DOCSLIB.ORG

Meeting Notes PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Meeting Notes PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY Meeting Notes PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE (PTAC) TUESDAY, APRIL 4, 2017 @ 7:00 PM BROOKLINE TOWN HALL, ROOM 408 333 WASHINGTON STREET, BROOKLINE MA 02446 7:00 CALL MEETING TO ORDER AND APPROVE MINUTES FROM MARCH 7, 2017 MEETING. CONGRATULATE NEW MEMBER DAVID SALTMAN AND WELCOME CANDIDATE JONATHAN ZELIG. PTAC members present: Abby Swaine, Linda Jason, Jane Gould, David Saltman PTAC liaison to Transportation Board present: Scott Englander PTAC candidate present: Jonathan Zelig March 7 minutes approved unanimously. 7:05 TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA. No guests present. 7:15 BROOKLINE HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT TRANSIT: FEEDBACK FROM MARCH 16 TRANSPORTATION BOARD MEETING AND NEXT STEPS. Abby recounted main points from summary presented to the Transportation Board (appended). The TB directed PTAC to approach the School Dept and School Committee to consider providing school bus service to BHS students, after school as well as potentially before school. (Currently no town school bus service is provided to BHS students after school, but some service is provided in the morning, appended to elementary school busing.) The TB feels it is reasonable to expect that the Town should pay, in moderation, for school bus transportation for BHS students not well-served by MBTA transit. The TB recommends that PTAC seek support from Town Meeting Members whose constituents may benefit, and from School Committee candidates. Now is an appropriate time to broach the issue, as the Town anticipates and plans for large increases in school enrolment, which will result in more traffic congestion at BHS and other schools. Students residing in parts of Brookline other than South Brookline may also face lengthy commutes to BHS. Some Baldwin (9th elementary) school students may need busing. Abby passed along member Deborah Dong’s observation that for BHS students taking the Green Line to Reservoir after school, and then the 51 bus to South Brookline, the Route 51 buses often arrive late at Reservoir (but perhaps not so late to be officially considered late by the MBTA—more than 15 minutes). Therefore, the entire trip takes longer and is more frustrating than the MBTA represents, or perhaps than the Town realizes (and would consider acceptable transport for BHS students). Deborah spoke to a Baker School employee who often takes the 51 bus from Beverly Rd to Reservoir Station around the 3:00- 3:30 timeframe, and she said that that particular bus was so inconsistent that Baker staff have stopped relying on it. Linda will ask the Tab to include school busing as an interview question for School Committee candidates. Abby will ask the School Committee, School Dept, and BHS administration for a meeting to plan next steps, including a needs assessment. PTAC intends to clarify how many BHS students utilize town-provided morning school bus transportation, and how many more might use it if students could make it to BHS in time for Z block. We noted that parents may find it more convenient to drop off students in the morning on their way to work than to pick them up in the middle of the afternoon. PTAC also intends to find out how much the School Dept currently pays for student transportation within Brookline, in order to estimate the cost of additional service (which will have to be approved as part of the Town budget). Additional service could be provided on a pilot basis. 7:35 ALLSTON I-90 INTERCHANGE PROJECT PRESENTATION BY MASSDOT AT MARCH 20 TRANSPORTATION BOARD MEETING: HIGHLIGHTS AND NEXT STEPS. Abby related high points of MassDOT’s presentation at the March 20 hearing, and responses from the Board, staff and audience (agenda: http://www.brooklinema.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/_03202017-4713). The entire project, including West Station, will proceed to permitting. Funding needs to be appropriated and is uncertain, so the project may be built in stages. The Draft Environmental Impact Report will model West Station, but according to MassDOT the case for building it will need to be made once the project area shows demand. This is in part due to a new station on the same Commuter Rail route, just ½ mile away, coming on line soon (the “New Balance” station). Whether or not the station gets built, pedestrian and bicycle access through the area from points South and North will be secured. MassDOT’s vision is to build the pedestrian and bike ramps from points South first, on bridge structures that might later accommodate bus access if/when West Station is built. On the subject of whether bus-only road access (as opposed to all vehicle access) could be provided from points South (including Brookline) to West Station and beyond (potentially north as far as Harvard Square), MassDOT said that restricting access into perpetuity could fail (and has in other cases). There is no way of building roadway access in such a way as to preclude future use by vehicles other than buses. MassDOT must present the all-vehicle-access scenario as part of environmental scoping/review, but is wary of the potential sizeable impacts on Babcock and (to a lesser extent) Pleasant streets. In any case, the envisioned I-90 off-ramp accounts for 50% of projected traffic impacts to those streets. In the Draft Environmental Impact Report, MassDOT will provide estimates of total traffic impact. To date, MassDOT has heard from few proponents of all-vehicle access; there is no “bloc” of allied interests, but some Allston residents are interested in allowing such access to points South as a way of potentially lessening traffic in/near the project area. The MBTA will not speculate on the benefits of providing new or modified bus service to/through the project area until it is built and demand can be assessed. MassDOT stated that they took seriously the input received at the February 29, 2016 Brookline hearing on the project regarding the desire for bus transit access. The City of Boston has expressed interest in Bus Rapid Transit between Longwood and Harvard Square, via the Allston project location. Boston University has also come out in favor of bus-only access. MassDOT will model the transit-only scenario, in addition to the all-vehicle scenario. MassDOT raised the question of whether neighborhoods that might see new bus transit will accept it. Crowningshield neighborhood residents were vocal at the meeting in opposition to increased traffic. The DEIR should be out for public comment by the end of September, 2017; MassDOT will walk the Transportation Board through it. At that point the Town will have an opportunity to formally comment. 7:55 MASSDOT PROPOSAL TO ELIMINATE ROUTE 60 OUTBOUND STOP OPPOSITE 850 BOYLSTON ST: DISCUSSION AND ACTION ON RECOMMENDATION TO TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT. PTAC continued discussion of this item; see March 7 2017 minutes for first discussion. David reported that he has repeatedly sought feedback from managers of the Brigham & Women’s Hospital medical office building at 850 Boylston. A Patient Relations rep said that a large number of staff and patients arrive via automobile. There is also a shuttle service that connects 850 Boylston to the main Brigham and Women's Hospital site, satellite parking, and the Green Line. Those who ride the outbound 60 seem to board at the Reservoir Rd stop, instead of trekking to 850 Boylston. David will make a few more attempts to verify that there is no utilization of this stop by businesses across Route 9. Adjacent to the stop there are no trip-generating land uses. Given the poor condition, desolate location, and hazardous access to the stop in question, its extremely low utilization, proximity to alternative Route 60 and Green Line stops, and the poor prospect of increased usage were it to be improved, Abby will communicate to Todd Kirrane on behalf of PTAC that the Town should acquiesce to MassDOT’s proposal to eliminate it, barring any findings by MassDOT’s survey of riders to the contrary. 8:10 BUS STOP CENSUS: REVIEW PROGRESS AND MAKE PLANS FOR FINALIZING. Abby passed along Deborah Dong’s comment that assessing stops on Route 51 was impossible due to unshoveled snow rendering sections of sidewalk impassable. This is consistent with other PTAC members’ observations of stops on other routes this winter. After the record snows of February 2015, Brookline DPW agreed to give clearing snow from bus stops the same attention as Town parking spaces, but in reality access from the sidewalk to the curb at bus stops is often obstructed by snow/ice banks. Linda Jason and Jane Gould presented their findings on Route 66 bus stops. Conditions were generally good, although shelters were few. Once all census results are in and polished, PTAC will present them to the Transportation Department and Board, the Planning and Community Development Department, and the MBTA, in the interest of leveraging improvements. 8:30 UPCOMING GATEWAY EAST PUBLIC HEARING ON 25% DESIGN: PREPARE BY REVIEWING PRIOR PTAC RECOMMENDATIONS AND CHANGES SINCE THEN. Abby characterized PTAC’s recommendations for bus stop placement and amenities from the last time this project progressed to 25% design, several years ago. Since then, project design changes, including those occasioned by adding a cycle track, may have rendered some PTAC recommendations inapplicable. Abby will circulate to PTAC members those prior recommendations and information on the upcoming meeting. [DONE.] Jane, and tentatively Jonathan and Linda as well, will attend the hearing on April 26 to listen on behalf of PTAC. 8:50 WRAP UP AND ADJOURN. Abby relayed news from the March 16 Transportation Board meeting, provided by Todd Kirrane, that an MBTA-financed test of Transit Signal Prioritization on the C Line at Carleton St had been completed, and that the Town is studying the feasibility and cost of full deployment, which may require traffic signal hardware upgrades.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • City of Hamilton Truck Route Master Plan Study
    City of Hamilton CITY OF HAMILTON TRUCK ROUTE MASTER PLAN STUDY FINAL REPORT APRIL 2010 IBI G ROU P FINAL REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS DOCUMENT CONTROL Client: City of Hamilton Project Name: City of Hamilton Truck Route Master Plan Study Report Title: City of Hamilton Truck Route Master Plan Study IBI Reference: 20492 Version: V 1.0 - Final Digital Master: J:\20492_Truck_Route\10.0 Reports\TTR_Truck_Route_Master_Plan_Study_FINAL_2010-04-23.docx\2010-04-23\J Originator: Ron Stewart, Matt Colwill, Ted Gill, Scott Fraser Reviewer: Ron Stewart Authorization: Ron Stewart Circulation List: History: V0.1 - Draft April 2010 IBI G ROU P FINAL REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Purpose of the Truck Route Master Plan ............................................................................................ 1 1.2 Background ........................................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Master Plan Scope ................................................................................................................................ 2 1.4 Master Plan Goals and Objectives ....................................................................................................... 3 1.5 Consultation and Communication ....................................................................................................... 4 1.6 Implementation and Interpretation
    [Show full text]
  • Texas Reference Marker (TRM) System User’S Manual
    Texas Reference Marker (TRM) System User’s Manual Revised January 2005 © 2005 by Texas Department of Transportation (512) 302-2453 all rights reserved Manual Notice 2005-1 From: James L. Randall, P.E. Manual: Texas Reference Marker System User’s Manual Effective Date: January 01, 2005 Contents The manual provides Texas Reference Marker (trm) System Highway Data File users with the nec- essary information to input data to, or extract data from TRM. This manual is contained in the Planning, Programming, Environmental collection of the TxDOT Online Manual System. Changes Chapters 1 and 2 - Changed references from Design Division to Construction Division. Chapter 3 - Changed references from Design Division to Construction Division and added infor- mation about the new User Information screen and the Board. Chapter 4 - Added subsection for TRM Export instructions. Chapter 6 - Updated TPP Highway Values to include all District Highway Status Values. Chapter 7 - Updated instruction tables to reflect changes for inputting Reference updates. Chapter 8 - Clarified constraints. Chapter 10 - Updated of Travel responsibilities and Highway Values; Left/Right is now Shoulder Inside/Outside; Changed references from Design Division to Construction Division. Chapter 12 - Updated Design and Route values. Chapter 14 - Clarified references to the TPP website and updated graphics to reflect the look of the current. Contact Refer questions or suggestions to the Special Projects and Audit Branch of the Administration Sec- tion of the Transportation Planning and Programming Division. Archives Past manual notices are available in a PDF archive. Table of Contents Chapter 1 — Texas Reference Marker System Section 1 — Introduction to TRM . 1-2 What is TRM? .
    [Show full text]
  • Vtrans Road Centerline Spatial Data User Guide December 2019
    VTrans Road Centerline Spatial Data User Guide December 2019 Mapping Section Policy, Planning and Intermodal Development Division 219 North Main Street, Barre, VT 05641 Tel: 802‐828‐2600 https://vtrans.vermont.gov/planning/maps Read the metadata. V:\Projects\Shared\Mapping\_MappingSection_DataDictionary\RDSMALL_UserGuide\VTrans_Road_Centerline_User_Guide_20191231.docx VTRANS ROAD CENTERLINE SPATIAL DATA USER GUIDE TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 4 User Guide Background ............................................................................................................................ 4 Background of the Road Centerline Data Set ........................................................................................... 4 Release Notes – 2019‐12‐31 ..................................................................................................................... 5 Terminology .............................................................................................................................................. 5 DATA DESIGN AND MODEL ........................................................................................................................... 6 Model Features ......................................................................................................................................... 6 Units and Coordinate System ..................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation Department Policy
    TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT POLICY Contents POLICY STATEMENT ...................................................................................................................................................... 4 JOB DESCRIPTIONS ....................................................................................................................................................... 5 BUS DRIVER ................................................................................................................................... 5 GENERAL SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................. 5 MAJOR JOB DUTIES ................................................................................................................................... 5 GENERAL INFORMATION .............................................................................................................................................. 5 TWO‐WAY RADIO PROCEDURE ................................................................................................................. 5 AM/FM RADIO OPERATION ....................................................................................................................... 6 DEALING WITH THE NEWS MEDIA ............................................................................................................. 6 STUDENT INJURY ......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Preferential Facilities for Carpools and Buses
    'w~ - ?J.. · '1'/- ooS' Preferential Facilities for Carpools and Buses Seven Reports ( I ' a Portland Los Angeles 4:b-~ HE '.'.'it.'.>)() .C3 F' 73 S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION deral Highway Administration (HHP-26) 1shington D.C., 20590 May 1976 PREFACE These seven reports on preferential facilities for carpools and buses have been assembled and reprinted by the Federal Highway Administration. The reports provide information on several recent projects to increase the person-moving capacity of the highway system by designating facilities for preferential use by high-occupancy vehicles. The reduced traveltime and more favorable travel conditions on priority facilities provide an effective incentive to entice commuters into these more efficient modes. The reports presented here cover many different types of priority treatment. Some of the reports analyze and evaluate the effectiveness of particular projects. Other reports emphasize the project design and operational features; others simply describe the current operation of unique or unusual projects. Further information on the planning, design, implementation, and evaluation of priority projects for carpools and buses is available from the Federal Highway Administration. More detailed information on the specific projects described here is available in many cases from the responsible operating agencies. In general, any transportation corridor with recurrent traffic congestion could be a candidate for a priority treatment project regardless of metropolitan area size. Priority vehicles can often utilize marginal increments of highway capacity made available by operational changes or minor construction. The projects described in these reports demonstrate considerable ingenuity in designating preferential facilities through operational changes or incremental construction within existing rights- of-way.
    [Show full text]
  • A Framework for Traffic Assignment with Explicit Route Generation
    Institut für Straßen- und Verkehrswesen Lehrstuhl für Verkehrsplanung und Verkehrsleittechnik Univ.-Prof. Dr.-Ing. M. Friedrich A Framework for Traffic Assignment with Explicit Route Generation Yaohua Xiong Veröffentlichungen aus dem ISSN 0932 - 402X Institut für Straßen- und Verkehrswesen ISBN 978 - 3 - 9816754 - 2 - 9 D 93 (Dissertation der Universität Stuttgart) Heft 52 (September 2014) 52 Veröffentlichungen aus dem Institut für Straßen- und Verkehrswesen Universität Stuttgart Institut für Straßen- und Verkehrswesen Lehrstuhl für Verkehrsplanung und Verkehrsleitttechnik Univ.-Prof. Dr.-Ing. M. Friedrich A Framework for Traffic Assignmeent with Explicit Route Geeneration Yaohua Xiong Veröffentlichungen aus dem Institut für Straßen- und Verkehrswesen Heft 52 (September 2014) Herausgeber : Institut für Straßen- und Verkehrswesen Universität Stuttgart Copyright : Das Copyright liegt beim Verfasser. Eigenverlag und Vertrieb : Institut für Straßen- und Verkehrswesen Universität Stuttgart Lehrstuhl für Verkehrsplanung und Verkehrsleittechnik Pfaffenwaldring 7 70569 Stuttgart Hinweis / Note: Diese Veröffentlichung ist auch als "Elektronische Dissertation" online unter http://elib.uni-stuttgart.de verfügbar und kann dort im PDF-Format heruntergeladen werden. This paper is also published online as "Electronic Dissertation" at http://elib.uni-stuttgart.de and can be downloaded there as PDF file. A Framework for Traffic Assignment with Explicit Route Generation Von der Fakultät Bau- und Umweltingenieurwissenschaften der Universität Stuttgart zur
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Cycle Signs and Markings
    Review of Cycle Signs and Markings Report prepared for New Zealand Transport Agency ViaStrada Ltd December 2011 Review of Cycle Signs and Markings i This document has been prepared for the benefit of the New Zealand Transport Agency. No liability is accepted by ViaStrada Ltd, or any of its employees or sub-consultants with respect to its use by any other party. Quality Assurance Statement Project Manager: Axel Wilke ViaStrada Ltd 10 Bishop St PO Box 22 458 Prepared by: Christchurch New Zealand Axel Wilke Jon Ashford Phone: (03) 366-7605 John Lieswyn Fax: (03) 366-7603 www.viastrada.co.nz Reviewed by: Andrew Macbeth Project Number: Project Number: 729 Project Name: Project Title: Review of Cycle Signs and Markings Document Version Date Final Report, revision 1 1 Dec 2011 Final Report 7 Oct 2011 Second Draft 29 Sep 2011 First Draft 6 Sep 2011 Review of Cycle Signs and Markings ii Summary The Road User Rule (2004) and the supporting Traffic Control Devices (TCD) Rule (2004) gave cycle lanes a legal status through the application of cycle lane symbols. Some road controlling authorities (RCAs) and transportation practitioners are using or proposing to use cycle symbols for reasons other than defining legal cycle lanes. A traffic engineering tool used overseas is an advisory pavement marking treatment indicating or advising road users of the potential presence of cyclists and of the location where cyclists may be expected to ride on a road. Under New ZeDODQG¶VSUHVHQWUXOHV this tool cannot be used. In addition to this, many RCAs are devising non-standard signs and markings for cycling, in some cases to address similar issues.
    [Show full text]
  • WIKADUKE Trail Land Use and Access Management Study January 2004
    WIKADUKE Trail Land Use and Access Management Study January 2004 Prepared by: Teska Associates, Inc. Evanston, Illinois www.TeskaAssociates.com This project was funded through a grant from the Illinois Department of Transportation with local contributions from the Village of Plainfield, Kendall County, the City of Joliet, and the Villages of Minooka and Oswego. Acknowledgements Advisory Committee City of Aurora Bill Wiet, Director of Community Development City of Joliet Jim Haller, Dir. of Community and Economic Development Janeen Vitali, Planner Will County Colin Duesing, Planner Kendall County Jerry Dudgeon, Director of Planning, Building and Zoning Jeff Wilkins, County Administrator John Church, County Board Chairman Anne Vickery, Planning, Building & Zoning Committee Chair John Purcell, Highway Committee Chair Fran Klaas, County Engineer Moser Enterprises Wendy Yaksich, Manager of Entitlement Na-Au-Say Township Suzanne Schlapp, Supervisor Bonnie Henne, Planning Commission Chair Kendall County Soil & Water Jen Wiesbrook, Resource Conservationist Conservation District Natural Resource Conservation Ryan Armstrong Service Oswego School District #308 Joel Murphy Oswego Township James Detzler, Supervisor Oswegoland Park District Bert Gray, Executive Director Grant Casleton, Dir. Of Planning and Development Plainfield School District #202 Jim Ferguson, Director of Transportation Plainfield Park District Gregg Bott, Executive Director Jerry Culp, Superintendent of Planning Village of Plainfield Jim Sobkoviak, Plan Commission Chairman Allen Persons, Director of Public Works Michael Garrigan, Village Planner Stephanie Houk Sheetz, Planner Seward Township Jene Homerding, Supervisor Village of Minooka Richard Ellis, President Jim Grabowski, Village Administrator Village of Oswego Pam Hirth, Community Development Director Village of Shorewood Kurt Carroll, Village Administrator Nancy Roman, Economic Development Coordinator Consultants Teska Associates, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • WEST VIRGINIA HIGHWAYS Classification Systems, Characteristics and Usage
    WEST VIRGINIA HIGHWAYS Classification Systems, Characteristics and Usage Highway classifications are the result of the assignment of individual roads and streets into similar groups according to the character of service each is intended to provide. Highways may be classified into these groups using a variety of systems to serve a number of purposes. West Virginia’s highways are classified according to ownership (the jurisdictional system); according to the nature of the trips they serve (the National Highway Functional Classification System and the West Virginia Legal Functional Classification System); according to eligibility for matching assistance from the federal government (the federal-aid system); and according to the types of roadway sign shields used to guide motorists (the sign system). Since these classifications exist concurrently and are widely misunderstood, each of these classification systems is further described in this section. Additionally, mileage tables for both the Interstate and Appalachian Development Highway Systems have been included separately. It should be noted that these classification systems are not mutually exclusive and that mileage may vary among the systems. Throughout this chapter, an urban area will denote an area with 5,000 or more persons that encompasses, at a minimum, the land area delineated by the US Bureau of the Census, which establishes urban areas based on the density of the population. The Jurisdictional System Except for minor amounts of federal highway mileage under the jurisdiction of the US Forest Service and the National Park Service, practically all of the public roads and streets in West Virginia are under the jurisdiction of State and local governments; however, an undetermined number of miles of public roadway exists that is not under the jurisdiction of any specific governing body.
    [Show full text]
  • Major Roadways Plan
    Major Roadways Plan 2005 City of Yuma April 20, 2005 R2005-41 As amended by R2007 -008, adopted February 7, 2007 and R2007-71, adopted November 20, 2007 2005 Major Roadways Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page Table of Contents................................................................................................................. i List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... iii List of Figures.................................................................................................................... iii 1 Guiding Policy.....................................................................................................................1 2 Roadway Functional Classification Plan.............................................................................3 Roadway Characteristics and Features to be Provided..................................................4 Interstates and Freeways..........................................................................................4 Expressways.............................................................................................................4 Principal Arterials ....................................................................................................6 Minor Arterials.........................................................................................................7 Collectors .................................................................................................................9
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 10. Transportation Element
    Horizon 2040 Transportation Element CHAPTER 10. TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT 10.1 INTRODUCTION People and goods are connected to one another via a community’s transportation system. These transportation systems consist of facilities that accommodate many modes of transport including cars, trucks, buses, bicycles, pedestrians, railcars, and airplanes. The ability to move goods and people is essential for a healthy community. The Transportation Element describes how Yakima County’s transportation system provides for this movement now and how the system will provide for this movement in the future. The primary focus of Yakima County's transportation system is the County- owned facilities that serve motorized vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians. Yakima County’s population and employment will increase significantly over the next 20 years. This anticipated growth will result in an increase in traffic traveling to, from, through, and within the County. Transportation strategies must be developed to maintain acceptable levels of service for the County’s transportation system as this growth occurs. The Transportation Element identifies existing transportation system characteristics, establishes Level of Service ratings, identifies existing and future deficiencies, develops improvement projects and strategies to mitigate deficiencies, and analyzes projected revenues to ensure that necessary improvements will be constructed concurrent with demand. 10.2 Purpose of the Element The Transportation Element of Plan 2015 Horizon 2040 serves as Yakima County's action plan to provide the transportation strategies necessary to accommodate future growth. The element describes the existing condition of the transportation network, and sets forth policies and objectives, which integrate function of the network with the Land Use Map of the Comprehensive Plan.combines technical and financial analyses for the County’s transportation system through a methodology that meets the requirements of the GMA.
    [Show full text]
  • Green Open Vehicle Routing (Govr) with a Special Truck Lane to Reduce Congestion
    Pak. J. Statist. 2020 Vol. 36(1), 1-12 GREEN OPEN VEHICLE ROUTING (GOVR) WITH A SPECIAL TRUCK LANE TO REDUCE CONGESTION Almira Amir§, Herman Mamengkang, Saib Suwilo and Tulus Universitas Sumatera Utara of Indonesia. Corresponding author email: §[email protected] ABSTRACT Effectively of transportation services plays an important role in modern industry. This study was carried out to know the transportation services that request a number of challenges of the customers; it takes from a depot center with the aim of minimizing the distance to get optimal delivery. The method or model chosen to estimate travel time on the specific route set for trucks is the Greenshield model (Banks, 2002). The Green Open Vehicle Routing Problem model was adapted a linear relationship between the estimated speed on the road section vi, vehicle per meter ki on the road route i, traffic jam kj, the speed for the chosen truck route sa. The data analysis showed that at the stage of optimization of the current, departures were determined from the ant system where most ants used a route that attracted ants with their pheromone deposits. Pheromone deposits were on the number of solutions of all ants. It concluded that a model of Green Open Vehicle Routing Problem (GOVR) to keep the sustainable transportation is more effective. It could be a special route for truck vehicles to avoid traffic congestion so that less air pollution from vehicles emits CO2 per vehicle-mile. KEYWORDS Optimal delivery; congestion; transportation; green vehicle route. 1. INTRODUCTION Transportation services now have been facing the effective handling system to meet the costumers’ demand.
    [Show full text]