12:30 AM
 |
| Who is the contracting agency for ARTIMIS? |
| Since April 1, 2002, the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) is the contracting agency under a bi-state agreement with the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet (KYTC). KYTC was the contracting agency up to April 1. |
| Who controls the program? |
| The ARTIMIS program reports to a Policy Committee and a Technical Committee. |
| The Technical Committee is made up of members of KYTC, ODOT, the OKI Regional Council of Governments, the City of Cincinnati, the Northern Kentucky Area Planning Commission, and the Federal Highway Administration. In most cases, there are representatives from both States, as applicable, both from the central office and the local district office. This committee oversees all technical aspects of the program. |
| The Policy Committee is made up of a single representative from each location. The two States have a local and state representative. This committee is responsible for determining all overriding program policies. For example, information distribution, camera monitoring, and changeable message sign usage. |
| How is ARTIMIS funded? |
| Funding comes from the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) and the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet (KYTC). ODOT pays 75% of any system-wide costs and KYTC pays the remaining 25%. Components clearly in Kentucky or Ohio are paid by that State. For the ARTIMIS/CVS Samaritan vans, ARTIMIS pays for 51% of the cost and a private sponsor (CVS Drug Stores) picks up the other 49% of the cost. |
| What is the policy for putting messages on the big, black, electronic signs? |
| After much discussion and review of similar activities in other cities, the Policy Committee made a decision to only use the signs when there was significant information to inform the motorist, for example, an accident or heavy congestion. It was felt that if there was always a message on the sign it would eventually be ignored. In some cases, even though a message might be warranted, the sign is left blank due to overriding circumstances, for example, significant rainfall during rush hour after a couple of weeks of little or no precipitation. In that case, although we would normally display congestion messages, signs are left blank since motorists would be heavily occupied dealing with the weather and we do not want to introduce another distraction. In 2001, the States decided to begin an experiment and display travel times when possible. This is under evaluation. |
| In general, when messages are displayed, we attempt to use the fewest messages with the shortest words. Usage procedures are reviewed on a regular basis internally and adjustments made as appropriate. |
| Are the cameras used to catch speeders? |
| No. It is difficult to monitor a single vehicle. The cameras are used to monitor the roadways and verify incidents. Our job is the macro, not micro, management of traffic: we are not an enforcement organization. |
| Do you record what your cameras see? |
| No. The Policy Committee made the decision that we will not record camera images. |
Copyright © 1997-2008 ARTIMIS