National Academies Press: OpenBook

Bus Rapid Transit, Volume 2: Implementation Guidelines (2003)

Chapter: Chapter 7 - ITS Applications

« Previous: Chapter 6 - BRT Vehicles
Page 130
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 7 - ITS Applications." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2003. Bus Rapid Transit, Volume 2: Implementation Guidelines. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21947.
×
Page 130
Page 131
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 7 - ITS Applications." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2003. Bus Rapid Transit, Volume 2: Implementation Guidelines. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21947.
×
Page 131
Page 132
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 7 - ITS Applications." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2003. Bus Rapid Transit, Volume 2: Implementation Guidelines. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21947.
×
Page 132
Page 133
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 7 - ITS Applications." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2003. Bus Rapid Transit, Volume 2: Implementation Guidelines. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21947.
×
Page 133
Page 134
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 7 - ITS Applications." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2003. Bus Rapid Transit, Volume 2: Implementation Guidelines. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21947.
×
Page 134
Page 135
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 7 - ITS Applications." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2003. Bus Rapid Transit, Volume 2: Implementation Guidelines. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21947.
×
Page 135
Page 136
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 7 - ITS Applications." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2003. Bus Rapid Transit, Volume 2: Implementation Guidelines. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21947.
×
Page 136
Page 137
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 7 - ITS Applications." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2003. Bus Rapid Transit, Volume 2: Implementation Guidelines. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21947.
×
Page 137
Page 138
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 7 - ITS Applications." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2003. Bus Rapid Transit, Volume 2: Implementation Guidelines. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21947.
×
Page 138
Page 139
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 7 - ITS Applications." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2003. Bus Rapid Transit, Volume 2: Implementation Guidelines. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21947.
×
Page 139
Page 140
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 7 - ITS Applications." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2003. Bus Rapid Transit, Volume 2: Implementation Guidelines. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21947.
×
Page 140
Page 141
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 7 - ITS Applications." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2003. Bus Rapid Transit, Volume 2: Implementation Guidelines. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21947.
×
Page 141
Page 142
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 7 - ITS Applications." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2003. Bus Rapid Transit, Volume 2: Implementation Guidelines. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21947.
×
Page 142
Page 143
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 7 - ITS Applications." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2003. Bus Rapid Transit, Volume 2: Implementation Guidelines. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21947.
×
Page 143
Page 144
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 7 - ITS Applications." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2003. Bus Rapid Transit, Volume 2: Implementation Guidelines. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21947.
×
Page 144
Page 145
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 7 - ITS Applications." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2003. Bus Rapid Transit, Volume 2: Implementation Guidelines. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21947.
×
Page 145
Page 146
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 7 - ITS Applications." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2003. Bus Rapid Transit, Volume 2: Implementation Guidelines. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21947.
×
Page 146
Page 147
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 7 - ITS Applications." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2003. Bus Rapid Transit, Volume 2: Implementation Guidelines. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21947.
×
Page 147
Page 148
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 7 - ITS Applications." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2003. Bus Rapid Transit, Volume 2: Implementation Guidelines. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/21947.
×
Page 148

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

7-1 CHAPTER 7 ITS APPLICATIONS BRT service should be fast, reliable, and safe. Buses should run on time; their performance should be monitored, and sched- ule adjustments should be done quickly. Passengers should be informed of when buses arrive at stations, and boardings at sta- tions should be fast and convenient. ITSs can achieve these objectives and greatly enhance BRT operations. ITS applica- tions are essential complements to running ways, stations, vehi- cles, and overall bus operations. They can determine whether buses are early, on time, or late; monitor bus operations; and enhance safety and security. They can provide priority for BRT at signalized intersections, expedite fare collection, and provide guidance control and precision docking. Ideally, BRT should mirror rail transit in the use of ITS technology. The main ITS elements for BRT include the following: • Automatic vehicle location and control (AVLC), which includes provisions for safety and security; • Passenger information; • Traffic signal priorities; • Automated passenger counting; • Electronic fare collection; and • Vehicle guidance and control. Figure 7-1 shows how some of these ITS elements interface with buses, and Table 7-1 provides potential applications for BRT. Most BRT systems have some ITS applications. In places where ITSs have been most successfully applied to BRT, such as in Los Angeles, ITS elements have been part of a geograph- ically larger, functionally comprehensive ITS system. This chapter describes the main types of ITS technologies and their BRT applications. It draws from and extends the information contained in Advanced Public Transportation Systems: The State of the Art: Update 2000 (Casey et al., 2000); the National Transit Institute’s ITS for Transit: Solving Real Problems (Draft Participant’s Manual) (2002); and Ben- efits Assessment of Advanced Public Transportation System Technologies (Goeddel, 2000). 7-1. AUTOMATIC VEHICLE LOCATION AVL is an integrated part of BRT fleet management. Bus tracking uses AVL to pinpoint a bus’s location on the street network. It allows real-time monitoring of a bus’s move- ments, control of bus headways, closer schedule adherence (including more effective timed transfers), and the ability to direct maintenance crews in the event of a vehicle break- down. It also gives agencies the opportunity to provide real- time bus schedule information to patrons at stops and via the Internet on computers, personal digital assistants, and cell phones. AVL systems also allow two-way communications between bus drivers and central supervisors. AVL systems can incorporate passenger information sys- tems, identification for traffic signal controllers, automatic passenger counters, and silent security alarms for operator emergencies. AVL also allows transit agencies to monitor the mechanical condition of buses on the road. It usually con- tains some form of management reporting system. These features make AVL an essential part of any BRT system. Accordingly, most existing and planned BRT sys- tems incorporate or will incorporate AVL systems. Benefits of AVL to transit agencies and BRT include the following: • Improved dispatch and operated efficiency; • Improved overall reliability of service; • Quicker responses to disruptions in service such as vehi- cle failure or unexpected congestion; • Quicker response to threats of criminal activity (via silent alarm activation by the driver); • Extensive information provided at a lower cost for plan- ning purposes, including information on passenger loads and travel patterns; and • Rapid rerouting of buses when running ways are blocked. AVL systems require three components: (1) a method of determining vehicle location, (2) a means of communicating the vehicle’s location to a main center, and (3) a central proces- sor to store and manipulate the information. Typical compo- nents of an AVL system are shown in Photo 7-A. AVL sys- tems normally come equipped with a mobile data terminal for the driver to communicate with the dispatch center and to get direct feedback on on-time status. The dispatch center usually contains one or more staffed dispatch stations. Each dispatcher usually has two screens: one with a computerized map show- ing the current locations and status of all vehicles in service (covered by the AVL) and one that can display a variety of information, including communications with other drivers.

7-2 Traffic Signal Priority Automated Passenger Counting Card Reader Silent Alarm Driver Information Display Advanced Wireless Communication Automatic Vehicle Location (SOURCE: Casey et al., 2000) Figure 7-1. Fleet management systems. TABLE 7-1 Potential BRT applications of ITS technologies • AVL systems can provide information to improve schedule adherence and reduce headways. • AVL systems can provide command center control to guarantee swift movement between feeder and express vehicles. • Real-time passenger information systems can give up-to-date information at home, office, or station through kiosks, automated signs, and the Internet. • Automated on-board information (voice and visual) systems can give information to passengers on stops, transfer points, and local attractions. Alternatively, they may be used for news, weather forecasts, and other information that would be helpful to passengers. • Automated traffic signal priority control systems can speed the movement of buses through intersections. • Video surveillance and covert emergency systems can guarantee the safety of customers on board vehicles and at load points and parking facilities. • Electronic passenger counting systems can provide readily retrievable information on use of stations by bus, by time of day, and by direction of travel. • Sensors can monitor mechanical and electric systems to ensure that problems are identified and that needed replacement vehicles are dispatched with minimum system disruption. • Smart cards can provide pre-boarding fare collection and be used on buses and in adjacent parking facilities. • Automated docking systems can expedite the loading and unloading of passengers to increase convenience and reduce dwell times. • Adaptive cruise control or automated guideway operation can decrease headways and expedite service. • Automated ramp control systems can speed the movement of buses onto freeways or dedicated lanes.

7-1.1. Location Technology The choice of location technology depends greatly on the specific agency needs and where the system will be installed. Location technologies are usually one of the following, but they can be used in combination: • Global positioning system (GPS); • Signpost and odometer interpolation, both active and passive; • Dead reckoning; and • Ground-based radio, such as LORAN-C. The advantages and disadvantages of the various available location technologies are set forth in Table 7-2. A description of principal technologies follows. 7-1.1.1. GPS GPS is the most widely used location technology, account- ing for about three-quarters of all AVL systems in the United 7-3 States. Figure 7-2 provides an example of an AVL system using GPS with odometer interpolation when GPS signals are not available. GPS uses satellites to locate objects on the earth’s surface. Like LORAN-C, GPS uses triangulation to locate objects. One big advantage of GPS is that it can cover a wide area with minimal equipment; a vehicle requires only an on-board device to detect overhead satellites. A disadvantage is that GPS may have trouble in natural canyons, in the “urban canyons” of CBDs in major cities, and in tunnels. A dead- reckoning sensor can be added to overcome these blind spots. An emerging system is the Nationwide Differential GPS that has 3- to 10-meter accuracy. This system is already available along U.S. coasts, major waterways, and in Hawaii and Puerto Rico. Tests of AVL using Nationwide Differential GPS have been conducted on the Acadia National Park transit system. 7-1.1.2. Signpost/Sensor System This system uses fixed transmitting signposts that are detected by passing vehicles. The signpost’s transmitter signals are used to determine the vehicle’s position, which can then Driver with Mobile Data Terminal Mobile Data Terminal Dispatch Center (SOURCE: Casey et al., 2000) AVL Dispatch Station Photo 7-A. Applications of ITSs.

be relayed back to a central control location. When there are no signposts, buses use their odometers to measure the dis- tance from the last signpost. The bus’s location is communi- cated by radio frequency to a central processor, which updates the dispatcher, who can communicate with the driver about his/her progress. 7-1.1.3. Dead Reckoning This technology uses the bus odometer and on-board com- pass to compute its location. Starting from a known position, the system computes the distance and direction traveled and then fine-tunes its estimated new position by comparing it with a road map database stored in the vehicle. To correct 7-4 any location errors that accumulate, it also takes readings from strategically located signposts. The system is the least accurate of systems discussed. 7-1.1.4. LORAN-C This system was originally developed for the United States Coast Guard. Ground-based transmitters, which are already in place, emit a signal that is picked up by buses equipped with LORAN-C receivers, which determine the signal’s direction. Buses receive signals from several transmitters and triangu- late their positions from three reference points. This system works regionwide, rather than just along routes. However, local topography can cause problems and dead spots. TABLE 7-2 Synopsis of location technologies Technology How it Operates Advantages Disadvantages Signpost & Odometer- “active” Signposts (beacons) are located at specific points along the route, each signpost transmitting a unique signal. Vehicle reads signals to determine location. (Vehicles usually interpolate between signposts, using their own odometer readings.) Vehicles send location data to dispatch. • Proven, well-established technology • Low in vehicle • No blind spots or interference • Repeatable accuracy • Need signposts wherever AVL is to operate • Not effective for vehicles off-route or paratransit Signpost & Odometer- “passive” Each vehicle transmits a unique signal to various signposts, located at specific points along the route (or signposts read transponders affixed to the vehicles). The signposts then transmit the vehicle’s location to dispatch. • Proven, well-established technology • Potentially reduces the number of dedicated radio frequencies required. • Need signposts wherever AVL is to operate • Location only given when vehicle passes signpost • Not effective for vehicles off-route or paratransit GPS and Differential GPS A network of satellites in orbit transmits signals to the ground. Special receivers on each vehicle read the signals available to them and triangulate to determine location. If the agency expects there to be long periods between GPS readings, they are sometimes supplemented with odometer readings or even more extensive dead reckoning. • Can be operated anywhere GPS signals can be received • Does not require purchase, installation, or maintenance of wayside equipment • Very accurate (especially differential GPS) • Moderate cost per vehicle • Signals can be blocked by tall buildings, tree cover, tunnels, or overpasses • May be subject to multi-patch errors Ground- Based Radio (e.g., LORAN-C) Network of radio towers on the ground transmits signals. Special receivers on each vehicle read the signals available to them and triangulate to determine location. Ground-based radio is sometimes supplemented with odometer readings for interpolations between signal receptions. • Can be operated anywhere signals can be received • Does not require purchase, installation, or maintenance of wayside equipment • Low capital and maintenance costs • Moderate accuracy • Can be blocked by hills and tall buildings. • Incomplete coverage in the United States • Monthly service fees can be high Dead- reckoning The vehicle uses its own odometer and a compass to measure its new position from its old (known) position. Dead-reckoning is often supplemented by “map- matching”- Comparing expected position if the vehicle is not on a road. Dead- reckoning is often supplemented with readings from another location technology, like signposts or GPS. • Requires no or significantly less purchase and maintenance of equipment if signposts are used as a supplement • Relatively inexpensive • Self-contained on vehicles • Not as accurate as other location technologies without supplements • Accuracy degrades with distance • Requires direction indication and map matching to track vehicles off-route. SOURCE: Adapted from Casey et al., 2000.

7-2. PASSENGER INFORMATION SYSTEMS ITS can provide dynamic (real-time) information to pas- sengers before trips; at stations, stops, and terminals; or on a vehicle. Many of the automated passenger information fea- tures associated with rail transit systems can and should be applied to BRT. Passenger information systems for BRT should include all methods of informing the public about the service. Both the type of information available and how it is provided are important. Both affect the public’s understand- ing of the system and ease of use. Bus information systems also can affect BRT perceptions and ridership. Traveler information can be either static (e.g., the transit schedule, fares, and routes) or dynamic (e.g., delays and actual arrival/departure information). A complete BRT information system should utilize a variety of static and dynamic traveler information devices. Furthermore, each type of information can be delivered in a variety of ways including timetable dis- pensing kiosks, telephones, and displays for static informa- tion and variable message signs, radio and television broad- casts, hand-held computer devices, home computers, and mobile phones for dynamic information. Real-time infor- mation generally can be classified into one of three groups: (1) pre-trip information; (2) stop, station, and terminal infor- mation; and (3) on-board information. 7-2.1. Pre-Trip Information Most North American BRT systems have a telephone-based information system that allows patrons to obtain schedule and route information. Systems may also have automated tele- phone systems through which information is provided based on input from the telephone keypad. Most transit agencies also make trip planning information available via the Internet. Several BRT systems have implemented advanced real- time systems that provide patrons with information on when buses will actually arrive and/or depart. Some even provide the actual location of buses. This information is delivered over fixed and mobile phones; through interactive computer 7-5 terminals at kiosks; and over the Internet to portable com- puters, personal digital assistants, and other such devices. 7-2.2. Stop, Station, and Terminal Information At a minimum, BRT stops, stations, and terminals should provide route numbers, static schedule information, and route maps. Several BRT systems, such as Boston’s Silver Line, Los Angeles’s Metro Rapid, Ottawa’s Transitway System, Brisbane’s South East Busway, and Vancouver’s B-Line provide real-time information at stations. Passenger information may come from video monitors or variable message signs, depending on the application and need for security. Monitors can be used when a large amount of information is being displayed and when there is a need for color and graphics to explain various options (e.g., in ter- minals). Variable message signs are more appropriate when information about a few buses is needed and security is an issue (e.g., at remote bus stops). Passengers may also get infor- mation at load points from mobile devices, personal digital assistants, and other wireless devices. Figure 7-3 shows the Service Area Traveler Information Network that is used in the New York City area to provide information on traffic conditions, bus returns and schedules, weather, tourism, and park-and-ride. The system was installed at major bus terminals and transit centers. Costs for a 20-kiosk system were $1.3 million. Figure 7-4 shows the Transit Watch Screen used at Seattle’s Northgate Transit Center. The screen identifies bus routes, destinations, scheduled bus departures and loading bays, and departure status. Recent applications of BRT in Los Angeles and Vancou- ver have included “next bus” departure information in real- time. Variable message signs provide real-time information for the next bus (see Photo 7-B). Real-time transit informa- tion used for light, heavy, and commuter rail systems, such as variable message signs or video monitors, may be appli- cable to BRT systems. Traveler information is typically pro- vided at stations and transit centers. King County Metro in Seattle has placed video monitors with real-time bus departure GPS Satellites Radio System Odometer Gyroscope Communications Center Dispatch Stations Customer Assistance Planning, Scheduling Operations Analysis (SOURCE: Casey et al., 2000) Figure 7-2. Schematic of an AVL system used in a transit agency.

7-6 (SOURCE: Casey et al., 2000) Figure 7-3. Satin kiosk screen. (SOURCE: Casey et al., 2000) Figure 7-4. Sample transit watch screen flow—Northgate transit center.

7-7 shows the passenger information provided on buses using the Val-de-Marne BRT in Paris. 7-2.4. Summary A BRT system should provide information for pre-trip planning and at stations and on buses. A BRT patron should be able to access trip planning and real-time system infor- mation while at work, on the computer, or using a wireless device. Once at a station or stop, real-time information should be available to tell the patron the current status of the system. Finally, on-board automated voice recordings or message dis- plays should provide information on where to get off the bus. The passenger should be provided with real-time information on the status of bus routes at every stage of the trip. 7-3. TRAFFIC SIGNAL PRIORITIES Traffic signal priority is an ITS strategy that gives buses preference at signals, whenever they arrive at an intersection, or only under certain conditions (e.g., when buses run late). As described in Chapter 4, signal prioritization can reduce the mean and variance of bus delays with minimum impacts on cross street traffic. The number of signal applications for BRT priority continues to increase. BRT systems in Los Angeles, Vancouver, and Rouen, and under development along Line 22 in Santa Clara and Euclid Avenue in Cleveland provide (or will provide) preference to BRT vehicles. 7-3.1. Techniques Buses can communicate with traffic signals in several ways, including a sonic or optical pulse. One promising future application is allowing AVL systems to interact with traffic signals. The basic steps of signal prioritization include initiat- ing a bus call, communicating between the bus and the traffic signal, and then implementing traffic signal control intelli- gence (signal timing that changes the intersection timing, thereby providing priority). Implementing signal priority requires traffic signal controllers that can distinguish between a priority call from a bus and a preemption call for an emer- gency vehicle; proper control algorithms are essential. A wide range of system architecture is used for bus prior- ity in cities around the world. Systems are evolving in com- plexity and functionality from transponder- and tag-based systems providing local priority to all buses, to more inte- grated AVL/Uniform Traffic Control systems. The latter sys- tems often offer real-time fleet management, passenger infor- mation at bus stops, and “differential” priority for buses at traffic signals in an effort to improve bus regularity and reli- ability, as well as increase operating speeds. Table 7-3 cites the advantages and disadvantages of various detection technologies. Many of the early installations used optical scanning or loop detection keyed to specific locations. Figure 7-5 illustrates optical and tag priority systems. There is Photo 7-B. Off-board passenger information, Metro Rapid, Los Angeles. Photo 7-C. On-board passenger information, Paris, Val-de-Marne (Trans Val-de-Marne). information in secure locations at several transit centers in the county. 7-2.3. On-Board Information A traditional on-board information system consists of printed timetables and driver announcements. Improvements in technology have allowed stop announcements to be deliv- ered by automated voice recordings or some type of message display. These systems can also announce transfer opportu- nities and local attractions. Some systems carry advertising messages to help cover the costs involved. Several BRT systems have automated station announce- ments on vehicles. They include the Boston Silver Line, the Ottawa Transitway System, Pittsburgh’s busways (on some buses), Brisbane’s South East Busway, Rouen’s BRT, and Curitiba’s median busway system. Photo 7-C

TABLE 7-3 Advantages and disadvantages of various vehicle detection technologies Technology Suppliers Features Advantages Disadvantages Low Frequency RF (100–150 KHz) MFS; Detector Systems/LOOPCOM; Vapor VECOM through Vapor; Vapor VECOM through LSTS Uses inductive radio technology with transmitters on vehicles and other standard loop detectors or antennas embedded in the road; transmitter factory programmed or interfaced from onboard keypad Transmitters are inexpensive and are easily removed or replaced Message transmission may be hindered by accumulated dirt or snow on tag Radio Frequency @ 900–1000 MHz TOTE/AMTECH; AT/COMM Uses transmitter tags mounted on the side or vehicle top and antennas mounted roadside or overhead; historically used in toll collection, rail car, and containerized cargo ID; requires FCC registration Transmitters are inexpensive and are easily removed or replaced; can transmit much information Message transmission may be hindered by accumulated dirt or snow on tag Spread Spectrum Radio Automatic Eagle Signal/ Tracker System; Econcile/EMTRAC Sweeps narrow band signal over broad part of frequency spectrum; uses transmitter with directional antenna, and an electronic auto compass in each priority vehicle and receiver with omni-directional antenna at each intersection Can transmit much information Not as accurate in locating buses as other radio frequency technologies; can be affected by weather; may be more expensive Infrared Siemens/HPW infrared Uses signpost on the side of the road to pick up and read signals; most common AVI technology for European bus priority systems Well-proven in Europe Limited ability to provide precise vehicle information; limited amount can be transmitted from vehicle; requires line of sight Video Racal Communications video with ALPR software Video camera equipped with Advanced License Plate Recognition Software Requires line of sight Optical 3M/Opticom Uses light emitter attached to transit coach and different frequency than emergency vehicles which have high priority Potential advantages if intersections are already equipped with Opticom emergency preemption equipment Limited ability to provide precise vehicle information and transmit from vehicle; requires line of sight Vehicle Tracking IBM/Vista System; TDOA & FDOA Tracking Uses time difference of arrival and frequency difference of arrival to locate and track radio frequency transmissions from the vehicle’s emitter Buildings may block signal; may not provide precise location information for signal priority treatment SOURCE: “Transit Priority Systems Study—Summary Report,”1994. Optical Strobe Light Optical Detector Traffic Signal Controller (SOURCE: Rutherford et al., 1995) AVI Tag Reader AVI Tag Traffic Signal Controller Figure 7-5. Examples of bus detection.

a clear trend toward using GPS to perform the location func- tion. This enables the bus priority systems to be integrated with the master urban traffic control systems. Figure 7-6 shows how AVL relates to signal priorities at controllers. Centralized AVL-related systems work in two basic ways. In the first method, bus detection is relayed to a traffic con- trol center and a computer message is sent to the local signal controller. In the second method, GPS location and schedule adherence information are sent to the transit control man- agement center, and a priority request is then submitted to the traffic control center. In both cases, priority is then granted or denied to the local signal controller. Several examples are described below. 7-3.1.1. Vancouver’s #98 B-Line Vancouver’s #98 B-line rapid transit is one of the first to use the Novax Bus Plus™ System (“Bus Plus™ Traffic Sig- nal Priority System,” n.d.). This system uses vehicle transpon- ders that emit an infrared priority signal from a designated bus to identify it as a priority vehicle. Wayside units mounted near selected intersections detect the buses and then pass signals on to master units. The master units provide timely overrides to the traffic signal controller to expedite the passage of the designated buses through the selected intersections (“Bus Plus™ Traffic Signal Priority System,” n.d.). Photo 7-D shows a bus getting priority for a left turn. 7-3.1.2. Los Angeles Transit Priority Signal System Los Angeles Metro Rapid’s Transit Priority System pro- vides communications between antenna loops embedded in the pavement and transmitters mounted on buses. Informa- tion is sent to the city’s control center, from which messages are sent to individual controllers (Levinson et al., 2003). A bus priority system along the portions of the Wilshire- Whittier and Ventura Boulevards BRT routes in the City of Los 7-9 Angeles gives late buses additional green time (Levinson et al., 2003). Buses are given preference at most signalized inter- sections where the signal green time may be advanced or extended up to 10% of the signal cycle whenever a bus approaches. Cycle lengths range from about 70 to 90 sec- onds, with longer cycles in a few locations. At important intersections, the green light can be extended only in every other cycle. To prevent drivers from speeding up to extend the green time, early buses are not given priority. The system is based on communications between antenna loops embedded in the pavement and transmitters mounted on buses. The automatic bus detection using loops and transpon- ders was designed to reduce bus delay, maintain bus spacing, and simultaneously minimize impact on cross traffic. Real- time communication with the Los Angeles central urban traf- fic control system is once per second. A key objective of this system was to maintain uniform headways between successive buses. The Transit Priority System was designed and implemented by the City of Los Angeles Department of Transportation. This program has gained nationwide attention since its debut on June 24, 2000, and has significantly improved the quality of transit opera- tions along the two Metro Rapid corridors. The Transit Priority System is an enhancement to the city’s Automated Traffic Surveillance and Control (ATSAC) sys- tem. This concept was embraced by the Los Angeles Metro- politan Transportation Authority and became an integral part of its Metro Rapid program. The system has been deployed at more than 211 intersections along the two Metro Rapid corridors in Los Angeles, Ventura Boulevard and Wilshire/ Whittier Boulevards. The Transit Priority System also includes control of dynamic passenger information signs at selected bus shelters along the Metro Rapid routes. These highly visible light-emitting- diode signs inform passengers of the estimated arrival times of the “next” Metro Rapid bus. The arrival time information is computed by the system based on the actual speed of the Passenger Counting Continuous Schedule Adherence Monitoring Priority Movement Request Automatic Vehicle Location Traffic Signal Control In-Vehicle Fixed End (SOURCE: ITS for Transit: Solving Real Problems, 2001) Figure 7-6. Traffic signal priority treatment keyed to AVL. Photo 7-D. Traffic signal priority, Vancouver B-Line.

bus, is accurate to within 1 minute, and is relayed to the respec- tive stations using technology similar to that used in cellu- lar telephones. The Los Angeles Metro Rapid also employs automatic traffic surveillance and control technologies. Each signalized intersection in the project is equipped with loop detectors that serve as AVI sensors. These sensors, embedded in the pave- ment, receive a radio-frequency code from a small transpon- der installed on the underside of a vehicle. Buses equipped with unique transponders are detected when traveling over the loop detectors. The loops are connected to a sensor unit within the traffic signal controller at each intersection, which transmits the bus identification number to the Transit Prior- ity Manager computer in the city’s ATSAC center at City Hall East for tracking and scheduling comparison. (See Photos 7-E and 7-F.) Once the bus identification and location are received by the Transit Priority Manager, the computer determines the need for traffic signal priority. If the bus is early or ahead of the scheduled headway, no traffic signal priority treatment is provided. However, if the bus is late or beyond the scheduled headway, then the downstream traffic signal controller will provide priority to help the bus catch up with the scheduled headway. In addition, real-time data links from the Los Ange- les County Metropolitan Transportation Authority dispatch center to the ATSAC center are used to obtain the daily bus assignment for schedule comparison. Traffic signal control at each intersection is provided by a Model 2070 controller that is equipped with a state-of-the-art software program developed by the City of Los Angeles specifically for this project. Once the Model 2070 traffic sig- nal controller receives a request from the Transit Priority Manager, it implements one of the four types of traffic sig- nal priority actions depending on the point in time when the signal controller receives the commands relative to the back- ground cycle. The four types of traffic signal priority are the following: 7-10 • Early Green priority is granted when a bus is approach- ing a red signal. The red signal is shortened to provide a green signal sooner than normal. • Green Extend priority is granted when a bus is approach- ing a green signal that is about to change. The green signal is extended until the bus passes through the intersection. • Free Hold priority is used to hold a signal green until the bus passes through the intersection during noncoor- dinated (free) operation. • Phase Call brings up a selected transit phase that might not normally be activated. This option is typically used for queue jumper operation or a priority left-turn phase. 7-3.1.3. Benefits of Bus Priority Systems Bus priority systems benefit BRT by reducing the average delays and the variability of delays at traffic signals. A wide range of bus travel time savings has been reported. FTA-Reported Studies. A study prepared by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority and summarized by the Federal Transit Administration analyzed 24 signal priority projects (Casey et al., 2000; Goeddel, 2000). Key results are summarized as follows. • Atlanta, Georgia. This project covered 25 buses on one route. It shortened the red times for approaching buses. Average travel time inbound for the entire route went from 41.8 minutes before shortening red times to 28 min- utes after the change (a 33% decline). In the outbound direction, the time went from 33.1 minutes before short- ening red times to 27.5 minutes after the change (a 16.9% reduction). Photo 7-E. Central control room, Metro Rapid, Los Angeles. Photo 7-F. Control room bus location bus plan displays, Metro Rapid, Los Angeles.

6% 6% 3% 4% 9% 15% 32% 16% 9% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 Seconds Without Traffic Signal Priority Average = 85 sec 84% 8% 4% 4% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 Seconds With Traffic Signal Priority Average = 43 sec NOTE: Based on run times between two bus stops in Hamburg, Germany. (SOURCE: Goeddel, 2000) • Anne Arundel County, Maryland. This test included 12 buses and 14 intersections. A 10-minute savings for a 52-minute trip was reported. • Pierce Transit, Tacoma, Washington. This 3.1-mile-long project included 11 intersections and used 15 buses. A 6% average travel time reduction was reported. • Toronto Transit Commission, Ontario, Canada. This study involved 10 buses traveling over 210 intersections. Travel times in peak period were reduced 2 to 4%. Recent Studies. More recent benefits resulting from traf- fic signal priorities for buses are as follows: • Los Angeles. Metro Rapid buses along Wilshire-Whittier Boulevards and Ventura Boulevard in Los Angeles achieved a 25% reduction in total travel time; signal pri- orities accounted for 30% of the savings—a 7.5% travel time reduction. There was a negligible increase in delays to cross traffic (“Bus Plus™ Traffic Signal Priority System”). • Portland, Oregon. TriMet installed a bus priority sys- tem at 58 intersections along Bus Routes 4 and 104. Buses are given selective priority when they are over 90 seconds late. A 5 to 8% reduction in running time was reported. The technology used was TriMet’s Bus Dis- patch System (an AVL system). An on-board GPS satel- lite receiver determines the bus location, and an Opticom emitter is actuated to initiate priority. All emergency vehicles have a “high-priority” setting that overrides tran- sit’s low-priority setting (Klous and Turner, 1999; Chada and Newland, 2002). • King County, Seattle. The King County Department of Transportation implemented signal priorities on 2.1 miles of Ranier Avenue in 2000. Five of nine intersections were given priority. The system hardware included Amtech RF radio frequency tags on buses. The a.m. peak period along Ranier Avenue experienced a 12-second (13%) reduction in average intersection delay. The intersections with priorities reduced the average intersection bus delay by about 5 seconds—a 24 to 34% reduction for buses getting priority. The priorities for buses produced mini- mal side street delay, and no side street vehicles had to wait more than one signal cycle (“Final Report,” 2001). • Bremerton, Germany. Some 105 intersections in the bus service area were given traffic signal priorities. This resulted in reducing the fleet size by 10% (Greschner and Gerland, 2000). • Hamburg, Germany. Traffic signal priorities were installed along a bus route serving the major Wansbek Market Rapid Transit Station. Both the bus travel speeds and reliability improved. (See Figure 7-7.) Dur- ing the peak periods overall bus speeds increased from 20.8 kilometers per hour to 26.0 kilometers per hour, a 25% gain. During the off-peak periods, bus speeds increased from 22.3 kilometers per hour to 31.3 kilo- meters per hour, a 40% gain. 7-11 Before priorities, the time to pass the Rodigalles and Schifteker Weg intersections averaged 85 seconds; 32% of the buses needed 100 seconds. With priorities at signals, the average travel time reduced to 43 seconds; 84% of the buses needed only 40 seconds. The range in travel times was 90 sec- onds before priorities and 50 seconds after—a dramatic decline in running time variability. 7-4. AUTOMATIC PASSENGER COUNTERS Automatic passenger counters (APCs) count passengers automatically when they board and alight buses. These sys- tems are used to develop or refine bus schedules or to plan or support service changes (Table 7-4). They can greatly reduce the cost of collecting ridership information by reducing or eliminating the need for manual checkers. APCs can also increase the amount and quality of information obtained and Figure 7-7. Distribution of run times between bus stops Rodigalles and Schifteker Weg, Hamburg, Germany.

7-12 TABLE 7-4 Uses for APC systems Uses for Collected Data Number of Systems Create / Evaluate / Adjust Run Times / Schedules 14 Plan / Justify Route Changes 13 Evaluate Marketing Strategies 3 Estimate Expected Revenue 1 Determine Fleet Needs 2 Monitor Driver Performances 3 Determine Location of Stop Facilities 5 NTD (formerly Section 15) Reporting 6 Other 2 NOTE: Based on 25 agencies surveyed. SOURCE: Baltes and Rey, 1998. (SOURCE: Casey et al., 2000) Figure 7-8. Illustration of a hypothetical APC system and related components. can permit continuous sampling of stop-by-stop ridership on each BRT vehicle so equipped. APCs typically use either treadle mats or infrared beams. Treadle mats placed on the steps of the bus register passengers as they step on a mat, and infrared beams (mounted either hor- izontally or vertically) directed across the path of boarding and alighting passengers register riders when they break the beam. Typically, two mats or two beams are put in succession so that a boarding passenger triggers them in a different order than does an alighting one, allowing the APC to distinguish between boardings and alightings. Other counting technolo- gies, such as those employing computer imaging, are being developed. Figure 7-8 illustrates a hypothetical APC system and shows how the various components such as GPS or radio signposts relate to the passenger counting unit. An electronic record is created at each bus stop that typi- cally includes information on stop location, date and time, time of doors opening and closing, the number of passengers board- ing, and the number of passengers alighting. These records are grouped by trip and are usually held in storage on the vehicle until they are downloaded to a central facility for further pro- cessing and use in operations, planning, and management. Ide- ally, the APC system is linked to an operational AVL system employed by the same agency to pinpoint vehicle locations. 7-5. ELECTRONIC FARE COLLECTION CARDS Fare payment methods can affect the overall success of a BRT operation by increasing passenger convenience and oper- ation efficiency. New fare systems may serve to attract new passengers and retain existing passengers, whereas cumber- some methods may inhibit ridership and hamper bus opera- tions. Fare payment methods also affect the bus driver directly: some methods are time consuming, distracting, and can lead to driver-passenger disputes. In addition, ITS-based electronic fare payment systems can allow an agency to collect information about ridership for use in planning and operations. Transit agencies using these systems add flexibility to establishing fares, help reduce collection costs and theft, and increase revenue by using the “float” on prepaid fares and reducing fare evasion. Table 7-5 describes the advantages and disadvantages of various fare collections media, including cash and tokens, paper passes and tickets, magnetic stripe cards, and “smart cards.” Smart cards have emerged as the preferred option, and will be more attractive as their costs go down. The implementation of electronic fare payment systems has increased rapidly in the past 6 or 7 years, and several sur- veys have documented dramatic increases. An FTA report on the benefits of advanced technologies for public transpor- tation cites survey results in which operational deployments increased 96% from 1996 to 1999, and planned fare sys- tems increased 265% for that same time period (Goeddel, 2000). 7-5.1. Types of Cards Several different types of smart cards may be used for fare collection, including debit cards, credit cards, and magnetic stripe fare cards. The FTA report cited above reports the fol- lowing distribution of cards in use, under deployment, or planned (Goeddel, 2000):

• Unknown: 14% (not yet selected); • Magnetic Stripe Cards: 35%; • Smart Cards: 40%; • Debit Cards: 4%; and • Credit Cards: 7%. 7-5.1.1. Magnetic Stripe Cards Magnetic stripe cards, which were first used for the Bay Area Rapid Transit District in San Francisco in 1972, elimi- nate the need to put cash in a farebox. The patron simply runs the card through a reader and the magnetic stripe stores the value left on the card or in some cases just indicates that the card is valid. The cards have the advantage of simple tech- nology, a proven track record, and the ability to be purchased prior to boarding. 7-5.1.2. Smart Cards Smart cards are replacing magnetic stripe cards as the fare collection system of choice in many recent applications. The cards look similar to standard credit cards and are equipped with a programmable memory chip that performs several func- tions: holding instructions, holding value, self-monitoring, and creating an electronic billing record (Casey et al., 2000). Smart cards have several advantages over magnetic stripe cards. They cannot be erased accidentally, and they can be identified by an electronically unique internal serial number and cannot be duplicated fraudulently. In addition, they can 7-13 register the fare by touching a certain location on the fare col- lection device using an active or passive radio signal. Some smart card systems use a distance-based fare scheme, with the exact fare calculated after one person’s card is read by the fare device on the way in and out of the vehicle. 7-5.1.3. Credit and Debit Cards Small financial transactions are becoming attractive to credit card companies. Enabling the use of credit or debit cards as a transit fare collection device has numerous advan- tages. Transit agencies can avoid the costs of fare card dis- tribution, advertising, billing, as well as fraud responsibili- ties. This arrangement also increases the potential ridership pool to all credit card holders, including infrequent riders and visitors from outside the transit service area. The disadvantages are mostly institutional, in that public and private companies do not have a history of cooperative ventures of this type. When credit and debit cards are used, the cards might contain two systems, one with a magnetic stripe for normal sales transactions, and the other a contact- less chip for the transit system transaction. 7-5.2. Reported Benefits A study conducted for the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority concluded that electronic fare systems sup- port numerous objectives, including the following (Multi- systems, 2001): TABLE 7-5 Fare media advantages and disadvantages Advantages Disadvantages Cash and tokens: Simplest form of payment Most widely used Cash and tokens: Most expensive form of payment to process Highly susceptible to theft High exposure to fraud State-of-the-art cash and token collection equipment is complex Paper passes and tickets: Inexpensive to purchase stock Easily combined with other payment technology, such as magnetic stripe and optical coating Paper passes and tickets: Susceptible to fraud Labor intensive Pre-printed stock needs to be treated like a currency Magnetic stripe cards: Proven technology Inexpensive media Can be combined with printing Support a high number of uses Magnetic stripe cards: Require complex equipment Maintenance intensive Susceptible to accidental erasure Have a large variance in reliability More susceptible to fraud than smart cards Smart Cards: Secure data transfer No physical connection required for contactless applications Larger memory capacity Can perform complex security validation calculations (microprocessor card) Highly reliable High resistance to fraud Smart Cards: Cost—prohibits use for single ride SOURCE: Casey et al., 2000.

• Improved travel time through faster boarding, • Improved coordination within a region using the same card, • Creation of a more seamless network with one card, • Improved operational efficiency, and • Increased ridership potential with added convenience and less confusion. The financial advantages of fare collection technologies are shown in Table 7-6. 7-6. VEHICLE GUIDANCE Several ITS technologies available or under development are designed to assist transit operators in driving their vehicles more safely and, in some cases, can control the vehicle’s lane position automatically. These technologies can be employed along the entire running way or just at stations where precision docking is important to provide a small separation between the vehicle and the platform. Other guidance applications include tunnels and narrow running ways. These precision docking and collision avoidance technologies can be beneficial to BRT systems. 7-6.1. Tight Maneuvering/Precise Docking Precision docking applications position a bus precisely rel- ative to the curb or loading platform. The driver can maneu- ver the bus into the loading area and then turn it over to automation. Sensors continually determine the lateral dis- tance to the curb, front, and rear, and the longitudinal distance to the end of the bus loading area. The driver can override the 7-14 system at any time by operating the brakes or steering and is expected to monitor the situation and take emergency action as necessary (e.g., if a pedestrian steps in front of the bus). When the bus is properly docked, it will stop, open the doors, and revert to manual control. Safer boarding and egress for people with disabilities, the elderly, and children are impor- tant considerations in developing these systems. Guidance may be mechanical, optical, magnetic, or wire. For several decades, many manufacturers in Europe have been developing guided buses as an alternative to trains. Daimler-Benz developed the O’Bahn in 1970 for the Federal German Government. MATRA has developed an optical guidance system following a painted line on the road. Bom- bardier is using a single guidance system under the center of the road. 7-6.2. Mechanical Guidance Mechanical guidance systems use physical contact between wheels attached to the vehicle and some type of curb that guides the vehicle’s path. The wheels are connected to the steering mechanism, which makes small adjustments based on the position of the vehicle and the curb. Mechanical guidance has been used in O’Bahn systems in Leeds, United Kingdom; Essen, Germany; and Adelaide, Australia, since the 1970s. In Leeds, it is used in queue jumps that are self-enforcing because of the technology. In Essen (a system that has since ceased operations), the O’Bahn shared a right-of-way with an LRT line. In Adelaide, the O’Bahn was selected because of its nar- rower right-of way and reduced cross sections (about 22 feet) in elevated structures (see Photo 7-G). Photo 7-H shows a BRT guideway with mechanical guidance in Leeds. TABLE 7-6 Financial advantages of electronic fare media Increase Revenue Decrease Costs Shorter processing time and use of conventional fare media may result in increased ridership. Integration with other modes or operators may enable more customer discounts and loyalty schemes resulting in increase ridership and revenue. Use of electronic fare media decreases cash/coin handling: - cash/coins collected for fare payment (i.e., at farebox or fare gate) decreased or eliminated; - higher value ticket/fare sales transactions, resulting in fewer transactions. Increased transaction data permit equitable distribution of shared revenues and audit trail to protect against employee theft. Automation of fare collection processes decreases labor costs. Increased customer information permits optimization of fares, schedules, and transit service. Use of products without mechanical/moving parts (e.g., ticket transports) increases equipment reliability, reducing maintenance. Increased media security decreases fraud levels. SOURCE: Casey et al., 2000.

7-15 Photo 7-G. BRT guideway, Adelaide. Photo 7-I. “Optical scanner” vehicle at station. Photo 7-J. Optical guidance on a BRT vehicle.Photo 7-H. BRT guideway, Leeds. 7-6.3. Optical Guidance This technology uses machine vision cameras and related equipment to read the location of a painted pile on the pave- ment and keep the vehicle within the lane width provided. Examples of vehicles using this type of guidance are shown in Photos 7-I, 7-J, and 7-K. 7-6.4. Magnetic Guidance This technology uses magnetic tape or plugs that are located on the surface of the guideway or drilled into the pave- ment. The vehicle carries a sensor that measures the strength of the signal and uses that information to calculate the lateral position of the bus. The University of California Partners for Advanced Transit and Highways (PATH) Laboratory has been developing this technology for many years and has conducted several successful demonstrations. 7-6.5. Wire Guidance In this application, a wire is embedded in the pavement, and an electric current passes through the wire. The current causes a magnetic field to be generated that can be used for guidance

in a way similar to the magnetic system. The Bombardier BRT vehicles in Nancy, France, use a light duty track in the mid- dle of a dedicated running way that guides vehicles under electric power. Vehicles can be steered like a bus when run- ning on other rights-of-way under diesel power. 7-6.6. GPS GPS-based guidance systems can locate the position of a vehicle to within 2 to 5 centimeters. Knowing where the vehi- cle is requires precise knowledge of the location of the road- way lanes. If the roadway were fully described in a digital geospatial database, it would be possible to use this to pro- vide vehicle guidance. 7-7. COLLISION AVOIDANCE SYSTEMS Collision avoidance systems deal with the various ways to avoid bus collisions with other vehicles. There have been several operational tests, and performance specifications are 7-16 under development. There were no operating systems as of 2002 (A Survey to Assess Lane Assist Technology Require- ments, 2002). 7-7.1. Lane Change and Merge Collision Avoidance These systems warn the transit driver of hazards, espe- cially in the vehicle’s “blind spot,” where many accidents happen. More advanced applications provide information on vehicles in adjacent lanes based on their position and veloc- ity and whether they pose a risk to a lane change or merge. 7-7.2. Collision Avoidance Technology can help avoid collisions in both the front and back of BRT vehicles. Radar can detect how the transit vehi- cle is approaching other vehicles and either warn the driver or automatically reduce the vehicle’s speed to avoid the accident. Rear-end collisions with the transit vehicle can be reduced with visual warnings on the back of the bus. 7-8. BUS PLATOONS Manually dispatched bus platoons operated on Chicago State Street Transit Mall in the 1980s and still operate in sev- eral South American cities. In bus platoons, electronic tech- nologies enable buses to be electronically coupled with short headways and, in essence, operate as if they were a train. This could be desirable for high-speed, high-volume express BRT runs from a few outlying collection points to the down- town of a major city. It is a long-range opportunity for densely developed corridors that remains to be fully developed and tested operationally. 7-9. BENEFIT AND COST SUMMARY General benefits resulting from various Advanced Public Transportation System programs are summarized in Table 7-7. These benefits also apply to BRT systems (Automatic Vehicle Location, 2000). Examples of benefits associated with AVL, passenger information, fare collection, traffic signal priori- ties, and vehicle guidance are discussed below. 7-9.1. AVL Several transit agencies have indicated that AVL systems reduce capital and operating costs and enhance ridership. In Kansas City, Missouri, the Kansas City Area Transportation Authority was able to reduce the number of buses serving its routes by seven vehicles. This translated into a capital cost savings of $1,575,000 ($225,000 per bus). Throughout the United States, AVL and computer-aided dispatching has reduced bus operating costs from 4 to 9%. Some agencies in Photo 7-K. Precision docking at stations with a BRT vehicle.

North America reporting a reduction in operating costs are the following: • Atlanta, Georgia. The Metropolitan Transportation Area Regional Transportation Authority has saved $1.5 million annually in operating costs because of the reduced need for schedule adherence and travel time surveys. • London, Ontario. An AVL system saves London Tran- sit from $40,000 to $50,000 (U.S. dollars) on each schedule adherence survey conducted. • Kansas City, Missouri. By reducing its fleet size (as a result of implementing AVL), the Kansas City Area Transportation Authority realized maintenance expense savings of $189,000 per year ($27,000 per bus per year) and total labor cost savings of $215,000 per year. • Baltimore, Maryland. By the fourth to sixth year of operation, the Mass Transit Administration expects to save $2 to 3 million per year by purchasing, operating, and maintaining fewer vehicles because of increased efficiencies provided by its AVL system. • Prince William County, Virginia. The Potomac and Rappahannock Transportation Commission estimated an annual savings of $870,000 because of its AVL system. • Portland, Oregon. TriMet’s AVL/computer aided dis- patch (CAD) system produced an estimated annual operating cost savings of $1.9 million, based on an analysis of eight routes that are representative of TriMet’s service typology. Some agencies reported other benefits of using an AVL sys- tem. Some of these are the following: • Denver, Colorado. The Regional Transportation District observed a 5.1% increase in ridership between 1995 and 7-17 1996 and attributes the increase to its CAD/AVL system. Also, an AVL system with silent alarms supported a 33% reduction in bus passenger assaults. CAD/AVL report- edly decreased customer complaints and improved bus performance by 9 to 23%. • Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Total revenue ridership increased 4.8% between 1993 and 1997 for the Mil- waukee County Transit System. The agency attributes the improvement to its CAD/AVL system. • Toronto, Ontario. The Toronto Transit Commission estimates that service improvements from its AVL sys- tem will conservatively result in a 0.5 to 1.0% increase in ridership. • Portland, Oregon. From fall 1999 to fall 2000, week- day ridership increased by 450 for one route after TriMet used AVL data to adjust the route’s headways and run times. 7-9.2. Passenger Information Improved passenger information has been beneficial for many transit agencies. Some examples are the following: • London, United Kingdom. London Transport’s ROUTES, a computerized route planning system, gen- erated an additional estimated £1.3 million of revenue for bus companies, £1.2 million for the Underground, and £1 million for the railways from increased ridership. • Helsinki, Finland. In a customer survey regarding a real-time transit vehicle arrival display system imple- mented on one tram line and one bus route, 16% of tram passengers and 25% of bus passengers reported that they increased their use of the line/route because of the displays. TABLE 7-7 Summary of Advanced Public Transportation System (APTS) program benefits Fleet Management Systems • Increased transit and security • Improved operating efficiency • Improved transit service and schedule adherence • Improved transit information Operational Software and Computer- Aided Dispatching Systems • Increased efficiency in transit operations • Improved transit service and customer convenience • Increased compliance with ADA requirements Electronic Fare Payment Systems • Increased transit ridership and revenues • Improved transit service and visibility within the community • Increased customer convenience • Enhanced compliance with ADA Transit Intelligent Vehicle Initiative • Increased safety of transit passengers • Reduced costs of transit vehicle maintenance and repairs • Enhanced compliance with ADA SOURCE: Casey et al., 2000.

• Turin, Italy. An opinion survey regarding the provi- sion of next-stop information on board transit vehicles revealed that 75% of customers found the system useful. 7-9.3. Fare Collection Fare collection systems can create system savings through lower fare avoidance, reduced labor costs, and more efficient operations. For example, the MetroCard system saved New York City Transit $70 million per year. 7-9.4. Traffic Signal Priorities Travel signal priorities have typically resulted in a travel time savings of about 7 to 10%, although higher travel time savings have been reported. (See Section 7.3 for further discussion.) 7-10. COSTS Capital and operating cost ranges based on the ITS Unit Costs Database are summarized in Table 7-8. Costs for vehi- cle location interface, electronic fareboxes, and trip computer and processors are given on a per bus basis. Generally, AVL systems cost up to about $8,000 per bus, whereas advanced traveler information systems cost from $2,000 to $7,000 per bus. A TCRP study indicates that GPS-based AVL systems cost about $13,700 per vehicle (Okunieff, 1997). Electronic fare collection currently costs $7,000 to $12,000 per bus. 7-11. CHAPTER 7 REFERENCES A Survey to Assess Lane Assist Technology Requirements (Draft Report). Metro Transit Minneapolis and University of Minnesota, 7-18 ITS Institute, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal High- way Administration (December 19, 2002). Automatic Vehicle Location: Successful Transit Applications: A Cross-Cutting Study: Improving Service and Safety. FHWA-OP- 99-022/FTA-TRI-11-99-12. Joint Program Office for Intelligent Transportation Systems, FTA (2000). Baltes, M. R. and J. R. Rey. “Use of Automatic Passenger Counters Assessed for Central Florida’s Lynx.” CUTRLines Newsletter, Vol. 9, No. 1 (1998). “Bus Plus™ Traffic Signal Priority System.” Novax Industries Cor- poration, New Westminster, British Columbia, Canada (n.d.). www.novax.com/products/media/Novax_BusPlus.PDF. Casey, R. F., et al. Advanced Public Transportation Systems: The State of the Art: Update 2000. DOT-VNTSC-FTA-99-5. U.S. Department of Transportation, Volpe National Transportation Systems Center (December 2000). Chada, S., and R. Newland. “Effectiveness of Bus Signal Priority— Final Report.” National Center for Transit Research, Center for Urban Transportation Research, University of South Florida (June 2002). “Final Report—Ranier Avenue South Transit Signal Priority Field Evaluation.” King County Metro, Seattle, WA (January 2001). Goeddel, D. L. Benefits Assessment of Advanced Public Trans- portation System Technologies. DOT-VNTSC-FTA-00-02. U.S. Department of Transportation, Volpe National Transportation Systems Center (November 2000). Greschner, J. T., and H. E. Gerland. “Traffic Signal Priority: Tool to Increase Service Quality and Efficiency.” Proc., Bus and Para- transit Conference, Houston, TX, APTA, Washington, DC (2000) pp. 138–143. ITS for Transit: Solving Real Problems (Draft Participant’s Manual). National Transit Institute, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ (September 2001). ITS for Transit: Solving Real Problems (Draft Participant’s Manual). National Transit Institute, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ (September 2002). Joint Program Office for Intelligent Transportation Systems, U.S. Department of Transportation. ITS Unit Costs Database. TABLE 7-8 Cost ranges for specific ITS technologies Subsystem/Unit Cost Element IDAS No. Lifetime (7 years) Capital Cost (K) Operating & Maintenance Cost ($K per year) Notes 1. Information Service / Provider Labor IS004 Low High Low 175 High 250 2 Staff @ $50–75K. Salary costs are fully loaded. 2. Vehicle Location Interface TR007 20 10 15 Vehicle location interface 3. Transit Center Software, Integration TR002 20 815 1720 6 12 Includes vehicle tracking & scheduling, database & information storage, schedule adjustment software, real time travel information software, and integration 4. Electronic Farebox TV007 10 0.8 1.5 0.04 0.075 On-board flex fare system DBX processor, on- board farebox, and smart card reader 5. Trip Computer and Processor TV005 10 0.1 0.15 0.002 0.003 On-board processor for trip reporting and data storage 6. Transit Center Hardware TR001 10 15 30 Includes three workstations NOTE: Costs are per bus for items 2, 4, and 5. SOURCE: Joint Program Office for Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2002.

www.benefitcost.its.dot.gov/ITS/benecost.nsf/ByLink/Costho me. Accessed March 30, 2002. Klous, W. C., and K. R. Turner. “Implementing Traffic Signal Prior- ities for Buses in Portland.” Presented at Transportation Frontiers for the Next Millennium, 60th Annual Meeting of the Institute of Transportation Engineers, Las Vegas, NV (August 1999). Levinson, H., S. Zimmerman, J. Clinger, S. Rutherford, R. L. Smith, J. Cracknell, and R. Soberman. TCRP Report 90: Bus Rapid Transit, Volume 1: Case Studies in Bus Rapid Transit. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, DC (2003). Okunieff, P.E. TCRP Synthesis of Transit Practice 24: AVL Systems for Bus Transit. Transportation Research Board, National Re- search Council, Washington, DC (1997). 7-19 Multisystems. Intelligent Transportation Systems: Regional Bus Study. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, Wash- ington, DC (August 2001). Rutherford, G. S., S. MacLachlan, K. Semple. Transit Implications of HOV Facility Design, WA-RP-3961-1. Prepared for Federal Transit Administration by Washington State Transportation Center, Seattle, WA (September, 1995). “Transit Priority Systems Study—Summary Report.” Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas. Prepared for Intercity Transit (July 1994).

Next: Chapter 8 - Bus Operations and Service »
Bus Rapid Transit, Volume 2: Implementation Guidelines Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB's Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) Report 90: Bus Rapid Transit, Volume 2: Implementation Guidelines discusses the main components of bus rapid transit (BRT) and describes BRT concepts, planning considerations, key issues, the system development process, desirable conditions for BRT, and general planning principles. It also provides an overview of system types. Bus Rapid Transit, Volume 1: Case Studies in Bus Rapid Transit was released in July 2003.

March 29, 2008 Erratta Notice -- On page 4-11, in the top row of Figure 4-7, in the last column, the cross street green for the 80 sec cycle is incorrectly listed as 26 sec. It should be 36 sec.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!