T3 Webinar Presentation

Lessons Learned: Improving Reliability with Transit Signal Priority Systems -
King County Metro Transit and Los Angeles County MTA (January 22, 2008)

Presenter:   Steven Y. Gota
Presenter's Org:   Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro)
Presenter:   Reinland Jones
Presenter's Org:   Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro)

HTML version of the presentation
Image descriptions are contained in brackets. [ ]
Back to Webinar Files

T3 Webinars are brought to you by the ITS Professional Capacity Building Program (ITS PCB) at the U.S. Department of Transportation's (USDOT) ITS Joint Program Office, Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA)


Slide 1: Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro)

Metro’s Countywide Signal Priority Program
T3 Webinar
January 22, 2008

Slide 2: Background

In the late 90’s, Metro funded several transit signal priority demonstrations

  • City of Los Angeles
  • City of Glendale
  • City of Lancaster
  • City of Santa Monica
  • Metro

Slide 3: Metro’s Bus Signal Priority Pilot Project

  • Initiated in January 1999
  • Multijurisdictional effort aimed at
    • minimizing delay experienced by buses and
    • shortening round trip running times
  • Develop a preferred signal priority solution for high-ridership corridors traversing multiple jurisdictions with different local traffic control equipment and software

Slide 4: Los Angeles County

  • 89 jurisdictions
  • 43 public agencies providing fixed route bus service
  • Metro alone operates 191 bus routes with over 1.3 million weekday boardings on average

[Map of Los Angeles County and its 89 jurisdictions.]

Slide 5: Program Context, cont'd

Los Angeles County

  • 1,433 square miles in Metro service area
    • City of Los Angeles = 466 sq. miles
  • 88 other jurisdictions = 967 sq. miles
  • Over 10,000 traffic signals

[Photos of signal controllers.]

Slide 6: Program Funding

  • Local
    • Proposition C: ½-cent sales tax used to maintain, improve and expand public transit as well as reduce congestion and increase mobility in LA County
  • Federal
  • Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds through FTA

[Pie chart that shows transit funding stems from two sources: local (Proposition ) and Federal (CMAQ funds through FTA).]

Slide 7: Program Funding

  • Bus Signal Priority Pilot Project: $4.3 million
  • Metro Rapid Countywide Signal Priority Expansion
    • Phase 1: $7.5 million
    • Phase 2: $8.7 million (estimate)

Slide 8: Study Tour

Locations

  • Portland Tri-Met
  • KITSAP Transit
  • King County Metro

[Map that shows location of study tours.]

Slide 9: Study Tour Objectives

  • Evaluate different signal priority technology solutions implemented by various transit properties
  • Study the institutional, political, legal, and financial issues
  • Assess systems integration complexities
  • Review adopted signal priority implementation guidelines
  • Discuss "lessons learned"

Slide 10: King County Metro Transit Peer Review

  • Multiple jurisdictions
  • Several different traffic signal control hardware types
  • Multiple firmware interfaces
  • Decision to grant priority made at the local control level
  • Headway intervals were similar to ours
  • Local traffic engineering control

Slide 11: Countywide Signal Priority Pilot Project

  • Crenshaw Corridor
    • 10.5 miles
    • Adams Blvd. to Redondo Beach Blvd.
    • 54 Signalized Intersections
    • 51 signal-priority- equipped
    • Jurisdictional Partners
    • City of Los Angeles
    • City of Inglewood
    • County of Los Angeles
    • Unincorporated County areas, City of Gardena and City of Hawthorne

[Map that shows location of the Crenshaw Corridor.]

Slide 12: Countywide Signal Priority Evaluation Results

  • Average Bus Travel Time
    • Up to 8.8% reduction - northbound PM peak
    • Up to 4.2% reduction - southbound AM peak
  • Average Delay Due to Red Signals
    • Up to 22.5% reduction - northbound PM peak
    • Up to 12.5% reduction - southbound AM peak

[Photo of a Metro Rapid bus.]

Slide 13: Countywide Signal Priority Process

[Image that shows Bus-to-Intersection Communications. Communications flows from the vehicle” to the decision to request priority (DTRP) [both on-bus system functions] onto decision to grant priority (DTRP) and implement priority (both traffic signal controller functions).]

Slide 14: Countywide Signal Priority WLAN Equipment

[Slide shows diagram of the Countywide Signal Priority WLAN Equipment. The diagram shows the bus (the mobile client) navigating through different access points along the corridor.]

Slide 15: Countywide Signal Priority On-Bus Equipment

[Photos of on-bus signal priority equipment.]

Slide 16: Countywide Signal Priority Technologies

  • On-Bus Equipment
  • Intersection Check-In Technologies
  • Intersection Controller Equipment

Slide 17: Countywide Signal Priority Technologies

  • On-Bus Equipment
  • Intersection Check-In Technologies
  • Intersection Controller Equipment

Slide 18: Countywide Signal Priority WLAN Equipment

[Photos of signal priority WLAN equipment.]

Slide 19: Countywide Signal Priority WLAN Equipment

[Additional photos of signal priority WLAN equipment.]

Slide 20: Countywide Signal Priority Traffic Signal Integration

[Photos of signal controllers.]

Slide 21: Countywide Signal Priority Traffic Signal Integration

[Photos of signal priority depot WLAN equipment.]

Slide 22: Countywide Signal Priority Expansion Phase I

[Map that shows location of Expansion Phase I of LA Countywide Signal Priority system.]

Slide 23: Countywide Signal Priority Expansion Phase II

[Map that shows location of Expansion Phase II of LA Countywide Signal Priority system.]

Slide 24: Countywide Signal Priority Expansion

[Map that shows location of LA Countywide Signal Priority system after Phase I and II are completed.]

Slide 25: Multijurisdictional Project Implementation: Challenges and Lessons Learned

  • Project Oversight and Coordination
    • Allocation of necessary staff resources
    • Project schedule to accommodate jurisdictional coordination Issues
  • Consensus Building
    • Schedule/time management
    • No "One size fits all" approach
    • Management, administrative, and technical staff must all be included in the decision making process
    • Work with your jurisdictional partners both collectively and individually to resolve implementation questions and concerns

Slide 26: Multijurisdictional Project Implementation: Challenges and Lessons Learned

  • Legal Agreements
    • Respective legal counsels and technical staff must coordinate with one another to address legal concerns
    • Project scope, roles and responsibilities, on-going operations and maintenance, cooperation, communications, and liability are key elements
    • Legal impasse can become a showstopper
    • Corridor Synchronization
    • Signal timing update

Slide 27: Multijurisdictional Project Implementation: Challenges and Lessons Learned

  • Technology Migration
    • Work with participating jurisdictions to ensure system- upgrade compatibility
    • Develop an operations and maintenance plan that accommodates potential hardware and software upgrades
    • Continually evaluate the existing system and look for opportunities to improve performance

Slide 28: Contact Information

Steven Y. Gota
Transportation Planning Manager
San Gabriel Valley Area Team
LA Metro
One Gateway Plaza
Mail Stop: 99-22-8
Los Angeles, CA  90012-2952

213-922-3043
GOTAS@metro.net

Reinland Jones
Transportation Planner
San Gabriel Valley Area Team
Los Angeles County Metro
One Gateway Plaza
Mail Stop: 99-22-8
Los Angeles, CA 90012-2952

213-922-2231
JONESRE@metro.net


back to top