St_Kilda_Town_Hall.jpg

14. Local authority aspects

14.1   Scope

 

This Section is targeted at local authorities and persons interested in the local authority perspective on ITS. It is therefore different in scope and nature to all other Sections.  Its main objective is to provide the reader with easy to access information about a selection of road transport systems and ITS tools commonly implemented by public authorities and the European and international standards that underpin them, and the relevance of standards, from the perspective of a typical local authority.

The ‘Transport context’ Section (14.2) is intentionally somewhat detailed in order to enable readers to gain a good understanding of the transport tasks and the ITS priorities of local authorities. The main body of the Section (14.6) is divided into functional domains that typically fall within the transport remit of the local authority (from the perspective of a typical local authority rather than the perspective of a technical standards developer). Under each functional heading, a set of road management systems and/or ITS tools are described and relevant ITS standards and legislation are referenced. Many of these systems and tools are described further in other Sections and links are provided accordingly.

The choice of the three functional domains (Reducing delay for all modes at traffic signals, Managing urban vehicle access regulations and Infrastructure developments) has been made for several reasons.

Firstly, they have strategic importance at local and/or European level.

The second reason is to collate and combine information about one domain that is spread across several Sections of this document.

There are many other functional domains of importance to local authorities, such as parking and public transport management, information and fares. These are covered in a comprehensive manner in distinct Sections within ICIP and are therefore easily accessible to readers. Cross references are provided to make this easy to use.

 

14.2  Transport context

14.2.1 Local authorities and transport

 

The local authority is a key stakeholder in the ITS sector, as both ITS service provider and provider of transport data to enable ITS services. Before entering into the ITS specifics, it is useful to understand what are the roles and responsibilities of local authorities in the transport domain, because these influence their approach to ITS and more generally the way they manage the transport network.

The transport tasks of local authorities are wide-ranging, but typically include transport planning (to achieve policy goals), regulating access to and use of public space (e.g. parking, restricted vehicle zones, speed limits), licensing (e.g. taxi services and eScooter operations), operational aspects (notably traffic management) and procurement of transport services (in particular public transport). In addition, there are numerous other local authority functions that have a transport dimension, including in the schools domain (e.g. school bus services), social care (e.g. special transport services for the elderly and disabled), land use planning (e.g. access requirements, parking) and the environment (e.g. tackling air quality and noise), among others.

The actual transport responsibilities of an authority depend on its form (borough, district, municipality, county, province or region) and jurisdiction. To improve the integration of systems and services (in particular around large urban centres) contiguous local authorities are forming integrated transport authorities, with a core function being the joint procurement of passenger transport services, but whose activities are increasingly broadening out to other areas (functional area traffic planning, traffic management, urban logistics, etc).

It is not uncommon for the road network of a local authority area to be managed by more than one road authority. In most European countries, the responsibility for managing motorways running through or entering a city remains with the motorway authority/operator. In countries such as Norway, the national road authority (NPRA) is responsible for all high-capacity roads in cities, including the task of traffic management. In London, the integrated transport authority Transport for London manages all of London’s 6000+ traffic signals and manages 5% of roads carrying 1/3 of  traffic volume, with the remaining roads under the responsibility of the respective 32 London borough councils. The governance picture is therefore quite heterogenous across Europe and is in stark contrast to the ‘simpler’ motorway environment - where there is usually just one authority and one operator, which are often one and the same.

 

14.2.2               ITS as an enabler of policy

 

ITS offers local authorities a tool to manage the transport network in a way that helps them implement their policies.

The overarching transport goal of most local authorities, in particular cities, is to improve liveability through policies generally or specifically aiming to reduce the environmental impact of transport (promoting walking, cycling and public transport, reducing congestion), to enhance transport equity (affordable and accessible transport), to improve road safety and to promote healthy choices (active travel) whilst maintaining economic vitality. The single most important objective of most local authorities is modal shift from the private car to sustainable modes (cycling, walking and public transport) for which local authorities make use of a mixture of carrot (nudging, awareness raising, incentives) and stick (mainly regulations) measures.

The Sustainable Urban Mobility Planning (SUMP) approach, heavily promoted by the European Commission, provides a framework for building an integrated transport plan that is goal and vision-oriented and has made a clear diagnosis of the transport system’s problems. Integration of policy areas and government levels are key principles of the SUMP approach.

 

The past 20 years has seen a shift in focus in the use of road management systems and ITS by local authorities, in line with their changing policy goals. Whereas road management systems, such as traffic signals, and ITS tools, such as parking information signs, were originally designed and operated to ensure road vehicles flowed efficiently, they are now being called upon to deliver wider policy goals, such as prioritising public transport vehicles and cyclists at traffic lights or dynamic parking guidance signs directing drivers away from parking facilities in the city centre towards park and ride sites in the outskirts. This change in focus has two important effects.

Firstly, the traffic management task has become a provider of wider transport policies, such as emissions reduction, safety of all road users (especially vulnerable road users), economic regeneration and social cohesion.

Secondly, local authorities are prioritising investments in road management systems and ITS that support goals of modal shift and seamless intermodal trips (such as real-time public transport information and integrated payment schemes) and that operationalise the array of traffic restrictions and other access regulations being adopted by local authorities, such as low emission zones, limited traffic zones, road pricing, etc.

 

14.2.3 Local authorities, data and ITS

 

It is well-recognised that the domain of ITS emerged from the re-use of data from road management systems (especially traffic signalling systems) to build information services for drivers originally, and all types of road users today.

Until the ‘90s, this data was merely a by-product of road management systems. The growth of the ITS industry combined with the public sector open data movement  (from around 2010 onwards) has altered local government perceptions of transport data from a mere systems’ by-product to an asset that has value and consequently is to be curated. Local authorities are no longer ‘just’ transport managers but are increasingly having to become data managers too. The creation of data skills and capacity is an ongoing process within the public sector more broadly.

Given the growth in the ITS industry and in the number and type of transport data players in the market, a key question local authorities are asking themselves today is what role they should they play in the ITS service delivery and data creation domains? In other words, what should a local authority do itself and what should it leave to (including procuring from) the market?

By way of example, a local authority wanting to obtain average traffic speeds must decide whether to buy a road user detection system, such as an ANPR camera system (cf. Section 21.2), or to procure the data directly from third parties. There are many factors that need to be taken into account in this deliberation, including cost-effectiveness, reliability of data or services, alignment with policy goals, market maturity, data privacy and user satisfaction. Despite the plethora of ITS services and data sets available in the market, the pros and cons for a public authority to ‘leave it to the market’ have still not been fully explored. There are nonetheless many interesting practical examples of local authorities engaging with the market, some of which have been examined in two recent studies commissioned by the European Investment Bank on urban mobility data acquisition and urban ITS procurement.

 

14.2.4   Local authorities and ITS standards

The use of ITS standards by public authorities is typically determined by the availability (and maturity) of a standard, the industry’s uptake/willingness to use it and awareness of the standard within local government (especially at the system procurement stage when technical specifications are defined). The experience of several cities on standards specification in public procurements is addressed in the EIB study on urban ITS procurement . In one case, a city authority indicated in a recent tender that a standard was desired but not mandatory for a new parking guidance system, in recognition of the fact that mandating adoption of a standard could penalise smaller players in what is already a relatively small market. Ultimately, the winning bid did actually propose a standard protocol.  

There is a general perception that the public transport sector (driven by the Transmodel family of standards) has been more active in terms of ITS standards development and uptake in the urban environment. While there are ITS standards available in the area of road/traffic management, notably the DATEX II suite (cf. Section 22.5), their application to urban transport functions has been limited since the DATEX standard emerged from the motorway environment (for centre-to-centre communications originally) and its outputs focused initially on motorway ITS applications. There is now a concerted effort to rectify this situation by the DATEX II community and within CEN.

There are a growing number of DATEX II data models to support urban functions such as urban vehicle access regulations and parking. Within CEN’s ITS technical committee (CEN TC278), a dedicated urban working group (WG17) was established in 2017, in a bid to move away from the silo’d nature of CEN working groups and with a remit to take a problem-solution oriented approach. CEN TC278 WG17 changed its name to ‘Mobility Integration’ in 2019 to better reflect the nature of its work and to align with its sister working group in ISO, carrying the same name ‘Mobility Integration’ and technically referred to as ISO TC204 WG19  (cf. Section 15.2). CEN TC278 WG 17 has already published a number of deliverables (information, guidance and specifications) responding to a series of urban ITS challenges and needs identified in the urban ITS pre-study PT1701. Some of these are referenced throughout this Section.

 

 

 

 
 
 

14.3  Overview of stakeholders

 

The stakeholders listed below cover the organisations primarily involved in managing and enforcing transport, the entities that are major trip generators (passenger and goods) and citizens (groups). These are typically the main stakeholders that would be consulted and/or engaged in the SUMP development process.

  • Local authority (and its varied organisational constructs)

  • National road/transport authority

  • Integrated (passenger) transport authority

  • Transport police

  • Citizens, civil society and pressure groups

  • Local businesses, in particular retail outlets

  • Logistics companies

  • Employers

 

14.4  Main legislation mandating the use of standards

 

The most important European legislation dealing with urban ITS of relevance to local authorities are listed below. There are nonetheless other pieces of legislation that may be relevant to specific functional areas and which are referenced in the relevant functional Sections.

  • ITS Directive suite

    • ITS Directive (2010/40/EU, 17/07/10), provides a framework for accelerating the deployment of Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) and ensuring continuity of services across borders through improve available and accessibility of data (cf. Section 19.1.2.8.3). It essentially gives a mandate to the European Commission to adopt delegated regulations in the priority action areas defined in the Directive. The Directive has led to the adoption of 5 delegated regulations, including the real-time traffic information (RTTI) and multi-modal travel information services (MMTIS) delegated regulations described below.

    •  

The initial fixed duration of the Directive (7 years) was extended from 2017-2022. The EC adopted the revision of this Directive, as part of the new EU urban mobility framework launched on 14 December 2021. Deliberations within the Council and European Parliament are expected to take 1-2 years. The two most far-reaching scope changes relate to the mandatory creation of data by public authorities for the benefit of ITS services, referred to as ‘data availability’ in EC parlance, and the mandatory deployment of services. Other important elements of the revision concern C-ITS, specifically the role of the EC as certificate policy authority, and tacit extension of the Directive for a period of 5 years unless there is opposition from Council and the European Parliament.

 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_21_6729

 

  • MMTIS delegated regulation (EU) 2017/1926, 31/05/17, on the provision of multimodal travel information services (MMTIS) mandates the publication on a national access point and in a standardised form a series of static multimodal data sets. The EC plans to revise the regulation to extend the data sets and to mandate the publication of specified dynamic data sets. The regulation does not mandate the creation of data nor does it stipulate open data.

 

  • RTTI delegated regulation (EU) 2015/962, 18/12/14, on the provision of real-time traffic information (RTTI) mandates the publication on a national access point and in a standardised form a series of static, dynamic and real-time road and traffic data sets. The regulation currently applies to motorways only. The imminent (March 2022) revision of the delegated regulation is expected to broaden its application beyond motorways to all roads and extend the data sets -particularly to traffic and road rules and in-vehicle data for the benefit of traffic and asset management and road safety.

 

 

 

14.5  Main ITS standards families relevant to local authorities

 

Transmodel:

  • NeTEx for essentially static information: public transport network topology (part 1), scheduled timetables (part 2) and fare information (part 3) and, more recently, new transport modes (part 5).

  • SIRI for real-time public transport information operations and information service provision

DATEX II for traffic information and traffic data and more recently traffic regulations (e.g. vehicle access regulations such as low emissions zones). (cf. Section 22.5)

INSPIRE transport data specifications

TN-ITS for exchanging information on changes in static road attributes.

C-ITS standards

CEN 17378 and CEN 17380 (detailed below and in Section 15) on air quality management and UVAR instantiation

CEN 17400 (Mixed vendor environments, methodologies & translators), CEN 17401 (Mixed vendor environment guide), and CEN 17402 (Use of regional traffic standards in a mixed vendor environment). See 14.6.1.1 below.

 

14.6  Functional areas and standards

 

14.6.1 Reducing delay for all modes at traffic signals

 

14.6.1.1  Purpose

As pointed out in Section 21.3, traffic signals are the primary tool for local (traffic) authorities to control traffic. They may be fixed-time or adapt to traffic volume, and may operate locally (e.g. at junction level) or area-wide (involving multiple junctions). The main objective for traffic signals, in particular the adaptive kind, is to optimise the throughput of vehicles at junctions and to reduce delay. While this remains an important objective, traffic signals are increasingly being used to optimise the flow of specific modes (e.g. buses, cyclists or pedestrians) in line with policies prioritising sustainable modes.

Traffic signals are a central function of traffic management and therefore play an important role in system architecture. Other electronic ITS systems procured subsequently will have to integrate with the traffic signals system. Vendor lock-in is a common problem in this field (cf. Section 15.1). In the absence of a European approach to this problem, many national/regional interface standards have emerged, including OCIT in the German speaking part of Europe, UTMC in the UK and RSMP in the Nordics. While they are different in architecture, they all strive for the common goal of enabling a multi-vendor environment. See CEN 17400 (Mixed vendor environments, methodologies & translators), CEN 17401 (Mixed vendor environment guide), and CEN 17402 (Use of regional traffic standards in a mixed vendor environment).

 

14.6.1.2  Links

Section 21 (Traffic management and control), particularly Sections 21.3 (traffic signals operation) and 21.11 (road network optimisation).

Section 15 (Mobility integration), particularly Section 15.1.

 

14.6.1.3  Applicable legislation

The only legislation applying to traffic signals relates to:

  • data output: in the event of a revised RTTI delegated regulation being extended to roads other than motorways (current application), certain traffic signal data outputs (e.g. traffic volume) will need to be made available in DATEX II format on the national access point

  • data processing for which GDPR would apply

 

14.6.2             Adaptive traffic signals

 

14.6.2.1  Description

 

Traffic signals are programmed to optimise the flow of vehicles according to local priorities. Vehicle detector data and algorithms are required to adjust signals settings in real-time locally (eg junction level) or area-wide (multiple junctions). The algorithms are intrinsic to the traffic controller, which is under the control of the traffic authority. Road user detection happens in a number of ways, either through the traditional inductive loops or the less intrusive above ground systems such as cameras or radar. More information about road user detection and identification systems can be found in Section 21.2.

 

14.6.2.2  Standards

The main ITS standards for traffic signals concern the signal controller data outputs. For ITS, the DATEX II data exchange specifications apply. For C-ITS, the Signal Phase and Timing (SPaT) and MAP standardised message sets must be adopted in any traffic signal related C-ITS use case, such as green light optimal speed advisory (GLOSA). DATEX II is a data-structuring standard whereas SPaT, MAP and other C-ITS standards work on the communications/connectivity level. These are further described in Section 21.3.4.

CEN TC278 WG17 (Mobility Integration) has drafted a series of documents related to vendor lock-in:

CEN/TS 17400:2020- Intelligent transport systems - Urban ITS - Mixed vendor environments, methodologies & translators. 00278522. This document provides specifications for the introduction and maintenance of a “Mixed Vendor Environment” (MVE) in the domain of urban-ITS. It focuses on the principal aspects of urban ITS where vendor lock-in is a technical and financial problem: primarily centre-to field communications and traffic management systems.

 

 - CEN/TS 17466:2020 Intelligent transport systems - Urban ITS - Communication interfaces and profiles for traffic management. 00278523 This document identifies traffic management interfaces between central stations and specifies related ITS communication profiles enabling standardized data exchange over these communication interfaces, applicable for a variety of platforms including ITS station units (ITS-SUs) compliant with ISO 21217:2014.

 

 

14.6.3            Bus priority systems enabled by automatic vehicle location

 

14.6.3.1 Description

 

Many cities across Europe have installed priority systems for buses (and trams) at traffic signals to reduce delay and increase commercial speed, thereby making them a more attractive mode of transport. On its approach to a set of signals, the bus is detected either locally (interaction between vehicle and roadside detector) or centrally through an automatic vehicle location (AVL) system. The traffic signal responds to this detection according to a pre-determined strategy, e.g. extending or accelerating the arrival of the green signal. Each city determines its own bus priority strategy, for instance, one city might offer absolute priority to all buses whereas another may only offer priority to those buses behind schedule. Section 17.5 carries more information about vehicle priority systems.

In addition to enabling bus priority and wider fleet management, AVL data outputs can also serve other applications such as real-time information about the arrival or departure of a bus at a given stop. This real-time passenger information can be delivered to the passenger at the bus stop or via a mobile app of the transport authority or a third party app enabled by open data. Section 17.10 carries more information about real-time service monitoring and Section 17.5 about real-time passenger information

 

14.6.3.2  Standards

 

There is a family of CEN standards for AVL data based on SIRI (Service interface for real-time information), which are listed in Section 17.10.4. SIRI  is the prescribed format in the European MMTIS regulation for dynamic public transport (and wider multimodal) data sets that must be made available on the national access point. The publication of dynamic data is expected to become mandatory in the planned revision of the MMTIS regulation due in 2022.

‘There are no European standards specifically focussing on public transport access control systems. However, the following international standard is applicable:  ISO 22951:2009: Data dictionary and message sets for pre-emption and prioritisation signal systems for emergency and public transport vehicles (PRESTO). In addition, there are a number of national specifications that apply. An example is the document RTIG-T031, produced by the UK-based public transport forum RTIG’ (Section 17.5.4)

 

14.6.4               Optimising signalised crossings for pedestrians

 

14.6.4.1   Description

 

With the aim of optimising the performance of signalised pedestrian crossings and improving the safety and comfort of waiting pedestrians, some cities (e.g. London) are installing systems based on pedestrian detection equipment (such as thermal imaging or infrared cameras) that allow the crossing time to be adapted to the measured demand. This can result in an extended crossing time in case of high pedestrian volumes or simply a person requiring more time to cross the road. It can also lead to a shortening of the crossing time, thereby reducing vehicular delay. Default priority for pedestrians is being introduced at some signalised crossings in London, with positive initial results[mm1] .

 https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/media/press-releases/2022/february/new-tfl-data-shows-success-of-innovative-pedestrian-priority-traffic-signals

 

14,6.4.2  Standards

There are no known ITS standards applying to pedestrian detection systems. CEN tc278 WG17 / ISO TC204 WG19 are investigating requirements.

 

14.6.5             Optimising traffic signals through speed advice - GLOSA

 

14.6.5.1  Description

The advent of C-ITS is offering the possibility for communication between vehicles and infrastructure. Green Light Optimal Speed Advice (GLOSA) is a first generation C-ITS service designed for traffic controllers to interact with vehicles. The service consists of a broadcast of the traffic signal phasing schedule, enabling vehicles to calculate the optimal speed of approach to reach a green light (Time To Green/Green Wave Assistant applications) or the inability to reach a green light thereby averting unsafe acceleration (Deceleration Assistant).  The proclaimed benefits of GLOSA are emissions reductions and safety (due to less stopping and a reduction in acceleration and deceleration).

Standards

The GLOSA services derives speed advice from two data inputs: SPAT(EM) and MAP(EM) messages.

  • Signal Phase and Timing (SPAT/SPATEM) is the standardised message set for broadcasting the current traffic signal phase and the next change. It can also include information about approaching traffic.

  • Map Data (MAP/MAPEM) is the standardised message set describing the physical geometry of one or more interSections.

 

ISO/TS 19091:2017 defines the message, data structures, and data elements to support exchanges between the roadside equipment and vehicles. Visit Section 8.4.1.26 for further information

The message can be transmitted over a short-range (ITS-G5) or long-range (mobile) communication network. There are pros and cons with both forms of  communication technology. For further information on these communication channels, visit Section 8.2.3 on cellular and localised technologies.

Interesting reads: , InterCor GLOSA Testfest and NordicWay2 GLOSA mapping study

 

 

14.6.6               Managing urban vehicle access regulations (UVARs)

 

14.6.6.1  Purpose

Dire air quality and excessive congestion are the main drivers for the adoption of urban vehicle access regulations by local authorities. Many cities are in breach of European air quality legislation and are overrun by vehicles, despite substantial efforts to provide alternatives (including investment in public transport, cycling and walking). From the local authority perspective, the climate crisis has added impetus to the need for drastic action to be taken.

Urban vehicle access regulations (UVARs) come in many forms and are implemented in different ways across Europe. The most recognised regulations are low/zero emissions zones (LEZ/ZEZ), limited traffic zones and road user charging schemes. To this core group could be added parking regulations, areas reserved for specific modes (e.g. pedestrianised areas) and lanes reserved for public transport. The European H2020 project ReVeAL has created an UVAR classification scheme comprising three groups: emissions-based, spatial interventions and pricing measures. This Section is focusing on the most recognised core group of urban vehicle access regulations, for two main reasons.

Firstly, the rise in the number of UVAR schemes, particularly LEZs, being adopted by city authorities across Europe is continuing unabated. The schemes are designed to respond to the specific needs, policies and culture of a city, according to subsidiarity principles and their SUMP. They therefore differ greatly across Europe in terms of the vehicle characteristics that are subject to the restrictions (vehicle type, emissions level), the operation of the scheme (24/7, week days, morning and evening, peak hours), the spatial extent (city centre, residential neighbourhoods, whole metropolitan area, freight corridors) and the time-scale (gradual tightening of emissions levels in LEZs towards ZEZs).

Secondly, the diversity of UVARs is creating the need for better and easy-to-access information by drivers about the schemes in place. This is particularly the case for drivers from outside a given city, such as lorry drivers or even tourists/visitors, who more often than not are unaware of the vehicle access restrictions in place. Indeed, the European Commission has received many complaints from frustrated drivers unaware of the UVAR policy and subsequently receiving a penalty notice. To achieve higher levels of compliance (and issue fewer fines), local authorities need to use as many channels as possible to disseminate information about UVARs. The spread of connected vehicle technologies can be of great assistance here.

 

14.6.6.2  Links to other Sections

Section 15: Mobility integration, especially re CEN/TS 17380:2019    Intelligent transport systems - Urban-ITS - 'Controlled Zone' management for UVARs using C-ITS, and CEN/TS 17378:2019    Intelligent transport systems - Urban ITS - Air quality management in urban areas  

 

CEN/TS 17378:2019    - Air quality management in urban areas   provides guidance regarding Air quality management in urban areas, while CEN/TS 17380:2019, provides guidance on how to implement UVARs in the context of ‘connected vehicles.

(see also 14.6.2.1 below).

Section 10: Electronic Fee Collection

Section 21: Traffic management & control, especially 21.2 (Road user detection and identification), 21.4 (zone access control) and 21.13 (Traffic enforcement)

14.6.6.4  Applicable legislation

 

There is no European legislation on the definition and adoption of UVARs since they are embedded in national legislation (cf. Section 21.13.15). Local authorities are free to choose the UVAR scheme type and to design it according to their requirements, within the boundaries of national law. However, it is widely acknowledged that European air quality legislation (Directive 2008/50/EC, 21/05/09 on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe) has been an important driver for the adoption of emissions-oriented UVARs, namely LEZs.

There is however a family of legislation related to tolling systems, whose aim is to promote interoperable tolling services across Europe and to allow cross-border enforcement for non-payment of road fees – using pricing to achieve strategic policy objectives. The interoperability provision applies to tolling schemes requiring an on-board unit (OBU). Purely local road pricing schemes are currently exempt from the interoperability obligation. However, certain local pricing schemes may be covered by the cross-border enforcement part, specifically schemes that apply a toll/fee, as opposed to those that incur a fine (e.g. LEZ).

 

Other areas of European legislation that are relevant today (and possibly in the future) to the management of UVAR schemes include:

  • data privacy for any UVAR management systems that involves road user identification is subject to GDPR (cf. 21.2), and,

  • digital and standardised information about UVAR schemes may be required in a future revision of the real-time traffic information (RTTI) Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/962.

 

14.6.7   UVAR management systems

14.6.7.1  Description

The technological solutions for actively managing UVARs have vehicle identification as a core function. The range of solutions are essentially limited to infrastructure systems (mainly ANPR - cf. Section 21.2) or systems requiring an on-board unit that communicates locally with a roadside unit or centrally using cellular communications, often incorporating satellite positioning. Systems with on-board units (OBU) have in the past tended to be implemented in tolling schemes where they are referred in ITS service terms as Electronic Fee Collection (EFC). The advent of so called ‘connected vehicles (CCAM in EC parlance) enables ITS technology to manage UVARs.

It is also quite possible to implement certain UVAR schemes, primarily LEZs and limited traffic zones, passively through manual enforcement. This is practiced widely in countries such as Germany, where there is a public aversion to systems that track and trace people and where vehicle detection systems are currently only permitted for road safety-related offences (speeding, red-light jumping, etc).

ANPR is widely implemented in cities choosing an active UVAR management system. For instance, it is used in London for enforcing the congestion charge and LEZ, in Rome for its ‘Limited Traffic Zone’, LEZ and coach restrictions, in Brussels for the LEZ and in Stockholm and Gothenburg for their urban road toll. ANPR has the advantage that it can be used for other urban transport functions, particularly calculating average travel speeds for traffic management and speed enforcement purposes. In its 2016 framework contract for an ANPR system to manage the LEZ, the Brussels regional government specified that the system should support the LEZ, calculate the average speed and propose other interesting functions of ANPR data. It is useful to note that for legal reasons the same ANPR camera could not be used for both LEZ and speed functions in Brussels. (source: EIB Technical on ITS Procurement for Urban Mobility). Systems requiring on-board units are widely implemented in countries where road tolls are commonplace, such as in Norway’s urban areas and on Austrian and French tolled motorways. Given that Norway’s urban toll collection points are open (barrier-free)  to avoid vehicles having to stop, they are also equipped with ANPR cameras to capture the number plate of those vehicles that do not possess an OBU under the country’s electronic fee collection system, Autopass.  

Centrally-managed systems (based on satellite positioning/GNSS) are currently used in distanced-based national tolling schemes, such as the German Maut (toll) for heavy duty vehicles. However, the Brussels region is considering a GNSS system for its road user charging scheme, called SmartMove, which is due to be implemented in 2022. The CLARS website contains a comprehensive overview of the UVAR schemes in Europe, including their characteristics, legal basis and enforcement methods.

Standards

CEN/TS 17378:2019    Intelligent transport systems - Urban ITS - Air quality management in urban areas    

  

This document provides

• information, guidance and specifications on - how to set up an air quality and emissions management policy; - to deploy reliable and scalable technologies to monitor air quality on a continuous or regular basis; - to react with adequate measures; - to specify air quality levels for triggering a scenario;

 • a toolkit of parameters and data definitions that a regulator can use;

 • means to measure the air quality required by relevant EU directives

 • to specify use of TS Intelligent transport systems - Urban-ITS - 'Controlled Zone' management using C-ITS, for the purposes of geofenced controlled zones for emissions management

 

NOTE: In order to maximise European harmonisation, it is recommended that this specification is used in combination with a module of standardised data concepts, however, this version of this document, which is focussed on policies and procedures, does not provide these data concept specifications.

 

 

CEN/TS 17380:2019    Intelligent transport systems - Urban-ITS - 'Controlled Zone' management for UVARs using C-ITS

​This document provides information and specifications enabling management of road traffic in controlled zones applying geofencing. Specifically, this document provides:

- a "Controlled Zone Data Dictionary" (CZDD) for management of controlled zones providing an extendible toolkit that regulators can use e.g. to inform potential CZ users, e.g. vehicles, about - the CZ area, i.e. the geographical boundaries of the CZ;

- CZ access conditions including exempts;

 - time windows indicating when these CZ access conditions are applicable, allowing the potential CZ users to select an appropriate routing, either by pre-trip planning or ad hoc re-routing,

 

 - and illustrations and guidelines on how to use this toolkit. The toolkit is designed in compliance with the general ITS station and communications architecture specified in ISO 21217, and optionally applicable C-ITS protocols and procedures, e.g. ISO 22418:2018  on "Service Announcement", EN ISO 18750 on the "Local Dynamic Map", and EN ISO 17419  on globally unique identifiers. Enforcement is out of scope of this document.

 

While CEN/TS 17380:2019      - Urban-ITS - 'Controlled Zone' management for UVARs using C-ITS’ provides a common standard for implementing UVARs in a connected vehicle/CCAM context, it provides a mechanism that can be used for any type of vehicle restriction, whether to meet the local authority traffic management policies, or long existing regulations such as height and weight restrictions, market day and other event restrictions, time of day restrictions. Etc. It provides a multi-layered mechanism so that UVARs for different purposes can operate simultaneously at any given location. And while its title is “Urban ITS”, its protocols will also operate just as well in rural and motorway environments.

 

A large family of Electronic Fee Collection standards that apply to road tolling schemes requiring on-board units implement a softer form of UVAR by price control. An entire Section (Section 10) is dedicated to this ITS service area and the underlying standards. In essence, the EFC standards support the implementation of the European Electronic Tolling Service (enabled by various legal instruments including Directives (EU) 2019/520, a recast of Directive (EU) 2004/52/EC). The EFC standards apply to all component parts of an EFC system:  back office (toll service provider and charger), roadside unit (RSU), OBU and communications between them. For locally managed EFC systems, i.e. employing RSUs, dedicated short-range technology (DSRC) technology must be used and therefore the DSRC family of communication technology standards apply.

As mentioned in Section 10.3.3, it is also worth noting that “CEN is, at the time of writing of this report, undertaking a pre-study on the use of vehicle license plate information and automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) technologies (CEN PWI 00278540). The objective is to foster a common understanding on the use of vehicle licence plate information and ANPR technologies for EFC and to define the associated standardisation roadmap.”

Geo-fencing is a new approach being considered for defining the spatial boundaries of various technologies. It is ”currently under investigation in a new work item on Management for Electronic Traffic Regulations (METR) - General concept and architecture” [under development] at CEN/TC 278 and ISO/TC 204. Geo-fencing is related to the "Local Dynamic Map" (LDM) specified in EN ISO 18750, which is a storage for time- and location-referenced data together with suitable query mechanisms. (cf. Section 8.1.6).

 

14.6.8             UVAR information systems

 

14.6.8.1  Description

 

The availability of information about UVAR schemes on digital devices is fragmented across Europe. This poses a problem for long distance drivers (lorry drivers, tourists, etc) in particular who rely heavily on these tools for route planning and guidance. The main cause of this fragmented service provision is the unavailability and/or inaccessibility of machine-readable data about UVAR schemes. As mentioned earlier in this UVAR Section, the European Commission has received many complaints about the paucity of digital information and is therefore planning to take action to mandate the publication of data about UVAR schemes in a machine-readable and standardised format. This obligation will be part of the forthcoming revision of the RTTI delegated regulation ((EU) 2015/962, 18/12/14).

The European Commission is funding an initiative, called UVARBox, that is building a framework (toolkit and process) to aid UVAR implementing authorities in publishing information about their UVAR scheme in a machine-readable and standardised format. The initiative is building on the UVAR standardisation work underway within the CEN and DATEX II contexts (see below). The framework will offer a variety of interfaces that can deal with information about UVAR schemes that may or may not be machine-readable and standardised. The toolkit will be able to support the digitisation of LEZs, ZEZs, LTZ, charging schemes and pedestrian schemes. For parking schemes, there is work on-going to ensure alignment between Standards and technical specifications defining parking data and traffic regulations relating to parking schemes.  The primary focal point of this alignment work is being undertaken both within the DATEX II PSA project and its close relationship with WG8 of CEN/TC278 – this interfacing between operational parking data and traffic regulations for parking remains an evolving domain – where alignment is being sought.

14.6.8.2  Standards

Currently, there are no UVAR information system standards (although an implementation mechanism exists in CEN TS 17380). However, there are numerous UVAR data standardisation activities underway:

  • Within the DATEX II Connecting Europe PSA project, there is an activity dedicated to traffic regulations. The project group working on this activity, known as METR (Management of Electronic Traffic Regulations), is building an extended DATEX II data model that will allow the informational content of traffic regulations orders (a legal document restricting or prohibiting use of the roads) to be encoded and exchanged with users including ITS service providers. The data model has been drafted within the project and forms the core of an approved work item for a future CEN Technical Specification under WG8 of CEN’s Technical Committee for ITS (TC 278). This is expected to form Part 11 of the CEN 16157 “DATEX II” standards series. This model will become part of DATEX II v3.0 packages.

 

  • Additionally, the UVARBox activity, in conjunction with DATEX II project activities, is planning to profile and focus the DATEX II METR data model, to produce a DATEX II set of publications (and data model) for UVAR data - providing the formalised structure for digitally encoding UVAR data

The DATEX II data model for UVARs coming out of UVARBox  is expected to form the proposal for an additional new proposed work item for a new CEN Technical Specification under CEN/TC278 WG8 – potentially Part 13 of the CEN 16157 "DATEX II" standard series.

 

  • CEN/TC278 WG 17 (Mobility Integration) is undertaking preliminary work to develop more general standards supporting the definition of the ecosystem needed to support the codification and exchange of traffic regulations digitally and is working closely with its sister group WG19 in the global ISO Technical Committee for Intelligent Transport Systems (ISO/TC204).

 

  • Regarding parking, a major industry stakeholder body, the Alliance for Parking Data Standards (APDS), has developed a common language for data elements and definitions to facilitate integration, compatibility and communication between all parking stakeholders (including ITS providers). The APDS data specification forms the core of an adopted work item in ISO TC204's WG19 for a new ISO Technical Specification (ISO/TS 5206-1 – "Intelligent transport systems – Parking – Part 1: Core data model").  There are also, concurrently, and currently actions underway to revise Part 6 ("Parking Publications") of the CEN 16157 "DATEX II" standards series, with the preparatory work being done by the DATEX II PSA project. This revision of the DATEX II parking data model and Part 6 will use and be aligned to the APDS data specification (and ISO/TS 5206-1).

14.6.9               Infrastructure development to support ITS services

 

14.6.9.1  Purpose

 

This Section combines the most relevant streams of infrastructure-related developments. The three streams carry different time-scales, starting with infrastructure digitalisation which is happening now, the short-to medium term deployment of infrastructure to support V2I/I2V C-ITS communication and the longer term perspective of highly automated driving and the role that infrastructure will play therein.

Infrastructure digitalisation (and the data that enables this) is not, strictly speaking, an ITS matter. However, data is the fuel of ITS and the process of infrastructure digitalisation will unlock vast amounts of machine-readable infrastructure (spatial, road, service and traffic) data for the benefit of improved and new ITS services and high quality digital maps. A bold EU data policy agenda, notably the creation of an European mobility data space (cf. Section 9.2.1.12) and legislation to enable greater data sharing is adding further momentum to the digitalisation process.

Followings many years of research, development, demonstrations and piloting, C-ITS is starting to be rolled out by automotive manufacturers and by road authorities, albeit national road authorities in the first instance. However, it is only a matter of time before local authorities also start to implement C-ITS.  In the future, automated driving is of course where the digital and connectivity (C-ITS) streams of infrastructure development come together.

14.6.9.2  Links

Section 19

14.6.9.3  Applicable legislation

 

ITS Directive and delegated regulations RTTI  and MMTIS

INPSIRE Directive : Directive 2007/2/EU establishing an Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community (INSPIRE). Under this directive, public authorities provide road network geospatial data sets in an INSPIRE-compliant way.

 

14.6.9.4  Standards

DATEX II : The part dealing with traffic data is EN 16157-5 "Intelligent transport systems - DATEX II data exchange specifications for traffic management and information - Part 5: Measured and elaborated data publications" (2020)

Transmodel:

  • NeTEx for static multimodal (particularly public transport) information, such as routes, timetables, stop locations, etc

  • SIRI  for real-time public transport information

INSPIRE: CEN/TR 15449 is a technical report of 5 parts published between 2012 and 2015 under the general title "Geographic information - Spatial data infrastructures". It targets the application of the Directive 2007/2/EU (“INSPIRE directive”) to support the development of the Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI).

TN-ITS for exchanging information on changes in static road attributes.

 

14.6.10             Infrastructure digitalisation

 

14.6.10.1  Description

 

The transition to a digital transport infrastructure has been happening gradually for decades both within local government (eGovernment processes) and through the opening up of public sector data to support research and the emergence of commercial services. Open data is a big activity today and it is understood that transport data is among the public sector data sets with the highest demand and economic value. Many local authorities put data about transport services, traffic and road infrastructure into the public domain, often on local open data portals but increasingly on national access points as required by the regulations of the EU’s ITS Directive.

Through legislation requiring access to spatial data (INSPIRE  Directive 2007/2/EU) and road, traffic and travel data (ITS Directive and regulations), the EU is contributing to the creation of a digital transport infrastructure. An additional impetus for a digital infrastructure has emerged from CCAM developments, where it is becoming clearer that HD digital maps are a pre-condition for the deployment of highly automated vehicles. Section 19 provides a detailed description of the standards and specifications for spatial, geographic and road traffic data and Section 9.2 provides an overview of the digital road infrastructure.

14.6.10.2  Standards

 

There are various types of road, traffic and travel data that are needed for ITS services and for HD digital maps, including spatial data (relating to road geometry and attributes), static public transport data (e.g. public transport service routes and timetables), dynamic data (relating to the road or transport service status), traffic data (about real-time traffic flow and volume) and data about traffic regulations.  There are many standards for each of these data categories.

  • Spatial data: There are two main bodies of specifications related to spatial data. They are the INSPIRE data specifications (mandated by the INSPIRE Directive 2007/2/EU) and a relatively new body of specifications called TN-ITS, which is mainly designed to support digital map makers. This latter data specification is likely to be prescribed for spatial data under the forthcoming revision of the RTTI  delegated regulation. Both data specifications are dealt with in Section 19

  • Static data in a multimodal service context refers to data about public transport routes, timetables and fare information. NeTEx is the European standard and is prescribed in the EU’s multimodal travel information services (MMTIS) delegated regulation. NeTEx is standardised by CEN TC 278 WG3 and is described in Section 17.

  • Dynamic data in a road traffic context means road data that change often or on a regular basis and describe the status of the road, for instance, road closures, dynamic speed limits or temporary traffic management measures. The standard prescribed in the EU’s RTTI regulation is DATEX II or specifications compatible with DATEX II. CEN and ISO’s METR projects are also addressing these issues.

  • Dynamic data in a multimodal service context covers, for instance, the estimated time of arrival/ departure of a bus, disruptions to services, availability of a shared car or bike. The most common exchange specification for this type of data is SIRI, which is also specified in the EU’s MMTIS  delegated regulation. SIRI is developed by CEN TC 278 WG3 and is described in Section 17.

  • Real-time traffic flow data applies to data types such as real-time traffic volume, speed and travel times. DATEX II (or compatible standard) is prescribed in the EU’s RTTI regulation.

  • Traffic regulations (e.g. Low Emission Zones) standardisation activity is underway within DATEX II and CEN and ISO’s METR projects are also addressing these issues.

 

See Section 19.2.5, The Traffic code dissemination service package: 19.2.5.1: Description: This service package disseminates current local, regional or national regulations or orders, that have been adopted by local, regional or national authorities that govern the safe, orderly operation of motor vehicles, cycles and pedestrians on public roads and space. The focus of this service package is electronic distribution to automated vehicles and their drivers so that automated vehicles can safely operate in compliance with the traffic or motor vehicle code for the current region and locality, though this information would also be useful to human drivers.

 

14.6.11             CCAM – Cooperative ITS – connected vehicles

 

14.6.11.1  Description

From a local authority perspective, C-ITS should enable traffic managers to communicate with vehicles in various situations (use cases) with the aim of improving traffic efficiency and road safety. Of the day-1 use cases adopted, those most relevant to local authorities are GLOSA (cf. Section 16.6.1) and IVS (in-vehicle signage). While the other day-1 services are useful (road works warning and hazardous location notifications), they may have greater safety benefit on higher speed interurban roads where the speed of vehicles makes the presence of these events safety-critical. Beyond the actual services themselves, the CAM message (status and position) generated by vehicles (ie, probe vehicle data) could potentially become an important feed for traffic monitoring and management purposes due to their high transmission interval (message generated several times every second) and the fact that they are cost-free if delivered through the ITS G5 communication channel (notwithstanding the cost of a road-side unit). It is not inconceivable that probe vehicle data may well be the trigger for some local authorities to implement C-ITS.

Standards

There is a huge body of standards and specifications in the C-ITS domain related to the message sets, communication channel, ITS station, security, certification, among others. These are referenced in many places throughout this document, in particular in Sections 8 (ITS communications) and 9 (CCAM/C-ITS). Since many standards have been developed from an automotive perspective, the EU-funded C-Roads platform was established to develop profiles and protocols from the infrastructure perspective, in cooperation with the automotive sector. There is a dedicated working group dealing with urban C-ITS matters. The platform recently adopted the harmonised C- ITS specifications for I2V (Infrastructure-to-Vehicle) communication related to the C-ITS Day 1 services. 

 

14.6.11.2             CCAM – Infrastructure support for automated driving (ISAD)

 

14.6.11.2.1  Description

There is growing realisation that the roll out of automated vehicles will take longer than originally proclaimed and that the co-existence of different levels of automated vehicles will be ‘painful’.

There is also a growing recognition that the infrastructure (physical and digital) has an important role to play in the deployment of automated vehicles. A classification scheme has been developed within the H2020 Inframix project, which proposes a framework for categorising the infrastructure according to its support level for automated driving, called ISAD. Although not a specification or standard yet, ISAD provides a scheme with five levels to classify the physical and digital road infrastructure’s preparedness to aid automated vehicles (AV):

  • ISAD E – Conventional road infrastructure: No AV support

  • ISAD D – Static digital information: Digital maps including static road signs are provided to the AVs.

  • ISAD C – Dynamic digital Information: Same as D plus dynamic information like traffic light status, variable speed limits, lane directions, road closures, short-term road works.

  • ISAD B – Cooperative perception: Same as C, plus the infrastructure is capable of perceiving small traffic situations like C-ITS Day 1 services and relay the information to the AVs.

  • ISAD A – Cooperative manoeuvres: Same as B, plus the infrastructure is capable of perceiving vehicle trajectories and guide AVs in order to optimize the traffic flow similar to C-ITS Day 2+ services.

 

The five levels of ISAD are only concerned with digital communications connectivity.  The EU’s CCAM Platform WG3 for physical and digital road infrastructure is in addition building a list of physical road at attributes that can assist automated driving functionality.