Houston, Texas, United States
Dallas, Texas, United States
California, United States
California, United States
Los Angeles, California, United States
Charlotte, North Carolina, United States
Fresno, California, United States
Norfolk, Virginia, United States
Oakland, California, United States
Sacremento, California, United States
Denver, Colorado, United States
New York City, New York, United States
Chicago, Illinois, United States
Detroit, Michigan, United States
Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States
Freeway Services Patrols: A State of the Practice
Summary Information
Incident management programs with freeway service patrols have proven to be very successful at reducing incident detection time and duration. With a high benefit-to-cost ratio (ranging from 2:1 to 36.2:1), programs such as these are becoming more popular with the motoring public, politicians, and the agencies that support/operate them.
Results of Service Patrol Benefit-Cost Studies:
LOCATION |
PATROL NAME |
YEAR PERFORMED |
B/C RATINGS |
---|---|---|---|
Charlotte, NC | Incident Management Assistance Patrol |
1993 |
3:1 to 7:1 |
Chicago, IL | Emergency Traffic Patrol |
1990 |
17:1 |
Dallas, TX | Courtesy Patrol |
1995 |
3.3:1 to 36.2:1 |
Denver, CO | Mile High Courtesy Patrol |
1996 |
20:1 to 23:1 |
Detroit, MI | Freeway Courtesy Patrol |
1995 |
14:1 |
Fresno, CA | Freeway Service Patrol |
1995 |
12.5:1 |
Houston, TX | Motorist Assistance Program |
1994 |
6.6:1 to 23.3:1 |
Los Angeles, CA | Metro Freeway Service Patrol |
1993 |
11:1 |
Minneapolis, MN | Highway Helper |
1995 |
5:1 |
New York & Westchester Co., NY | Highway Emergency Local Patrol |
1995 |
23.5:1 |
Norfolk, VA | Safety Service Patrol |
1995 |
2:1 to 2.5:1 |
Oakland, CA | Freeway Service Patrol |
1991 |
3.5:1 |
Orange Co., CA | Freeway Service Patrol |
1995 |
3:1 |
Riverside Co., CA | Freeway Service Patrol |
1995 |
3:1 |
Sacramento, CA | Freeway Service Patrol |
1995 |
5.5:1 |