National Academies Press: OpenBook

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

Chapter: Appendix B - Traffic/Roadway Agency Survey and Responses

« Previous: Appendix A - Transit Agency Survey and Responses
Page 138
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Traffic/Roadway Agency Survey and Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Bus and Rail Transit Preferential Treatments in Mixed Traffic. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13614.
×
Page 138
Page 139
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Traffic/Roadway Agency Survey and Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Bus and Rail Transit Preferential Treatments in Mixed Traffic. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13614.
×
Page 139
Page 140
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Traffic/Roadway Agency Survey and Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Bus and Rail Transit Preferential Treatments in Mixed Traffic. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13614.
×
Page 140
Page 141
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Traffic/Roadway Agency Survey and Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Bus and Rail Transit Preferential Treatments in Mixed Traffic. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13614.
×
Page 141
Page 142
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Traffic/Roadway Agency Survey and Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Bus and Rail Transit Preferential Treatments in Mixed Traffic. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13614.
×
Page 142
Page 143
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Traffic/Roadway Agency Survey and Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Bus and Rail Transit Preferential Treatments in Mixed Traffic. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13614.
×
Page 143
Page 144
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Traffic/Roadway Agency Survey and Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Bus and Rail Transit Preferential Treatments in Mixed Traffic. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13614.
×
Page 144
Page 145
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Traffic/Roadway Agency Survey and Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Bus and Rail Transit Preferential Treatments in Mixed Traffic. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13614.
×
Page 145
Page 146
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Traffic/Roadway Agency Survey and Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Bus and Rail Transit Preferential Treatments in Mixed Traffic. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13614.
×
Page 146
Page 147
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Traffic/Roadway Agency Survey and Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Bus and Rail Transit Preferential Treatments in Mixed Traffic. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13614.
×
Page 147
Page 148
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Traffic/Roadway Agency Survey and Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2010. Bus and Rail Transit Preferential Treatments in Mixed Traffic. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13614.
×
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.

138 APPENDIX B Traffic/Roadway Agency Survey and Responses

139 TRAFFIC/ROADWAY 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 Transit Preferential Treatment Applications You will be asked to review a table of all transit preferential treatments that the transit agency has implemented. You are only asked to update information on treatments within your jurisdiction. A sample treatment is provided below.

Transit Type: Bus Treatment Type: Exclusive Lanes (EL) If other, Identify: Street: SR 522 Year Built: Direction of Treatment: Two-way Peak Hour Transit Volume: 25 Transit vph Off-Peak Transit Volume: 15 Transit vph Daily Traffic Volume: Peak Hour LOS: Captial Cost: $ Annual O & M Cost: $ Travel Time Savings: 10.00 % Reduction in Travel Time Variability: 30.00 % Average Daily Ridership: 3000 Please answer the remaining questions with respect to the number of directions indicated above. Check the map below to see if this treatment is in your jurisdiction. Impact on General Traffic Operations: Review treatment: Information in this entry was provided by the transit agency using whatever data they had available. If this treatment is in your jurisdiction, please review the information below and correct, update, or fill in the missing information for each entry, if possible. Boxes with grey backgrounds cannot be edited. Page 2 2. 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 3. What is your perception of the impact of different transit preferential treatments applied in your urban area on general traffic operations? Map data ©2009 Tele Atlas - Terms of Use 140

141 Negligible Impact Mild Impact Major Impact 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) Width of median transitway (one-directional): Width of median transitway (two-directional): Length of queue jump/bypass lane: Controller Type: Software: Control of Priority: Centralized Distributed Both Priority Type (check all that apply): Early Green Green Extension Activated Transit Phases Phase Insertion Phase Rotation What amount of time is given for early green TSP? seconds Is green extension time fixed or variable? Fixed Variable What amount of time is given for green extension? seconds The amount of time given for green extension ranges between and seconds Detection Type (check all that apply): Optical/Infrared GPS Inductive Loop 4. What is the minimum acceptable lane width and length for exclusive transit facilities on your street system? feet feet feet Page 3 5. Identify the type of signal hardware and software applied in transit signal priority (TSP) implementations in your urban area, and the extent of application. Bus

Wi-Fi Wayside Reade r Othe r Controller T ype: Software: Control of Priority: Central iz ed Di stri buted Both Priority Ty pe (check all that apply): Early Green Gr een E xt ension Ac tivated T ransit Phase s Phase In sertion Phase Rotatio n What a mo unt of ti me is given for early green TS P? seconds Is green e xt ension ti me fi xe d or variable? Fi xe d V ariabl e What a mo unt of tim e is given for green ex tension ? second s Th e am ount of tim e given for green e xt ension ranges betwee n a nd seconds Detection Ty pe (check all that apply): Optical/I nfrare d GP S In ductive Loop Wi-Fi Wayside Reade r Othe r Proper detection of transit vehicle s Equip me nt functioning properl y Use of queue jum p/bypass lane s Nu mb er of possible T SP events Nu mb er of A ctual T SP event s Duration of T SP ev ents LRT/Str eet ca r Pag e 4 6. D o es yo ur a ge nc y ha ve a tr an si t si gn al p ri or it y mo ni to ri ng o r re por ti ng p rogr am ? Yes No Which events are m onitored? (Check all that apply ) Which of the following events are recorded? (Check all that apply ) 142

143 No Support Mild Support Major Support 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) 7. Are there any special signing/striping design treatments that are implemented for particular preferential treatments? Yes No If yes, please describe: 8. Is there an agreement with the local transit agency with respect to developing transit preferential treatments? Yes No What enhancements to this agreement would be desirable from your agency's perspective? Page 5 9. What is your agency's level of support with respect to potential future implementation of different transit preferential treatments on your street system? Notes: << Back to the start page

Traffic Agency Responses ID Agency Name Title Q2 - Agency Role MT EL TSP STS QJ / BL CE LS O one- way two- way QJ min length 1 WSDOT Jim Johnstone Signal Operations Engineer o/m, major major mild major mild major major major 2 City of Tacoma Public Works Chris Larson Assistant Engineering Division Manager construct, o/m, major major mild major mild mild negligible negligible 3 City of Eugene Tom Larsen City Traffic Engineer planning,o/m, performance, negligible negligible negligible negligible negligible negligible major major 120 4 City of Bellevue Mike Whiteaker ITS Manager design, construct, o/m, negligible negligible mild mild mild mild mild negligible 5 Los Angeles Department of Transportation Chun Wong Transportation Engineer planning, design, construct, o/m, performance, mild mild negligible mild mild mild mild mild 10 14 6 Utah Department of Transportation Matt Luker Assistant Signal Systems Engineer design, o/m, performance, major major major mild negligible negligible mild negligible 30 7 City of Everett Dongho Chang City Traffic Engineer planning, design, construct, o/m, performance, major major mild mild mild mild mild negligible 11 22 100 8 Mn/DOT Jennifer Conover Team Transit Project Manager planning, design, construct, o/m, negligible mild major negligible negligible negligible negligible negligible 10 300 9 Sacramento County DOT Doug Maas Senior Transportation Engineer o/m, performance, major mild mild mild mild mild negligible negligible 1 1 1 10 City of Lynnwood Paul Coffelt ITS Engineer o/m, performance, major mild negligible mild major mild negligible negligible 9 20 80 11 Philadelphia Streets Dept. Charles Denny Chief Traffic Engineer design, o/m, mild major mild mild mild mild negligible negligible 12 24 12 City of Ottawa Tom Fitzgerald Manager, Traffic Engineering design, o/m, performance, major major mild mild major mild mild negligible 14 32 70 Q3 - Perceived Treatment Impacts Q4 Geometry

Traffic Agency Responses ID Agency 1 WSDOT 2 City of Tacoma Public Works 3 City of Eugene 4 City of Bellevue 5 Los Angeles Department of Transportation 6 Utah Department of Transportation 7 City of Everett 8 Mn/DOT 9 Sacramento County DOT 10 City of Lynnwood 11 Philadelphia Streets Dept. 12 City of Ottawa Controller Type TSP Software Priority Type TSP Control Early Green Time Green Ext. Type Green Ext. Min Length Green Ext. Max Length Detection Type Traconex TMP 390 J8 centralized optical, LMD9200 early green, green ext. centralized optical, 170 McCain green ext., active transit phase distributed variable 1 2 loop, Econolite ASC/2 35906v1.04 early green, green ext. distributed 60 variable 0 0 loop, 2070 Los Angeles TPS Module software early green, green ext., active transit phase centralized 10 variable 0 10 loop,wifi, Econolite ASC/3 ASC/3 early green, green ext. distributed 10 variable 0 10 optical, currently Multisonic, will be upgraded this year to a new controller and central system Opticom ID tag will be used for bus priority early green, green ext. centralized 10 variable 10 20 optical, doesn't exist optical emitter 3m pre-emption w ACTRA signal system early green, green ext. distributed 10 variable 0 10 optical, Naztec 2070 Apogee early green, green ext. distributed 10 variable 5 10 wayside, 170 Bitrans early green, green ext., distributed 10 variable 0 10 optical, Multilek DirX early green, green ext., active transit phase, phase insertion, phase rotation centralized 20 variable 2 20 loop, wayside, Q5 - Bus TSP Attributes

Traffic Agency Responses ID Agency 1 WSDOT 2 City of Tacoma Public Works 3 City of Eugene 4 City of Bellevue 5 Los Angeles Department of Transportation 6 Utah Department of Transportation 7 City of Everett 8 Mn/DOT 9 Sacramento County DOT 10 City of Lynnwood 11 Philadelphia Streets Dept. 12 City of Ottawa Controller Type TSP Software Priority Type TSP Control Early Green Time Green Ext. Type Green Ext. Min Length Green Ext. Max Length Detection Type Y/N Monitored Events Recorded Events no_lrt No no_lrt No no_lrt No no LRT yet No 2070 Yes detect_vehicles, equip_function, possible, actual, and duration of tsp events Eagle M50 family Siemens NextPhase early green, green ext., active transit phase, phase insertion, phase rotation distributed 15 variable 0 30 loop, other No no_lrt Yes detect_vehicles, equip_function, possible, actual, and duration of tsp events don't know don't know No None No no_lrt Yes detect_vehicles, equip_function, possible, actual, and duration of tsp events 170 bitrans early green, green ext., 10 variable 0 10 optical, No multilek Yes detect_vehicles, equip_function, queue_jump_use possible, actual, and duration of tsp events Q6 - Monitor and Record Events?Q5 - LRT/Streetcar TSP Attributes

Traffic Agency Responses ID Agency 1 WSDOT 2 City of Tacoma Public Works 3 City of Eugene 4 City of Bellevue 5 Los Angeles Department of Transportation 6 Utah Department of Transportation 7 City of Everett 8 Mn/DOT 9 Sacramento County DOT 10 City of Lynnwood 11 Philadelphia Streets Dept. 12 City of Ottawa Y/N If Yes, Describe No No Yes Queue jumps have separate signal heads and lanes. Exclusive bus lanes are signed appropriately. Rail type signals are used in block protected bi-directional exclusive lanes. Yes We mark the loop as "Bus Detector" and/or provide a blue light to let operator know we have detected them. Yes Signing and striping modifications to accommodate for far-side bus stops Yes At all sites where left-turns are allowed from a parallel movement across LRT tracks, we have blankout warning signs which are lit with an image of a train when a train is approaching the intersection. Additionally, at sites where one of two dual left-turn lanes is shared with the LRT trackway, we have blankout signs warning motorists to stay off the track when a train is approaching from the rear. The signs are not lit if vehicles are already in the lane. No Yes Signs for the Bus Shoulders and for HOV bypasses. Special diamond striping and overhead changeable message signs for the HOT (high occupancy toll) lanes. No Yes Signs indicate: Right Lane Must turn Right except for Bus. Yes Only where we have a separate marked area in the center of Girard Avenue for the route 15. Yes bus signal signing, experiment with painting lanes red Q7 - Special Signing/Striping/Design for Treatments?

Traffic Agency Responses ID Agency 1 WSDOT 2 City of Tacoma Public Works 3 City of Eugene 4 City of Bellevue 5 Los Angeles Department of Transportation 6 Utah Department of Transportation 7 City of Everett 8 Mn/DOT 9 Sacramento County DOT 10 City of Lynnwood 11 Philadelphia Streets Dept. 12 City of Ottawa Y/N If Yes, Desired Enhancements MT EL TSP STS QJ / BL CE LS O No major major mild major mild major major major Yes Not sure. none none major mild mild major mild mild Yes The agreement is informal and based on mutual benefit. major major major major major major mild mild Yes Each agreement is more project specific and longer ranging and lacking consistancy. They seem to be highly variable depending on capital funding available and project manager. major mild major none mild none mild none No major major major major major major major major Yes The agreement at present is informal but is undergoing review with the transit agency and other traffic agencies. It will then be formalized. One enhancement desired by all the participating agencies (traffic and transit) is that no more sites will be constructed with shared trackway/left-turn lanes, since they have been problematic mild mild mild none mild none mild none No none mild major major major major major major Yes The real answer is "no", not a written agreement. However, we have an interagency working group called Team Transit that develops ideas and is chaired by Mn/DOT. Our working group has developed nearly 300 miles of bus shoulders and many other transit advantages and seems to work well. We have a written policy to provide transit advantages applied to freeways and expressways as appropiate (is also in statute). major major mild mild major none mild major No mild mild major major major mild major mild Yes I can only comment on my personal viewpoint as we have not had any discussions to determine agency- wide desires. My personal desire would be to add training for central software operation to include analysis and reporting. none major major none mild mild major none Yes For each project there is an agreement. These three were pilots. mild mild major major none major major none Yes define the # of buses required for treatment levels. mild mild major major major major major major Q9 - Agency SupportQ8 - Agency Agreement?

Next: Appendix C - Sample Intergovernmental Agreements »
Bus and Rail Transit Preferential Treatments in Mixed Traffic Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) Synthesis 83: Bus and Rail Transit Preferential Treatments in Mixed Traffic explores the application of different transit preferential treatments in mixed traffic. The report also examines the decision-making process that may be applied in deciding which preferential treatment might be the most applicable in a particular location.

  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!