Home > Promising Practices > Ramp Metering Strategies in the Twin Cities

Ramp Metering Strategies in the Twin Cities

An Effective Practice

Description

In the fall of the year 2000, a unique experiment was conducted in the Minneapolis/St. Paul (MSP) region of Minnesota to answer questions regarding the ability of ramp metering strategies to reduce congestion and improve travel safety in the region.

Goal / Mission

The goal was to evaluate the regionwide impacts of turning off the ramp meters for a six-week period.

Results / Accomplishments

When the traffic conditions were compared, it was observed that there were 26 percent fewer crashes on the freeways and ramps when the ramp meters were working. The freeways also were observed to operate at higher speeds with ramp metering. This resulted in 14 percent faster throughput and 22 percent reduced travel times as a result of ramp metering.

About this Promising Practice

Organization(s)
United States Department of Transportation - Federal Highway Administration
Primary Contact
Brian J. Kary, MnDOT Freeway Operations Engineer
651-234-7022
brian.kary@state.mn.us
http://www.dot.state.mn.us/rampmeter/study.html
Topics
Community / Transportation
Community / Public Safety
Organization(s)
United States Department of Transportation - Federal Highway Administration
Date of publication
7/19/2004
Date of implementation
2000
Geographic Type
Urban
Location
Minneapolis/St. Paul region of Minnesota
For more details
http://www.dot.state.mn.us/rampmeter/pdf/finalrepo...

Related Promising Practices

  1. Driving and Dementia Toolkit
  2. Driving Decisions Workbook
  3. Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
  4. Checkpoints Program
  5. Telecommuting Program - Arizona
  6. Get on Board

More

Related Content for: Ramp Metering Strategies in the Twin Cities

An Effective Practice meets the following HCI criteria:

  1. The program description includes at a minimum: the sponsoring organization, program goals, program implementation steps, and outcomes that have demonstrated program success and/or promise in achieving the program goal in one or more localities.
  2. The results from an evaluation of the program include quantitative measures of improvement in outcome of interest (i.e. increase in voter registration, not just delivery of voter registration drive) and/ or the outcome measure is increased or improved compared to the baseline measurement or the control group but the difference is not statistically significant.
Nevada Tomorrow