Transit Speed

1
Transit Speed Reliability
Engineering a Faster Bus
Owen Kehoe, P.EKing County MetroTransit Speed
Reliability
2
OVERVIEW

• Metros Speed Reliability Group
• The Speed Reliability Toolbox
• Bus Stop Consolidation
• Route 48 Project
• Analysis of results
• Transit Signal Priority
• Current System
• Future System

3
The Speed Reliability Group

• Traffic Engineering to improve transit
• Spot improvements
• Transit Signal Priority (TSP)
• Planning
• Design
• Implementation
• Operation
• Corridor Projects (Often Multi-Jurisdiction)
• Evaluation, Studies, Simulations

4
Speed Reliability Toolbox

• Engineering solutions to solve transit operations
  problems.
• Examples
• Queue Jump Signal
• Bus Bulb
• Transit Lane
• Parking Removal/Channelization
• Signal Timing/Phasing
• Bus stop Consolidation
• Transit Signal Priority

5
Queue Jump Signal

• Special bus signal
• Provides advance green for waiting buses

NE 45th St 7th Ave NE (I-5 NB Ramp)
6
Queue Jump Signal
Montlake Blvd NE Pacific St (HOV lane)
7
Bus Bulbs

• Convert pull-out stop to in-lane stop
• Eliminates merging delay
• Additional customer waiting space

University Way
8
Parking Removal

• Free curb lane for transit use
• Simple engineering, politically challenging

Wallingford Ave N N 85th St
Wallingford Ave N East Greenlake Dr N
9
Channelization

• Change in Lane Configuration

Lake City Way (under construction)
15th Ave NE NE 65th St (Proposed)
10
Transit Lane

• Transit-Only
• Transit/HOV Lane
• Business Access/Transit Lane (BAT Lane)
• Transit Right-Turn-Only Lane

Aurora Ave N (Route 358)
11
Transit Lane
12
Turn Radius Improvements

• Intersection changes ease turning maneuvers

16th Ave SW SW 107th St (Route 120)
13
Signal Timing/Phasing

• Re-time signals to improve general traffic flow
• Special considerations for transit movements.
• Change signal phasing

Old Signal Timing
New Signal Timing
25th Ave NE NE 44th St(UW East Entrance)
14
Bus Stop Consolidation

• Evaluating bus stops in a corridor context
• Closing/relocating selected stops
• Improve service on established bus route

15
Goals of Bus Stop Consolidation

• Speed ltgt Travel Time
• Reliability ltgt Schedule Adherence
• Safety
• Pedestrian
• General Traffic
• Improve Spacing
• Passenger Facility Investments
• Other improvements ? TSP

16
The Route 48 Project

• King County MetroSpeed Reliability Project
• Bus Stop Consolidation Began Dec. 2002
• Completed October 2003
• Other improvements continuing
• Parking/channelization
• Signal timing/phasing
• Transit Signal Priority (TSP)

17
Route 48

• 16 miles long
• Cross-town route
• 90 min one-way peak travel time.
• Reliability problems
• 11,000 daily rides
• Operates on 4-lane arterials

18
Route 48

• Mostly in-lane stops
• No merging delay
• 240 bus stops
• Avg spacing 700
• 41 stops closed
• 26 of stops within study area
• Avg spacing 850

19
Process for Bus Stop Consolidation

• Data collection/field observations
• Number of Ons/Offs (APC database)
• Pedestrian crossing/signals
• Sidewalk condition/curb ramps (ADA Accessibility)
• Social service/community centers
• Hide Ride behavior
• Night security/Lighting
• Other unique characteristics

20
(No Transcript)
21

• ¼ mile coverage review
• Identify lost coverage areas

22
Process for Bus Stop Consolidation

• Initial Plan
• Route split into segments
• Operator Input
• Internal Review Committee
• Scheduling, Safety, Operations Supervisors, Route
  Facilities, Service Planning, Customer Service,
  etc.
• Roll Out Proposal for Public Comment

23
Public Notification

• Bus stop notices
• Project website
• Contacts to community organizations
• 3-week comment period
• 191 total comments
• 80 negative
• Finalize consolidation plan
• Service Change Process

24
Analysis of Results

• Data Collection
• AVL for travel time
• APC for ridership
• Compared 6-week spans of AVL data
• Before 11/11/02 12/19/02
• After 11/10/03 12/18/03

25
Trip times
- Scheduled time O Average for specific trip
- Scheduled time O Average for specific trip
26
More Analysis

• Trips Grouped by Time of day
• AM 600AM 900AM
• MD 901AM 315PM
• PM 316PM 615PM
• EV/LN 616PM 559AM (Not used)
• Weekday only
• Separated by Time Point Interval
• 9 TPIs used, 3 not used
• Inbound/Outbound directions

27
Other MOEs

• Observed Travel Time Change (ttchg)
• Travel Time Change per Mile (ttchgpm)
• Percentage of late trips, measured by travel
  time within TPI
• 1 min late (late)
• 3 min late (verylate)

28
Change in travel time, per mile vs. change in bus
stop spacing
29
Predictor of Bus Travel Time Savings
Where Dtt Change in average travel time (in
minutes) Dss Change in bus stop spacing (in
feet) d Length of project segment (miles)
30
Ridership

• Autumn 2002 11,590 avg. weekday riders
• Autumn 2003 12,430 avg. weekday riders
• 7 increase
• Some new service added
• Autumn 2004 12,140

Bus Stop Consolidation Process

31
Possible Sources of Error

• Construction
• University Way reconstruction
• Fleet changes
• Low-floor coach phase-in
• Traffic variations

32
Some Conclusions

• Bus stop consolidation is effective
• Improved travel times
• Improved reliability
• No adverse impacts on ridership
• Possible improvement in ridership

33
Further Analysis

• Route 5
• Bus stop consolidation completed February 2005
• Out-of-lane bus stops
• More Statistical Analysis
• Additional independent variables
• Larger dataset
• Combined interactions

34
Transit Signal Priority (TSP)
Using bus detection technology to give transit
vehicles preferential treatment at traffic signals
The King County TSP System
35
TPR Transponder Tag

• 128 bit packet
• system
• agency
• vehicle ID
• driver ID
• route
• run
• trip
• class
• lateness
• ridership
• No input by driver required.

36
TPR Reader

• RF antenna mounted above roadway.
• Reader detects tag, reads data packet and passes
  information to TPR Generator.

37
TPR Generator

• Interfaces with traffic controller.
• Determines if bus is eligible for priority.
• Stores logs and priority logic.

38
City Traffic Control Limitations

• Dos
• Green Extension
• Red Truncation
• Donts
• Shall not shorten any minimum or clearance
  intervals
• Shall not skip any phases
• Shall not break coordination
• Shall yield to high priority calls

39
Current TSP Projects

• Rainier Avenue
• SR 99 North
• SR 99 South
• Bellevue 8th St.
• 272nd / I-5
• TSP Redmond RITS
• 124th ITS
• Renton TSP
• Lake City Way
• 1st Avenue South
• 15th Avenue NE
• Jackson St/12th Ave
• E-3 Busway to CBD

40
TSP in the Future

• Communication using Wi-Fi Technology
• Eliminate costly reader
• Improved system flexibility

DSRC or 802.11
SMART BUS
41
TSP in the Future
Current

• PriorityRequest ID
• priorityRequestVehicleID
• PriorityVehicleClassType
• PriorityVehicleClassLevel
• priorityRequestService StaregyNumber
• priorityRequestTimeOf ServiceDesired
• priorityRequestTimeOfEstimatedDeparture

• Request Priority using NTCIP standard
  communication protocol

Future
42
Final Thoughts

• Many tools available to improve Transit Speed
  Reliability
• High Tech TSP
• Low Tech Bus Stop Consolidation
• Sometimes easy to engineer, hard to sell
• Demonstrating the benefit is key
• Optimize person-delay, not vehicle-delay

43
(No Transcript)
44
(No Transcript)
45
(No Transcript)
46
(No Transcript)
47
(No Transcript)