Urban Traffic Management URBAN TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT

Urban Traffic Management

www.eu-portal.net

URBAN TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT


www.eu-portal.net

What you will (hopefully!) learn in this session

What traffic management is

Why you do it

How you might enforce it

What it can achieve

What it might cost

(Briefly) how you might implement it


www.eu-portal.net

Structure of session

Introduction and categorisation of traffic management measures

Focusing in on certain types

Enforcement – exercise

More details of different types of traffic management including costs and what they’ve achieved

Group exercise based on arterial street


www.eu-portal.net

DEFINITION OF TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT

Traffic Management is

• the process of adjusting or adapting the use of an existing road (system) to meet specified objectives without substantial new road construction.

So strong links to other topics in this and other ELTIS workshops:

• Cycling• Safety• Parking


www.eu-portal.net

So what are some objectives of TM?

What do you think?


www.eu-portal.net

Categorisation of TM measuresPublic transport priority

Street management to share space differently or make space feel different;

Traffic system optimisation

Access controls and pricing


www.eu-portal.net

In this session, we concentrate on:

Public transport priority such as • bus (or tram) lanes,

• better bus stops,

• Public transport (PT) priority at signals,

• PT-only sections of road,

• turns that only PT vehicles can make

Street management to share space differently or make space feel different such as

• Parking regulations

• Wider and more comfortable footways, road narrowings, level changes

• Better crossings

• Shared space

Why only these two categories of measure for this training?


www.eu-portal.net

ENFORCEMENT DISCUSSION•Many TM measures work only with proper enforcement – but how does proper enforcement work for you?

•In multi-national groups of 5 discuss the following questions:

• Think about a traffic management measure in your city that doesn’t work well because drivers don’t comply with (respect) it e.g. a bus lane or a parking regulation

• How (well) is the measure enforced? What is the penalty for not complying?

• How could you improve compliance with TM measures generally?

• Are there any examples of traffic management or parking measures in your towns and cities where compliance with the measures is good and/or has improved recently? How is this achieved?


www.eu-portal.net

FIRST OF ALL…. MAKING STREETS FEEL DIFFERENT


www.eu-portal.net

Footways and simple crossings

Ideally, smooth wide walking space free from obstructions

Clear safe frequent crossing points

Dropped kerbs and tactile paving - €1300 per pair

Rebuilt footway €20-€150 per sq m

Building footway into road space - €50-€200 per sq m


www.eu-portal.net

Slightly more expensive crossingsSignalled crossings with raised road surface - €25000

Painted signed crossings - €3000 (but don’t forget dropped kerbs unless you have…)

… entry treatments on side road junctions – priority to pedestrians - €7000 – maybe with widened footway/narrowed junction mouth


www.eu-portal.net

Pedestrianisation – it is nice but it’s not cheap

UK costs €800,000 to €1.3 million per 100m of street!

Spain - €300,000

Pedestrianisation


www.eu-portal.net

Signage Cheap and effective if compliance/enforcement good

One way streets for cars two way for bikes and/or buses

30 kph zones

Sign and pole cost €120 plus installation

Parking restrictions – signs and painted lines @ €0.70 per m

Parking ticket machines €7,000 (but you could use SMS parking payment)

Would this work in your city?


www.eu-portal.net

30 kph zones (with speed cushions)

Slow cars but not buses

€1000-€1500 per cushion


www.eu-portal.net

Minimum widths (UK)

Traffic lane, no parking – 2.8m

Traffic lane with parking – 4.5m

Cycle lane on street – 1m (sometimes 0.8m)

One-way cycle path off-street – 2.5m

Two way cycle path off-street – 3.5m

Footway for pedestrians – depends on flow but absolute minimum 1m, comfortable minimum in low-flow situations 2.5m


www.eu-portal.net

Shared spaceCosts – as for pedestrianisation

Effects – reduces accidents, improves local economy, and enhances traffic flow

Let’s watch some videos…


www.eu-portal.net

EXAMPLES ADONIS Project(4th Framework) – Local street improvements

Access Control system

Pedestrianised area with access for residents, Namur

ADONIS – Final Report – Pages 40 and 41


www.eu-portal.net

EXAMPLES ADONIS Project (4th Framework) – Local street improvements

Elimination of pavements in streets with limited car traffic - Mechelen

Signage – Sign at the entrance of la Ribera, Barcelona

ADONIS – Final Report – Pages 22 and 40


www.eu-portal.net

Impacts of such measures

One example – CIVITAS Burgos (ES) access restrictions

• 4 square km in city centre

• All with access restrictions (bollards); 25% completely pedestrianised

• Results:

• 25% reduction in CO2 levels in the historical centre

• 30% reduction in vehicles circulating including 20% in HGVs

• Road safety


www.eu-portal.net

Economic impacts of traffic management

Specifically, impacts of shared space, streetscape improvements, parking management, pedestrianisation

See Whitehead et al (2006) – left – and Sandahl and Lindh (1995) below


www.eu-portal.net

SECONDLY – PRIORITY FOR PUBLIC TRANSPORT


www.eu-portal.net


www.eu-portal.net

What is PT priority 1

• Any physical measure on the highway which protects PT vehicles from or allows them to bypass congested sections of road

• Any physical measure on the road which protects PT vehicles from the effects of parked vehicles

• Hierarchy of measures from turning ban exemptions through to full segregation (tram or busway)

• Is it giving capacity to public transport?


www.eu-portal.net

Effect of PT lane on junction capacity

Stop line

SETBACK

BUS LANE

Eight cars per cycle

Next eight cars

BUS

Six cars plus bus per cycle

2 delayed cars

Next eight cars


www.eu-portal.net


• Turning ban exemptions and entry restrictions

• With-flow bus lanes

• Contra-flow bus lanes


www.eu-portal.net


Bus advance areas

Bus only streets

Bus boarders


www.eu-portal.net

Does PT priority work?

• Uxbridge Rd, London:• 42km route 2-way, of which 6 km bus lane

• Excess waiting time down 30% in 3 years 1993-1996

• Pax numbers up 20%

• Burdett Rd, London (bus lane and pre-signals) 1990 to 1995:• SB am peak 411 seconds down to 397

• SB pm peak 735 seconds down to 398

• SB am peak 578 seconds down to 575

• SB am peak 1100 seconds down to 517


www.eu-portal.net

Does PT priority work?

• Route 220, London:

• 1993-1995 14.5% reduction in journey time

• Patronage increased by 10%

• 3.7% of new passengers transferred from car

• Bath Rd, Bristol, bus lanes 1992

• Before average journey time 21’4”, after 12’3”

• SD down from 5’5” to 1’38”


www.eu-portal.net

EXAMPLES: CAPTURE Project (4th Framework) – Bucharest Physical MeasuresImplementing a public transport lane on one side of a 600 metres corridor together with stop platform facilities

78180Trip time (seconds)

16.716.5RATB average speed in Bucharest (km/hour)

27.012.5Average speed of bus travel on (corridor/Km/hour)

8998Bus Frequency(nº of vehicles/hour/direction)

After

(June 1998)

Before

(June 1997)

‘’CAPTURE’ – Deliverable 8 – Page 1.159


www.eu-portal.net

EXAMPLES INCOME Project(4th Framework)

Public Transport Priority UTC London

Sample SPRINT Strategy Saving in Average Bus Delay (Secs/Junction)

Main Road Links Green Extensions onlyGreen Extensions and recalls

1.82.0

Side Road Links Green Extensions onlyGreen Extensions and recalls

2.46.4

All Links Green Extensions onlyGreen Extensions and recalls

1.92.9

INCOME - Annex A to Final Report – Technical Description, Results and Recommendations, Page A7


www.eu-portal.net

EXAMPLES INCOME Project(4th Framework) - Public Transport Priority UTC Gothenburg

ACL impact at intersection 16 Cycle Time Green Split (s)

Before emergency priority (mid-day) 72 s 26 s

During emergency priority (mid-day) 95 s 65 s

Difference +32% +150%

Emergency Vehicle Priority - The escape route along Engelbrektsgatan and the effects on cycle time and green splits from the ACL impact

INCOME - Annex A to Final Report – Technical Description, Results and Recommendations, Page A35

Main vehicle flowBus/Tram routeBus routeEmergency corridors


www.eu-portal.net

Signal timings, central priority, etc

Radio poll and priority request

Location/timeSignal status, priority request (optional), etc.

Roadside beaconSignal

controller

Radio or cable link

Priority algorithm AVL

EXAMPLES INCOME Project (4th Framework) - London – Integration of Public Transport Priority and AVL

INCOME - Final Report – Pages 13,14

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 20 40 60 80 100Percentage of buses receiving priority (Simulation Results)

To

tal

bu

s s

av

ing

(E

uro

/hr)

Combined

Waiting time

Travel time


www.eu-portal.net

Enforcing PT priority

Colour bus lanes

Use police traffic wardens

Automatic enforcement:

• Decriminalise

• Allow camera enforcement

• Roadside CCTV and on-bus used in London

• Croydon used CCTV, issued 47175 tickets

• Non-compliance down by >90%

• Newham down by >74%


www.eu-portal.net

Implementing PT priority

ID problems

• queues, delays, boarding difficulties

ID opportunities

• wide roads; one-way systems; places to re-route

Outline design - consider:

• Operating hours

• Parking restrictions

• Requirements for equipment on buses

• Police resources

Consultation


www.eu-portal.net

Going beyond bus priority

Total route treatment e.g. Route 43, London

• Nicer buses

• Better stops and access to stops

• Priority (inc. at signals)

• Rationalisation of on-street loading

• Better enforcement

• Driver training

• Decent road surface

• Marketing and information

• Good operational management

Extended to 70 routes over next 3 years - £200 million


www.eu-portal.net

Example of arterial street a bit like yours

Documents

Urban Traffic Management URBAN TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT