Home Sources How Do I? Site Map What's New Help Search Terms: ramp meter*, Special report: Ramp meters; Drivers get benefits, but many pay a... FOCUS™ Edit Search Document 1 of 1. Copyright 1999 Star Tribune Star Tribune (Minneapolis, MN)November 28, 1999, Sunday, Metro EditionSECTION: NEWS; Pg. 1ALENGTH: 3945 wordsHEADLINE: Special report: Ramp meters;Drivers get benefits, but many pay a price;Motorists love to hate them. So are they worth the hassle? Ramp meters speed freeway flow, but Twin Cities-area drivers endure the longest ramp waits in the country, and the Minnesota Department of Transportationdoesn't have studies to back up all of its claims.BYLINE: Joe Rigert; Staff WriterBODY:Under the most extensive system of freeway controls in the nation, Twin Cities-area drivers routinely spend 10 to 15minutes _ and some say 20 minutes _ waiting on metered ramps to get onto freeways during rush hours. And they're told it's for their own good. Minnesota Department of Transportation officials say ramp metering provides more gain than pain. By restrictingfreeway access, they say, meters dramatically ease congestion, speed traffic and reduce accidents. In fact, the metering program has been so impressively portrayed it is viewed as a national model. Do meters help commuters? The short answer: Yes, but not as much as transportation officials have said. Because the department has never comprehensively studied ramp meters, there is no way to conclusively gradetheir performance. That has prompted Senate Minority Leader Dick Day of Owatonna to call for an areawide test oftheir merits. A Star Tribune examination of metering has found that while the ramp controls improve the flow and safety offreeways, they also impose burdens: - For some drivers, metering makes work trips longer rather than shorter. They pay a time toll at the ramp meters,only to wait again in stop-and-go traffic on the freeways. - Although motorists say they have a generally favorable impression of meters, almost two-thirds sometimes skirtthe freeways to avoid ramp delays. Keeping drivers off the freeways is a key to the success of metering. - Even with metering, 123 miles _ one-quarter of the seven-county metropolitan area's freeways _ are congestedduring rush hours. Department officials say that, with ever more vehicles on the road, ramp controls can no longerprevent traffic backups on sections of major freeways such as Interstate Hwys. 35W, I-494 and I-94 and Hwy. 169. - The department has overstated ramp-meter benefits, especially in claims to the Legislature earlier this year. Thedepartment's claims are based largely on the most favorable findings of old studies and on anecdotal information thatoutside experts say generally can't be considered scientific proof. The department also has downplayed newerstudies showing modest gains under more congested conditions. Department officials say that although they don't have a recent, comprehensive study, they have reams of currentdata that back up their claims to the Legislature and to the public. They made the data and additional materialsavailable to the Star Tribune and shared their views in 19 memos and several interviews. Glen Carlson, manager of the department's Traffic Management Center, which controls the meters, said thecontrols sometimes achieve even greater traffic volumes and periods with fewer crashes than the department claims. Carlson and other officials say that metering by itself will not solve congestion problems, but they emphasize thatthe controls help get the most out of freeways as traffic increases, limiting the duration of congestion and keeping itfrom growing even worse. In less-congested areas, officials say they believe major benefits still can be gained from metering. For example,they recently announced installation of 11 more ramp meters on southern sections of Interstate Hwy. 35E and onHwy. 77. Their goal is to cover the metro system by 2007. A national transportation authority, James Moore at the University of Southern California, supported thedepartment's program after evaluating its studies at the Star Tribune's request. Overall, Moore said, the studies _despite some deficiencies _ indicate that Twin Cities-area ramp metering improves or maintains freeway conditions,especially travel speeds. "Are these measures worth the money? . . . If I had to wager based on the available evidence, I would bet 'yes,' "said Moore, director of USC's transportation engineering program and associate director of the National Center forMetropolitan Transportation Research. But he lamented a lack of meter-nonmeter comparisons on similar freeways and said none of the studies met aneeded test: Turn off the meters and see what happens. Key legislators took opposing positions on metering in reaction to the Star Tribune's findings. Rep. TomWorkman, R-Chanhassen and chairman of the House Transportation Committee, said he will push for a meteringholiday and more money to eliminate bottlenecks. He voted against the meter turnoff this year. Sen. Carol Flynn,DFL-Minneapolis and chairwoman of the Senate Transportation Policy Committee, said she also wants to providemore money to fight congestion, but remains opposed to a metering holiday as "much too dangerous." Day said thenewspaper's findings should help in his renewed effort to require the Transportation Department to test the merits ofmeters.Trip times For some drivers, meters speed up traffic enough to shorten trips. But in a limited study last year, the departmentfound that meters were increasing at least some travel times. Ramp waits on Hwy. 169 (in the western suburbs)added to trip times on five out of 10 freeway sections, the study showed, even though motorists could drive fasteronce on the highway. It took drivers who'd waited through meters longer to go 10.5 miles, for example, than it tookdrivers who didn't wait through meters to go 14 miles. The department called the more time-consuming trips oneof the drawbacks of metering.In another study, Washington state's transportation agency in 1996-97 asked drivers to report travel times beforeand after meters were installed on Interstate Hwy. 405. The result: an increase in commuting time of 3 to 9 percentafter metering in the morning peak period, and an increase of 11 percent on one freeway section in the evening. Minnesota officials acknowledge that, systemwide, the long ramp
View Full Document
Unlocking...