Skip to main content

Survey exposes prioritisation tech frustrations

90% of municipal and transit agencies believe they own their transit data, not the provider
By Ben Spencer January 20, 2022 Read time: 2 mins
71% say their provider does not allow for the integration of transit vehicle data with other systems (© BiancoBlue | Dreamstime.com)

A Lyt study has revealed nine out of 10 city and transit agencies running transit prioritisation technologies are frustrated by providers’ lack of cross-sharing of data.

This is just one issue indicated in a survey of more than 3,000 industry officials, including local municipal officers and transit network decision makers.

Lyt carried out the study to better understand how the respondents are leveraging transit prioritisation technology - such as bus queue jumps, transit signal priority and bus rapid transit lanes - and the opportunity for sharing critical data for systems improvements. 

The idea behind such schemes is to reduce traffic congestion or to speed up transit vehicle travel times

But results show that 71% of respondents say their current electronic data provider does not allow for the integration of transit vehicle data with other systems. 

Lyt says it is possible that this is taking place because six out of 10 say their current automatic vehicle location or other electronic data provider rely on hardware that is proprietary to their company and not available from other manufacturers.

The company describes this as problematic, especially since 90% of respondents and community officials believe they own their transit vehicle data, not the provider.

Many communities that have yet to implement transit prioritisation technologies say they are considering, but 27% are looking for the right technology provider. A quarter wants to make sure it is budgeted correctly while 15% are seeking private partners to help finance.

Lyt founder Timothy Menard says: “Finding the right partner who can implement the right transit prioritisation system is paramount to the success of every community’s transportation network. The identification of a partner who has a successful track record for technology implementation and success using sharing of data is even more important than finding budget in many cases.”
 

For more information on companies in this article

Related Content

  • Hartford’s tailors winter maintenance on Esri’s GIS platform
    August 5, 2016
    The in-house winter maintenance and vehicle tracking system built by the Public Works Department in Hartford, Connecticut, coped with record snowfalls and cut costs too. When it comes to dealing with the effects of mother nature, transport agencies can find themselves in a lose-lose situation: criticised if the roads or rail lines are disrupted by snow, ice or floods for more than a few hours and lambasted for wasting money if the equipment and stockpiles put in place for a hard winter remain unused.
  • Covid-19 risks creating US ‘transit death spiral’
    July 24, 2020
    Ridership is way down and the government is urged to find more money to help
  • Smarter transport remains key to smart cities
    January 9, 2018
    Colin Sowman looks at some of the challenges and solutions that will provide enhanced transport efficiency in tomorrow’s smarter cities. However you define a ‘smart city’, one of the key ingredients will be an efficient transport system. As most governments and city authorities face financial constraints, incremental improvements in the existing systems is the most likely way forward. In London, new trains and signalling are improving the capacity of the Underground but that then reveals previously
  • Active travel can't solve 'transport poverty', says Sustrans report
    September 26, 2024
    Millions who could benefit from cycling's health and economic effects are locked out