engineering Processes for Developing Traffic Signal Systems”, National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Synthesis 307, Transportation Research Board, 2003.

• “Adaptive Traffic Control Systems: Domestic and Foreign State of Practice”, National Cooperative Highway Research (NCHRP) Synthesis 403, Transportation Research Board, 2010.

• “Intelligent Transportation System Architecture and Standards; Final Rule, 23 CFR Parts 655 and 940”, Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Federal Register, Vol. 66, No. 5, Monday, January 8, 2001.

• “Bay Area ITS Architecture, 2011 Update”, Metropolitan Transportation Commission, April 23, 2012.



3 USER-ORIENTED OPERATIONAL DESCRIPTION This section describes the existing signal system infrastructure and operations along the Hesperian Boulevard portion of the project corridor, limitations of the existing system, and goals and objectives for the new ASCT system. While the overall project corridor is 13 miles long with 61 signalized intersections where ASCT and TSP will be deployed, ASCT will not be deployed at the 27 signalized intersections along the corridor within Union City. Thus, the focus of this document will be along the 6.6 mile segment portion of Hesperian Boulevard where ASCT and TSP will be deployed at 34 signalized intersections.

Existing Situation

3.1.1 Network Characteristics Hesperian Boulevard is a major north-south arterial in southern Alameda County that spans from the City of San Leandro to the City of Hayward. This corridor is a 6.6 mile long segment with 34 traffic signals where adaptive control is being considered and is shown in Figure 1 and Table 1. Hesperian Boulevard is a multi-lane divided arterial with primarily 6-lane cross sections with raised medians. A short segment of the corridor within the City of San Leandro has bike lanes as well as a short segment in northbound direction between Eden Park and Pepsi in the City of Hayward. There are also a few short segments of the project corridor (at the SR-92 interchange, between Tahoe Ave. and Industrial, and between Eden Park and Pepsi) where the cross sections vary between 5-lanes and 4-lanes. There are three freeway interchanges along the project corridor at SR-238, I-880, and SR-92. There is also an active highway-railroad at-grade crossing on Hesperian Boulevard located approximately 115 feet north of the Springlake Drive intersection in San Leandro. The corridor has varying spacing between traffic signals that range from 390 feet to 2940 feet apart as shown in Table 2. As summarized in Table 1, of the 34 traffic signals along the Hesperian Boulevard corridor: 1) three signals are owned, operated, and maintained by the City of San Leandro, 2) nine signals are owned, operated, and maintained by Alameda County, 3) 17 signals are owned, operated, and maintained by the City of Hayward, 4) three signals are owned, operated, and maintained by Caltrans, and 5) two signals designated as Alameda County/Caltrans are owned by Caltrans but operated and maintained by Alameda County.



TABLE 2: SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SPACING Int. No Agency Intersection Distance to Next

1 San Leandro Hesperian/Thornally 0’ 2 San Leandro Hesperian/Drew 1165’ 3 San Leandro Hesperian/Springlake 620’ 4 Alameda County/Caltrans Hesperian/College/I-238 EB ramp 935’ 5 Alameda County Hesperian/Sycamore 390’ 6 Alameda County Hesperian/Lewelling 730’ 7 Caltrans Hesperian/I-880 NB off-ramp 410’ 8 Alameda County/Caltrans Hesperian/Grant/I-880 SB on-ramp 1060’ 9 Alameda County Hesperian/Post Office 615’

10 Alameda County Hesperian/Paseo Grande 800’ 11 Alameda County Hesperian/Via Mercado 395’ 12 Alameda County Hesperian/Hacienda 1710’ 13 Alameda County Hesperian/Bockman 1125’ 14 Alameda County Hesperian/Bartlett 1105’ 15 Alameda County Hesperian/Golf Course 390’ 16 Hayward Hesperian/W. A St. 900’ 17 Hayward Hesperian/Sueirro 1335’ 18 Hayward Hesperian/Skywest/Longwood 1610’ 19 Hayward Hesperian/Winton 2130’ 20 Hayward Hesperian/Southland 1020’ 21 Hayward Hesperian/West/La Playa 1160’ 22 Hayward Hesperian/Turner 1140’ 23 Hayward Hesperian/Chabot 1620’ 24 Hayward Hesperian/Depot/Cathy 555’ 25 Caltrans Hesperian/SR-92 WB ramp 925’ 26 Caltrans Hesperian/SR-92 EB ramp 590’ 27 Hayward Hesperian/Sleepy Hollow 490’ 28 Hayward Hesperian/Aldengate 610’ 29 Hayward Hesperian/Tennyson 860’ 30 Hayward Hesperian/Arf/Panama 2580’ 31 Hayward Hesperian/Industrial 2940’ 32 Hayward Hesperian/Eden Shores/Tripaldi 1220’ 33 Hayward Hesperian/Eden Park 725’ 34 Hayward Hesperian/Pepsi 820’

Total Corridor Length: 34,680’ (6.6 miles) The posted speed limit along the Hesperian Boulevard corridor varies between 35 to 40 mph. Along the northern portion within the City of San Leandro, the posted speed limit is 40 mph. The posted limit decreases to 35 mph for the remainder of the corridor within unincorporated Alameda County and the City of Hayward. Average travel speed along the corridor varies by direction and time of day based on the



peak travel direction. Floating car travel time studies were conducted along the corridor in 2014 as part of the Alameda County Congestion Monitoring Program with the results summarized in Table 3.

TABLE 3: HESPERIAN BOULEVARD | EXISTING TRAVEL SPEED (MPH)

Jurisdiction Segment Limits AM PM NB SB NB SB

San Leandro Fairmont to Springlake 18.9 18.2 16.3 19.1 Alameda County Springlake to Lewelling 20.6 21.8 17.1 12.4 Alameda County Lewelling to Grant 26.4 12.9 10.2 11.3 Alameda County Grant to Hacienda 22.3 20.5 20.3 21.5 Alameda County Hacienda to A St. 20.9 17.7 21.9 19.3

Hayward A St. to Winton 18.6 9.3 18.5 19.2 Hayward Winton to La Playa 29.5 12.8 7.0 18.1 Hayward La Playa to SR 92 27.8 18.9 16.0 18.9 Hayward SR 92 to Tennyson 14.8 24.0 13.8 20.6

3.1.2 Traffic Characteristics Hesperian Boulevard is heavily utilized with an average daily traffic (ADT) ranging from approximately 25,000 to 35,000 vehicles per day (vpd) along the corridor. Figures 2, 3, and 4 shows ADT volume distribution at the northern end, middle, and southern end of the corridor, respectively. Within each figure, graphs show the directional distribution of traffic during the weekday. During the weekday AM peak, the peak travel direction is southbound along the corridor with traffic volumes higher in the southbound direction compared to the northbound direction. This is particularly prevalent along the middle portion of the corridor. Along the northern and southern portions of the corridor, this distinction is less prevalent. During the weekday midday period, there is no pronounced peak travel direction and traffic flow tends to be evenly distributed between the northbound and southbound directions. Midday traffic volumes are also significantly lower compared to the AM or PM peaks. During the weekday PM peak, the peak travel direction is northbound along the middle and southern portions of the corridor with traffic volumes higher in the northbound direction compared to the southbound direction. This is particularly prevalent along the middle portion of the project corridor. Along the northern portion of the project corridor, the peak travel direction remains to slightly favor the southbound direction. The duration of the PM commute peak period is longer compared to the AM peak and exhibits less of the sharp peaking characteristic of the AM.



FIGURE 2: HESPERIAN BOULEVARD TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS (NORTH SECTION)



FIGURE 3: HESPERIAN BOULEVARD TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS (MID SECTION)



FIGURE 4: HESPERIAN BOULEVARD TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS (SOUTH SECTION)



3.1.3 Signal Grouping The location of signals to be operated under adaptive control are shown in Figure 1 and Table 4. All the traffic signals are on one route and currently operate in either Free mode or coordinated mode by time-of-day (TOD) in various single groups. Generally, all signals that are coordinated operate under three different timing plans for the AM, midday, and PM peak periods. Coordinated signal groups exist within each local agency’s boundaries and there is currently no coordination of signals across jurisdictional boundaries along the corridor. In San Leandro, the two signals at Hesperian/Drew and Hesperian/Springlake are part of a coordinated group with Hesperian/Thornally coordinated as a separate group with signals to the north. In unincorporated Alameda County, the signals from Hesperian/College/I-238 ramp to Hesperian/Lewelling are not part of a coordinated group and operate in Free mode all day. The signals from Hesperian/Grant Ave/I-880 ramp to Hesperian/Golf Course are part of the same coordinated group throughout the day. In Hayward, signal groups vary based on the time of day. During the AM peak, there are three coordinated groups along Hesperian Boulevard: 1) W. A to Turner (except Winton), 2) Chabot to Depot/Cathy, and 3) Sleepy Hollow to Pepsi. During the midday peak, there are two coordinated groups: 1) W. A to Depot/Cathy, and 2) Sleepy Hollow to Pepsi. During the PM peak, there are three coordinated groups: 1) W. A to West/La Playa, 2) Turner to Depot/Cathy, and 3) Sleepy Hollow to Pepsi.



TABLE 4: EXISTING SIGNAL COORDINATION Int. No Intersection AM MD PM

Cycle Time Cycle Time Cycle Time 1 Hesperian/Thornally 120 7-9 AM 120 11-1 PM 130 4-6 PM 2 Hesperian/Drew 90 7-9 AM 90 11-1 PM 90 4-6 PM 3 Hesperian/Springlake 90 7-9 AM 90 11-1 PM 90 4-6 PM

4 Hesperian/College/I-238 EB ramp Free Free Free

5 Hesperian/Sycamore Free Free Free 6 Hesperian/Lewelling Free Free Free

7 Hesperian/I-880 NB off-ramp Free Free Free

8 Hesperian/Grant/I-880 SB on-ramp 100 6-9 AM 100 9-3 PM 105 3-7 PM

9 Hesperian/Post Office 100 6-9 AM 100 9-3 PM 105 3-7 PM 10 Hesperian/Paseo Grande 100 6-9 AM 100 9-3 PM 105 3-7 PM 11 Hesperian/Via Mercado 100 6-9 AM 100 9-3 PM 105 3-7 PM 12 Hesperian/Hacienda 100 6-9 AM 100 9-3 PM 105 3-7 PM 13 Hesperian/Bockman 100 6-9 AM 100 9-3 PM 105 3-7 PM 14 Hesperian/Bartlett 100 6-9 AM 100 9-3 PM 105 3-7 PM 15 Hesperian/Golf Course 100 6-9 AM 100 9-3 PM 105 3-7 PM 16 Hesperian/W. A St. 110 7-9 AM 110 11:30-2 PM 140 3:30-6 PM 17 Hesperian/Sueirro 110 7-9 AM 110 11:30-2 PM 140 3:30-6 PM

18 Hesperian/Skywest/Longwood 110 7-9 AM 110 11:30-2 PM 140 3:30-6 PM

19 Hesperian/Winton 145 7-9 AM 110 11:30-2 PM 140 3:30-6 PM 20 Hesperian/Southland 110 7-9 AM 110 11:30-2 PM 140 3:30-6 PM 21 Hesperian/West/La Playa 110 7-9 AM 110 11:30-2 PM 140 3:30-6 PM 22 Hesperian/Turner 110 7-9 AM 110 11:30-2 PM 96 3:30-6 PM 23 Hesperian/Chabot 130 7-9 AM 110 11:30-2 PM 96 3:30-6 PM 24 Hesperian/Depot/Cathy 130 6-9 AM 110 11:30-2 PM 96 3:30-6 PM 25 Hesperian/SR-92 WB ramp Free Free Free 26 Hesperian/SR-92 EB ramp Free Free Free 27 Hesperian/Sleepy Hollow 130 7:30-9:30 AM 110 12-2 PM 120 3:30-6 PM 28 Hesperian/Aldengate 130 7-9 AM 110 11:30-2 PM 120 3:30-6 PM 29 Hesperian/Tennyson 130 7-9 AM 110 11:30-2 PM 120 3:30-6 PM 30 Hesperian/Arf/Panama 130 7-9 AM 110 11:30-2 PM 120 3:30-6 PM 31 Hesperian/Industrial 130 7-9 AM 110 11:30-2 PM 120 3:30-6 PM

32 Hesperian/Eden Shores/Tripaldi 130 7-9 AM 110 11:30-2 PM 120 3:30-6 PM

33 Hesperian/Eden Park 130 7-9 AM 110 11:30-2 PM 120 3:30-6 PM 34 Hesperian/Pepsi 130 7-9 AM 110 11:30-2 PM 120 3:30-6 PM



3.1.4 Land Use Characteristics Along the Hesperian Boulevard corridor, the fronting land use consists of a mixture of multi-unit residential, single family residential, commercial, retail, restaurants, and schools. Significant land uses include Bay Fair BART station located in San Leandro on the north end of the corridor, the Hayward Executive Airport, Southland Mall, Chabot College, and Mt. Eden High School. The presence of the schools and BART station also generates significant pedestrian activity at the intersections in the vicinity of the schools and the train station. The project corridor also serves as a vital link for regional transit service. In addition to Line 97, the project corridor is served by Lines 22, 75, 83, 85, 93, and Transbay Line S. The AC Transit bus lines that run along this corridor are regional lines connecting San Leandro, Hayward, and Union City, and a number of the lines connect to the BART stations in these cities.

3.1.5 Existing System Architecture Along the Hesperian Boulevard corridor, the existing system architecture varies depending on the local jurisdiction in which the corridor passes through. Each local jurisdiction has their own preference or standard for the local controllers, cabinets, central signal system, and method of communications utilized as part of their existing overall signal system. Table 5 shows the cabinet, controller, communications type, and presence of preemption at the 34 traffic signals along the corridor. The City of San Leandro currently uses a central signal system (Trafficware ATMS.now) for day-to-day operations and management of the City’s traffic signals. Along the corridor, the three signals located in San Leandro are connected to their central signal system. The signal system is housed in the City’s Traffic Management Center (TMC) located within the City’s Engineering and Transportation Department work space of City Hall. Transportation staff have access to the ATMS.now system on client workstations in their office. For the three project signals, traffic signal control cabinets are Type P that are either NEMA TS-1 or TS-2. Traffic signal controllers are Naztec 980 TS-2 controllers. Communications between the City’s TMC and the three project signals is achieved through the use of fiber optic (FO) cables. Communications is achieved by the use of Layer 2 field Ethernet switches in traffic signal cabinets for backhaul on fiber optic to a central Ethernet switch at the TMC. At the Hesperian/Springlake signal, it should be noted that while an FO cable enters the cabinet, it is not terminated and there are no communications equipment in the cabinet. Thus, there is currently no communications to this signal. The City of Hayward currently uses a number of central signal systems (Trafficware ATMS.now and SCATS) for day-to-day operations and management of the City’s traffic signals. Along the corridor, the 17 signals located in Hayward are connected to their ATMS.now central signal system. The signal system is housed within the City’s Transportation Division work space of City Hall. Transportation staff have access to the ATMS.now system on client workstations in their office. For the 17 project signals, traffic signal control cabinets are Type P that are either NEMA TS-1 or TS-2. Traffic signal controllers are Naztec 980 TS-2 controllers. Communications between the City’s central signal system and the 17 project signals is achieved through the use of a 6-pair copper interconnect (SIC) and fiber optic (FO) cables. For traffic signals connected to the SIC, communications is achieved by the use of serial modems in traffic signal cabinets back to the central signal system at City Hall. Existing fiber optic (FO) cables also run alongside the SIC cable along this corridor and is primarily used to bring back digital video from video detection



cameras using Ethernet. At these locations, signal controller communications is also over Ethernet utilizing the Layer 2 switch in the cabinet. Alameda County currently does not have a central signal systems for centralized day-to-day operations and management of the County’s traffic signals, but instead utilizes a number of on-street masters. Along the corridor, the 11 signals located in unincorporated Alameda County are connected to an on-street field master located at the Hesperian/Grant/I-880 ramp signal. The on-street master controller at this location is housed in a separate Type P next to the cabinet for signal control. For the 11 project signals, traffic signal control cabinets are mostly Type R NEMA TS-1, with one Type P NEMA TS-1. Traffic signal controllers are Naztec 981 TS-2 controllers. Communications between on-street master and the 11 project signals is achieved through the use of a 6-pair copper interconnect (SIC) cable. Communications is achieved by the use of serial modems in traffic signal cabinets utilizing SIC back to the on-street master. Caltrans currently does not utilize a central signal systems for centralized day-to-day operations and management of the three State traffic signals on the project corridor. The State signals on this corridor do not have communications. However, at the Hesperian/I-880 NB off-ramp signal, the County’s signal interconnect does enter and exit the controller cabinet but does not connect to the signal controller. Traffic signal control cabinets are 332 and controllers are Type 170E. For the 34 signals along the corridor, while all local agency signals communicate back to either a central signal system or on-street master within their respective jurisdiction, there are communications infrastructure gaps at the jurisdictional boundaries. Thus, there is no communications infrastructure along Hesperian Boulevard between Springlake Dr. and College St./I-238 ramp (when crossing between San Leandro and Alameda County) and between Golf Course Rd. and W. A St. (when crossing between Alameda County and Hayward). There is also no communications infrastructure serving the three State signals. All 34 traffic signals along the corridor are currently fully-actuated with detection provided at all approaches. All existing detection is either in-pavement loops or video detection. In San Leandro, unincorporated Alameda County, and at Caltrans locations, all traffic signals use in-pavement loops. In Hayward, some signals utilize in-pavement loops only for detection, with other signals utilizing a combination of both in-pavement loops and video detection. At these locations, video detection is used for stop bar detection (through, left turn, and right turn) with in-pavement loops used for advanced detection.



TABLE 5: EXISTING SIGNAL INFRASTRUCTURE Int. No Intersection Cabinet Controller Comm. Preempt

1 Hesperian/Thornally P, TS2 Naztec 980 Ethernet EVP 2 Hesperian/Drew P, TS1 Naztec 980 Ethernet EVP 3 Hesperian/Springlake P, TS2 Naztec 980 -- RR, EVP 4 Hesperian/College/I-238 EB ramp R, TS1 Naztec 981 Serial EVP 5 Hesperian/Sycamore R, TS1 Naztec 981 Serial EVP 6 Hesperian/Lewelling R, TS1 Naztec 981 Serial EVP 7 Hesperian/I-880 NB off-ramp 332 170E -- EVP 8 Hesperian/Grant/I-880 SB on-ramp R, TS1 Naztec 981 Serial EVP 9 Hesperian/Post Office R, TS1 Naztec 981 Serial EVP

10 Hesperian/Paseo Grande R, TS1 Naztec 981 Serial EVP 11 Hesperian/Via Mercado P, TS1 Naztec 981 Serial EVP 12 Hesperian/Hacienda R, TS1 Naztec 981 Serial EVP 13 Hesperian/Bockman R, TS1 Naztec 981 Serial EVP 14 Hesperian/Bartlett R, TS1 Naztec 981 Serial EVP 15 Hesperian/Golf Course R, TS1 Naztec 981 Serial EVP 16 Hesperian/W. A St. P, TS1 Naztec 980 Serial EVP 17 Hesperian/Sueirro P, TS1 Naztec 980 Serial EVP 18 Hesperian/Skywest/Longwood P, TS2 Naztec 980 Serial EVP 19 Hesperian/Winton P, TS1 Naztec 980 Serial EVP 20 Hesperian/Southland P, TS1 Naztec 980 Serial EVP 21 Hesperian/West/La Playa P, TS1 Naztec 980 Serial EVP 22 Hesperian/Turner P, TS1 Naztec 980 Serial EVP 23 Hesperian/Chabot P, TS2 Naztec 980 Ethernet EVP 24 Hesperian/Depot/Cathy P, TS1 Naztec 980 Ethernet EVP 25 Hesperian/SR-92 WB ramp 332 170E -- -- 26 Hesperian/SR-92 EB ramp 332 170E -- EVP 27 Hesperian/Sleepy Hollow P, TS2 Naztec 980 Serial EVP 28 Hesperian/Aldengate P, TS1 Naztec 980 Serial EVP 29 Hesperian/Tennyson P, TS1 Naztec 980 Ethernet EVP 30 Hesperian/Arf/Panama P, TS1 Naztec 980 Serial EVP 31 Hesperian/Industrial P, TS1 Naztec 980 Ethernet EVP 32 Hesperian/Eden Shores/Tripaldi P, TS2 Naztec 980 Serial EVP 33 Hesperian/Eden Park P, TS2 Naztec 980 Serial EVP 34 Hesperian/Pepsi P, TS1 Naztec 980 Serial EVP

Limitations of the Existing System The following statements illustrate the limitations of the existing system that is not capable of managing the existing traffic conditions on the project corridor.



• Traffic flow is interrupted by multiple breaks in signal coordination along the corridor, particularly across jurisdictional boundaries. Breaks in signal coordination occur at random locations (jurisdictional boundaries) rather than based on prevailing traffic volumes and travel patterns.

• The existing system cannot detect the sudden changes in traffic demand as a result of school traffic activity. The existing system also cannot react to the resulting change in travel patterns (increase in left and right turns) and surge in pedestrian crossing activity.

• Traffic conditions can vary along different portions of the corridor with certain segments experiencing higher traffic volumes compared to other segments. The system cannot react to this condition by operating certain group(s) of signals at different cycle lengths to suit prevailing traffic demand.

• The existing system cannot recognize the onset or dissipation of the peak periods, so the time-based control coordination times are conservatively set to ensure that the variability of peak onset/dissipation times are covered. As a result, inefficiencies result during the shoulders of the peak periods.

• The coordinated signal operation is often disrupted by emergency vehicle and rail preemption. An adaptive system would be expected to recover faster from these disruptions than the existing system which typically takes three to five cycles to transition back to coordination.

• The existing system is not capable of implementing a routine for transit signal priority (TSP).

Proposed Improvements to the Existing System The following statements generally describe the improvements that are desired to address the limitations of the existing system. The project stakeholders seek a system that will:

• Recognize changes in traffic conditions and react quickly and automatically to accommodate those changes.

• Be capable of implementing a priority routine (i.e., early green, green extension) to accommodate transit signal priority with minimal disruption to coordinated operation.

• Recognize the existence of differing traffic conditions in various parts of the project corridor and react in each section appropriately.

• Keep signal timing current rather than letting its efficiency deteriorate between signal re-timing efforts.

• More efficiently accommodate rail and emergency vehicles and recover more quickly from rail and EVP preemption.

• Improve the management of queues within the network, particularly related to events associated with rail gate activation during rail crossings and school morning start and afternoon dismissal.

Vision, Goals and Objectives for the Proposed System

The vision of the adaptive system is to provide an advanced traffic control system that responds to changing traffic conditions in order to reduce delays, stops, and travel time, improve air quality by reducing emissions, improve transit operation and reliability, and improve safety while balancing the needs of all roadway users. The goal of the adaptive system is to support vehicle, pedestrian, and transit safety and mobility. To support the vision and goal to be achieved by the adaptive system, the following objectives for the adaptive system are identified as follows:



• The system needs to be able to implement preference for bi-directional corridor progression during certain periods of the day as currently provided by time-of-day (TOD) signal coordination;

• The system needs to be capable of supporting transit signal priority operation; • The system needs to provide operational preference to minimize delay for side-streets and

protected left turns; • The system needs to be able to provide cross-coordination along intersecting corridors, especially

at the intersection of two major arterials; • The system needs to be capable of being expanded to accommodate additional traffic signals; and • The system needs to be capable of supporting preemption operation for rail and emergency

vehicles.

Strategies Applied by the Improved System The adaptive coordination and control strategies that may be used to achieve the operational objectives include:

• Providing a pipeline along a coordinated route to maximize the throughput in both directions during peak periods;

• Distributing time in a way that equitably shares the green time between various movements; and

• Managing queues so they do not exceed the available storage capacity and minimize phase failures.

Alternative Non-Adaptive Strategies Considered

The City of San Leandro, City of Hayward, and Alameda County currently employ time-of-day signal coordination for various segments of the project corridor. The alternative non-adaptive strategy available would be traffic responsive pattern selection (TRPS) which could be implemented by each local agency’s existing central signal system or on-street master. The local agencies have not utilized TRPS along this corridor because they do not believe this strategy can efficiently handle the traffic fluctuations experienced along this project corridor. TRPS tends to be slow to react to changing traffic conditions, as it makes decisions based on traffic data that can be as old as 15 minutes and then takes another three to five cycles to transition from the current coordinated plan to a new plan. The project stakeholders also do not believe TRPS operation is flexible enough to interact with TSP operation.



4 OPERATIONAL NEEDS This chapter describes the user needs identified by the project stakeholders related to the operations of the adaptive system. Each section below describes something that the system user needs to be able to accomplish. Each of these needs, preceded with a Concept of Operations reference number as shown, will be satisfied by compliance to a set of system requirements that will be developed in the subsequent systems requirements document.

Adaptive Strategies The system operator needs the ability to implement different strategies individually or in combination to suit different prevailing traffic conditions. These strategies are: [4.1-01] The system needs to provide a pipeline along the coordinated route, as its primary operational objective. [4.1-02] The system needs to manage queues and prevent queue spillback to adjacent intersections, as its secondary operational objective. [4.1-03] The system needs to distribute phase times in an equitable manner to provide operational preference to minimize delay for side-street and protected left turn, as its third operational objective. [4.1-04] For continuity on crossing arterials, City of Hayward would prefer that the crossing arterials operations are incorporated as separate systems. San Leandro prefers the adaptive system to respond to the crossing arterial operations. [4.1-05] The system needs to be able to change the operational strategy based on changing traffic conditions.

Network Characteristics [4.2-01] With this initial project, adaptive operation needs to be implemented for 34 signalized intersections. [4.2-02] The system needs to be able to capable of future expansion to implement adaptive operation for additional signals. [4.2-03] In San Leandro, the three project signals could operate as a group that can work together with other groups, and linear operation for the network is more critical, in the short term. [4.2-04] The system needs to be able to adaptively control multiple independent groups of signals with the ability to vary the number of signals in each group to accommodate prevailing traffic conditions.



Coordination across Jurisdictional Boundaries [4.3-01] The City of San Leandro wants to collaborate with Alameda County, ideally utilizing the same system as the County. [4.3-02] The City of San Leandro prefers to integrate the neighboring system and the adaptive system needs to respond to operations of the neighboring system. [4.3-03] Alameda County currently does not have an adaptive system and would like a system that works best with both neighboring agencies. [4.3-04] At institutional borders of the system, the City of Hayward would prefer the system to make neighboring systems part of the operation.

Security [4.4-01] The system needs to have a security management and administrative system that allows access and system modifications to be assigned, monitored, and controlled by an administrator, and conforms to any access and network infrastructure security policies that each public agency stakeholders may have.

Queuing Interactions [4.5-01] The system needs to detect the formation of rapidly building queues and modify the adaptive operation to manage and clear the queues. [4.5-02] The system needs to detect the presence and formation of long standing queues and modify the adaptive operation to manage queue dissipation and dispersal.

Pedestrians [4.6-01] The system needs to accommodate bike and pedestrians. Hayward is looking to utilize a pedestrian adaptive timing. San Leandro needs functionality for a pedestrian early start, especially for approaches where no dedicated left-turn movements are provided. [4.6-02] The system needs to accommodate frequent pedestrian operation while maintaining adaptive operation during key parts of the day such as during school start/dismissal and boarding/alighting activity at the BART station. [4.6-03] The system needs to be flexible to accommodate various pedestrian operational goals including the ability to operate different (longer) Walk and Flashing Don’t Walk durations and early pedestrian start during different times of the day.



Non-Adaptive Situations [4.7-01] The system needs to provide controls (both manual and time based control) that allow users to override system control to provide another form of operation including Free, TOD coordination, or a user-selected timing plan. [4.7-02] In the absence of adaptive control, the system needs to operate some form of coordination at selected intersections. The City of Hayward noted that actuated, free operation would be allowed at intersections that are not closely spaced. The City of San Leandro would prefer the system to operate some form of coordination around a fixed cycle length. [4.7-03] In situations when non-adaptive control is needed, the system needs to change operational strategy adaptively and automatically and also provide operator over ride.

System Responsiveness [4.8-01] The system needs to address small, moderate, and large shifts in demand due to recurring congestion and large shifts in demand due to non-recurrent congestion. The system needs to have a response time that is within every two cycles up to a 5 minute window. [4.8-02] The system needs to be able to accommodate variable cycle lengths that are automatically calculated within a range of 60-150 seconds and allow for double cycle for a particular intersection. [4.8-03] The system needs to be able to provide dynamic directional offset adjustments that has the ability for a user defined range of change. [4.8-04] The system needs to be able to provide variable phase green splits adjustments that has the ability for a user defined frequency of change. [4.8-05] Both Hayward and San Leandro prefer that phase sequence remain fixed and not vary during specific periods of operation. Phases without traffic demands are allowed to be skipped similar to Free or standard coordinated operation.

Complex Coordination and Controller Features The system needs to provide the following controller features as part of the adaptive operation: [4.9-01] Protected/permissive operation using flashing yellow arrow operation. Not required for San Leandro. [4.9-02] Operate different (longer) Walk and Flashing Don’t Walk durations by time of day. [4.9-03] Operate an early pedestrian start by time of day. [4.9-04] Rest-in-walk coordinated operation.



[4.9-05] Stop-in-walk coordinated operation. [4.9-06] Service a phase more than once per cycle.

Monitoring and Control The following system monitoring and control are needed: [4.10-01] The system needs to provide system monitoring and control via interface centrally (such as a central server), distributed to multiple client workstations on a local area network (LAN), and remote client workstation outside the LAN (i.e., VPN). [4.10-02] The system needs to provide system monitoring and control to multiple users on multiple client workstations simultaneously. [4.10-03] The system needs to provide system monitoring and control information to the user similar to or better than that provided by a modern day advanced traffic signal system. This generally includes information related to all pertinent system health information such as system status, communications status, detector status, intersection status, mode of operation, active phase and duration, etc. [4.10-04] The system needs to provide system monitoring and control that allows the user to access all local controller settings and parameters from a central server, client workstation, or remote client workstation. Access includes the ability to upload (controller to system), download (system to controller), and compare (controller vs. system) a user-selected portion of the controller database or the entire controller database. [4.10-05] The system needs to provide system monitoring and control that allows the user to view, edit, and save changes to all systems level settings and configurations and all individual controller settings and parameters via the central server, client workstation, and remote client workstation.

Performance Reporting The following system performance reporting are needed: [4.11-01] The system needs to be able to provide and store real-time logs of all system status, events, operation and measures of performance. [4.11-02] The system needs to store logs up to one year and provide internal or external storage and accessibility. [4.11-03] As part of the system, the local controllers needs to be able to log and store real-time status, events, and alarms for the individual controller. [4.11-04] The system needs to generate, store, and provide historic and real-time performance measures and decisions that effectively support operation, maintenance, and analysis.



[4.11-05] The system needs to provide TSP data collection and monitoring.

Failure Notification The following system failure notifications are needed: [4.12-01] The system needs to immediately notify operations staff of any alarms and alerts. [4.12-02] The system needs to provide and store real-time logs of all alarms, alerts, and failure events.

Preemption and Priority The system needs to accommodate preemption and priority operations as follows: [4.13-01] During and after rail preempt operation, the system needs to provide operational preference to minimize side street delay and subsequently to provide queue dissipation strategies. [4.13-02] The system needs to accommodate rail and emergency vehicle preemption operation. [4.13-03] The system needs to accommodate transit signal priority operation. [4.13-04] The system needs to accommodate transit queue jump operation at signalized intersections such as the ability to operate exclusive transit vehicle phase(s) and associated timing parameters. [4.13-05] The system needs to report the following data for each TSP request: date, start time, end time, travel direction, bus ID, intersection ID, TSP request, TSP request granted/not granted, time granted (seconds), time between TSP requests, state of signal when TSP is granted/not granted. The system needs to provide data to show what is happening at the intersections equipped with TSP. [4.13-06] The system needs to report the following data for each emergency vehicle preempt request: date, start time, end time, travel direction, emergency vehicle ID (if available), intersection ID, and EVP request granted/not granted.

Failure and Fallback Modes The following system response are needed in the case of system or system component failures: [4.14-01] When a system failure (i.e., central server failure) occurs, controllers under the system control need to revert to the local controller TOD operation that include Free operation, coordinated operation, and any special functions. [4.14-02] When a system-wide communication failure occurs, controllers under the system control needs to revert to the local TOD operation that include Free operation, coordinated operation, and any special functions.



[4.14-03] When a localized failure (controller and/or communications) occurs, the system needs to allow the user to determine the mode of operation at the failed location and at other non-failed intersections based upon a pre-defined set of conditions. [4.14-04] When a localized detection failure occurs, the system needs to allow the user to determine the mode of operation based upon a pre-defined set of conditions. [4.14-05] The system needs to accommodate a detector failure rate between 10% and 20%. The system needs to be able to accommodate redundant detection to minimize the system entering detector failure state.

Constraints The system is constrained to the following needs: [4.15-01] The system needs to work with existing Type 332, NEMA TS2, and NEMA TS1 type traffic signal controller cabinets. [4.15-02] The system needs to fully function in a computer network environment with various system devices and components potentially residing on different networks, different virtual local area networks (VLANs), and between network security devices (i.e., fire wall). [4.15-03] The system needs to be operated and monitored at each agency’s office, at the workstation of each agency staff, and on any mobile computing device connected to each agency’s computer network. [4.15-04] The system needs to allow monitoring access by authorized users (e.g., Caltrans and AC Transit) via secured VPN. [4.15-05] The system needs to allow monitoring and control access by authorized users (e.g., Alameda County) via secured VPN. [4.15-06] The system needs to use a standard database that allows access and assign rights to multiple levels of user access (i.e., admin, user, guest).

Training and Support The public agency stakeholders will need the following training and support to be provided by the system vendor: [4.16-01] The system vendor needs to provide user manuals for system set-up, configuration, and maintenance. [4.16-02] Comprehensive training needs to be provided to engineering staff on system (hardware and software) set-up, configuration, and maintenance.



[4.16-03] Comprehensive training needs to be provided to engineering staff and signal maintenance staff on local controller hardware and firmware programming, operation, and configuration. [4.16-04] The system vendor needs to provide on-going technical support to local agency staff during the operation of the system. [4.16-05] The system/vendor needs to provide bi-weekly confirmation noting system operations confirming all system components are properly functioning including verification of two-way communications, system software and hardware, local controller, and detection health. Prepare a list of action items, if needed, to address and repair all deficiencies and failures. [4.16-06] The system/vendor needs to perform a bi-weekly review of system event logs, alarms, notifications, etc. on health of system and preparation of action items, and if needed, to address any system deficiencies or component failures to return the system to a state of good operation for the first year of system deployment.

External Interfaces [4.17-01] The system needs to have a standards-based interface for sharing of information between the system and other signal systems or ATMS systems utilizing the Traffic Management Data Dictionary (TMDD) Standard for Center to Center Communications. In particular, the sharing of traffic signal control and status needs to be provided for the future I-880 Integrated Corridor Management project.

Maintenance [4.18-01] The provided system will need to include on-going warranty and maintenance of a minimum of three years from the date of system acceptance.



5 ENVISIONED ADAPTIVE SYSTEM OVERVIEW This chapter describes the envisioned adaptive system to be deployed on the Hesperian Boulevard corridor. Key elements include system architecture, system size and grouping, operational objective, fallback operation, crossing routes and adjacent systems, operator access, coordination and controller operation, and organizations involved will be discussed.

Adaptive System Architecture The project plans to implement a single adaptive system to operate the 34 signalized intersections along the project corridor as shown in Figure 5. The main adaptive server and any associated equipment will be located in, and hosted by, the City of Hayward. A second, backup adaptive server will be located in, and hosted by, the City of San Leandro. Day-to-day operation of the adaptive system will be managed by the main adaptive server located in Hayward. In the event of a failure of the main adaptive server in Hayward, the operator will be able to direct operation to the backup server in San Leandro to resume adaptive operation along the corridor. Existing communications infrastructure to traffic signals will be modified and new communications infrastructure will be built to direct signal communications towards the main adaptive server in Hayward as the primary route and to the backup adaptive server in San Leandro as a secondary route. Communications infrastructure will need to be built to close the gaps in communications at jurisdictional borders (between Springlake and College/I-238, and between Golf Course and West A) and at the three State signals. Communications between the adaptive server and the local controllers will be Ethernet-based using a combination of the existing fiber optic and copper SIC cables and new SIC to be installed.

FIGURE 5: ADAPTIVE SYSTEM CONFIGURATION

Backup Adaptive Server

Thornally Springlake College/I238

Golf Course W. A Pepsi

Main Adaptive Server

I-880 NB off-ramp

SR 92 WB ramps

SR 92 EB ramps

San Leandro Alameda County Hayward

= San Leandro Signal = Alameda County Signal = Hayward Signal = Caltrans Signal



Size and Grouping The project plans to implement adaptive signal control at 34 signalized intersections along Hesperian Boulevard. This Concept of Operations defines the envisioned system for adaptive control operation for the project corridor and potential expansion either along the corridor (i.e., further north within San Leandro or further south into Union City) or on crossing corridors (i.e., Lewelling Boulevard). The system will implement adaptive operation for groups of traffic signals that will be defined by the operator. Groups of signals may range from a single signal up to any number of signals defined by the operator that may include all traffic signals along the corridor. Group definitions will be flexible and allow for individual signals to belong to one or more groups. This will provide the operator with flexibility to define signal groups by either time-of-day or day-of-week to suit the varying traffic characteristics or conditions along any specific route or area.

Operational Objective The first objective of the adaptive system will be to provide for smooth flow along an arterial, minimizing the number of stops and delay experienced by users along the coordinated route. This objective includes providing progression along both travel directions along the entire corridor. Simply progressing traffic in the peak direction, at the expense of the opposite travel direction, would not be acceptable. Part of this coordination objective will be to maximize the throughput along the coordinated route with a reasonable tradeoff of increasing delay for side streets and protected left turns, such that delays experienced by traffic on the coordinated route will be balanced with delays experienced by side-street and protected left turn traffic. This objective is intended to overcome the current operational segmentation of the corridor into disparate groups due to jurisdictional boundaries and the existing signal system architecture of each agency. The second objective of the adaptive system will be to manage the lengths of queues at specific locations within the corridor, so that long queues do not block upstream intersections, do not extend towards the freeway at off-ramps, or otherwise reduce the capacity available to adjacent movements. During this objective, the goal of managing queues and clearing queues, especially for protected left-turn movements and freeway off-ramp approaches, may override the first objective of maximizing the throughput along the coordinated route. This may require controlling phase durations so that the size of platoons entering a downstream block does not exceed the storage length if the platoon will be stopped. This objective applies for specific situations, events, or areas along the corridor where queue management and minimizing the delay experienced by turning movements outweigh the need to provide progression along the main coordinate route. In particular, this objective would apply to signalized locations near schools during the school start/dismissal periods, near transit hubs, at freeway off-ramps, and in areas where there is a concentration of retail land use during peak shopping times. The third objective of the adaptive system will be to improve bus travel time by reducing running time delay. The adaptive system will support transit signal priority at all signalized intersections along the project corridor to provide either an early green or a green extension of the through phases along Hesperian Boulevard and provide the ability to operate an exclusive transit phase for transit queue jump operation. To some extent, this objective will also be achieved by default through achieving the first two objectives which should improve overall operation along the corridor.



The system or the operator will be able to select the appropriate objective depending on the current traffic conditions. For example, during commute peaks, the primary objective may be to maximize throughput and provide smooth flow on the coordinate route. Then during school start/dismissal periods, the objective may be to manage queues, prioritize pedestrian service, and balance delay for side-street and left turn traffic compared to the main street movements. The operator will be able to define for each group of signals, the appropriate operational objective. For example, near a school or a concentrated retail area with heavy turning movements, the queue management strategy may be specified, while on an arterial with long signal spacing, the strategy to smooth flow and maximize throughput may be specified. Within these operational objectives, the adaptive system will change its operation to accommodate the rise and fall of traffic volumes throughout the day and the changing patterns of flow throughout the day and week.

Fallback Operation The system will have a fallback state that allows coordination using a common cycle length for all signals within a coordinated group, similar to existing TOD coordinated operation when a complete system failure occurs, such as failure of the adaptive system server or a complete loss of communications between the adaptive server and all signals in a group. In the event that failures are limited or isolated (i.e., detection failure for a specific movement at one or more location, communications failure at one particular location, etc.), the operator will have the option to continue running adaptive control based on historical data. If the isolated failure is at a location at the end or edge of a signal group, the system will have the option to remove (manually by the operator or automatically by the system) the isolated signal from the group and to operate in a backup mode (i.e., Free, TOD, etc.), while the remainder of the group continues to operate normally under adaptive control.

Crossing Routes and Adjacent Systems The system will provide for coordination to occur on more than one coordinate route, such as two crossing arterials or a grid network of signals. At locations where coordination is to occur along two crossing arterials, the system will be able to maintain coordination along both routes in both directions by designating multiple phases as the coordinated phase. There are no adjacent systems that the proposed adaptive system needs to interact with.

Operator Access Each public agency’s transportation engineering and support staff will be assigned different levels of authority and access to the adaptive system for which they are authorized, based on their roles and responsibilities. This will allow agency personnel to control, modify, monitor, and analyze the operation of the system as appropriate. The following access is envisioned:

• City of San Leandro: Will have full rights (read and write) to control, modify, monitor, and analyze the operation of the signals that are operated and maintained by San Leandro. Will have limited



rights (read only) to monitor and analyze the operation of signals that are operated and maintained by other public agency stakeholders.

• City of Hayward: Will have full rights (read and write) to control, modify, monitor, and analyze the operation of the signals that are operated and maintained by Hayward. Will have limited rights (read only) to monitor and analyze the operation of signals that are operated and maintained by other public agency stakeholders.

• Alameda County: Will have full rights (read and write) to control, modify, monitor, and analyze the operation of the signals that are operated and maintained by Alameda County. Will have limited rights (read only) to monitor and analyze the operation of signals that are operated and maintained by other public agency stakeholders.

• Caltrans District 4: Will have full rights (read and write) to control, modify, monitor, and analyze the operation of the signals that are operated and maintained by Caltrans. Will have limited rights (read only) to monitor and analyze the operation of signals that are operated and maintained by other public agency stakeholders.

• AC Transit: Will have limited rights (read only) to monitor and analyze the operation of signals that are operated and maintained by other public agency stakeholders.

The system will also allow limited access by authorized users, such as the system vendor, for support and maintenance purposes.

Complex Coordination and Controller Operation The public agency stakeholders will use the following coordination and controller features:

• The ability to repeat a phase, such as running a left turn phase before and after its opposing through movement;

• The ability to operate different phase sequences based on different traffic conditions or by time-of-day;

• The ability to omit a phase based on user input; • The ability to operate flashing yellow for protected/permissive operation; • The ability to allow the coordinated phase to terminate early if the coordinated phase gaps-out;

and • The ability to designate a phase split shorter than the minimum time required to serve a

pedestrian movement (i.e., stop-in-walk).

Organizations Involved The City of San Leandro, City of Hayward, Alameda County, and Caltrans will continue to own, operate, and maintain the traffic signals along the Hesperian Boulevard corridor with the deployment of the adaptive and TSP systems, as they do today. However, signals currently operated and maintained by Caltrans may require the transfer of operation and maintenance responsibilities to the local agency (i.e., Hayward, Alameda County), depending on the needed controller modifications based on the adaptive solution selected. The City of Hayward will host, operate, and maintain the main adaptive server and thus will act as the administrator of the adaptive system. The City of San Leandro will host and maintain the backup adaptive server. Specific details on ownership and maintenance responsibilities will be developed and memorialized in various agreements (MOU, Cooperative Agreement, Maintenance Agreement, etc.).



6 ADAPTIVE OPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENT The system will be operated and monitored from various locations by the City of Hayward, City of San Leandro, Alameda County, Caltrans District 4, and AC Transit. The central server equipment will be housed at the City of Hayward’s City Hall alongside other computing and networking devices. A backup central server will be housed at the City of San Leandro’s TMC. The central server will be a stand-alone commercial-off-the-shelf standard platform server and be able to be replaced independently from the adaptive software. Public agency stakeholder staff will have the ability to log in to the adaptive system locally (Hayward) or from remote locations (San Leandro, Alameda County, Caltrans District 4, AC Transit) via secured VPN over the Internet and have full functionality consistent with their access rights. The City of Hayward, City of San Leandro, Alameda County, and Caltrans District 4 will maintain control of all local signal timing parameters for the traffic signals that they operate and maintain. At State-owned traffic signals that are operated and maintained by another local agency, all local signal timing parameters developed or modified by the local agency for these signals may require the concurrence of Caltrans. This includes timing parameters such as minimum green, clearance, pedestrian walk and clearance, and preemption. When the signals are operating in adaptive mode, timing parameters (i.e., cycle length, phase splits, and offset) will be determined by the adaptive server. These agencies will coordinate to determine system-wide parameters such as the days of adaptive operation (i.e., weekday only, weekends) and hours of operation. All system-wide parameters will be determined by the public agency stakeholders and will be implemented by the City of Hayward as the administrator of the system. The public agency stakeholder’s transportation engineering staff are experienced in setting up, operating, and managing their existing signal system. Day-to-day operations and management of the adaptive system will be the responsibility of the public agency stakeholder’s transportation staff. They will require training specific to the adaptive system to set-up, fine-tune, and operate all aspects of the system. Maintenance of any field equipment deployed as part of the adaptive system, along with all other existing traffic signal infrastructure, will be performed by each public agency’s signal maintenance staff or contractor. The public agency stakeholders expect to operate the adaptive system with the latest software for a period of ten years assuming system performance continues to meet the agency’s needs. The agencies will seek technical support from the system vendor in using the adaptive software for three years in which the vendor will provide support via a combination of phone, on-site visits, and remote log-in to the adaptive server. The agencies expect warranty and maintenance of any vendor-supplied software, parts, and equipment for a minimum of three years will be included in the purchase price. Software maintenance will include any updates (software patches, iterative revisions, and new versions) to be included in the purchase price for a minimum of five years.



7 ADAPTIVE SUPPORT ENVIRONMENT This chapter describes the support environment for the adaptive system. Key elements include identifying institutions and stakeholders, facilities, system architecture constraints, utilities, equipment, computing hardware and software, personnel, and other support needs will be discussed. Existing stakeholders of the adaptive system includes the City of Hayward, City of San Leandro, Alameda County, Caltrans District 4, AC Transit, and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). The City of Hayward will be the host site of the adaptive system to be deployed and will be responsible for operation, management, and maintenance of the system. The City of San Leandro, Alameda County, and Caltrans District 4 signal operations staff will have operational oversight for each respective agency’s signals under the control of the adaptive system. Each public agency stakeholder will provide approval for any physical improvements required in each agency’s right-of-way. MTC is the funding agency and program manager of this initiative and is responsible for overall program oversight to ensure project delivery and success. The City of Hayward has an existing facility in the City Hall building where transportation staff are located. The existing facility currently houses the existing central signal system and is fully equipped with equipment racks, servers, networking equipment, workstations, and video equipment. The adaptive system will be housed in this facility alongside the existing equipment. The City of San Leandro has an existing TMC that currently houses their existing central signal system and if fully equipped with racks, servers, networking equipment, workstations, and video equipment. The backup adaptive server will be house in this facility alongside the existing equipment. The adaptive server will reside within the Hayward’s transportation network dedicated for transportation use, which is standalone and outside of the City’s IT network. This will be the same network in which the existing central signal system currently resides along with all other communications and equipment associated with the City’s signal infrastructure. The City of Hayward’s IT Department will provide support and system management so that the adaptive server will be integrated into this network so that operators will have appropriate access to the system locally and externally outside this LAN. The communications media available for use by the adaptive system will be the same currently used by the existing signal system to communicate with existing controllers and other field devices as detailed in Section 3.1.5 of this report. Communications to field controllers will need to be upgraded to provide an Ethernet network via a combination of Ethernet-over-copper devices over SIC to a field hub for backhaul to the central server over fiber optic cable. Each public agency stakeholder has all required equipment and resources to support the existing traffic signal system. Any additional test equipment required to support the adaptive system will be determined by the system vendor. The vendor will specify any needed hardware and software to support the adaptive system as well as any needed field modifications (i.e., detection). The vendor will be responsible for identifying and providing any hardware needed to support the adaptive system, such as servers and data storage. It is anticipated that other existing equipment in the cities of Hayward and San Leandro’s facility will be utilized to support the adaptive system (i.e., network switch, workstations, monitors, printers, equipment racks, and power supply). Maintenance and repair of the computing equipment is the responsibility of each agency’s transportation staff. Additional support provided by each agency’s IT staff will be specific to each agency’s business practice.



The adaptive system will be operated by the City of Hayward’s existing transportation staff in conjunction with City of San Leandro, Alameda County, and Caltrans District 4 transportation staff. Each public agency has transportation engineers dedicated to signal operations and no additional staff is anticipated to be required to operate the adaptive system. The operators are available during normal business hours with after-hours support provided by each public agency’s signal maintenance staff or contractor. Training of transportation engineering staff and staff from each public agency’s signal maintenance staff/contractor will be required to be provided by the system vendor during and after the installation of the adaptive system. Backup of the adaptive system database will be incorporated into the work flow and follow the same existing routine of backing up the signal system database. To ensure optimal operation of the system, the system vendor will provide the each public agency’s transportation staff with bi-weekly confirmation noting system operations confirming all system components are properly functioning, including verification of two-way communications, system software and hardware, local controller, and detection health. The system vendor will also monitor system event logs, alarms, notifications, etc. on the health of system. The system vendor will prepare a list of action items, if needed, to address any system deficiencies or component failures to return the system to a state of good operation.



8 OPERATIONAL SCENARIOS

Overview This chapter presents a number operational scenarios to describe how the adaptive system is expected to operate to meet user needs. The envisioned adaptive system is expected to be able to manage the following operational scenarios for both the current Hesperian Boulevard corridor and potential future expansion of the system to other corridors:

• Peak Period Operation • Midday Operation • Transit Signal Priority • Preemption • Fault Condition

Peak Period Operation

During the morning peak period, the peak travel direction is primarily southbound along Hesperian Boulevard. During the evening peak period, the peak travel direction is primarily northbound along Hesperian Boulevard. However, in the northern and southern portions of the corridor, directional peaking is less prevalent and tends to be more evenly balanced. The adaptive system will provide smooth flow and maximize the progression bandwidth in the peak direction, while at the same time provide progression for the non-peak direction, though the degree of progression provided may be to a lesser extent (i.e., smaller bandwidth, one or more stops) compared to the peak direction. The system will achieve this at the expense of increased delay for side-street and protected left turn traffic, but not to the extent that phase failures occur or an unreasonable delay is experienced. The adaptive system will operate at a cycle length optimized for the prevailing traffic conditions, and increase the cycle length as the peak period builds and decrease the cycle length as the peak period dissipates. The system would utilize the following signal timing strategies:

• At all intersections, select phase times that equitably serve all movements and eliminate phase failures;

• At the critical intersections, select phase times that eliminates queue overflow in left turn pockets; • For intersections where the left turn demand is high, the system will allow for the left turn phase

to be served twice per cycle to avoid queue build up; • At all intersections, provide green times on the coordinated phases to minimize stops for travel

along Hesperian Boulevard; and • Provide the ability to operate the entire corridor as one single group, or be broken up into two or

more groups, based on prevailing traffic conditions and the required cycle lengths required on certain portions of the corridor compared to another.

Midday Operation

During the midday period, traffic volumes are much lighter compared to the peak periods with directional flow more balanced. During this time, the system will operate at the lowest cycle length possible, subject



to prevailing traffic conditions, to ensure equitable distribution of green time to all phases while providing coordination. Unlike the peak periods, where the primary objective is to provide smooth flow and maximize throughput on Hesperian Boulevard, the primary objective during the midday will be to ensure that all movements at all intersections have equitable distribution of green time, while still providing a reasonable progression along Hesperian Boulevard in both directions. As a result, it would be acceptable to provide smaller progression bandwidths with potentially the need to stop once or twice when traveling through the project corridor.

Transit Signal Priority Transit signal priority (TSP) will be implemented along Hesperian Boulevard concurrently to function with the envisioned adaptive system. Thus, the system will have the capability to implement a TSP request routine and be able to extend the existing green or introduce an early green in order to serve a transit priority request initiated by an AC Transit bus. As part of the TSP request routine, the system will have the capability to support transit queue jump operation by giving buses an exclusive transit signal phase at selected key intersections. A typical operation would be to provide a green indication on the exclusive transit signal phase to serve a bus in advance of the green indication to serve vehicles, thus allowing the bus to advance through an intersection ahead of other vehicular traffic. The decision to provide priority and the extent in which priority is provided will be determined by the signal controller of the adaptive system based on a set of controller parameters defined by the user. For example, as an AC Transit bus approaches a signalized intersection, the priority request generator on the bus transmits a message to the priority request server/receiver at the intersection to request priority on the approach. The message contains information such as the vehicle ID, position, approach direction, and speed. The priority request server/receiver at the intersection receives the request from the approaching bus and estimates when it will reach the intersection. The priority request server/receiver places an input call to the controller and checks the vehicle in. The traffic signal controller receives this input, compares the request against a set of controller parameters, and determines if it meets all parameters to grant the TSP request. At that time, the controller will determine if an early green or a green extension is needed in order to provide a green indication to the signal phase corresponding to the travel direction of the bus, so that it may to pass through the intersection with minimal delay.

Preemption There is an existing at-grade highway-rail crossing on Hesperian Boulevard located approximately 115’ north of the Springlake Drive intersection. The grade crossing is equipped with gates, bells, and warning lights and activated during a rail crossing. The railroad-gated controls preempt the traffic signal at Springlake Drive. Upon preemption, the signal at Springlake Drive enters a track clearance phase to ensure vehicles queued near or across the tracks can clear the tracks before the gates descend. Once the preemption period ends, the signal initiates an exit routine and returns to normal operation. Under adaptive control, the signal at Springlake Drive would operate the same rail preemption sequence during a preemption event with all other signals continuing to operate under adaptive control. All, but one, of the traffic signals along the corridor are equipped with emergency vehicle preemption (EVP) as shown in Table 5. When an intersection responds to an EVP request, other signals within the adaptive control group will continue to operate adaptively. The preempted signal will run the preempt



routine for the duration of the preemption request and return to adaptive operation once the preemption call ends.

Fault Conditions If a communication failure prevents the adaptive system from continuing to control one or more intersections within a defined group, all signals within the group will revert to a pre-defined mode of operation based on a time-of-day (TOD) table residing in each signal controller. This may include either time-based coordination or free operation depending on the time-of-day and/or day-of-week in which the communication failure occurs. However, if the communication failure occurs at the endpoint of a corridor or at the edge of a network, the system will allow the user to remove the failed intersection (either manually or automatically through a predefined set of parameters) from the adaptive control group and continue to operate the remainder of the group under adaptive control. The system will recognize a detector failure and take appropriate action to accommodate the missing data. For a detector that influences adaptive operation, the system will use data from an alternate detector (such as an adjacent lane detector or another upstream/downstream detector) or use historical data from an archive of historical detector data. If the number of detector failures within an adaptive control group exceeds a user-specified threshold, the system will automatically cease adaptive operation and revert to a pre-defined mode of operation based on a TOD table similar to that described for a communications failure. Detector failures not only occur when a detector is broken and ceases to function, but it may also fail by reporting erroneous information (i.e., excessively high or low occupancy and count data), which would affect the operation of the adaptive system. The system will allow a user to set thresholds for individual detectors that will designate a detector as failed when erroneous data is reported by the detector. In the event that the adaptive system fails (i.e., server fails), all signals under adaptive control will revert to a pre-defined mode of operation based on a TOD table similar to that described for a communications failure.