Skip to Content Skip to Search U.S. Department of Transportation (US DOT) Logo Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA) Logo Intelligent Transportation Systems Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA)
 

 

Need assistance? Contact us or view the Help page.
Quick Links: Applications Overview icon Benefits Database icon Costs Database icon Deployment Statistics icon Lessons Learned icon
in   Search Help

 

Link 3: Arterial Management to Transit Management (13 unique benefit summaries found)

Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) strategies that promote integration among freeways, arterials, and transit systems can help balance traffic flow and enhance corridor performance; simulation models indicate benefit-to-cost ratios for combined strategies range from 7:1 to 25:1.(2009)

In Snohomish County, Washington State, implementation of a transit signal priority system on two test corridors reduced average transit corridor travel time by 4.9 percent, and had insignificant negative impacts on local cross street traffic.(15 June 2007)

In Los Angeles, transit signal priority reduced total transit travel time by approximately 25 percent.(July 2001)

Adaptive signal control systems deployed in five metropolitan areas have reduced delay 19 to 44 percent.(December 2000)

Adaptive signal control systems in Los Angeles, Broward County, and Oakland County reduced vehicle stops by 28 to 41 percent (December 2000)

Adaptive signal control may can lower operations and maintenance costs associated with traffic signal retiming; in Minnesota DOT signal technicians indicated that adaptive signal control systems were easy to operate and required minimal maintenance.(December 2000)

Adaptive traffic signal control systems in Los Angeles, Broward County, and Newark decreased travel times by 13 to 25 percent. (December 2000)

The payback period for expansion of an adaptive signal control system in Toronto, Canada was estimated at less than two years.(8-12 November 1999)

An adaptive signal control system in Toronto, Canada increased traffic flow speeds by 3 to 16 percent. (8-12 November 1999)

An adaptive signal control system in Toronto, Canada reduced vehicle emissions by three to six percent and lowered fuel consumption by four to seven percent.(8-12 November 1999)

In Toronto, Canada adaptive signal control reduced ramp queues by 14 percent, decreased delay up to 42 percent, and reduced travel time by 6 to 11 percent; and transit signal priority reduced transit delay by 30 to 40 percent and travel time by 2 to 6 percent. (8-12 November 1999)

In San Jose, California, a paratransit program equipped with AVL/CAD and an automated scheduling and routing system, realized increased ridership, better on-time performance, and a $500,000 reduction in annual operating costs. (March/April 1997)

In San Jose, California, a paratransit driver commented that she was satisfied with a new AVL/CAD scheduling and routing system, and said it was useful for settling disputes concerning on-time performance .(March/April 1997)