DOCSLIB.ORG

SEPTA Bus Stop Design Guidelines

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
SEPTA Bus Stop Design Guidelines The Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission is The symbol in our logo is adapted from the dedicated to uniting the region’s elected officials, planning official DVRPC seal professionals and the public with a common vision of and is designed as a making a great region even greater. Shaping the way we stylized image of the live, work, and play, DVRPC builds consensus on Delaware Valley. The outer ring symbolizes the region as improving transportation, promoting smart growth, a whole while the diagonal bar signifies the Delaware River. The two adjoining crescents represent the protecting the environment, and enhancing the economy. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the State of We serve a diverse region of nine counties: Bucks, New Jersey. Chester, Delaware, Montgomery, and Philadelphia in Pennsylvania; and Burlington, Camden, Gloucester, and DVRPC is funded by a variety of funding sources including federal grants from the U.S. Department of Mercer in New Jersey. DVRPC is the federally designated Transportation’s Federal Highway Administration Metropolitan Planning Organization for the Greater (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA), Philadelphia Region — leading the way to a better future. the Pennsylvania and New Jersey departments of transportation, as well as by DVRPC’s state and local member governments. The authors, however, are solely responsible for the findings and conclusions herein, which may not represent the official views or policies of the funding agencies. DVRPC fully complies with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and related statutes and regulations in all programs and activities. DVRPC’s website (www.dvrpc.org) may be translated into multiple languages. Publications and other public documents can be made available in alternative languages and formats, if requested. For more information, please call (215) 238-2871. Table of Contents How to Use this Document ..................................................................................................................... 1 Purpose & Introduction .............................................................................................................. 1 Structure of Report .................................................................................................................... 1 CHAPTER 1 Stop Location .......................................................................................................................................... 3 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 3 Transit Stop Characteristics ...................................................................................................... 3 Stop Spacing ....................................................................................................................... 3 Typical Stop Types ............................................................................................................. 3 CHAPTER 2 In-Street Design ...................................................................................................................................... 7 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 7 Typical Bus Zone Configuration Options ................................................................................... 7 Curbside/shoulder stop ....................................................................................................... 8 Bus bay/turnout ................................................................................................................... 9 Curb extension .................................................................................................................. 10 Open bus bay .................................................................................................................... 11 Detailed Dimensional Specifications ....................................................................................... 12 Engineering Considerations to Accommodate SEPTA Buses ................................................ 19 Roadway Paving Considerations ...................................................................................... 21 CHAPTER 3 Curbside Design ................................................................................................................................... 23 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 23 Universal Design and ADA ...................................................................................................... 23 SEPTA Curbside Passenger Facility Design .......................................................................... 23 Other elements ................................................................................................................. 25 Detailed Dimensions for Curbside Passenger Facilities ......................................................... 26 CHAPTER 4 Passenger Amenities ............................................................................................................................ 33 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 33 Bus Stop Comforts .................................................................................................................. 33 Street Furniture ................................................................................................................. 33 CHAPTER5 Development Context & Case Studies ................................................................................................. 35 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 35 Case Study 1 ........................................................................................................................... 36 Case Study 2 ........................................................................................................................... 37 Case Study 3 ........................................................................................................................... 38 Case Study 4 ........................................................................................................................... 39 Case Study 5 ........................................................................................................................... 40 Figures and Tables Figure 1: Typical far-side curbside stop configuration .................................................................................................... 8 Figure 2: Typical near-side curbside stop configuration ................................................................................................. 8 Figure 3: Typical midblock curbside stop configuration .................................................................................................. 8 Figure 4: Near-side bus bay example............................................................................................................................. 9 Figure 5: Near-side curb extension example ................................................................................................................ 10 Figure 6: Far-side open bus bay example .................................................................................................................... 11 Figure 7: Turning radii for SEPTA standard and articulated buses .............................................................................. 20 Figure 8: Flexible paving components for high-volume roadway .................................................................................. 22 Figure 9: Concrete bus pad integrated into flexible paving roadway design ................................................................. 22 Figure 10: Legend for case study graphics .................................................................................................................. 35 Figure 11: Case study 1 – Highway commercial shopping center with curbside stop .................................................. 36 Figure 12: Case study 2 – Commercial center interior bus routing ............................................................................... 37 Figure 13: Case study 3 – Shopping mall transit hub ................................................................................................... 38 Figure 14: Case study 4 – Urban neighborhood stop: curb extension .......................................................................... 39 Figure 15: Case study 5 – Urban stop: coordination between routes ........................................................................... 40 Table 1: Advantages and disadvantages for typical stop location types......................................................................... 4 Table 2: Curb extension dimensions for various vehicle/door configurations ............................................................... 10 Table 3: Dimensional specifications for in-street (but outside travel lane) stop types .................................................. 13 Table 4: Dimensional specifications for curbside passenger facilities .......................................................................... 27
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Transit Ready City Report
    City of Rochester Comprehensive Access and Mobility Plan Transit Ready City Report Cover photo from patrickashley via wikimedia Table of Contents Page 1 Introduction ..................................................................................................... 1-1 2 Priority Corridors .............................................................................................. 2-1 Identification.....................................................................................................2-1 Land Use and Development............................................................................2-3 Street Design and Public Realm ......................................................................2-3 3 Stations and Stops ........................................................................................... 3-1 Basic Bus Stops..................................................................................................3-1 Enhanced Bus Stops .........................................................................................3-1 Transfer Points ...................................................................................................3-1 Stop Hierarchy and Requirements...................................................................3-4 Supportive Right-of-Way Considerations.........................................................3-5 Evolution of the Transit Center .........................................................................3-8 Connections to Intercity Services ....................................................................3-9
    [Show full text]
  • 16Th Street Project Flyer ENGLISH
    16th Street Improvement Project We’re Moving Muni Forward As part of Muni Forward, SFMTA is adding transit and safety improvements along the 22 Fillmore route that will make it safer to walk and bike, increase the reliability of transit service and enhance the customer experience on and off the bus. Project Overview BENEFITS AT A GLANCE The 16th Street Improvement Project aims to improve transit reliability and Reduce travel travel time for the 18,000 customers who ride Muni along the corridor on time by almost an average weekday, while enhancing safety and accessibility. It will address transportation needs of current and future residents, workers and visitors to the southeastern portion of the 22 Fillmore route along 2.3 miles of 16th Street. The 25% project also features utility upgrades as well as new trees, sidewalks and bus shelters. To allow for zero-emission transit service into Mission Bay, the project includes extending the overhead contact system (OCS) that powers our trolley buses on 16th Street from Kansas to Third streets. Additionally, new bike lanes have been added to 17th Street to create a continuous route from Mission Bay to the Mission neighborhood. Wider sidewalks at intersections This project is part of Muni Forward, an ongoing initiative to create a safe, reli- and bus bulb outs for safer able and comfortable experience on and off transit. crossings for people walking and quicker bus boardings. Schedule Stay Connected Construction will occur in two phases. First will be Potrero Hill/ Sign-up to get project updates and alerts: Mission Bay, followed by the Mission neighborhood section.
    [Show full text]
  • Utica Avenue Select Bus Service Workshop Summary | November 13, 2014
    Utica Avenue Select Bus Service Workshop Summary | November 13, 2014 New York City Transit +selectbusservice , Utica Avenue On November 13, 2014, the New York City transit signal priority to improve the quality and Department of Transportation (DOT) and the performance of transit and, in turn, to improve Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) kicked mobility and access in the neighborhoods that off the public outreach process for the Utica it serves. SBS projects are designed to make it Avenue Select Bus Service (SBS) project. The MTA easier, safer, and more comfortable to travel by and DOT hosted a public workshop at PS 167 on bus, through features like bus bulbs, high-quality Eastern Parkway to gather initial feedback from passenger information, and overall attention to community members on plans to upgrade the B46 pedestrian and vehicular safety. limited bus to Select Bus Service. The project aims to improve bus service while maintaining traffic Utica Avenue Select Bus Service flow and curb access and to increase safety for all During the 2009 Bus Rapid Transit Phase II users along the Utica Avenue corridor in Brooklyn. Study, Brooklyn community members identified Utica Avenue as a corridor that could support The workshop brought together community and benefit from a Select Bus Service project. members, bus riders, transit advocates, Sixty-one percent of residents along the corridor representatives from elected offices, community commute to work on public transit. However, the boards, and police precincts to share their route is characterized by slow and crowded bus experiences as transit riders, drivers, and trips. The community ranked the Utica Avenue B46 pedestrians traveling along the Utica Avenue corridor as one of two corridors most in need of corridor.
    [Show full text]
  • Transit Speed and Reliability Guidelines and Strategies
    TRANSIT SPEED & RELIABILITY GUIDELINES & STRATEGIES AUGUST 2021 II KING COUNTY METRO SPEED AND RELIABILITY GUIDELINES AND STRATEGIES AUGUST 2021 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................1 5. CASE STUDIES ............................................................................ 99 2. OVERVIEW OF SPEED AND RELIABILITY ���������������������������������������3 5.1 RENTON, KENT, AUBURN AREA MOBILITY PROJECT ............... 100 2.1 WHAT ARE SPEED AND RELIABILITY? ........................................4 5.1.1 FORMING PARTNERSHIP .........................................................100 2.2 TYPES OF PROJECTS ..................................................................8 5.1.2 TOOLS IMPLEMENTED ............................................................101 2.3 BENEFITS OF SPEED AND RELIABILITY IMPROVEMENTS ...........12 5.1.3 LESSONS LEARNED ................................................................103 2.3.1 MEASURED BENEFITS .............................................................. 12 5.2 98TH AVENUE NE AND FORBES CREEK DRIVE QUEUE JUMP . 104 2.3.2 ACHIEVE REGIONAL AND LOCAL GOALS .................................. 14 5.2.1 FORMING PARTNERSHIP ........................................................104 2.3.3 SCALABLE SOLUTIONS ............................................................. 17 5.2.2 TOOLS IMPLEMENTED ............................................................106 2.3.4 BENEFITS TO OTHER MODES .................................................... 17
    [Show full text]
  • Page. CLAIMS of the PRINCIPLE of RPTATION of TURBINE ONE
    Page. CLAIMS OF THE PRINCIPLE OF RPTATION OF TURBINE ONE. What to claim is: 1. Rotation is obtained of the cross axial and axial bearing mounted turbine rotors, by shielding the returnblades partially or completely and uncovering the pushblades partially or completely. 2. Rotation of horizontal and vertical mounted rotor operable in bearings comprising at least three rotor blades radial and axially projecting its form expending from the hub. Cross-axial rotation of turbine rotors by means of shielding vane, or wind screen shielding the return blades partially or completely and uncovering the pushblades partially or completely for fluid to be channelled cross axially trough the intakes and impact coaxial and horizontally on the transverse projecting turbine rotor blades causing rotation of the prime mover, drivetrain by the converting kinetic energy into mechanical energy and into electric energy by means of a constant transmission turbine gearbox and lubricant system mechanical coupled in rotational mode with the electric generator rotor, comprising a cylindrical permanent or electromagnet coupled electrically to the exciter electrically connected with the disk magnet and axially opposing stator coils or disk or plates or massive electric conductive material disk or cylinder. 3. Rotation of the horizontal and vertical turbine rotor is obtained in clockwise direction and in counterclockwiswise direction. Generating AC current or dc current. Defines the rotor by at least two axial halves exposed axially for cross-axial flow axial flow and/or for perpendicularly flow turbine rotors. A left and right axial halve, or upper and lower axial halve which form the returnblades section and the pushblades intake and exhaust sections.
    [Show full text]
  • Transit Improvements – Faster and More Reliable Service PUBLIC OPEN HOUSES – SPRING 2014
    TRANSIT IMPROVEMENTS – FASTER AND MORE RELIABLE SERVICE PUBLIC OPEN HOUSES – SPRING 2014 LINE 1 & 1R MINIMIZING ROAD USER CONFLICTS, MAXIMIZING SPEED & EFFICIENCY STATION #6 CONSOLIDATION BENEFITS OF THE ROAD DIET, CONSOLIDATION & TREATMENT OPTIONS EXAMPLES OF BUS BULBS AND TRANSIT ISLANDS § Minimize bus-bicycle conflict in roadway: A road diet provides sufficient space for separate bicycle BUS BULB-OUT CONCEPT ILLUSTRATION OPTION lanes or cycle tracks so that buses do not have to share the vehicle travel lane with cyclists. § Minimize bus-bicycle conflict at bus stops: Bus bulbs provide opportunities to physically separate BERKELEY Sacramento St bicycles and buses at bus stops by routing bicycles behind the bulb (creating a “transit island”). Alcatraz Ave College Ave 62nd St Adeline St § Enable more efficient transit service: Bus bulbs provide a more convenient and efficient transit Shattuck Ave 60th St facility for bus operators to access and egress; 59th St Claremont Ave § 58th St Improve transit passenger waiting environment: Bus bulbs provide space for shelters, benches LIFORN CA IA 24 Stanford Ave and signs, while freeing space from existing sidewalks for landscaping, bike parking, seating and other Aileen St 56th St furnishings; 55th St Transfer: AC Transit Transfer: Line 12 Broadway AC Transit § Improve bus speed and reliability: Transit Signal Priority (TSP) combined with bus stop relocation to Line 12 Broadway Ter the far-side of signals, and queue bypass lanes improve service speed and reliability. 49th St 51st St EMERYVILLE 48th St LIFORN CA IA 47th St OAKLAND 123 45th St 46th St San Pablo Ave BERKELEY Sacramento St Transfer: AC Transit 44th St 43rd St Alcatraz Ave Lines 31, 57 Pleasant Valley Ave INCREASE TRANSIT SPEED WHILE IMPROVING THE TRANSIT RIDER EXPERIENCE College Ave 62nd St Adeline St 41st St TRANSIT ISLAND WITH BIKE LANE BEHIND: 40th St Shattuck Ave 60th St West St NORTHBOUND BUS SPEED SOUTHBOUND BUS SPEED SEATTLE, WA 59th St Claremont Ave MLK Jr.
    [Show full text]
  • Bus Stop Location and Transit Amenities Development Guidelines
    BUS STOP LOCATION AND TRANSIT AMENITIES DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES Most Recent Revision: _07/10/16_ Formally Adopted by Valley Regional Transit’s Board of Directors on: _07/10/16_ Disclaimer The purpose of this document is to develop criteria for designing and placing transit facilities and amenities. This information is not to be used as a set of standard details on which to base a final design, but rather as criteria and general guidance for the placement and safe design of transit facilities and amenities. It cannot be overemphasized that these guidelines must be used in conjunction with sound evaluation of the facts and engineering judgment. Valley Regional Transit (VRT) reserves the right to supersede or make exceptions to these guidelines based on individual elements or special context. In the instances of confusion, conflicting information, duplication or overlapping requirements, the user should default to the most conservative standards given out by VRT staff, state and/or local agency requirements, the American Association of State and Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Guide for the Geometric Design of Transit Facilities on Highways and Streets, the AASHTO Guide to the Design of Park and Ride Facilities, the Public Right of Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG) and guidance in this document. These guidelines are intended to be used for actions on new or revised transit stop locations or amenities. Local authorities, in adopting these guidelines, indicate their general acceptance of the information provided. Their acceptance of these guidelines does not modify or supersede their current standards and/or policies otherwise adopted by the authority. Acknowledgements This work was developed by the Valley Regional Transit (VRT) Regional Coordination Council (RCC) Sub‐Committee taskforce.
    [Show full text]
  • Surface Transportation Optimization and Bus Priority Measures the City of Boston Context
    Surface Transportation Optimization and Bus Priority Measures The City of Boston Context March 2013 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS SPECIAL THANKS TO: Rick Dimino Tom Nally Charles Planck David Carney Erik Scheier Greg Strangeways Joshua Robin Angel Harrington David Barker Melissa Dullea Vineet Gupta i | P a g e TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents .......................................................................................................................................................... ii Table of Exhibits............................................................................................................................................................ iii Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................... 1 MBTA Operations and Initiatives ................................................................................................................................... 3 Current MBTA Operational Challenges ...................................................................................................................... 4 Recent MBTA Initiatives............................................................................................................................................. 9 Current MBTA Initiatives ......................................................................................................................................... 10 Bus Priority Best Practices ..........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Characteristics of Bus Rapid Transit for Decision-Making
    Project No: FTA-VA-26-7222-2004.1 Federal United States Transit Department of August 2004 Administration Transportation CharacteristicsCharacteristics ofof BusBus RapidRapid TransitTransit forfor Decision-MakingDecision-Making Office of Research, Demonstration and Innovation NOTICE This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the United States Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this report. Form Approved REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503. 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES August 2004 COVERED BRT Demonstration Initiative Reference Document 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS Characteristics of Bus Rapid Transit for Decision-Making 6. AUTHOR(S) Roderick B. Diaz (editor), Mark Chang, Georges Darido, Mark Chang, Eugene Kim, Donald Schneck, Booz Allen Hamilton Matthew Hardy, James Bunch, Mitretek Systems Michael Baltes, Dennis Hinebaugh, National Bus Rapid Transit Institute Lawrence Wnuk, Fred Silver, Weststart - CALSTART Sam Zimmerman, DMJM + Harris 8.
    [Show full text]
  • Guidelines for Planning, Designing and Operating Transit-Related Street Improvements: Survey of September 1989 Current Practice 6
    l. Re pon :\o. FHWA/TX-90/1225-1 4. Title ano Suorn1e 5. Repon Date Guidelines for Planning, Designing and Operating Transit-Related Street Improvements: Survey of September 1989 Current Practice 6. Penonnmg Orgamzauon Code 7. Authon.sJ 8. Pen·onnmg Organtzauon Rcpon No. Robert W. Stokes, Paul Luedtke &Thomas Urbanik II Research Report 1225-1 9. Pcrionnmg Organiz.auon Name and Address 10. Wont Umt No. Texas Transportation Institute The Texas A&M University System 11. Contract or Grant No. College Station, Texas 77843 Research Study No. 2-18-89-1225 U. Sponwnng Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Repon and Penod Covered . September 1988 Texas State Department of Highways Interim - September 1989 and Public Transportation Transportation Planning Division 14. Sponsonng Agency Code P.0. Box 5051 11 .. .-+.;,., T,.,v:>c- 7P.7h.1 15. Suppiememary Notes Research performed in cooperation with Tex as SDHPT, DOT, and FHWA. Research Study Title: Preparation of a Texas Manual for Planning, Design, and Operation of Streets and Highways with Public Transportation Systems 16. Abstract This report summarizes the results of a national survey of state DOTs and local transit agencies concerning current practice in the planning, design and operation of transit-related street improvements. The summary of current practices is divided into four subsections: 1) Bus service planning guidelines; 2) Bus facility design guidelines; 3) Bus service operating considerations; and 4) Light rail transit (LRT) services. The results of the study indicate that basic practices do not differ substantially between the agencies surveyed, though differences were found in the level of detail contained in the various guidelines.
    [Show full text]
  • Short Range Transit Plan (PDF)
    Short Range Transit Plan FY 2021/22 - 2025/26 Golden Empire Transit District Adopted May 2021 FY 2021/22 - 2025/26 Golden Empire Transit District Board of Directors Cindy Parra Rueben Pascual Chair Vice Chair City of Bakersfield County of Kern Carlos Bello Leasa Engel Erika Dixon Director Director Director City of Bakersfield At-Large County of Kern A five-member Board of Directors governs Golden Empire Transit District. Two members are appointed by the Bakersfield City Council, two members are appointed by the Kern County Board of Supervisors, and one member is appointed at-large by the four other Board members. GET coordinates with City of Bakersfield, the County of Kern, and the Kern Council of Governments. Karen King Chief Executive Officer Short Range Transit Plan FY 20/21 – 24/25 Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................... iv CHAPTER 1 SYSTEM DESCRIPTION ......................................................1 CHAPTER 2 SERVICE & PERFORMANCE STANDARDS ......................... 29 CHAPTER 3 SERVICE ANALYSIS .......................................................... 41 CHAPTER 4 PREVIOUS SERVICE REVISIONS ........................................ 79 CHAPTER 5 RECOMMENDED SERVICE PLAN ...................................... 83 CHAPTER 6 FINANCIAL PLAN ............................................................ 95 CHAPTER 7 GLOSSARY .................................................................... 100 REFERENCE MAPS .......................................................................... 115 GET was formed in July 1973 and is the primary public transportation provider for the Bakersfield Urbanized Area. It is the largest public transit system within a 110 mile radius. The District’s legal boundary includes all of the area within the Bakersfield city limits as well as adjacent unincorporated areas. GET serves 16 routes, operating 7 days a week and transporting more than 6 million passengers each year with its fixed-route buses. In addition, GET operates 21 compressed natural gas GET-A-Lift buses.
    [Show full text]
  • TCQSM Part 8
    Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual—2nd Edition PART 8 GLOSSARY This part of the manual presents definitions for the various transit terms discussed and referenced in the manual. Other important terms related to transit planning and operations are included so that this glossary can serve as a readily accessible and easily updated resource for transit applications beyond the evaluation of transit capacity and quality of service. As a result, this glossary includes local definitions and local terminology, even when these may be inconsistent with formal usage in the manual. Many systems have their own specific, historically derived, terminology: a motorman and guard on one system can be an operator and conductor on another. Modal definitions can be confusing. What is clearly light rail by definition may be termed streetcar, semi-metro, or rapid transit in a specific city. It is recommended that in these cases local usage should prevail. AADT — annual average daily ATP — automatic train protection. AADT—accessibility, transit traffic; see traffic, annual average ATS — automatic train supervision; daily. automatic train stop system. AAR — Association of ATU — Amalgamated Transit Union; see American Railroads; see union, transit. Aorganizations, Association of American Railroads. AVL — automatic vehicle location system. AASHTO — American Association of State AW0, AW1, AW2, AW3 — see car, weight Highway and Transportation Officials; see designations. organizations, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. absolute block — see block, absolute. AAWDT — annual average weekday traffic; absolute permissive block — see block, see traffic, annual average weekday. absolute permissive. ABS — automatic block signal; see control acceleration — increase in velocity per unit system, automatic block signal.
    [Show full text]