Originally Posted by
Urban Pioneer
SUMMARY
September 24, 2018 Automatic Signal Priority Meeting for OKC Streetcar
Between City Staff, EMBARK Staff, Consultants, and Myself
420 Main (4th Floor MAPS Office Conference Room)
There are 39 traffic signals that may potentially affect the efficient operation of OKC Streetcar.
15 Signals will have some sort of degree of priority control that is fully-funded by MAPS.
24 Signals currently do not have funded priority control and are being evaluated.
An additional $600,000 is required to deploy priority control equipment to the remaining 24 locations.
Consultants and OKC Streetcar Staff have identified three signal locations on the Bricktown loop that would potentially, positively affect route times.
An estimated $150,000 has been identified as “next-step” investments and involve outfitting the seven train cars with OPTICOM transmitters and to convert the initial three signal control cabinets with new controllers that can communicate with the system.
OPTICOM is the current method for actuating the signals due to historic reliability precedents with minimal, ongoing traffic management programming requirements from Public Works.
OPTICOM has its limitations however as it is not a “smart” technology. It can cause preemptive traffic management cycling times to occur on demand. However, it does not actively make “smart” judgments about real-time situations at intersections. A camera-type solution may provide better overall results but also would likely require more ongoing programming investment costs to keep such a system reliable.
The goal is 12 – 14-minute intervals between trains.
Additional time extending beyond 12 – 14 minutes is projected to have a detrimental effect on ridership.
Current Consultant estimates based on projected averages have trains estimated to function within reason.
The Bricktown loop is taking longer to travel than projected. Factoring crosswalk signal cycles, Bricktown times can only be marginally improved but probably require the initial three OPTICOM signal investments to keep travel times within reason.
(1 of 3)
PERSONAL SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Public Works Staff is resistant to a blanket Signal Priority Policy such as I have proposed to the OKC Traffic Commission and attempted to promote through the MAPS process.
The attempt at implementing the policy has continued to elevate awareness about the issue.
There is strong communication occurring between EMBARK and Traffic Control and active monitoring of route times.
OPTICOM is not the ideal long-term solution to improve overall times but it is the immediate technology of choice by Public Works to resolve current obstacles that are delaying efficient streetcar circulation at key signal points.
One of the main obstacles to improving times system-wide is pedestrian crosswalk buttons. If a reliable “camera-type” technology could be obtained that Public Works found acceptable, real-time evaluation of pedestrian activity might be achieved allowing for the smart ongoing evaluation of real-time conditions of crosswalks. Cameras could detect whether the crosswalk had fully cleared of activity and automatically shorten the length of time as necessary thus improving the promptness of green lighting streetcar through-movement. Such a system is being deployed in Kansas City.
The problem with route timeliness and its relationship to signal cycles is incredibly dynamic and varies throughout the day. Additional building development and increased pedestrian activity downtown will ironically exacerbate the timeliness problem. A smarter preemption technology than OPTICOM should be pursued to assist with the new dynamism downtown and its impacts to streetcar movement.
The meeting illustrated that there is an earnest effort to coordinate between city departments to achieve a consultant-based level of service timeliness that the consultant, JACOBS/URS, believes will obtain reasonable streetcar ridership.
The current plan does not attempt to wholly eliminate unnecessary stops at red lights.
I believe it is essential to actively monitor the situation as we enter testing and aggressively evaluate what the ridership experience is like.
I also believe that additional “smart” solutions should be evaluated and a vendor solution selected that provides the necessary reliability and ongoing support that Public Works desires be provided in the immediate future.
Eliminating unnecessary stops at red lights will improve the ridership experience and the sense of expediency that riders throughout the US expect out of streetcar travel.
(2 of 3)
NEXT STEPS THAT I RECOMMEND
1. Approve the estimated $150,000 investment out of excess MAPS sales tax collections to improve travel times at three signals identified in Bricktown.
2. Actively test and reevaluate B Line circulation after OPTICOM is deployed on the B Line.
3. Begin testing on D line and evaluate performance.
4. Identify bottlenecks that OPTICOM may temporarily improve.
5. Develop a Request for Proposals through the Consultant for a truly “smart” priority system that uses technology such as cameras and achieves a real-time evaluation of intersection activity. This RFP should include commitments and provisos from potential vendors describing the level of ongoing support that they would be willing to commit to. Recognize that OPTICOM is not a long-term solution and is only a stop-gap measure. Utilize available MAPS funds to jump-start a permanent solution.
Jeff M. Bezdek
MAPS 3 Streetcar Subcommittee Appointee
OKC Streetcar Initiative
Cc. MAPS 3 Subcommittee Members, MAPS 3 Oversight Board, David Todd, Eric Wenger, Dennis Clowers, Doug Smith, Jesse Rush, Jason Ferbrache, James Cooper,
(3 of 3)
Re: Streetcar
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks