Table Of Content388.1
T6C0MS
2005
Congestion
Management
System
(CoMS)
2005
Rail, Transit, and Planning Division Report
Data and Statistics Bureau
Planning Systems Section
November 2005
••••
MontanaStateLibrary
3 0864 1006 3100 4
CONTENTS
Report Overview
/
- 2005 1 CoMS Information 1
ATO. 1 1
1 1
1 Interstate System 1
NO. 2
1
1 1
C
1 Rural NI-NHS
NO. 3 J
1
1 1
o
1 Rural Primary System 1
4
no. 1
M
1 1
1 Secondary System 1
NO. 5
S J
1
1 State Highways 1
NO. 6
1
1 1
Report 1 Corridors 1
NO. 7
1
1 1
Functional Class
/
Special Facilities
/
8
NO.
1 M
Miscellaneous
~~.n,„,-„„„**. Montana Departmentof Transportation 1 1
AVERY- EXECUTIVE READY INDEX' DIVIDERS
3
Q
Digitized by the Internet Archive
2013
in
http://arcTT^^
'
Overview
The Congestion Management System did not allow for an analysis using 2003
(CoMS) underwent significant changes since traffic data. For the purposes ofthis report,
the 2003 Report. The past year has been spent 2001 and 2002 will be used for comparison
bringing CoMS into compliancy with the purposes. The following table provides a
Transportation Information System (TIS). quick reference ofthe State's overall
CoMS was previously base route driven while congestion indices by system. The table
&
the TIS had integrated the Departmental route shows a comparison ofthe 2001, 2002
and Corridor naming conventions. This TIS 2004 CIs to the projected CIs in five-year
compliancy conversion has enabled CoMS to increments. Due to staffing constraints traffic
perform analyses by departmental route and information is only available on five State
corridor rather than the previous base route Highways; therefore an individual analysis
naming convention. This program conversion was run on each ofthese five routes but no
was a large undertaking and involved a great statewide analysis was calculated.
deal oftime and effort. For this reason time
Statewide Systems' Congestion Indices
2001 2002 2004 2004 2009 2009 2014 2014 2019 2019 2024 2024
System Existing2 Existing Existing E+C3 Existing E+C Existing E+C Existing E+C Existing E+C
Interstate 94 93 93 92 90 89 86
NI-NHS 75 74 75 76 73 74 71 72 69 70 66 68
Primary 80 79 79 79 78 78 76 76 75 75 73 73
Secondary 92 91 91 91 91 91 90 90 89 89 89 89
AllOn-Systems4 85 - 84 85 84 85 83 84 82 83 80 82
Traffic Year
2ExistingHighwayNetwork
3ExistingplusCommitted HighwayNetwork
Includesonlyon-systemroutesthatareanalyzedbyCoMS.
Shadedcellsindicatetherearenocapacityenhancingprojectsforthissystem.
-DuetotheTIScompliancyconversionCoMScouldnotanalyzeatthestatewidelevel using2002trafficdata.
The following table illustrates the percent to the projected traffic year (2024). No
ofmiles, by system, in each ofthe level of committed or recommended improvements
service ranges. The percentages are a are included.
comparison ofthe current traffic year (2004)
Percent of Miles by Level of Service
System
Interstate NI-NHS Primary Secondary
2004 2024 2004 2024 2004 2024 2004 2024
A
95.4 71.2 34.8 24.9 38.8 31.5 78.6 72.5
of B 4.5 23.0 33.6 28.1 38.3 34.0 17.4 19.3
C 0.1 3.4 20.9 23.3 17.3 17.6 3.2 4.6
Service D
Level 0.0 2.5 7.8 11.2 3.3 9.7 0.6 2.8
E 0.0 0.0 2.9 9.9 2.2 6.5 0.1 0.7
F 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.7 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.1
CoMS
Information
CoMS
Definition
The Congestion Management System, or LOS B - The ability to maneuver within the
CoMS as it is commonly called, is a database traffic stream is only slightly restricted, and the
that utilizes several techniques (both automated general level ofphysical and psychological
and manual) to produce congestion indices (CIs) comfort provided to drivers is still high. Minor
for the majority ofMontana's "on-system" disruptions are still easily absorbed at this level.
roads. The CoMS measures the current and, in
the case ofthe rural corridors, the future LOS C - Freedom to maneuver within the
(predicted) "operational health" ofthe highway traffic stream is noticeably restricted. There are
systems. noticeable increases in platoon formation,
On the rural highway corridors, CIs consist of platoon size, and frequency ofpassing
point values ranging from - 100 and are a impediments. Minor disruptions may be
numerical representation ofthe levels ofservice expected to cause serious local deterioration in
(LOS). Numerical ranges were developed 1) to service, and queues may form behind any
accommodate the input for CoMS equations and significant traffic disruption.
2) to identify any analysis segment/corridor's
relative position within a LOS range. LOS D - Freedom to maneuver is more
The following table represents the CI range for noticeably limited and the driver experiences
each LOS. reduced physical and psychological comfort
levels. Even minor incidents can be expected to
create queuing because the traffic stream has
LOS CI RANGE little space to absorb disruptions.
A 85-100
B 70-84 LOS E - Roadway is operating at capacity.
C 55-69 Operations at this level are volatile there being
D 40-54 virtually no usable gaps in the traffic stream.
E 25-39
F 0-24 LOS F - Describes breakdowns in vehicular
flow.
There are six levels ofservice defined for each Congestion Definition
type offacility (i.e. two-lane, multi-lane, and The Department, as part ofthe Performance
freeway). These LOSs are given letter Programming Process (P3 has adopted
designations, from A to F, with LOS A congestion based performa),nce objectives for
representing the best operating conditions and each ofMontana's highway systems, excluding
LOS F the worst. Each level ofservice local roads. A level ofservice deemed
represents a range ofoperating conditions. The 'acceptable' was set for each system. For the
definitions for these ranges vary based on the Interstate System, the level is a LOS greater
type offacility being analyzed, but following are than C and for the remaining systems, NI-NHS,
general definitions ofthe operating conditions Primary, Secondary and State Highways, the
that exist at each level. acceptable LOS threshold has been set at greater
than D. The "hot spot" maps in each system
LOS A - Vehicles are completely section show the sections ofroads that do not
unimpeded in their ability to maneuver within meet these acceptable thresholds.
the traffic stream. Almost no platoons are
observed.
