Transit Management > Operations & Fleet Management > Transit Signal Priority
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)
Implementing Transit Signal Priority (TSP) can improve bus running times by 2 to 18 percent.(2007)
In the central area of Chicago, a feasibility study indicated that driver assistance technologies and transit signal priority for bus rapid transit would be cost-effective.(8/19/2004)
Surveys found that riders on Vancouver's 98 B-line Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) service, which implemented transit signal priority to improve schedule reliability, rated the service highly with regard to on-time performance and service reliability (an average of 8 points on a 10 point scale).(29 September 2003)
When transit signal priority was not used in Portland, Oregon; bus travel times increased up to 4.2 percent during peak periods and up to 1.5 percent in non-peak periods.(19-22 May 2003)
In Dallas, Texas, simulation found that transit signal priority reduced bus travel time up to 11 percent during peak periods, reduced car travel times up to 16 percent, vehicle delay up to 4 percent and person delay up to 6 percent.(14-17 October 2002)
Simulation of a transit signal priority system in Helsinki, Finland indicated that fuel consumption decreased by 3.6 percent, Nitrogen oxides were reduced by 4.9 percent, Carbon monoxide decreased by 1.8 percent, hydrocarbons declined by 1.2 percent, and particulate matter decreased by 1.0 percent.(13-17 January 2002.)
During the A.M. peak period, transit signal priority on an arterial route in Arlington, Virginia could reduce bus travel time by 4.0 to 9.1 percent, decrease person delay of bus passengers by 6.5 to 14.2 percent, and reduce transit vehicle stops by 1.5 to 2.9 percent.(13-17 January 2002)
In Helsinki, Finland a transit signal priority system improved on-time arrival by 22 to 58 percent and real-time passenger information displays were regarded as useful by 66 to 95 percent of passengers.(13-17 January 2002.)
A transit signal priority system in Helsinki, Finland reduced delay by 44 to 48 percent, decreased travel time by 1 to 11 percent, and reduced travel time by 35,800 to 67,500 passenger-hours per year. (13-17 January 2002.)
During the A.M. peak period, transit signal priority on an arterial route in Arlington, Virginia could increase carbon monoxide emissions by 5.6 percent and decrease nitrogen emissions by 1.7 percent.(13-17 January 2002)
Evaluation of several transit signal priority systems found decreased bus travel time variability by 35 percent, lowered bus travel times by 6 to 27 percent, reduced AM peak intersection delay by 13 percent, and decreased signal-related bus stops by 50 percent.(January 2002)
A before-and-after study found that transit patrons experienced a smoother and more comfortable ride when a transit signal priority system was implemented in Seattle, Washington. (January 2002)
In Los Angeles, transit signal priority reduced total transit travel time by approximately 25 percent.(July 2001)
In Tucson, Arizona, models indicated adaptive signal control in conjunction with transit signal priority can decrease delay for travelers on main streets by 18.5 percent while decreasing delay for travelers on cross-streets by 28.4 percent.(7-13 January 2001)
A transit priority system along an urban arterial in Vancouver, Canada reduced bus travel time variability by 29 and 59 percent during AM and PM peak periods, respectively.(6-10 August 2000)
Implementing traffic signal priority for a light-rail transit line in Toronto, Canada allowed system operators to remove one vehicle from service and maintain the same level of service to passengers.(6-10 August 2000)
At an intersection in Eindhoven, the Netherlands a transit signal priority system reduced bus schedule deviation by 17 seconds. (1-4 May 2000)
When conditional priority was deployed in Eindhoven, the Netherlands; buses experienced 27 seconds of delay without priority and no significant change in delay under conditional priority. (9-13 January 2000)
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)
When bus priority was used with an adaptive signal control system in London, England average bus delay was reduced by 7 to 13 percent and average bus delay variability decreased by 10 to 12 percent. (6-12 November 1999)
A transit signal priority system in Southampton, England reduced bus fuel consumption by 13 percent, lowered bus emissions by 13 to 25 percent, increased fuel consumption for other vehicles by 6 percent, and increased the emissions of other vehicles up to 9 percent.(1999)
A transit signal priority system in Eastleigh, England reduced bus delay by 9 seconds/vehicle/intersection and increased delay for other traffic by 2.2 seconds/vehicle/intersection. (1999)
A transit signal priority system in Eastleigh, England reduced bus fuel consumption by 19 percent and reduced bus emissions by 15 to 30 percent, and increased fuel consumption for other vehicles by 5 percent and increased the emissions of other vehicles up to 11 percent.(1999)
A transit signal priority system in Southampton, England reduced bus delay by 9.5 seconds/vehicle/intersection and increased delay for other traffic by 3.8 seconds/vehicle/intersection.(1999)
A bus priority system in Sapporo City, Japan reduced bus travel times by 6 percent, decreased the number of stops by 7 percent, and reduced the stopped time of buses by 21 percent.(1999)
There were 32 accidents along a transitway at the University of Minnesota before transit priority lights were installed, while no accidents were reported after installation of the lights.(2 February 1998)
Transit priority systems in England and France have reduced transit vehicle travel times by 6 to 42 percent, while increasing passenger vehicle travel times by 0.3 to 2.5 percent. (December 1995)
A bus priority system on a major arterial in Portland, Oregon reduced bus travel times by five to eight percent. (July 1994)
Three evaluation projects conducted in Europe found that transit signal priority reduced travel time for transit vehicles by 5 to 15 percent.(1994-1998)
Driver assist and automation systems can substantially increase the cost of a new bus.(2007)
The annualized life-cycle costs for full ITS deployment and operations in Tucson were estimated at $72.1 million. (May 2005)
A modeling study evaluated the potential deployment of full ITS capabilities in Cincinnati. The annualized life-cycle cost was estimated at $98.2 million.(May 2005)
The annualized life-cycle costs for full ITS deployment and operations in Seattle were estimated at $132.1 million.(May 2005)
The capital costs to implement TSP range from $5,000 per intersection (if existing software and controller equipment are used) to $20,000 to $30,000 per intersection (if software and control equipment are replaced).(May 2005)
The costs of the in-vehicle components of precision docking technology ranged from $2,700 to $14,000 per bus depending on the number of units produced.(8/19/2004)
TMC central hardware costs can exceed $200,000 if regional communications and system integration are required.(5 August 2004)
The ITS components for the Bus Rapid Transit system in the Greater Vancouver area of British Columbia, Canada costs $5.8 million (Canadian).(August 2003)
The cost of stage one of the Watt Avenue ITS corridor in Sacramento, California was estimated at $1.5 million.(May 2003)
Implementation costs for transit signal priority range from $8,000 to $35,000 per intersection.(11 July 2002)
In Los Angeles, California, transit signal priority for BRT cost approximately $20,000 per intersection, or $100,000 per mile.(July 2001)
In Chattanooga, Tennessee a transit signal priority system with 27 buses and 10 intersections was installed for $250,000.(22 June 2001)
The costs to implement a transit signal priority demonstration project in Los Angeles, California was $10 million.(January 2001)
Anticipate and address challenges to consistently operating a transit signal priority (TSP) system.(4/14/2006)
