View By Application

Transit Management > Information Dissemination > In-Terminal/Wayside


Transit agencies can disseminate both schedule and system performance information to travelers through a variety of applications, in-vehicle, wayside, or in-terminal dynamic messages signs, as well as the internet or wireless devices. Coordination with regional or multimodal traveler information efforts can also increase the availability of this transit schedule and system performance information.


When implementing congestion pricing, considerations must be made for the impact dynamic tolling will have on travel choice and behavior among a specific region and/or corridor’s travelers.(04/17/2014)

Consider the long-term operations and maintenance responsibilities and costs when selecting project components. (9 May 2008)

Expect non-custom hardware and software to have technology limitations that may affect operational capabilities. (9 May 2008)

Involve all appropriate stakeholders in the planning and development of the project to encourage coordination and collaboration. (9 May 2008)

Understand user and usability issues surrounding the development and deployment of kiosks and Interactive Voice Response (IVR) systems.(4/14/2006)

Minimize technical issues encountered with integrating ITS components by planning for issues and developing solutions prior to project implementation.(4/1/2004)

Recognize the value of other agencies' experiences when planning an ITS project.(4/1/2004)

Recognize potential institutional issues when deploying an ITS system.(4/1/2004)

Provide ITS training for transit systems managers, operators, and maintenance personnel when deploying Advanced Public Transportation Systems.(August 2003)

Develop ways to raise awareness among businesses to promote advanced traveler information sources to their customers.(June 2003)

Thirty percent of commuters would like to see an expansion of the Automated Parking Information System (APIS) that provides heavy-rail commuters with station parking availability information at en-route roadside locations.(December 2010)

Cameras on buses and in facilites improve rider and driver sense of security and reduce insurance claims paid to passengers, while scheduling software saved $1 million in labor costs.(December 16, 2009)

Two thirds of bus tracking website users said they used transit more frequently because of the availability of real-time information.(December 2009)

Implementation of ITS with AVL, real-time passenger information, and electronic fare media in a mid-sized transit system resulted in a minimum 3.9:1 benefit/cost ratio.(July 2009)

Increasing integration between AVL systems, components, and interfaces has improved the ability of transit agencies to collect data on location and schedule adherence; support operational control, service restoration, and planning activities.(2008)

Transit operators and dispatchers for the South Lake Tahoe Coordinated Transit System (CTS) are generally satisfied with the new system deployed and feel that it can provide good capabilities for future service expansion.(4/14/2006)

A survey of visitors to the Acadia National Park in Maine found that more than 80 percent who experienced on-board next-stop announcements and real-time bus departure signs agreed these technologies made it easier to get around.(June 2003)

Simulation of a transit signal priority system in Helsinki, Finland indicated that fuel consumption decreased by 3.6 percent, Nitrogen oxides were reduced by 4.9 percent, Carbon monoxide decreased by 1.8 percent, hydrocarbons declined by 1.2 percent, and particulate matter decreased by 1.0 percent.(13-17 January 2002.)

In Helsinki, Finland a transit signal priority system improved on-time arrival by 22 to 58 percent and real-time passenger information displays were regarded as useful by 66 to 95 percent of passengers.(13-17 January 2002.)

A transit signal priority system in Helsinki, Finland reduced delay by 44 to 48 percent, decreased travel time by 1 to 11 percent, and reduced travel time by 35,800 to 67,500 passenger-hours per year. (13-17 January 2002.)

Users of the Advanced Traveler Information System in Seattle, Washington were satisfied with the information on freeway and transit conditions provided via Web sites and a Traffic TV service.(30 May 2000)

Deployment of an Advanced Public Transit System (APTS) for a mid-size transit system costs $150,000.(July 2009)

Driver assist and automation systems can substantially increase the cost of a new bus.(2007)

The Portland TriMet Transit Tracker real-time traveler information system cost approximately $1.075 million to design and implement.(August 2006)

In Michigan, the Flint Mass Transportation Authority budgeted $1 million to develop a central system for county-wide AVL.(June 2005)

ITS deployment set to improve safety, efficiency, air quality, and traveler information to cost $11,250,000 across Colorado.(12/29/2004)

The ITS components for the Bus Rapid Transit system in the Greater Vancouver area of British Columbia, Canada costs $5.8 million (Canadian).(August 2003)

Client Referral, Ridership, and Financial Tracking (CRRAFT), a New Mexico Web-based system that provides coordination between funding agencies and their subgrantees cost about $1 million to implement. CRRAFT is one of five transit agency highlighted in a rural transit ITS best practices case study.(March 2003)

Based on information from 18 agencies worldwide, the costs of real-time bus arrival information systems vary depending on AVL technology, fleet size, and provisioning of real-time information. (2003)

Software development was the key cost driver for the bus arrival and departure information system deployed as part of the Seattle Metropolitan Model Deployment Initiative.(30 May 2000)