ITS at the Border. Technologies, Strengths/Weaknesses & Why It s Important

Transcription

1 ITS at the Border Technologies, Strengths/Weaknesses & Why It s Important

2 About Y2K Engineering Founded in 2017 by Yung Koprowski Headquartered in Gilbert, AZ Y2K is a transportation planning and civil engineering firm that provides context-sensitive solutions from concept to successful completion. Expertise with temporary and permanent deployment of ARID systems to obtain performance measure data for a variety of applications.

3 About Crossborder Group Founded in 1996 by Kenn Morris Key consulting & research staff: San Diego, USA Tijuana, Mexico Specialists in Mexico & North American border market research, data collection, surveys, and strategies for business, transportation, and site selection Our Focus: US-Mexico & US-Canada border markets Transportation & freight planning Site selection, cost & feasibility studies Crossborder strategies & market entry Maquiladora & NorthAm industrial research Crossborder retail research

4 ITS At the Border: How Common? To-date, Crossborder Group has collected data at 22 Land Ports of Entry (21 US-Mexico, 1 US-Canada) Of these, only 3 had ITS systems in place to measure border crossing times for POVs (2 in TX, 1 in WA/BC BT) More had ITS for cargo: RFID - 7 currently in TX, 1 in AZ (new) So of 48+ US-Mexico crossings, most do not have ITS in place

5 Why ITS Is Important At the Border? (1) Reliable border crossing times increases ability for community members to plan for shopping and tourism-related trips Image courtesy of Michael Baker Intl At-border surveys find direct relationship between perceived border delays & decision to cross border Work/school - inelastic Discretionary crossings (shopping, social visits) negatively impacted by perceived delays Real Impacts: recent Imperial County study found $370M+/yr retail spend by MX visitors

6 Why ITS Is Important At the Border? (2) Sierra Vista MPO Crossborder Visitor O/D & Shopping Study (just released) Found top reasons for MX visitation was shopping & social visits too (common along US-MX border) MX Visitor Spend: $146/trip in Summer, $95/trip in Fall

7 ITS At the Border: What s the Purpose? Traffic Management and Response Border Wait Time (BWT) Measurement Data Collection and Management Traveler Information Coordination U.S. Customs and Border Protection CBP Border Wait Times App

8 ITS At the Border: The Challenge It s complicated: Have to address two sides of a border, sharing of data, many lane types Queues can be very, VERY long (see example at right), for commercial, POVs and pedestrians What tech to use? No single tech solution covers all needs & field conditions Sample Queue data provided by Crossborder Group to SANDAG

9 Current Methods From Low Tech to High Tech (1) Manual recording of license plates for travel time data Have used this method for measuring crossing times for over 50,000 vehicles Collect data at two locations (per direction of travel) Match rates: 5%-30% Labor intensive + data entry Flexible data collection points but limited (safety/daylight) Higher volumes = more noise

10 Current Methods From Low Tech to High Tech (2) LPRs automated reading of license plates for travel time Used extensively by CBP for security/id purposes & transit time; have done POE-specific BWT projects w/ CBP using LPRs Current tech provides excellent read rates (90%+) Limits: fixed collection points queues may extend past sites, lighting/imaging can be issue, poss. data delay between points Can be costly (but costs decreasing some now in cloud) Cultural/security issues with LPRs (esp. in MX) Image by Crossborder Group; LPR data analysis by Open ALPR

11 Current Methods From Low Tech to High Tech (4) RFID for travel times (primarily cargo) In use at 7 commercial crossings along US-MX border currently For small pool of frequent crossers, can be feasible Excellent read rates in variety of conditions; no issues w/ imagery, less conspicuous Limits: fixed collection points queues may extend past sites, poss. data delay between points Courtesy of Texas Transportation Institute

12 Current Methods From Low Tech to High Tech (3) Bluetooth, Wifi & ARID sensors for travel time data Remote sensing of BT or Wifi signals from vehicles (or pedestrians) probably most common primarily along US- CA border so far Requires less public interaction, is anonymous data, fairly inconspicuous Modest level of samples per vehicle (varies by tech, will change over time) Limits: fixed collection points queues may extend past sites, poss. data delay between points Photo courtesy of TPA North America Inc.

13 Current Methods From Low Tech to High Tech (5) GPS and anonymous cell phone data for travel times Either via probe vehicles (equipment or app recruitment needed), or anonymous GPS data from cell phone providers Highly accurate can be real time Requires little infrastructure investment, positions not fixed Limits: Historic disconnect between US-MX cell companies has limited access to their data binationally (may change) Tough (but not impossible) to recruit sufficient pool of public participants

14 Current Methods From Low Tech to High Tech (5) Facial recognition for pedestrian travel time data Has not yet been implemented for travel time measures Photo courtesy of San Diego Union Tribune Was implemented first as security/immigration related measure pilot project at Otay Mesa POE (San Diego) However, binational airport terminal exploring system both for security & travel time using facial recognition Could be used at other pedestrian POEs Photo courtesy of Cross Border Xpress

15 Case Studies In Arizona And California

16 Case Study: ADOT Evaluation of ARID at POEs Goal of study: To analyze the penetration rate of ARID technology to measure wait times of US & Mexico bound POVs at 6 US-MX Ports of Entry in Arizona. Also, for ADOT and stakeholders to have understanding of ARID data collection tech & validity of measuring wait time at POEs To make recommendations on which POEs to install permanent ARID technology..and help prioritize

17 Wi-fi versus Bluetooth Northbound Southbound

18 Data Analysis San Luis SOUTHBOUND Penetration Rate: 21.0% Average Delay Per Vehicle: 47 sec Average Daily Vehicle Delay: veh-hrs

19 Data Analysis DeConcini NORTHBOUND Penetration Rate: 30.6% Avg Delay Per Vehicle: 2.89 minutes Avg Daily Vehicle Delay: 303 veh-hrs SOUTHBOUND Penetration Rate: 24.5% Avg Delay Per Vehicle: 0.79 mins (47 sec) Avg Daily Vehicle Delay: 70.4 veh-hrs

20 Case Study: SVMPO Origin-Destination Study Goal of study: To provide City of Sierra Vista & Sierra Vista MPO with insights into cross border visitors from Mexico regarding shopping & travel destinations For O/D: Wi-Fi devices were temporarily installed at six locations to determine route characteristics and popular destinations of border crossing vehicles. For shopping & tourism: implemented two waves of at-border surveys to Mexicoresiding car crossers at Douglas (Raul Hector Castro) Summer 779 Fall 1,171 "Mexican Visitors to Arizona: Visitor Characteristics and Economic Impacts, " produced by U of A for AZ Office of Tourism

21 SVMPO: Weekday Origin-Destination

22 SVMPO: Weekend Origin-Destination

23 SVMPO: Weekend Origin-Destination Average Daily Matches Visiting or Passing Through the City of Sierra Vista Percent of Total Daily Matches Estimated Daily Volume* Weekday (M-F) % 1,362 Weekend (Sat/Sun) % 1,041 Bypassing the City of Sierra Vista Entirely Average Daily Matches Percent of Total Daily Matches Estimated Daily Volume* Weekday (M-F) % 1,224 Weekend (Sat/Sun) % 942 *Daily volumes were estimated using ADOT continuous count station data on SR 80

24 Sierra Vista Study: Principal Findings O/D Results: Were able to use border ITS data to assess travel patterns to border community for econ dev planning Able to use ITS to estimate average visitation time to Sierra Vista: hours Travel & Tourism Results (for Sierra Vista): Determined basic crossing patterns & characteristics for visitors from Mexico in POVs Found that average expenditure of Mexican visitors destined for Sierra Vista ($252) was greater than the average spend for all Mexican Visitors ($146) Estimated that Sierra Vista likely captures minimum of $ million in direct retail expenditures by Mexicoresiding visitors annually

25 Case Study: San Ysidro POE & Wifi Detection Scale of San Ysidro POE is massive One of US largest border crossings Approx 50K cars & 25K pedestrians each day Finishing $800M+ upgrade (incl both US & MX infra) BWT system: nada until recently

26 Case Study: San Ysidro POE & Wifi Detection As part of ITS for regional POE system (to support tolled crossing at Otay Mesa East), need accurate travel time Possible ADOT study influence? Are implementing Wifi for POV detection Southbound system in place, adjusting algorithm (using GPS probe vehicles to compare) System likely to be expanded in Sample of crossing time and detection data

27 Summary ITS at the border is still in relatively new stage of testing and development Unique (but not unsurmountable) challenges created by border Variety of possible technological solutions but no one approach provides perfect data (limits and benefits for each) May require new ways of collecting data, possible need for P3s and/or binational non-profits to navigate crossborder issues Important to share data and experiences across both national and state borders to develop optimal solutions for border and transportation community

28 ITS at the Border Questions? Preguntas?