Bus and Rail Transit Preferential Treatments in Mixed Traffic (2010)

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.

87 APPENDIX A Transit Agency Survey and Responses

TRANSIT AGENCY SURVEY TCRP J-7/SA-22 - Bus and Rail Preferential Treatments in Mixed Traffic Environments This page shows all the questions on a single page to help your agency determine who should answer the survey. When you are ready to begin the survey, use the link here or at the bottom to go back to the start page Page 1 1. Has your agency been involved with implementing any of the following preferential treatments for bus or LRT/streetcar operations on the street system in your urban area? (Check all that apply) Median Transitway (MT) Exclusive Lanes (EL) Transit Signal Priority (TSP) Special Turn Signals (STS) Queue Jump/Bypass Lane (QJ/BL) Curb Extension (CE) Limited Stops (LS) Other (O) Identify: Page 2 Transit Preferential Treatment Applications You will be asked to complete a table of all transit preferential treatments your agency has implemented. The following questions apply to each transit preferential treatment. Add a new treatment: Please fill in the information below. You may only add one treatment type per entry, but please group similar treatments along a corridor if the are in proximity to one another. You are also asked to locate each treatment on a map. Use pins for point treatments (e.g. intersections) and lines for linear treatments (e.g. exclusive transit lanes). For example, if your agency employs TSP along a corridor, please draw pins at each intersection along the corridor for which TSP is applied. To draw point treatments, click the pin icon, then click the map on the point where the treatment is located. For linear treatments, click the polyline button and draw the line on the map, clicking once for each point in the line. Double-click to stop drawing the line. It you make a mistake, click the 'Clear Map' link to clear the map. You can pan (move) the map while drawing treatments by holding the mouse button down while dragging the mouse. 88

89 Transit Type: Treatment Type: If other, Identify: Street: Year Built: Direction of Treatment: Peak Hour Transit Volume: Transit vph Off-Peak Transit Volume: Transit vph Daily Traffic Volume: Peak Hour LOS: Captial Cost: $ Annual O & M Cost: $ Travel Time Savings: % Reduction in Travel Time Variability: % Average Daily Ridership: Answer the questions you know - traffic/roadway agencies will be asked later to provide answers to those you do not know. Please answer the remaining questions with respect to the number of directions indicated above. Enter the treatment location(s) on the map. Use pins for point treatments (e.g. intersections) and lines for linear treatments (e.g. exclusive transit lanes). Clear Map Impact on General Traffic Operations: Median Transitway (MT) Exclusive Lanes (EL) Transit Signal Priority (TSP) Special Turn Signals (STS) Queue Jump/Bypass Lane (QJ/BL) Curb Extension (CE) Limited Stops (LS) Other (O) Page 3 2. What warrants have you applied in identifying the need for different transit preferential treatments for bus or LRT/streetcar operations on your street system? (e.g. particular transit service headway, ridership, delay, reliability, traffic volumes, level of service, other) Bus Operations Map data ©2009 Tele Atlas - Terms of Use

Median Transitway (MT) Exclusive Lanes (EL) Transit Signal Priority (TSP) Special Turn Signals (STS) Queue Jump/Bypass Lane (QJ/BL) Curb Extension (CE) Limited Stops (LS) Other (O) LRT/Streetcar Operations Page 4 3. What types of priority are applied at your transit signal priority preferential treatments? (Check all that apply) Active Treatments: Unconditional Conditional - Vehicle behind schedule Conditional - Vehicle with certain on-board volume Conditional - Other Identify: Passive Treatments: Signal Coordination Other Identify: 4. What is the role of your agency related to transit preferential treatment development in your service area? (Check all that apply) Identifying and locating treatments Designing treatments Constructing treatments Operating and maintaining treatments Monitoring performance of treatments No role 90

91 Page 5 5. Does your agency have a comprehensive transit preferential treatment program in place which guides the development and implementation of different treatments associated with bus and LRT/streetcar operations? Yes No 6. Is there an agreement in place with the local traffic engineering jurisdiction related to the development, operation, and/or maintenance of transit preferential treatments? Yes No 7. Do you obtain public input/approval before transit preferential treatments are implemented? Yes No If yes, what public forum? (e.g. meeting, mailout) 8. Please provide a contact e-mail address for each traffic agency with which you cooperate on transit preferential treatments. Choose someone who is likely to be able to answer any blank sections in the table you filled out for each treatment. Please separate each address with a comma. << Back to the start page

Transit Agency Responses Q1 - ID Agency Name Service Treatments Q1 - Other MT EL TSP 1 Valley Metro Rail, Inc. James Mathien lrt mt, tsp, 2 Fresno Area Express Jeff Long bus o Bus only turn lanes 3 Capital District Transportation Authority Kristina Younger bus tsp, qj, ce, ls, Ridership, reliability, headway 4 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit Dave Reage bus tsp, sts, qj, ls, 5 Metro Transit Charles Carlson both mt, el, tsp, sts, qj, ce, ls, 6 Pace Taqhi Mohammed bus tsp, qj, ls, o Shoulder Lanes Delay due Red Signal, Number of times Bus Stops due to redlight. Travel time saving Potential including frequency of bus as mojor factor, schedule adherence and Bus occupancy 7 Lane Transit District Graham Carey bus mt, el, tsp, qj, ls, 8 Calgary Transit Neil McKendrick both el, tsp, sts, qj, ls, o Bus Only Crossings Some short bus lanes have been constructed on a case by case basis. No warrants required - TSP is implemented on longer high volume bus routes 9 Valley Metro RPTA Jim Book / Ratna Korepella bus tsp, qj, ls, o Unique Station Design Delay 10 Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority (dba LYNX) Doug Jamison bus el, tsp, traffic LOS, individual passenger trips Q2 - Bus Treatment Warrants

Transit Agency Responses ID Agency 1 Valley Metro Rail, Inc. 2 Fresno Area Express 3 Capital District Transportation Authority 4 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit 5 Metro Transit 6 Pace 7 Lane Transit District 8 Calgary Transit 9 Valley Metro RPTA 10 Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority (dba LYNX) STS QJ/BL CE LS OTHER bus volume ridership, reliability Queue Length, Cycle failures to buses,Delay due Red Signal, Number of times Bus Stops due to redlight. Travel time saving Potential including frequency of bus as major factor, schedule adherence and Bus occupancy On & offs, dwell time, bus travel time, density and walk time. No warrants required - case by case application No warrants required - case by case application Limited stop routes are provided on an as required basis in response to demand Bus only crossings - physical barriers or gates that allow bus passage between communities is established at the community road network planning stage Delay Q2 - Bus Treatment Warrants

Transit Agency Responses ID Agency 1 Valley Metro Rail, Inc. 2 Fresno Area Express 3 Capital District Transportation Authority 4 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit 5 Metro Transit 6 Pace 7 Lane Transit District 8 Calgary Transit 9 Valley Metro RPTA 10 Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority (dba LYNX) MT EL TSP STS QJ/BL CE LS OTHER LRT operates within a protected, exclusive right of way except in the downtown (see exclusive lanes) 7th Ave S is a transit mall with access restricted to LRT, buses and emergency vehicles LRT has preemption over traffic signals outside of the downtown core. Q2 - LRT/Streetcar Treatment Warrants

Transit Agency Responses ID Agency 1 Valley Metro Rail, Inc. 2 Fresno Area Express 3 Capital District Transportation Authority 4 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit 5 Metro Transit 6 Pace 7 Lane Transit District 8 Calgary Transit 9 Valley Metro RPTA 10 Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority (dba LYNX) Q3 - Passive - Q4 - Agency Q3 TSP Types Q3 Active - Other Other Role Q5 Q6 Y/N If Yes, Type a_cond-other, predictive priority; early green, green extension, phase insertion design, construct, o/m, No No No no_tsp planning, design, o/m, No No Yes meeting, mailout a_cond-behind, p_sgnl_coord, planning, design, performance, No Yes Yes open houses, meetings, mailouts, e-blast newsletters a_uncond, a_cond- other, Red truncation/green extension planning, No Yes No a_uncond, planning, No Yes Yes Public Meetings a_cond-behind, p_sgnl_coord, p_other Signal Timming Optimization planning, design, construct, o/m, performance, Yes Yes No a_uncond, planning, design, construct, No Yes Yes workshops, charrettes and meetings a_uncond, p_sgnl_coord, planning, design, performance, No Yes No a_cond-behind, p_sgnl_coord, planning, design, construct, performance, No Yes Yes meetings a_uncond, a_cond- other, addition of transit phase is vehicle present none No Yes Yes public meetings Q7 - Public Forum?

Transit Agency Responses Q1 - ID Agency Name Service Treatments Q1 - Other MT EL TSP Q2 - Bus Treatment Warrants 11 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Bruce Shelburne both tsp, o Traffic Signal Priority = Synchronization 12 Pierce Transit Tina Lee bus tsp, qj, Transit Signal delay greater than 10 sec. 13 TriMet Young Park both el, tsp, qj, ce, ls, bus volumes; loads; location of supporting bus stops bus volumes; delay factors 14 New Orleans Regional Transit Authority Edward J. Bayer both mt, el, sts, ce, Delay, level of service, need to maintain on time performance Delay, level of service, need to maintain on time performance 15 Transit Authority of River City Carrie Butler bus 16 Toronto Transit Commission Gary Carr both mt, el, tsp, sts, qj, ls, pro-transit policy, assisted by the fact that transit lanes carry as many people as a full auto lane pro-transit policy, assisted by the fact that transit lanes carry as many people as a full auto lane benefit to transit on busy routes was sufficient to remove a vehicle and still provide same no. of vehicle passes per hour, justifying the cost was the intial justificaiton - later it was simply seen as a proper pro-transit tool 17 Nashville MTA Jim McAteer bus 18 Central Arkansas Transit Authority Eric Meyerson both tsp, none none none 19 San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency Javad Mirabdal both mt, el, tsp, sts, qj, ce, ls, o Boarding Island, Turn Restriction Transit ridership, Street width, Traffic volume Transit ridership, Street width,Traffic volume Signal delay, Ridership 20 King County Metro Transit Ellen Bevington both el, tsp, qj, ce, ls, o HOV lane, Parking Restrictions Benefit/Cost Analysis, LOS Study, transit headways 10 bus/hr or greater Benefit/Cost Analysis, Delay Study, LOS Analysis (LOS B-E)

Tr ans it A gency Res pons es ID Ag en c y 11 Lo s A nge le s Co unt y Me tr op o lit an Tr an sp or ta ti on Auth or it y 12 Pi er ce Tr an si t 13 Tr iM et 14 Ne w Orl ean s Re gi on al Tr an si t Auth or it y 15 Tr an si t Auth or it y of Ri ve r Ci ty 16 To ro nt o Tr an si t Co mmi ssi on 17 Na sh v ille MT A 18 Ce nt ra l Arka ns as Tr an si t Auth or it y 19 Sa n Fr an ci sco Muni ci pa l Tr an sp or ta ti on Ag en cy 20 King Co unt y Me tr o Tr an si t ST S QJ / BL CE LS OT HE R Q2 - Bu s Tr eat ment Warrant s No ne bus vo lume s; l oad s; lo ca ti on of s uppo rti ng bus st op s bus vo lume s; st o p ac ti vi t y - on s/ o ffs ty pe of se rv ic e a g ood pr o- tr an si t t ool ju st if ie d on ca se -b y- ca se ba si s ju st a tr an si t ag en cy de ci si on gi ve n th at a pa ra lle l lo ca l se rv ic e al so pr ov id ed no ne no ne no ne tr avel time A cco mo da te sp ec ia l tr an si t mo ve me nt Ch a nge fr om ex cl us iv e to mi x fl ow , A cco mo da te sp ec ia l tr an si t mo ve me nt Be fo re a nd af te r l oad i ng de la y, A cce ss to bus st op Cl os el y lo ca te d st op s De la y Study , City 's LT si gna liz at io n wa rra n t, LO S An al ys is De la y Study , Be ne fi t/C os t An al ys is , LO S An al ys is De la y Study , Pilo t pr oj ec t wi th be fo re /a ft er st udy De la y Study , Pa rk i ng Ut iliz at io n Study

Tr ans it A gency Res pons es ID Ag en c y 11 Lo s A nge le s Co unt y Me tr op o lit an Tr an sp or ta ti on Auth or it y 12 Pi er ce Tr an si t 13 Tr iM et 14 Ne w Orl ean s Re gi on al Tr an si t Auth or it y 15 Tr an si t Auth or it y of Ri ve r Ci ty 16 To ro nt o Tr an si t Co mmi ssi on 17 Na sh v ille MT A 18 Ce nt ra l Arka ns as Tr an si t Auth or it y 19 Sa n Fr an ci sco Muni ci pa l Tr an sp or ta ti on Ag en cy 20 King Co unt y Me tr o Tr an si t MT EL TS P ST S QJ / BL CE LS OT HE R Q2 - LR T/ Streetcar Tr eat ment Warrant s Pa sse nge r vo lume s, di st an ce of st r eet run se ct io n, sp eed , tra ffi c inte rf ac e Sa fe op er at io n of LR T De la y, le ve l of se rv ic e, n eed to ma inta in on time pe rf or ma nc e De la y, le ve l of se rv ic e, n eed to ma inta in on time pe rf or ma nc e De la y, le ve l of se rv ic e, n eed to ma inta in on time pe rf or ma nc e ju st if ic at io n pr im ar ily th e n eed to se pa ra te tr an si t op er at io ns fr om e ffe ct s of tra ffi c de la ys ; a ssi st ed by th e fa ct th at tr an si t la ne s ca rr y as ma n y p eo p le as a fu ll au to la ne n/ a be ne fi t to tr an si t on bus y ro ut es wa s su ffi ci en t to re mo ve a ve hi cl e a nd st ill pr ov id e sa me no . of ve hi cl e pa sse s pe r ho ur , ju st if yi ng th e co st wa s th e inti al ju st if ic ai to n - la te r it wa s si mply s een as a pr op er pr o- tr an si t t ool a g ood pr o- tr an si t t ool n/ a n /a n/ a no ne to lin e u p tr ac k with br id g e ra mp sa fe ty sa fe ty no ne b oar ding lo ca ti on s no ne Tr an si t ride rs hip, Str eet wi dth, Tr a ffi c vo lume Tr an si t ride rs hip, Str eet wi dth, Tr a ffi c vo lume Signa l de la y, Ride rs hi p A cco mo da te sp ec ia l tr an si t mo ve me nt Ch a nge fr om ex cl us iv e to mi x fl ow , A cco mo da te sp ec ia l tr an si t mo ve me nt Be fo re a nd af te r l oad i ng de la y, A cce ss to bus st op Cl os el y lo ca te d st op s

Tr ans it A gency Res pons es ID Ag en c y 11 Lo s A nge le s Co unt y Me tr op o lit an Tr an sp or ta ti on Auth or it y 12 Pi er ce Tr an si t 13 Tr iM et 14 Ne w Orl ean s Re gi on al Tr an si t Auth or it y 15 Tr an si t Auth or it y of Ri ve r Ci ty 16 To ro nt o Tr an si t Co mmi ssi on 17 Na sh v ille MT A 18 Ce nt ra l Arka ns as Tr an si t Auth or it y 19 Sa n Fr an ci sco Muni ci pa l Tr an sp or ta ti on Ag en cy 20 King Co unt y Me tr o Tr an si t Q3 - P assi ve - Q4 - A g en c y Q 3 TS P Ty p es Q 3 A ct i ve - O t h er O t h er R o l e Q5 Q6 Y/ N If Y es, Ty p e Q7 - P ublic Forum ? a _unc o nd, p_s gnl_c oor d, pla nning, No No No a _unc o nd, pla nning, de si gn, co ns truc t, pe rf or ma nc e, No Ye s N o a_ co nd- be hind, pla nning, de si gn, co ns truc t, o/ m, pe rf or ma nc e, Ye s Y es No no _t sp pla nning, No No Ye s A ppr oval by City De p t. of Public Wo rk s no _t sp no ne No No Ye s n ot a pplic ab le a _unc o nd, pla nning, de si gn, pe rf or ma nc e, Ye s Y es Ye s de pe nds on th e tr eat me nt - in so me ca se s su ch as si gna l prio rity , no public input ob ta in ed ; wi th an y co ns truc ti on -re la te d impr ovem en ts su ch as me di an tr an si t wa ys , ex te ns iv e public pr oc es s no _t sp pla nning, no ne No No Ye s N/A - We do n't cu rre ntly ha ve an y tr an si t pr ef er en ti al tr eat me nt s a _unc o nd, no ne No No No a _unc o nd, p_s gnl_c oor d, p_o th er Sh or te rn wa lk to he lp ri ght tu rn mo ve me nt pla nning, de si gn, co ns truc t, o/ m, pe rf or ma nc e, Ye s Y es Ye s De pe nding on tr eat me nt we ma y ha ve co mmunity m eet i ng a nd public h ear in g a_ co nd- ot he r, p_s gnl_c oor d, p_o th er Elig ible ro ut es on ly , ge ne ra lly p eak dire ct io n on ly Signa l timing ad ju st me nt s fo r tr an si t mo ve me nt s pla nning, de si gn, pe rf or ma nc e, Ye s Y es Ye s Co mmunity m eet i ngs , dire ct co nt ac ts to af fe ct ed indi vi dua ls / bus ine sse s

Transit Agency Responses Q1 - ID Agency Name Service Treatments Q1 - Other MT EL TSP Q2 - Bus Treatment Warrants 21 Indianapolis Public Transportation Corporation (IndyGo) Trevor Ocock bus qj, 22 AC Transit Jon Twichell bus tsp, qj, ls, Significantly improve bus speed 23 COTA Doug Moore bus el, ls, High Street downtown 24 Greater Richmond Transit Company Scott Clark bus el, traffic volumes, safety 25 OC Transpo Jabbar Siddique both el, tsp, sts, qj, ce, ls, ridership; delay; reliability; traffic volumes ridership; delay; reliability; traffic volumes 26 Utah Transit Authority Jeff LaMora both mt, el, tsp, qj, o UTA /UDOT are in the process of building EL's for BRT Currently under construction… Warrented by faster trip times and higher ridership through congested corridor Safer operation and faster trip times 27 Port Authority of Allegheny County David Wohlwill both el, sts, N.A. Reliability and Traffic Volumes N.A. 28 Golden Gate Transit Alan Zahradnik bus mt, el, tsp, sts, qj, ce, ls, congested mixed flow operations with undesirable delay that effects on time performance congested mixed flow operations with undesirable delay that effects on time performance congested mixed flow operations with undesirable delay that effects on time performance 29 Sacramento Regional Transit District Don Smith both tsp, sts, qj, None None one intersection 30 Fort Worth Transportation Authority Carl Weckenmann bus el, tsp, No specific warrants, first project applied to busiest corridor 31 Sound Transit Greg Walker both mt, el, ce,

Transit Agency Responses ID Agency 21 Indianapolis Public Transportation Corporation (IndyGo) 22 AC Transit 23 COTA 24 Greater Richmond Transit Company 25 OC Transpo 26 Utah Transit Authority 27 Port Authority of Allegheny County 28 Golden Gate Transit 29 Sacramento Regional Transit District 30 Fort Worth Transportation Authority 31 Sound Transit STS QJ/BL CE LS OTHER Q2 - Bus Treatment Warrants Bypass congestion delay Significantly improve bus speed ridership; delay; reliability; traffic volume ridership; delay; reliability; traffic volume convinience for transit customers; delays; reliability; traffic volumes ridership; delay; reliability; Safety and efficiency for bus operations. Need to move buses through heavily congested areas N.A. N.A. A handful of routed offer limited stop service need for bus only left turn signal to allow buses to turn where traffic is prohibited congested mixed flow operations with undesirable delay that effects on time performance needed for establishing accessible ADA bus stops low ridership density corridors one intersection one intersection

Transit Agency Responses ID Agency 21 Indianapolis Public Transportation Corporation (IndyGo) 22 AC Transit 23 COTA 24 Greater Richmond Transit Company 25 OC Transpo 26 Utah Transit Authority 27 Port Authority of Allegheny County 28 Golden Gate Transit 29 Sacramento Regional Transit District 30 Fort Worth Transportation Authority 31 Sound Transit MT EL TSP STS QJ/BL CE LS OTHER Q2 - LRT/Streetcar Treatment Warrants Project justification through ridership. Most of street running portion of system is EL. - Safety and Efficiency Safer operation, faster trip times, consistent trip times Safety N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. In downtown there is TSP STS at some downtown intersections

Transit Agency Responses ID Agency 21 Indianapolis Public Transportation Corporation (IndyGo) 22 AC Transit 23 COTA 24 Greater Richmond Transit Company 25 OC Transpo 26 Utah Transit Authority 27 Port Authority of Allegheny County 28 Golden Gate Transit 29 Sacramento Regional Transit District 30 Fort Worth Transportation Authority 31 Sound Transit Q3 - Passive - Q4 - Agency Q3 TSP Types Q3 Active - Other Other Role Q5 Q6 Y/N If Yes, Type Q7 - Public Forum? no_tsp none No Yes No a_uncond, p_sgnl_coord, planning, performance, Yes Yes No no_tsp planning, No No No no_tsp none No No No a_uncond, a_cond- other, p_sgnl_coord, p_other pre-emptions are subject to fulfilling minimum requirements for intersecting streets; 1/2 cycle operation; Standby or Non coordinated operation; planning, design, construct, o/m, performance, Yes Yes Yes in some cases we obtain public input/approval through public meetings; however, in many cases we do not obtain public approval before transit preferential treatments are implemented a_uncond, planning, design, construct, o/m, performance, Yes No Yes Public input is considered during the public meeting process for any project. There is also consideration given to ongoing public comments provided to UTA and the various tranpsortation departments. no_tsp planning, No No No a_cond-other, p_other we have none we have none planning, No No No a_uncond, p_sgnl_coord, planning, No Yes Yes mailouts and meetings a_uncond, planning, design, performance, No No No no_tsp planning, construct, No No Yes meeting and mailout as well as website information

Transit Agency Responses Q1 - ID Agency Name Service Treatments Q1 - Other MT EL TSP Q2 - Bus Treatment Warrants 32 Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority Roberto Gonzalez bus sts, qj, ce, ls, o Working on TSP for future Rapid Bus Program (2011 Implementation) / Working on Shoulder use of Urban Expressways (future) City of Austin (Future Study) - Downtown (Lavaca and Guadalupe Corridors); TxDOT (Future Study) - Exclussive Bus Travel on Shoulder Program City of Austin (Future Project - 2011) - Rapid Bus Program (Lamar and South Congress) 33 Spokane Transit Gordon Howell bus o Limited Stop (Route 124) Single Treatment 34 Memphis Area Transit Authority John C. Lancaster, AICP both tsp, 35 Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority John Villeneuve bus ls, 36 MTA New York City Transit Ted Orosz bus el, tsp, qj, ls, Ridership, reliability, traffic volumes Delay, traffic volumes 37 Rochester-Genesee Regional Transit Authority Charles Switzer bus el, ls, headways, level of service 38 Connecticut Department of Transportation Micheal Sanders bus mt, 39 Central Okla. Transportation and Parking Authority (COTPA) dba METRO Transit Larry Hopper bus ls,

Tr ans it A gency Res pons es ID Ag en c y 32 Ca pita l Me tr op o lit an Tr an sp or ta ti on Auth or it y 33 Sp ok an e Tr an si t 34 Me m phi s Ar ea Tr an si t Auth or it y 35 Pine lla s S unc oas t Tr an si t Auth or it y 36 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t 37 Ro ch es te r-G en es ee Re gi on al Tr an si t Auth or it y 38 Co nne ct ic ut De pa rt me nt of Tr an sp or ta ti on 39 Ce nt ra l Ok la . Tr an sp or ta ti on a nd Pa rk i ng Auth or it y (COT PA) dba ME TR O Tr an si t ST S QJ / BL CE LS OT HE R Q2 - Bu s Tr eat ment Warrant s Ci ty of Au st in (re gul ar re que st s) - Le ft -t ur n pr ot ec ti on si gna liz at io ns Ci ty of Au st in (1 st ca se ) - No rt h La ma r/Airp or t Bl vd (Cre st vi ew St at io n) Ci ty of Au st in (s pe ci fi c ca se s) at ke y st op s - ty pi ca lly cu rb in se ts Ci ty of Au st in (w or king on Ra pid Bu s Pr og ra m) a nd c oor dina ti on of bus st op s Po te ntia l fo r co mp et itiv e tr avel time a nd in cr eas ed ri de rs hi p Ex pr e ss Bu s Se rv ic es De la ys , re lia b ilit y H ead wa ys , ride rs hi p ri de rs hi p ME TR O Tr an si t ha s so me ro ut es on wh ic h we op er at e he rita ge tro lle y bus es a nd th es e ar e "lim it ed st op ": we ha ve no qua ntit at iv e wa rra nt a sso ci at ed wi th th es e.

Tr ans it A gency Res pons es ID Ag en c y 32 Ca pita l Me tr op o lit an Tr an sp or ta ti on Auth or it y 33 Sp ok an e Tr an si t 34 Me m phi s Ar ea Tr an si t Auth or it y 35 Pine lla s S unc oas t Tr an si t Auth or it y 36 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t 37 Ro ch es te r-G en es ee Re gi on al Tr an si t Auth or it y 38 Co nne ct ic ut De pa rt me nt of Tr an sp or ta ti on 39 Ce nt ra l Ok la . Tr an sp or ta ti on a nd Pa rk i ng Auth or it y (COT PA) dba ME TR O Tr an si t MT EL TS P ST S QJ / BL CE LS OT HE R Q2 - LR T/ Streetcar Tr eat ment Warrant s Impr oved tr an si t ve hi cl e h ead wa y a nd sa fe ty .

Tr ans it A gency Res pons es ID Ag en c y 32 Ca pita l Me tr op o lit an Tr an sp or ta ti on Auth or it y 33 Sp ok an e Tr an si t 34 Me m phi s Ar ea Tr an si t Auth or it y 35 Pine lla s S unc oas t Tr an si t Auth or it y 36 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t 37 Ro ch es te r-G en es ee Re gi on al Tr an si t Auth or it y 38 Co nne ct ic ut De pa rt me nt of Tr an sp or ta ti on 39 Ce nt ra l Ok la . Tr an sp or ta ti on a nd Pa rk i ng Auth or it y (COT PA) dba ME TR O Tr an si t Q3 - P assi ve - Q4 - A g en c y Q 3 TS P Ty p es Q 3 A ct i ve - O t h er O t h er R o l e Q5 Q6 Y/ N If Y es, Ty p e Q7 - P ublic Forum ? no _t sp pla nning, No No Ye s Th ey w ill be pa rt of th e upc om i ng pr oc e ss (R ap id Bu s - 2011) no _t sp pla nning, de si gn, co ns truc t, o/ m, pe rf or ma nc e, No No No a _unc o nd, pla nning, de si gn, co ns truc t, No Ye s N o no _t sp pla nning, No No No a_ co nd- ot he r, Pe de st ri an sa fe ty ba se d on cy cl e time s. W ill turn or ho ld gr een light if n ear th e be ginning or e nd of cy cl e time re sp ec ti ve ly . pla nning, pe rf or ma nc e, Ye s Y es Ye s H ear i ngs , m eet i ngs no _t sp de si gn, No Ye s N o no _t sp pla nning, de si gn, co ns truc t, o/ m, pe rf or ma nc e, No Ye s Y es m eet i ngs , ma ilings no _t sp pla nning, de si gn, co ns truc t, o/ m, No Ye s N o

Transit Agency Responses Q1 - ID Agency Name Service Treatments Q1 - Other MT EL TSP Q2 - Bus Treatment Warrants 40 Community Transit June DeVoll bus tsp, Transit Delay and reliability 41 Chicago Transit Authority Peter Fahrenwald bus el, tsp, ls, level of service, delay, CBD priority only test project planned 42 York Region Transit Rick Takagi bus tsp, qj, ce, ls, All traffic signal in York Region on BRT routes 43 Chattanooga Area Regional Transportation Authority Annie Powell bus tsp, traffic volumes and route ridership 44 Maryland Transit Administration Vern G. Hartsock both tsp, ls, 45 Mountgomery County [MD] Transit aka Ride On Howard Benn bus qj, o semi-exclusive lanes 46 Regional Transportation Commission of Washoe County Tom Greco bus tsp, qj, o note, both items above are in the planning stage, not yet implemented. 47 SEPTA Josh Gottlieb both tsp, o far side stops reduced headway times 48 Miami-Dade Transit Steven Alperstein bus el, qj, ls, Travel delay caused by heavy traffic conditions on roadway 49 Hillsborough Area Regional Transit Eric Sitiko both el, tsp, sts, qj, ce, ls, 50 Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority Michael Schipper both mt, el, tsp, sts, qj, ce, ls,

Tr ans it A gency Res pons es ID Ag en c y 40 Co mmunity Tr an si t 41 Ch ic ag o Tr an si t Auth or it y 42 Yo rk Re gi on Tr an si t 43 Ch a tta n oog a Ar ea Re gi on al Tr an sp or ta ti on Auth or it y 44 Ma ry la nd Tr an si t Ad mini st ra ti on 45 Mo untgo me ry Co unt y [MD] Tr an si t ak a Ri de On 46 Re gi on al Tr an sp or ta ti on Co mmi ssi on of Wa sh oe Co unt y 47 SEPT A 48 Mi am i- Da de Tr an si t 49 Hills bo ro ugh Ar ea Re gi on al Tr an si t 50 Gr eat er Cl evel a nd Re gi on al Tr an si t Auth or it y ST S QJ / BL CE LS OT HE R Q2 - Bu s Tr eat ment Warrant s ri de rs hip, le ngth of ro ut e, aver a g e bus s p eed , ar te ri al st r eet ty pe Ke y lo ca ti on s on th e BR T wh ic h ex pe ri en ce d ma jo r ve hi cl e que i ng a nd wh er e th er e wa s su ffi ci en t r oad a llo wa nc e to a cco mmo da te a que ue jump la ne Lo ca ti on s on th e BR T ro ut e wh er e pr ov is io n of th e cu rb ex te ns io n wo uld impr ove se rv ic e re lia b ilit y a nd minimize de la ys De ve lo pm en t of a se rv ic e de si gn st a nda rd wh ic h in cl ude s minimum 750 me tr e sp ac i ng a nd minimy um of 300 b oar dings pe r w eek da y we ha ve no wa rre nt st a nda rd s fo r an y of th e ab ov e Tr avel de la y ca us ed by h eavy tra ffi c co ndito ns on r oad wa y

Tr ans it A gency Res pons es ID Ag en c y 40 Co mmunity Tr an si t 41 Ch ic ag o Tr an si t Auth or it y 42 Yo rk Re gi on Tr an si t 43 Ch a tta n oog a Ar ea Re gi on al Tr an sp or ta ti on Auth or it y 44 Ma ry la nd Tr an si t Ad mini st ra ti on 45 Mo untgo me ry Co unt y [MD] Tr an si t ak a Ri de On 46 Re gi on al Tr an sp or ta ti on Co mmi ssi on of Wa sh oe Co unt y 47 SEPT A 48 Mi am i- Da de Tr an si t 49 Hills bo ro ugh Ar ea Re gi on al Tr an si t 50 Gr eat er Cl evel a nd Re gi on al Tr an si t Auth or it y MT EL TS P ST S QJ / BL CE LS OT HE R Q2 - LR T/ Streetcar Tr eat ment Warrant s re duc ed h ead wa y time s

Tr ans it A gency Res pons es ID Ag en c y 40 Co mmunity Tr an si t 41 Ch ic ag o Tr an si t Auth or it y 42 Yo rk Re gi on Tr an si t 43 Ch a tta n oog a Ar ea Re gi on al Tr an sp or ta ti on Auth or it y 44 Ma ry la nd Tr an si t Ad mini st ra ti on 45 Mo untgo me ry Co unt y [MD] Tr an si t ak a Ri de On 46 Re gi on al Tr an sp or ta ti on Co mmi ssi on of Wa sh oe Co unt y 47 SEPT A 48 Mi am i- Da de Tr an si t 49 Hills bo ro ugh Ar ea Re gi on al Tr an si t 50 Gr eat er Cl evel a nd Re gi on al Tr an si t Auth or it y Q3 - P assi ve - Q4 - A g en c y Q 3 TS P Ty p es Q 3 A ct i ve - O t h er O t h er R o l e Q5 Q6 Y/ N If Y es, Ty p e Q7 - P ublic Forum ? a_ co nd- be hind, pla nning, pe rf or ma nc e, No Ye s N o a_ co nd- be hind, a_ co nd- ot he r, p_s gnl_c oor d, T SP gr an ts /h ou r pla nning, de si gn, pe rf or ma nc e, No Ye s N o a_ co nd- be hind, pla nning, o/ m, pe rf or ma nc e, Ye s Y es Yes public m eet i ngs , ma ilo ut a_ co nd- be hind, pla nning, No Ye s N o a_ co nd- ot he r, inte rs ec ti on gr an ts prio rity pla nning, de si gn, co ns truc t, o/ m, pe rf or ma nc e, No Ye s Y es m eet i ngs no _t sp pla nning, pe rf or ma nc e, No Ye s Y es ge ne ra lly m eet i ngs , ma ilo ut s, ne ws le tte rs ar e pr op os ed a _unc o nd, p_s gnl_c oor d, pla nning, de si gn, co ns truc t, o/ m, pe rf or ma nc e, No Ye s Y es public m eet i ng fo r th e BR T st udy on Virginia st . a_ co nd- ot he r, p_s gnl_c oor d, p_o th er 2nd pr io rity ma ss tr an si t ve hi cl e mi cr op ro ce sso r pr og ra ms to cy cl e pr io rity pla nning, de si gn, co ns truc t, o/ m, pe rf or ma nc e, No Ye s Y es ci ty a nd/ or to wn sh ip a ppr oval no _t sp pla nning, de si gn, co ns truc t, o/ m, pe rf or ma nc e, No Ye s Y es m eet i ng, public a nno unc em en ts a _unc o nd, p_s gnl_c oor d, pla nning, o/ m, No Ye s Y es m eet in g a_ co nd- be hind, p_s gnl_c oor d, pla nning, de si gn, co ns truc t, pe rf or ma nc e, No Ye s Y es Nu me ro us public m eet i ngs a nd ou tr eac h

Transit Agency Responses Q1 - ID Agency Name Service Treatments Q1 - Other MT EL TSP Q2 - Bus Treatment Warrants 51 Des Moines Area Regional Transit Authority Elizabeth Presutti bus tsp, ridership 52 Regional Transportation District Jeff Becker both el, tsp, qj, ls, reliability, ridership, time savings reliability, ridership, time savings reliability, ridership, time savings

Transit Agency Responses ID Agency 51 Des Moines Area Regional Transit Authority 52 Regional Transportation District STS QJ/BL CE LS OTHER Q2 - Bus Treatment Warrants reliability, ridership, time savings

Transit Agency Responses ID Agency 51 Des Moines Area Regional Transit Authority 52 Regional Transportation District MT EL TSP STS QJ/BL CE LS OTHER Q2 - LRT/Streetcar Treatment Warrants reliability, ridership, time savings

Transit Agency Responses ID Agency 51 Des Moines Area Regional Transit Authority 52 Regional Transportation District Q3 - Passive - Q4 - Agency Q3 TSP Types Q3 Active - Other Other Role Q5 Q6 Y/N If Yes, Type Q7 - Public Forum? a_cond-behind, performance, No Yes No a_uncond, p_sgnl_coord, planning, design, construct, o/m, performance, Yes Yes Yes meeting

Individual Transit Preferential Treatment Applications ID Agency Service Treat- ment Type Description (if Other) Street Year Built Direction Peak Hour Transit Volume Offpeak Hourly Volume Average Daily Traffic Peak Hour LOS Capital Cost 1 King County Metro Transit bus ce NE 45th St 2007 two-way 14 10 $33,000 2 King County Metro Transit bus ce University Way NE 2002 two-way 28 20 3 York Region Transit bus ce Yonge Street 2005 two-way 24 10 50,000 E 4 York Region Transit bus ce Highway 7 2005 two-way 12 8 65,000 E 5 Metro Transit bus el Marquette Ave/2nd Ave one-way 70 10 10,000 6 Metro Transit bus el 4th St (Contraflow) one-way 25 10 8,300 7 Metro Transit bus el Nicollet Mall two-way 40 20 0 8 Metro Transit bus el Hennepin Ave (Contraflow) one-way 30 15 17,000 9 Metro Transit lrt el 5th St 2003 two-way 8 6 2,300 10 Metro Transit bus el 5th St/6th St one-way 50 25 11 Lane Transit District bus el South A Street 2005 one-way 12 12 12 Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority (d/b/a LYNX) bus el Downtown Orlando (Loop) 1997 two-way 15 6 $21,000,000 13 New Orleans Regional Transit Authority bus el Crescent City Connection 1988 one-way 12 7 14 New Orleans Regional Transit Authority lrt el Mississippi Riverfront 1988 two-way 1 1 $14,000,000 15 King County Metro Transit bus el Elliott Ave W / 15th Ave W 2008 two-way 19 9 48,900 16 King County Metro Transit bus el 2nd Ave one-way 111 13 15,800 17 King County Metro Transit bus el 4th Ave one-way 120 14 19,700 18 King County Metro Transit bus el Bus Tunnel 1989 two-way 60 32 0 N $444,000,000 19 King County Metro Transit bus el SODO Busway (5th Ave S) two-way 63 42 0 20 King County Metro Transit bus el 1st Ave 2006 one-way 15 10 16,400 21 King County Metro Transit bus el Aurora Ave N 2004 one-way 27 11 40,000 22 King County Metro Transit bus el West Seattle Bridge 1999 one-way 32 18 23 King County Metro Transit bus el Seneca St 2007 one-way 22 8 24 King County Metro Transit bus el 4th Ave 2005 one-way 30 8 19,700 25 King County Metro Transit bus el Lake City Way 2007 two-way 20 4 37,000 26 King County Metro Transit bus el Aurora Ave N one-way 6 4 27 King County Metro Transit bus el Aurora Ave 2007 two-way 8 4 40,000

Individual Transit Preferential Treatment Applications ID Agency 1 King County Metro Transit 2 King County Metro Transit 3 York Region Transit 4 York Region Transit 5 Metro Transit 6 Metro Transit 7 Metro Transit 8 Metro Transit 9 Metro Transit 10 Metro Transit 11 Lane Transit District 12 Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority (d/b/a LYNX) 13 New Orleans Regional Transit Authority 14 New Orleans Regional Transit Authority 15 King County Metro Transit 16 King County Metro Transit 17 King County Metro Transit 18 King County Metro Transit 19 King County Metro Transit 20 King County Metro Transit 21 King County Metro Transit 22 King County Metro Transit 23 King County Metro Transit 24 King County Metro Transit 25 King County Metro Transit 26 King County Metro Transit 27 King County Metro Transit Annual O/M Cost Ridership % Travel Time Savings % Decrease in Travel Time Variability Impact on General Traffic Operations 4,510 Queues form behind buses at bus stops, but queue disperses quickly after bus leaves. 11,500 Queues form behind buses stopped at bus stops, but queue disperses quickly. 15,500 No impact 10,000 No impact Hennepin Ave to be re-striped to 2-way general traffic in 2010. With-flow exclusive bus/right turn lane $1,200,000 4,037 Operating buses in exclusive transit lanes eliminates the frequent stopping in general traffic lanes. This would have caused a removal of the vehicular capcity of the lane for the duration the bus was stopped. 4,912 The HOV lanes operate one-way in the peak direction (toward the New Orleans CBD in the AM and from the New Orleans CBD in the PM). The lanes improve the on-time performamce of transit vehicles. Note that transit vehicles per hour and ridership reflect the lower population of New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. $1,200,000 543 Operation on an exclusive transitway allows the Riverfront Line to avoid the congestion on adjoining Decatur Street in the French Quarter. Transit vehicles per hour and ridership reflect lower population post Hurricane Katrina. 13,220 8,150 7,770 31,010 No impact to traffic on surface. 22,030 7,540 Loss of on-street parking during PM peak. 2,920 Loss of on-street parking during AM peak. 8,060 4,980 7,770 Installation of Island Bus Stop removed one General traffic lane. 8,280 Loss of on-street parking during peak hours. 1,870 3,990

Indi vi dual Tr ans it Pref erent ia l Tr eat m ent A pp lic at i ons ID Ag ency Serv ic e Tr eat - ment Ty pe D escr i p tion (if Ot her) Street Y ear Bu ilt Di r ect io n P eak H our Tr ansi t Volume O ffp eak H ourly Volume Av er age Da ily Tr a ffi c P eak H our LO S C apital Co st 28 Gr eat er Ri ch mo nd Tr an si t Co mp an y bus el Br oad St 2007 tw o- wa y 104 61 15,000 29 OC Tr an sp o bus el Bu s on ly st r eet de si gna ltio n Ch ap el 1993 tw o- wa y 3 2 30 OC Tr an sp o bus el Albe rt Str eet 1970 on e- wa y 31 So und Tr an si t l rt el Pa ci fi c Av e. 2001 tw o- wa y 1 2 6 $78,200,000 32 Ch ic ag o Tr an si t Auth or ity bus el Ra ndo l ph- Wa sh i ngt on , Ad am s- Ja ck so n 1980 on e- wa y 6 5 2 0 20,000 C $25,000 33 Mi am i- Da de Tr an si t bus el So uth Da de Bu sw ay 1997 tw o- wa y 5 0 1 8 0 $148,000,000 34 Re gi on al Tr an sp or ta ti on Di st ri ct bus el Br oad wa y/ Linc ol n 1980 tw o- wa y 5 0 2 0 35 Re gi on al Tr an sp or ta ti on Di st ri ct bus el US 36 HO T La ne s 1994 tw o- wa y 3 2 1 2 36 Va lle y Me tr o RP TA bus ls Ma in Str ee t, Ariz on a Av e t wo -w ay 4 2 35,000 D $37,000,000 37 CO TA bus ls Hi gh tw o- wa y 8 0 20,000 C $0 38 Sp ok an e Tr an si t bus ls Mo nr oe/ Wa ll/ Ha st i ngs 2008 tw o- wa y 5 0 $1,000 39 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls Gra nd Co nc ou rs e 1993 tw o- wa y 1 6 1 3 $0 40 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls Fo r dha m Rd /P el ha m Pk wy 1990 tw o- wa y 2 4 1 2 $0 41 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls We bs te r Av /W hite Pl ai ns Rd 1995 tw o- wa y 1 2 0 $0 42 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls 3r d Av 1955 tw o- wa y 2 4 1 0 $0 43 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls 5th Av /M ad is on Av 1991 tw o- wa y 1 5 1 0 $0 44 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls Ri ve rs id e/ 5th a nd 6th Av es 1976 tw o- wa y 2 0 1 2 $0 45 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls 1s t Av / 2nd Av 1978 tw o- wa y 3 0 1 2 $0 46 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls Am st er da m Av /L exi ngt on Av /3rd Av 1991 tw o- wa y 1 6 1 2 $0 47 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls C hur ch Av / 39th St 2005 tw o- wa y 1 6 1 2 $0 48 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls Fl at bus h Av 1992 tw o- wa y 2 7 1 2 $0 49 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls No st ra nd Av /N ew Yo rk Av 1995 tw o- wa y 2 0 1 2 $0 50 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls Ut ic a Av /M al co lm X 1994 tw o- wa y 3 0 1 5 $0

Individual Transit Preferential Treatment Applications ID Agency 28 Greater Richmond Transit Company 29 OC Transpo 30 OC Transpo 31 Sound Transit 32 Chicago Transit Authority 33 Miami-Dade Transit 34 Regional Transportation District 35 Regional Transportation District 36 Valley Metro RPTA 37 COTA 38 Spokane Transit 39 MTA New York City Transit 40 MTA New York City Transit 41 MTA New York City Transit 42 MTA New York City Transit 43 MTA New York City Transit 44 MTA New York City Transit 45 MTA New York City Transit 46 MTA New York City Transit 47 MTA New York City Transit 48 MTA New York City Transit 49 MTA New York City Transit 50 MTA New York City Transit Annual O/M Cost Ridership % Travel Time Savings % Decrease in Travel Time Variability Impact on General Traffic Operations unknown - exclusive lane is often blocked by illegally parked vehicles with little enforcement. Lane is exclusive at peak times only. 890 Short bus-only street providing bus access where general traffic is not permitted 30,967 Minimal impact on general traffic $3,800,000 No significant impact. System was designed to maintain automobile capacity. $0 Minimal -- right turns are allowed from bus lane. 23,355 10 This is an exclusive busway running parallel to a major traffic corridor. Impacts occur when auto traffic crosses Busway at signalized intersections. Traffic signal coordination is an import component of the exclusive lanes to minimize travel time. 5,000 25 50 5,000 25 50 2,000 33 23 320 40 $496,000 420 10 $0 42,294 15 $0 42,633 17 $0 28,020 12 $0 16,706 $0 14,886 8 $0 11,898 $0 57,793 14 $0 36,423 20 $0 38,330 12 $0 39,457 18 $0 41,446 10 $0 52,681 8

Indi vi dual Tr ans it Pref erent ia l Tr eat m ent A pp lic at i ons ID Ag ency Serv ic e Tr eat - ment Ty pe D escr i p tion (if Ot her) Street Y ear Bu ilt Di r ect io n P eak H our Tr ansi t Volume O ffp eak H ourly Volume Av er age Da ily Tr a ffi c P eak H our LO S C apital Co st 51 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls Ba y Pk wy /A ve J/ Fl at la nds Av 2000 tw o- wa y 1 5 1 2 $0 52 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls Ri ch mo nd/Ar t hur Kill Rd 2002 on e- wa y 3 0 $0 53 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls Ri ch mo nd Av /B ayo nne Bridge 2007 tw o- wa y 8 0 54 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls Vi ct or y Bl/Bra dl ey Av 1989 on e- wa y 7 0 $0 55 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls Ha rl em Ri ve r Dr/3 rd Av /L exi ngt on Av 1987 tw o- wa y 1 6 0 56 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls Vi ct or y Bl 1988 on e- wa y 4 0 $0 57 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls Ri ch mo nd Rd /N ew Do rp La 2003 on e- wa y 4 0 $0 58 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls Cl ove Rd /Ve rra za no Bridge 2001 tw o- wa y 8 0 $0 59 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls Ri ch mo nd Av 1994 on e- wa y 4 0 $0 60 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls Ca st le to n Av 1996 on e- wa y 4 0 $0 61 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls Fo re st Av 1995 on e- wa y 5 0 $0 62 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls Ri ch mo nd Te r 1998 on e- wa y 4 0 $0 63 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls Ba y St/F at he r Ca po da nno Bl 2001 on e- wa y 3 0 $0 64 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls Linde n Bl 1988 tw o- wa y 1 5 0 $0 65 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls Me rri ck Bl 1988 on e- wa y 9 0 $0 66 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls Ki sse na Bl/H or ac e Ha rd i ng Ex p 2003 tw o- wa y 1 2 0 $0 67 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls 46th Av /R oc ky Hill Rd /Springf ie ld Bl 2001 tw o- wa y 1 5 0 $0 68 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls Hills id e Av 1993 on e- wa y 1 5 0 $0 69 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls Un io n Tp k 1974 tw o- wa y 2 0 0 $0 70 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls Libe rt y/ Mu rd oc k Av es 1993 on e- wa y 1 0 0 $0 71 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls Me rri ck Bl/Co nduit Av 1994 on e- wa y 8 0 $0 72 MT A Ne w Yo rk City Tr an si t bus ls Oc ean Av /B ed fo rd Av /R og er s Av tw o- wa y 4 0 $0 73 Yo rk Re gi on Tr an si t bus ls Yo nge Str eet 2005 tw o- wa y 2 4 1 0 50,000 E 74 Yo rk Re gi on Tr an si t bus ls Hi ghw ay 7 2005 tw o- wa y 1 2 1 8 6 5,000 E 75 Ma ry la nd Tr an si t Ad mini st ra ti on bus ls Ro ut e 40 2005 tw o- wa y 1 6 1 0 76 Me tr o Tr an si t l rt mt 34th Av e nue 2003 tw o- wa y 8 6 77 La ne Tr an si t Di st ri ct bus mt Ea st 10th, 2005 tw o- wa y 1 2 1 2

Individual Transit Preferential Treatment Applications ID Agency 51 MTA New York City Transit 52 MTA New York City Transit 53 MTA New York City Transit 54 MTA New York City Transit 55 MTA New York City Transit 56 MTA New York City Transit 57 MTA New York City Transit 58 MTA New York City Transit 59 MTA New York City Transit 60 MTA New York City Transit 61 MTA New York City Transit 62 MTA New York City Transit 63 MTA New York City Transit 64 MTA New York City Transit 65 MTA New York City Transit 66 MTA New York City Transit 67 MTA New York City Transit 68 MTA New York City Transit 69 MTA New York City Transit 70 MTA New York City Transit 71 MTA New York City Transit 72 MTA New York City Transit 73 York Region Transit 74 York Region Transit 75 Maryland Transit Administration 76 Metro Transit 77 Lane Transit District Annual O/M Cost Ridership % Travel Time Savings % Decrease in Travel Time Variability Impact on General Traffic Operations $0 43,426 8 $0 6,029 8 $1,400,000 217 $0 4,337 12 3,650 $0 5,549 12 $0 4,971 10 $0 9,948 $0 7,305 10 $0 7,703 15 $0 8,046 20 $0 4,689 $0 4,820 7 $0 11,172 22 $0 12,493 14 $0 18,860 6 $0 22,388 11 $0 16,202 $0 22,004 11 $0 9,785 10 $0 12,768 12 $0 17,924 12 15,500 No impact 10,000 no impact 9,214 Some parking removal was needed for this installation.

Individual Transit Preferential Treatment Applications ID Agency Service Treat- ment Type Description (if Other) Street Year Built Direction Peak Hour Transit Volume Offpeak Hourly Volume Average Daily Traffic Peak Hour LOS Capital Cost 78 Lane Transit District bus mt East 11th, Franklin Boulevard 2005 two-way 12 12 79 New Orleans Regional Transit Authority lrt mt Canal Street 2004 two-way 10 8 $161,000,000 80 New Orleans Regional Transit Authority lrt mt St. Charles Avenue 1922 two-way 14 16 81 Sound Transit lrt mt Martin Luther King 2009 two-way 12 8 82 Connecticut Department of Transportation bus mt Interstate 84 1989 two-way 20 2 130,000 A 83 Regional Transportation District bus mt 16th Street Mall 1982 two-way 96 48 $70,000,000 84 Regional Transportation District bus mt North I-25 HOT Lanes 1994 two-way 50 12 $220,000,000 85 Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority (d/b/a LYNX) bus o Signal Preemption Revere Avenue 1997 one-way 86 Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority (d/b/a LYNX) bus o Signal Preemption E Livingston St 1997 two-way 87 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority lrt o Pre-emption 3rd St. - East Los Angeles 2009 two-way 16 8 88 King County Metro Transit bus o Through Traffic Restrictions 3rd Ave 2005 two-way 114 58 8,100 89 King County Metro Transit bus o Parking Restriction Aurora Ave N 2002 two-way 6 4 42,300 90 King County Metro Transit bus o Parking Restrictions Delridge Way SW 2003 one-way 10 4 20,500 91 King County Metro Transit bus o HOV lane SR-99 one-way 6 4

Indi vi dual Tr ans it Pref erent ia l Tr eat m ent A pp lic at i ons ID Ag ency 78 La ne Tr an si t Di st ri ct 79 Ne w Orl ean s Re gi on al Tr an si t Auth or it y 80 Ne w Orl ean s Re gi on al Tr an si t Auth or it y 81 So und Tr an si t 82 Co nne ct ic ut De pa rt me nt of Tr an sp or ta ti on 83 Re gi on al Tr an sp or ta ti on Di st ri ct 84 Re gi on al Tr an sp or ta ti on Di st ri ct 85 Ce nt ra l Fl or id a Re gi on al Tr an sp or ta ti on Auth or it y (d /b/a LY NX ) 86 Ce nt ra l Fl or id a Re gi on al Tr an sp or ta ti on Auth or it y (d /b/a LY NX ) 87 Lo s A nge le s Co unt y Me tr op o lit an Tr an sp or ta ti on Auth or it y 88 King Co unt y Me tr o Tr an si t 89 King Co unt y Me tr o Tr an si t 90 King Co unt y Me tr o Tr an si t 91 King Co unt y Me tr o Tr an si t A nnual O/ M Co st Ride rs hi p % Tr av el Ti me Sa vi ngs % D ecr ease in Tr av el Ti me Variabilit y I mpact on Ge neral Tr a ffi c Oper at ions So me le ft turn s we re re mo ve d or re lo ca te d to a llo w fo r th e st at io n at th e inte rs ec ti on of Ag at e a nd Fr an k lin . $6,000,000 4,317 Op er at io n in th e me di an a llo ws th e Ca na l Str eet ca r Line to avoi d on st r eet co nge st io n, pa rtic ul ar ly in th e Ce nt ra l Bu si ne ss Di st ric t. Tr an si t ve hi cl es pe r ho ur a nd ri de rs hip re fl ec t lo we r po pul at io n po st Hu rri ca ne Ka trin a. $8,900,000 7,555 Op er at io n on th e me di an a llo ws th e St. Ch ar le s Str eet ca r Line to avoi d on st r eet co nge st io n. Tr an si t ve hi cl es pe r ho ur a nd ri de rs hip re fl ec t lo we r po pul at io n po st Hurri ca ne Ka trin a. Th e S ea ttl e ar ea Link light ra il lin e w ill en te r re ve nue se rv ic e in Ju ly 2009. Ca pita l a nd O& M co st s a sso ci at ed wi th this se ct io n of th e over a ll limne ar e no t ava ila bl e. Da ily ride rs hip of this lin e se ct io n is no t ava ila bl e. 3,000 50 90 No ne . No te : Ride rs hip fi gur e is bus ride rs hip on ly . Th e la ne is sh ar ed wi th ca rp ool s, va np ool s, ta xi s a nd inte rc it y bus es . $250,000 45,000 25 50 9,000 50 75 Tr a ffi c vo lume is light on Re ve re Av e nue . Ge ne ra l tra ffi c ha s th e gr een pha se at a ll time s ex ce pt wh en th e tr an si t ve hi cl e a ppr oac he s th e light. Th e tr an si t ve hi cl e is th en gi ve n th e gr een pha se to a llo w it to cr o ss th e ge ne ra l la ne . Impa ct is minima l. Ge ne ra l tra ffi c ha s a co ntinua l gr een pha se , until a rri va l of th e tr an si t ve hi cl e. Th e si gna l c hanges to a green phase fo r th e tr an si t ve hi cl e in th e ex cl us iv e la ne wi th re d ha se fo r en er al tra ffi c to a llo w th e tr ansi t ve hi cl e to cr o ss th e ge ne ra l tra ffi c la ne . Th e impa ct on ge ne ra l tra ffi c is minima l. Th is is a ne w a pplic at io n on th e Me tr o Go ld Line Ea st si de Ex te ns io n (ROD J une 2009), a llo wi ng fo r LR T ve hi cl es to pa ss thro ugh wi th ou t st o pping fo r a se ct io n of th e a lignm en t th at ha s st eep gr ad es . I do no t ha ve a cce ss to Da ily Tr a ffi c Vo lume , LO S, Ca pita l Co s t. Annua l O & M Co st i ng no t ava ila bl e until ne xt y ear . Tr avel time sa vi ngs is 0%, as th e pr oj ec t wa s pla nne d wi th this tr eat me n t. Like wi se , th e re duc ti on in tr avel time va ri ab ilit y is 0% . 51,690 Th ro ugh tr a ffi c sh if te d to ot he r st r eet s. Lo ca l ac ce ss st ill pr ov id ed on 3rd Av e. En fo rc em en t is ch a lle nging. 5,000 Lo ss of on -s tr eet pa rk i ng dur i ng p eak ho ur s. Impr ovem en t to ge ne ra l tra ffi c dur i ng p eak ho ur s. 3,180 Lo ss of on -s tr eet pa rk i ng dur i ng p eak ho ur s. Impr ovem en t to ge ne ra l tra ffi c dur i ng p eak ho ur s. 2,040 Ne w Co ns truc ti on .

Individual Transit Preferential Treatment Applications ID Agency Service Treat- ment Type Description (if Other) Street Year Built Direction Peak Hour Transit Volume Offpeak Hourly Volume Average Daily Traffic Peak Hour LOS Capital Cost 92 King County Metro Transit bus o HOV Lane SR-99 two-way 10 8 93 Mountgomery County [MD] Transit aka Ride On bus o semi-exclusive lanes Viers Mill Road [MD 586] 2007 one-way 24 12 D 94 Miami-Dade Transit bus o Bus on Shoulder SR 874 2007 two-way 16 0 75,833 $7,500 95 Miami-Dade Transit bus o Bus on Shoulders SR 878 2007 two-way 36 0 51,255 $7,500 96 Capital District Transportation Authority bus qj River Street 2005 one-way 20 15 15,000 C 97 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit bus qj Portland Street WB 2005 one-way 8 2 98 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit bus qj Portland Street EB 2005 one-way 22 11 99 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit bus qj Wyse Road 2008 one-way 24 12 100 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit bus qj Wyse Road one-way 58 27 101 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit bus qj Windmill Rd/Magazine Hill 2005 one-way 13 4 102 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit bus qj Windmill Rd./Akerley Bl. 2005 one-way 14 4 103 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit bus qj Windmill Rd./Wright Av 2005 one-way 13 4 104 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit bus qj Windmill Rd./Wright Av 2005 one-way 14 4 105 Lane Transit District bus qj Franklin Boulevard 2005 one-way 12 12 106 Pierce Transit bus qj Garfield/SR-7 2008 one-way 107 King County Metro Transit bus qj NE 45th St 2004 one-way 9 5 35,900 $15,000 108 King County Metro Transit bus qj NE Pacific St one-way 20 14 109 King County Metro Transit bus qj Montlake Blvd NE one-way 32 13 56,800

Individual Transit Preferential Treatment Applications ID Agency 92 King County Metro Transit 93 Mountgomery County [MD] Transit aka Ride On 94 Miami-Dade Transit 95 Miami-Dade Transit 96 Capital District Transportation Authority 97 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit 98 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit 99 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit 100 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit 101 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit 102 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit 103 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit 104 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit 105 Lane Transit District 106 Pierce Transit 107 King County Metro Transit 108 King County Metro Transit 109 King County Metro Transit Annual O/M Cost Ridership % Travel Time Savings % Decrease in Travel Time Variability Impact on General Traffic Operations 4,050 New Construction 10,000 In an intense, but routine, paving project, the southbound (only) curb lane was painted 'buses and right turn only' by State highways (no one told us; it just showed up one day! Their [contract] engineer thought it was a good idea. We agree.) There is no enforcement, per se. It is somewhat self-enforcing as many drivers do avoid the lane -- but a significant number do not. There has been no savings in scheduled running time but operators report (an undocumented) improvement in reliability. Average daily ridership represents the ridership (in this direction only) on the portions of the 5 routes that operate over this segment. 2,321 The buses can access the shoulders of the roadway when the regular traffic flow drops below 25 mph. Buses cannot exceed 35 mph on the shoulders. The only construction was new signage. It is estimated that 50% of the bus trips would operate in conditions to allow shoulder operations. 4,485 please see information on SR 874 for operational details. 1,000 Minimal 715 MetroLink BRT Only 4,254 6,006 17,323 2,015 2,015 2,015 2,015 2,410 6,490 6,890

Individual Transit Preferential Treatment Applications ID Agency Service Treat- ment Type Description (if Other) Street Year Built Direction Peak Hour Transit Volume Offpeak Hourly Volume Average Daily Traffic Peak Hour LOS Capital Cost 110 King County Metro Transit bus qj 2nd Ave Ext S one-way 88 13 15,800 111 King County Metro Transit bus qj Howell St one-way 10 3 42,300 112 King County Metro Transit bus qj Olive Way 2005 one-way 46 7 113 OC Transpo bus qj Kakulu & Eagleson one-way 8 0 2,413 D $1,000 114 OC Transpo bus qj Highway 417 EB Off Ramp and Moodie Dr. 1995 one-way 54 5 2,324 C 115 OC Transpo bus qj Merivale and Leikin 1999 one-way 9 2 1,833 C $10,000 116 OC Transpo bus qj Albert & Transitway 1998 one-way 12 8 10,866 E 117 OC Transpo bus qj Baseline & Prince of Wales 2001 one-way 11 4 17,935 F 118 OC Transpo bus qj Carling & Holland 2005 one-way 9 3 2,686 D $1,000 119 OC Transpo bus qj Carling & Holland 2007 one-way 4 4 16,447 F 120 OC Transpo bus qj Carling & Bronson 2005 one-way 9 5 9,513 E 121 Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority bus qj Lamar Blvd 2009 one-way 10 10 15,000 122 York Region Transit bus qj Yonge Street 2005 two-way 24 8 50,000 E 123 York Region Transit bus qj Highway 7 2005 one-way 6 4 65,000 E 124 Mountgomery County [MD] Transit aka Ride On bus qj Viers Mill Road [MD 586] 2007 one-way 18 9 D

Individual Transit Preferential Treatment Applications ID Agency 110 King County Metro Transit 111 King County Metro Transit 112 King County Metro Transit 113 OC Transpo 114 OC Transpo 115 OC Transpo 116 OC Transpo 117 OC Transpo 118 OC Transpo 119 OC Transpo 120 OC Transpo 121 Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority 122 York Region Transit 123 York Region Transit 124 Mountgomery County [MD] Transit aka Ride On Annual O/M Cost Ridership % Travel Time Savings % Decrease in Travel Time Variability Impact on General Traffic Operations 8,150 1,360 9,150 $0 540 5 5 Bus turns left from Right Turning Lane at T-intersection; Minimal impact on other traffic; Travel Time Savings and Reduction in Travel Time Variability are in minutes (not percentage)for each time bus recieves priority 2,912 75 70 Minimal impact on other traffic; Bus exists from highway only when signalled by waiting passengers $0 604 3 3 Daily traffic volume shown is for EB direction; Buses recieve priority using Transit Priority Signal Indicator (TPSI) or White Vertical Bar; Travel Time (TT) Savings and Reduction in TT Variability shown are in minutes; Minimal impact on other traffic $0 1,347 4 8 Traffic volume shown is for WB direction; Travel Time (TT) Savings and Reduction in TT Variability shown are in minutes; Stop bar for general traffic relocated allow buses to merge in front of queue; No impact on general traffic 3 3 Traffic Volume shown is for WB direction Travel Time Savings & Reduction in TT Variability shown are in minutes and for each time bus recieve priority Curb Lane designated as Bus Lane. Buses recieve priority using Transit Priority Signal Indicator (TPSI) or White Vertical Bar Some capacity removed from general traffic 1,618 3 3 Daily Traffic Volume shown is for SB direction; LOS shown is for SB approach; Bus continues in Right Turn laneto bypass congested Left Turn + Straight lane; Minimal impact on other traffic 819 3 3 Traffic volume shown is for WB direction; Travel Time (TT) Savings and Reduction in TT Variability shown are in minutes and for each time bus recieves priority; bus has seperate lane with Transit Signal Priority Indicator (TPSI) or White Vertical Bar; minimal impact on other traffic 1,751 5 5 Traffic volume shown is for EB direction; LOS service is for EB approach; Travel Time (TT) Savings and Reduction in TT Variability shown are in minutes each time bus recives priority; Right Turn traffic queue relocated to centre lane; 7,500 5 None for traffic. This is part of a "pull-off lane" that was constructed adjacent to Metro-Rail's Crestview station to allow train to bus transfers. The lane is coordinated with a traffic signal to allow buses to proceed ahead of SB traffic. For some inputs above, I do not have the exact figures (LOS, Capital, Annual O&M, Travel Variability). $0 15,500 No impact 10,000 No impact 7,500 These were put in along with the lane previously described. The paving was on 586 from Twinbrook Parkway south. While the lane is SB, the bypass lanes (one of which is shared, but striped in a way that does effectively keep most cars out) are NB.

Individual Transit Preferential Treatment Applications ID Agency Service Treat- ment Type Description (if Other) Street Year Built Direction Peak Hour Transit Volume Offpeak Hourly Volume Average Daily Traffic Peak Hour LOS Capital Cost 125 regional transportation commission of Washoe County bus qj Virginia Street 2009 two-way 12 6 E 126 Regional Transportation District bus qj E Alameda Ave & Colorado Blvd 1998 one-way 12 4 127 Regional Transportation District bus qj E Colfax Ave & Colorado Blvd 1990 two-way 32 20 128 Metro Transit bus sts Cedar Avenue 2008 one-way 20 129 Lane Transit District bus sts East 11th/Mill 2006 two-way 12 12 130 King County Metro Transit bus sts Grady Way 2004 one-way 52 39 43,000 131 King County Metro Transit bus sts Winona Ave N 2005 one-way 8 4 132 King County Metro Transit bus sts SR-900 2008 one-way 20 13 133 OC Transpo bus sts Richmond & DuMaurier 1999 one-way 2 2 D $3,000 134 Capital District Transportation Authority bus tsp NY5 2004 two-way 12 10 35,000 D 135 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit bus tsp North Street to MacDonald Bridge one-way 42 19 136 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit bus tsp Mumford Road @ Terminal Exit one-way 46 22 137 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit bus tsp Beaverbank Connector/Old Sackville Rd 2005 one-way 6 2 138 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit bus tsp Windmill Rd./Akerley Bl. 2005 two-way 12 4 139 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit bus tsp Windmill Rd./Wright Av 2005 two-way 12 4 140 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit bus tsp Windmill Rd/Victoria Rd 2005 two-way 12 4 141 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit bus tsp Portland @ Spring / Portland Estates Bl 2005 two-way 16 4 142 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit bus tsp Portland @ Carver/Eisener 2005 two-way 16 4

Individual Transit Preferential Treatment Applications ID Agency 125 regional transportation commission of Washoe County 126 Regional Transportation District 127 Regional Transportation District 128 Metro Transit 129 Lane Transit District 130 King County Metro Transit 131 King County Metro Transit 132 King County Metro Transit 133 OC Transpo 134 Capital District Transportation Authority 135 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit 136 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit 137 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit 138 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit 139 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit 140 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit 141 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit 142 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit Annual O/M Cost Ridership % Travel Time Savings % Decrease in Travel Time Variability Impact on General Traffic Operations both the TSP and QJ/BL on Virginia is in the planning stage. The planning will be completed by the end of 2009. Implementation will take place when funding is available, 2010-2012? The form above would not allow a future year for "year built". Also the AADT for this street is 32,000. When I entered that number in the daily traffic volume it gives me an error message of "please enter a valid integer", so I left it blank. 2,000 22,000 Bus only left turn to WB TH62. Buses not subject to queue for congested loop from NB Cedar. Minimal impact on SB traffic from Cedar Ave. Minimal impact on traffic operations. 3,443 2,810 LT signal can be used by general traffic. 1,240 New Construction. $0 216 50 50 LOS shown is for the approch road. Double Loops installed for 1/2 signal operation. Minimal impact on general traffic 9,500 Forced entries above do not present an accurate picture. The 17-mile corridor varies in traffic volume from 12000 to 45000 ADT; some intersections are at A, some are at F. 0's on benefits because we don't know. Issues with our AVL system reliability have stymied the data collection. 19,575 13,438 762 MetroLink BRT Only 1,524 MetroLink BRT Only 1,524 MetroLink BRT Only 1,524 MetroLink BRT Only 1,429 MetroLink BRT Only 1,429 MetroLink BRT Only

Individual Transit Preferential Treatment Applications ID Agency Service Treat- ment Type Description (if Other) Street Year Built Direction Peak Hour Transit Volume Offpeak Hourly Volume Average Daily Traffic Peak Hour LOS Capital Cost 143 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit bus tsp Portland @ Highway 111 NB Ramp 2005 two-way 16 4 144 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit bus tsp Portland @ Sears Driveway/Evergreen 2005 two-way 12 4 145 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit bus tsp Portland @ Gaston 2005 two-way 12 4 146 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit bus tsp Portland @ Pleasant 2005 two-way 12 4 147 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit bus tsp Portland @ Prince Albert/Alderney 2005 two-way 12 4 148 Metro Transit lrt tsp Hiawatha Ave 2003 two-way 8 6 32,000 149 Lane Transit District bus tsp East 10th, East 11th, Franklin Boulevard 2005 two-way 12 12 150 Valley Metro RPTA bus tsp Main Street, Arizona Ave 2009 two-way 4 2 35,000 D $37,000,000 151 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority lrt tsp Synchronizatio n Marmion Way 2003 two-way 16 8 152 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority lrt tsp Synchronizatio n Washington Blvd. - Flower St. 1990 two-way 24 10 153 Pierce Transit bus tsp Pacific Avenue 2003 two-way 154 Pierce Transit bus tsp 19th Street 2003 two-way 155 Pierce Transit bus tsp 6th AVenue 2004 two-way 156 Pierce Transit bus tsp South Tacoma Way 2004 two-way 157 Pierce Transit bus tsp 56th Street 2004 two-way

Individual Transit Preferential Treatment Applications ID Agency 143 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit 144 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit 145 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit 146 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit 147 Halifax Regional Municipality - Metro Transit 148 Metro Transit 149 Lane Transit District 150 Valley Metro RPTA 151 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority 152 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority 153 Pierce Transit 154 Pierce Transit 155 Pierce Transit 156 Pierce Transit 157 Pierce Transit Annual O/M Cost Ridership % Travel Time Savings % Decrease in Travel Time Variability Impact on General Traffic Operations 1,429 MetroLink BRT Only 1,283 MetroLink BRT Only 1,283 MetroLink BRT Only 1,283 MetroLink BRT Only 1,283 MetroLink BRT Only $0 TSP not running on Hiawatha due to unresolved issues. LRT now uses preemption at all signals along Hiawatha (except at Lake Street due to grade seperation). Traffic operations have been suffering due to preemption every 3 1/2 minutes during peak hours. Some movements can wait up to 7 minutes before they get a green. Transit Priority has not adversely impacted general traffic operations 2,000 33 10 We would anticipate that the impact on the general traffic would be in the vicinity of 15% 24,000 Metro Gold Line. Street run segment on Marmion Way. Traffic Signals are set to detect a LRV, then phasing will start and carry through the seven block section for train movement at 20 mph. If two trains enter at the same time (opposite directions), there is good probability that the second train will be delayed for 15-20 seconds at an intersection while the systems cycles. Travel time savings and normal variability is 0%, as the system was designed with this feature. 80,000 8 50 Signal synchronization was placed into service approximately 1993, after the Metro Blue Line opened in 1990. Traffic signals were phased to allow for trains to move from Washington Bl. and Long Beach Ave., on Washington Bl., then on Flower St., at a rate of approximately 33 miles per hour, for the most part without stopping. There is a section of the street run that has city blocks that cannot store a three car train...at those locations, the traffic signal system will detect the length of the train and momentarily hold the phasing if the train is delayed for whatever reason. This prevents trains that are delayed from blocking traffic at several intersections. Very successful. Saves 4 minutes running time in each direction (previous running time was 59 minutes)

Individual Transit Preferential Treatment Applications ID Agency Service Treat- ment Type Description (if Other) Street Year Built Direction Peak Hour Transit Volume Offpeak Hourly Volume Average Daily Traffic Peak Hour LOS Capital Cost 158 Pierce Transit bus tsp Bridgeport Way 2005 two-way 159 Pierce Transit bus tsp SR-7 2005 two-way 160 King County Metro Transit bus tsp Lake City Way NE 2007 two-way 20 4 37,000 161 King County Metro Transit bus tsp Rainier Ave S 1999 two-way 14 7 33,000 162 King County Metro Transit bus tsp 1st Ave S 2004 two-way 14 6 24,000 163 King County Metro Transit bus tsp Rainier Ave / Grady Way 2004 two-way 52 39 44,000 164 King County Metro Transit bus tsp Aurora Ave N 2001 two-way 8 4 40,000 165 King County Metro Transit bus tsp NE 124th St 2008 two-way 166 King County Metro Transit bus tsp Bellevue Way SE 2006 two-way 16 12 38,700 167 OC Transpo bus tsp Highway 417 EB Off Ramp and Moodie Dr. 1999 one-way 54 5 2,324 C $5,000 168 OC Transpo bus tsp Holly Acres and Tranistway 2000 one-way 21 10 6,996 A $4,000 169 OC Transpo bus tsp Iris and Transitway 1994 two-way 78 29 6,675 A $15,000 170 OC Transpo bus tsp Woodroffe & Meadowlands 2000 one-way 58 14 16,701 E $10,000 171 OC Transpo bus tsp Woodroffe & Knoxdale 2005 two-way 48 10 31,672 F $15,000 172 OC Transpo bus tsp Heron & Bronson 2001 one-way 29 11 12,400 C 173 OC Transpo bus tsp St. Joseph & Place D' Orleans 2001 one-way 8 8 8,296 B $7,500 174 OC Transpo bus tsp Richmond & Golden 2005 one-way 6 5 7,224 A $8,500

Individual Transit Preferential Treatment Applications ID Agency 158 Pierce Transit 159 Pierce Transit 160 King County Metro Transit 161 King County Metro Transit 162 King County Metro Transit 163 King County Metro Transit 164 King County Metro Transit 165 King County Metro Transit 166 King County Metro Transit 167 OC Transpo 168 OC Transpo 169 OC Transpo 170 OC Transpo 171 OC Transpo 172 OC Transpo 173 OC Transpo 174 OC Transpo Annual O/M Cost Ridership % Travel Time Savings % Decrease in Travel Time Variability Impact on General Traffic Operations 8,280 1,820 6,340 5,720 5,720 5 6,230 20 This intersection is the only stop between freeway to the South and two arterials that "y" into the road. Anytime this signal stops mainline it causes some queues that during peak can extend up both arterials. TSP hasn't seemed to drastically impact this queue length. $0 2,912 75 70 NS traffic is affected to some extent due to Signal pre-emption for buses $0 3,449 15 15 Minimal impact due to low traffic volume on intersecting street $0 27,978 25 25 Advance detection and green extension for buses; Peak hour & Off Peak Hr transit volumes shown are for per direction; Traffic volume shown is for E&W directions for intersecting street; traffic on intersecting street is impacted when buses recieve priority $0 14,160 10 10 Buses recieve priority using Transit Priority Signal Indicator (TPSI) or White Vertical Bar; Buses operate on exclusive bus lanes; Daily Traffic Volume shown is for NB direction only; When bus recieves priority, SBL traffic is penelized which is heavy during PM Peak Period $0 28,267 15 15 NS buses are detected in advance and Green extension is provided to give priority to buses; Transit volume shown is for one direction; Daily Traffic volume shown is for NS directions 2 2 Traffic volume shown is for EB direction; Travel Time (TT) Savings and Reduction in TT variability shown are in minutes (not percentage) each time bus recieves priority; Buses move from right lane to left lane on dedicated transit signal phase; some capacity removed from general traffic $0 1,063 Traffic volume shown is for EB direction; $0 1,136 2 2 Traffic volume shown is for EB direction; Travel Time (TT) Savings and Reduction in TT variability shown are in minutes and for each time bus recieves priority; EB curb lane designated as Right Turn Lane with Buses excepted

Individual Transit Preferential Treatment Applications ID Agency Service Treat- ment Type Description (if Other) Street Year Built Direction Peak Hour Transit Volume Offpeak Hourly Volume Average Daily Traffic Peak Hour LOS Capital Cost 175 OC Transpo bus tsp Woddroffe & Sportsplex South 2005 one-way 41 8 21,084 E $7,500 176 OC Transpo bus tsp Richmond & Island Park 2006 two-way 6 4 6,697 C $10,000 177 OC Transpo bus tsp March & Herzberg 2008 one-way 4 0 12,339 B $2,500 178 Utah Transit Authority lrt tsp 400 South Corridor - University Line 2001 two-way 8 10 22,000 179 Fort Worth Transportation Authority bus tsp Lancaster Ave. 2008 two-way 7 5 $250,000 180 Memphis Area Transit Authority lrt tsp Main Street 2006 two-way 12 12 3,500 A $53,000 181 Memphis Area Transit Authority lrt tsp Madison Avenue 2004 two-way 12 6 8,000 A $100,000 182 Memphis Area Transit Authority lrt tsp Front St. & Tennessee (Riverfront Line) 1997 one-way 6 6 0 A $60,000 183 Community Transit bus tsp State Route 99 2003 two-way 10 6 37,500 D $2,789,700 184 Chicago Transit Authority bus tsp Western Ave. 2009 two-way 24 12 $500,000 185 York Region Transit bus tsp Yonge Street, 2005 two-way 24 10 50,000 E $825,000 186 York Region Transit bus tsp Highway 7 2005 two-way 12 8 65,000 E $1,170,000

Indi vi dual Tr ans it Pref erent ia l Tr eat m ent A pp lic at i ons ID Ag ency 175 OC Tr an sp o 176 OC Tr an sp o 177 OC Tr an sp o 178 Ut ah Tr an si t Auth or it y 179 Fo rt Wo rt h Tr an sp or ta ti on Auth or it y 180 Me m phi s Ar ea Tr an si t Auth or it y 181 Me m phi s Ar ea Tr an si t Auth or it y 182 Me m phi s Ar ea Tr an si t Auth or it y 183 Co mmunity Tr an si t 184 Ch ic ag o Tr an si t Auth or it y 185 Yo rk Re gi on Tr an si t 186 Yo rk Re gi on Tr an si t A nnual O/ M Co st Ride rs hi p % Tr av el Ti me Sa vi ngs % D ecr ease in Tr av el Ti me Variabilit y I mpact on Ge neral Tr a ffi c Oper at ions 5,949 45 70 Tr a ffi c vo lume sh ow n is fo r NS di re ct io ns ; bus es ar e de te ct ed in ad va nc e a nd tr a ffi c si gna l is pr e- em pt ed to pr ov id e pr io rity to bus es ; NS tra ffi c is impa ct ed as a re su lt of pr e- em ptio n 963 15 15 Da ily Tr a ffi c Vo lume sh ow n is fo r E&W tra ffi c; minima l impa ct on ot he r tra ffi c; bus es ar e de te ct ed in ad va nc e a nd gr een ex te ns io n is pr ov id ed in or de r to gi ve pr io rity to bus es 43 40 40 Da ily Tr a ffi c Vo lume sh ow n is fo r NS di re ct io n; DO uble l oop is pr ov id ed to de te ct SBL turning bus es a nd si gna l is pr e- em pt ed to pr ov id e pr io rity to bus es ; miniml a impa ct on ot he r tra ffi c 20,000 20 Impa ct s va ry fr om inte rs ec ti on to inte rs ec ti on . Th e 400 So uth co rri do r is a ma jo r ar te ri al wi th 6 tra ffi c la ne s plus le ft turn a nd dua l le ft turn la ne s. Sh ar ed le ft turn la ne s ex is t in 5 lo ca ti on s. Th e 400 So uth co rri do r is al so a c oor dina te d co rri do r wi th cr o ss c oor dina ti on in ma n y lo ca ti on s. Mo st tr ai ns fo llo w th e gr een -b a nd al o ng th e co rri do r a nd re ce iv e ba ck gr ou nd T SP. Im pa ct s to tr af fi c in cl ude , ear ly te rm in at io n fo r cr o ss st r eet s, gr een ex te ns io ns at mo st lo ca ti on s, sw a pping of l ead /l ag le ft turn s, que ue jump s, a nd sh ar ed le ft turn la ne tr eat em en ts . Be ca us e th e st r eet s ar e ve ry wi de , pe de st ri an cr o ssi ng time s ar e high, di ct at i ng a high cy cl e le ngth a nd limiting th e am o unt of prio rity th at ca n be gi ve n wi thin th at cy cl e. Lo ca ti on s n ear th e CBD wh ic h a $1,500 1,300 5 1 0 Th e pr oj ec t re su lt s in ve ry mino r im pa ct s on ge ne ra l tra ffi c op er at io n. Ho we ve r, it ai ds tr an si t ve hi cl e op er at io n dur i ng do wn to wn sp ec ia l even ts , su ch as co nc er ts a nd N BA ba sk et ba ll ga me s wh en th e r oad wa y a nd tr an si t sy st em ex pe ri en ce high vo lume s of ve hi cu la r a nd tr an is t us e. Th e tr an si t si gna l pr io rity a llo ws tr an si t ve hc ile s (L RT Str eet ca rs ) to na vi ga te co nge st ed inte rs ec ti on s a nd he lp s ma inta in time sch e dul es a nd h ead wa ys . $1,500 550 0 0 Th e Ci ty of Me m phi s ha s no t pr og ra mme d th e si gna ls to a llo w a dditi on al time fo r tr an si t ve hi cl es . Signa l pr e- em ptio n is ava ila bl e fo r em er ge nc y ve hi cl es . $1,000 1,200 0 0 Signa l de te ct io n de vi ce s ar e us ed fo r sa fe ty wa rn i ng de vi ce s fo r au to mo b ile s a nd ra ilr oad cr o ssi ng de te ct io n a nd ga te ac ti va ti on . $30,000 4,200 16. 3 2 7 Sc he dul ed fo r im pl em en at io n Summe r 2009 $24,000 15,500 5 T he re ar e 55 si gna liz ed inte rs ec ti on s wi th tra ffi c si gna l prio rity . Ne g lig ab le impa ct on tra ffi c op er at io ns $36,000 10,000 5 Th er e ar e 78 si gna liz ed inte rs ec ti on s wi th tra ffi c si gna l prio rity . Ne g lig ab le impa ct on ge ne ra l tra ffi c op er at io ns .

Individual Transit Preferential Treatment Applications ID Agency Service Treat- ment Type Description (if Other) Street Year Built Direction Peak Hour Transit Volume Offpeak Hourly Volume Average Daily Traffic Peak Hour LOS Capital Cost 187 Chattanooga Area RegionalTransportation Authority bus tsp Shallowford/Gunbarrel 2001 two-way 5 3 22,575 D $200,000 188 Maryland Transit Administration lrt tsp Howard Street 2007 two-way $2,000,000 189 regional transportation commission of Washoe County bus tsp Virginia Street 2009 two-way E 190 SEPTA lrt tsp Lancaster, Lansdowne, 63rd 2000 two-way 191 SEPTA lrt tsp girard 2005 two-way 192 SEPTA bus tsp 52nd, 54th 2006 two-way 193 Regional TransportationDistrict lrt tsp Stout St/California St 1994 two-way 18 16 $100,000,000

Individual Transit Preferential Treatment Applications ID Agency 187 Chattanooga Area Regional Transportation Authority 188 Maryland Transit Administration 189 regional transportation commission of Washoe County 190 SEPTA 191 SEPTA 192 SEPTA 193 Regional Transportation District Annual O/M Cost Ridership % Travel Time Savings % Decrease in Travel Time Variability Impact on General Traffic Operations 1,800 33,000 50,000 25 50