Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Pre-signals for bus priority: basic guidelines for implementation

  • Case Study and Application
  • Published:
Public Transport Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

When compared to cars, public transportation (e.g., buses) can carry more people using less space. Hence, by increasing the share of people traveling by bus within an urban network, we can improve the efficiency of the urban transportation system, ultimately making it more sustainable. Unfortunately, buses operating mixed with cars can often get stuck in car congestion. One commonly used solution is to dedicate a lane for bus-use only. However, when bus flows are low, dedicated lanes running through intersections can reduce the discharge flows from these locations and lead to increased car delays, car queues, and all the negative externalities associated with congestion. This, in turn, can reduce the overall efficiency of the transportation network. Therefore, a solution is to discontinue the dedicated lane upstream of the main signal, removing bus priority at intersections. In this paper, we advocate the use of pre-signals upstream of signalized intersections to continue providing bus priority while minimizing the disruptions to car traffic. Pre-signals can allow buses to jump the car queues upstream of signalized intersections, while allowing cars to utilize the full capacity of the main signal when buses are not present. In this paper we provide practical guidelines on how to implement pre-signals at signalized intersections. Ideas on how to operate pre-signals are provided by using recent analytical and empirical findings from previous research on pre-signals. The reduction of system-wide (buses and cars) person hours of delay by using pre-signals, as compared to mixed-use lanes or dedicated bus lanes is also quantified. By doing so, the domains of application of pre-signals are also defined. This information can then be used to determine where and when pre-signals should be implemented in real urban networks and to quantify their benefits to the system.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

References

  • Arnott R, de Palma A, Lindsey R (1992) Route choice with heterogeneous drivers and group-specific congestion costs. Reg Sci Urban Econ 22(1):71–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basso LJ, Guevara CA, Gschwender A, Fuster M (2011) Congestion pricing, transit subsidies and dedicated bus lanes: efficient and practical solutions to congestion. Transp Policy 18(5):676–684

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cassidy M, Windover J (1995) Methodology for assessing dynamics of freeway traffic flow. Transp Res Rec 1484:73–79

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassidy M, Daganzo C, Jang K, Chung K (2009) Spatiotemporal effects of segregating different vehicle classes on separate lanes. In: Lam W, Wong S, Lo H (eds) Proceedings of international symposium on transportation and traffic theory, pp 57–74

  • Currie G, Sarvi M, Young B (2007) A new approach to evaluating on-road public transport priority projects: balancing the demand for limited road-space. Transportation 34:413–428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eichler M, Daganzo C (2006) Bus lanes with intermittent priority: strategy formulae and an evaluation. Transp Res Part B 40(9):731–744

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallo M, Montella B, DAcierno L (2011) The transit network design problem with elastic demand and internalisation of external costs: an application to rail frequency optimisation. Transp Res Part C Emerg Technol 19(6):1276–1305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guler SI, Cassidy MJ (2012) Strategies for sharing bottleneck capacity among buses and cars. Transp Res Part B 46(10):1334–1345

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guler SI, Menendez M (2014a) Analytical formulation and empirical evaluation of pre-signals. Transp Res Part B 64:41–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guler SI, Menendez M (2013) Empirical evaluation of bus and car delays at pre-signal. In: Swiss Transport Research Conference (STRC), Ascona, Switzerland

  • Guler SI, Menendez M (2014b) Evaluation of pre-signals at over saturated signalized intersections. Transp Res Rec 2418:11–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • He H, Guler SI, Menendez M (2015) Providing bus priority using adaptive pre-signals. In: Proceedings of the 94th annual meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington DC

  • Hidalgo D, Munoz JC (2014) A review of technological improvements in bus rapid transit (BRT) and buses with high level of service (BHLS). Public Transp 6(3):185–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levinson H, Adams C, Hoey W (1975) Bus use of highways planning and design guidelines. NCHRP, Report 155

  • Menendez M, Daganzo C (2007) Effects of hov lanes on freeway bottlenecks. Transp Res Part B 41(8):809–822

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nowlin L, Fitzpatrick K (1997) Performance of queue jumper lanes. In: Proceedings of traffic congestion and traffic safety in the 21st century: challenges, innovations, and opportunities, Chicago

  • Transport for London (2005) Bus pre-signal assessment and design guidance. http://www.tfl.gov.uk. Retrieved Jan 2009

  • Viegas J, Lu B (2001) Widening the scope for bus priority with intermittent bus lanes. Transp Plan Technol 24(2):87–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viegas J, Lu B (2004) The intermittent bus lane signals setting within an area. Transp Res Part C 12(6):453–469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viegas J, Roque R, Lu B, Vieira J (2007) The intermittent bus lane system: Demonstration in Lisbon. In: Proceedings of the 86th annual meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington DC

  • Widanapathiranage R, Bunker JM, Bhaskar A (2015) Modelling the BRT station capacity and queuing for all stopping busway operation. Public Transp 7(1):21–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu J, Hounsell N (1998) Bus priority using pre-signals. Transp Res Part A 32(8):563–583

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhou G, Gan A, Zhu X (2006) Determination of optimal detector location for transit signal priority with queue jumper lanes. Transp Res Record J Transp Res Board 1978(1):123–129

  • Zlatkovic M, Stevanovic A, Reza, RMZ (2013) Effects of queue jumpers and transit signal priority on bus rapid transit. In: Proceedings of the 92nd annual meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington DC

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. Ilgin Guler.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Guler, S.I., Menendez, M. Pre-signals for bus priority: basic guidelines for implementation. Public Transp 7, 339–354 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12469-015-0104-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12469-015-0104-9

Keywords

Navigation