Implementing Transit Signal Priority (TSP) can improve bus running times by 2 to 18 percent.
Surveys were conducted with selected transit agencies that implemented or planned to implement BRT systems. Information was collected on ridership, capital and operating costs, community acceptance, associated land-use development, funding support, support for system expansion, improved mobility, quality of service, travel time, comfort, dwell time, reliability, convenience, safety, security, improved frequency, and wait time. The survey data were compared to previous related research (TCRP Report 90) and updated findings were input into the Practitioner's Guide.
Researchers examined measured/estimated impacts of transit signal priority (TSP) on travel time, reliability (schedule adherence), operating costs, and general traffic. The table below excerpted from Exhibit 4-39 and Exhibit 4-40 details findings from several cities in the U.S. and abroad. The benefits of TSP vary depending on type and degree of application.
EXHIBIT 4-39 Reported Initial Estimates of Benefits to Buses from Traffic Signal Priority
|Anne Arundel County, MD|
|Chicago: Cermak Road|
|Los Angeles: Wilshire-Whittier Metro Rapid|
|Pierce County, WA|
|Seattle: Rainier Avenue|
EXHIBIT 4-40 ITS America's Summary of TSP Benefits and Impacts
Number of Intersections
|Portland, OR: Tualatin Valley Hwy|
|Early green, green extension||Bus travel time savings = 1.4-6.4%. Average bus signal delay reduction = 20%.|
|Portland, OR: |
|5-8% bus travel time reduction. Bus person delay generally decreased. Inconclusive impacts of TSP on traffic.|
|Seattle: Rainier Ave at Genesee|
|For prioritized buses:
Rainier Ave (Midday)
|For TSP-eligible buses:
|Various||10 seconds/intersection average signal delay reduction. 40-80% potential reduction in transit signal delay. Transit travel times in England and France reduced 6-2%. 0.3-2.5% increase in automobile travel times. 1- to 2-year payback period for installation of TSP.|
|Sapporo City, Japan:|
|Unknown||6.1% reduction in bus travel time. 9.9% increase in ridership .|
|15-49% reduction in transit signal delay. One streetcar removed from service.|
|7-20% reduction in transit travel time. Transit schedule reliability improved. Reduced number of buses needed to operate the service. Passenger satisfaction level increased. 1.5 seconds/vehicle average decrease in vehicle delay. 8.2 seconds/vehicle average increase in cross-street delay.|
LRT & Trolley
|6-25% reduction in transit signal delay.|
actuated transit phase
|0-38% reduction in bus travel times depending on TSP strategy. 23% (4.4 seconds/vehicle) increase in traffic delay. Skipping signal phases caused some driver frustration.|
|Los Angeles: Wilshire and Ventura Blvds|
actuated transit phase
|7.5% reduction in average running time. 35% decrease in bus delay at signalized intersections.|
Previous research can be found in:
TCRP Report 100 Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual 2nd Edition, Washington, DC, 2003
TCRP Report 90 Bus Rapid Transit Volume 1: Case Studies in Bus Rapid Transit, Washington, DC, 2003
"Evaluation of Service Reliability Impacts of Traffic Signal Priority Strategies for Bus Transit," Transportation
Research Record 1841. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, DC, 2003, pp. 23-31.
An Overview of Transit Signal Priority. Intelligent Transportation Society of America, Washington, D.C., July 2002.
Author: Kittelson & Associates, in association with Herbert S. Levinson Transportation Consultants and DMJM-Harris
Published By: Transit Cooperative Research Program, Transportation Research Board
Sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration
Source Date: 2007URL: http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_rpt_118.pdf
Average User Rating
Benefit of the Month for June, 2010 !
Related Metropolitan Integration Links
Typical Deployment Locations
bus priority, traffic signals, TSP