Skip to main content

Modeling Modified Intermittent Bus Lane Integrated with Transit Signal Priority Under Mixed Traffic Condition


This study endeavors to develop a new prioritizing scheme for transit vehicles (i.e., bus) without compromising the delay of other traffic by incorporating a modified concept of Intermittent Bus Lane (IBL) with Transit Signal Priority (TSP). Hence, an algorithm was proposed to integrate the scheme with an urban road network having mixed traffic and was simulated in a microsimulation environment. Traffic data of two peak periods, comprising seven (7) hours of traffic flow in each of the three (3) consecutive days, were recorded and extracted using the image processing technique. Moreover, a comparative study was done with commonly practiced priority schemes worldwide for the prevailing traffic conditions in terms of average traffic delay. The results suggested that IBL with TSP outperforms other priority schemes by reducing a minimum of 40-s traffic delay per vehicle than the “Do Nothing” Strategy, in case of lower traffic volume with only 15% of the bus. Besides, a validated “Color Code” was established for the policymakers to choose the best transit priority alternative for the prevailing traffic conditions.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9


  1. Ahmed B (2014) Exploring new bus priority methods at isolated vehicle actuated junctions. Transport Res Proc 4:391–406

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Arasan VT, Vedagiri P (2010) Microsimulation study of the effect of exclusive bus lanes on heterogeneous traffic flow. J Urban Plan Dev 136(1):50–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Barrios E, Ridgway M, Choa F (2001) The best simulation tool for bus operations. In: Improving Transportation Systems Safety and Performance. 2001 Spring Conference and Exhibit Institute of Transportation Engineers

  4. Ben-Dor G, Ben-Elia E, Benenson I (2018) Assessing the Impacts of Dedicated Bus Lanes on Urban Traffic Congestion and Modal Split with an Agent-Based Model. Proc Comput Sci 130(C):824–829

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Boxill SA, Yu L (2000) An evaluation of traffic simulation models for supporting its. Development Centre for Transportation Training and Research, Texas Southern University, Houston

    Google Scholar 

  6. Chiabaut N, Xie X, Leclercq L (2012) Road capacity and travel times with bus lanes and intermittent priority activation: analytical investigations. Transport Res Rec 2315:182–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Choa F, Milam, RT, Stanek D (2004) CORSIM, PARAMICS, and VISSIM: What the manuals never told you. In: Ninth TRB Conference on the Application of Transportation Planning Methods Transportation Research Board Louisiana Transportation Research Center Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development Louisiana Planning Council.

  8. Currie G, Sarvi M, Young B (2007) A new approach to evaluating on-road public transport priority projects: balancing the demand for limited road-space. Transportation 34(4):413–428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Currie G, Lai H (2008) Intermittent and dynamic transit lanes: Melbourne, Australia, experience. Transport Res Rec 2072:49–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Dell’Olio L, Ibeas A, Cecín P (2010) Modelling user perception of bus transit quality. Transp Policy 17(6):388–397

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Dhaka Transport Coordination Authority (2015) The Project on the Revision and Updating of the Strategic Transport Plan for Dhaka (RSTP)

  12. Eichler M (2005) Bus lanes with intermittent priority: assessment and design. Master of City Planning in City and Regional Planning. University of California, Berkeley.

  13. Eichler M, Daganzo CF (2006) Bus lanes with intermittent priority: strategy formulae and an evaluation. Transport Res Part B Methodol 40(9):731–744

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Garrow M, Machemehl R (1999) Development and evaluation of transit signal priority strategies. J Public Transp 2(2):4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Ghariani N, Elkosantini S, Darmoul S, Ben Said L (2014) A survey of simulation platforms for the assessment of public transport control systems. In: International Conference on Advanced Logistics and Transport (ICALT), (pp. 8590). IEEE

  16. Guler SI, Menendez M (2014) Analytical formulation and empirical evaluation of pre-signals for bus priority. Transport Res Part B Methodol 64:41–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Holm P, Tomich D, Sloboden J, Lowrance C (2007) Traffic analysis toolbox volume iv: guidelines for applying corsim microsimulation modeling software (No. FHWA-HOP-07–079)

  18. Hossain S (2015) Developing metanet-based macro traffic model for Dhaka City with Modified Link specific and Global Driver Parameters. Master of Science in Civil Engineering. Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology

  19. Hounsell NB, McLeod FN, Shrestha BP (2004) Bus priority at traffic signals: investigating the options. Road Transport Information and Control, 2004. RTIC2004. In: 12th IEE International Conference, pp 287–294

  20. Hounsell NB, Shrestha BP, Bretherton RD, Bowen T, D'Souza C (2008) Exploring priority strategies at traffic signals for London's iBus. In: European Congress and Exhibition on Intelligent Transport Systems and Services, 7th, 2008, Geneva, Switzerland

  21. Hounsell N, Shrestha B (2012) A new approach for co-operative bus priority at traffic signals. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst 13(1):6–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Jones SL, Sullivan AJ, Cheekoti N, Anderson MD, Malave D (2004) Traffic simulation software comparison study. UTCA report, 2217

  23. Khasnabis S, Rudraraju R (1997) Optimum bus headway for preemption: a simulation approach. Transport Res Rec 1603:128–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Kotusevski G, Hawick KA (2009) A review of traffic simulation software, Technical Report CSTN-095. Auckland, New Zealand

  25. Lyndon H, Todd T (2006) Evaluating new start transit program performance: comparing rail and bus. Victoria Transport Policy Institute

    Google Scholar 

  26. National Association of City Transportation Officials (2016) Transit street design guide. Island Press. Accessed 9 Dec 2021

    Google Scholar 

  27. Nelson JD, Brookes DW, Bell MG (1993) Approaches to the provision of priority for public transport at traffic signals: a European perspective. Traffic Eng Control 34(9)

  28. Qiu F, Li W, Zhang J, Zhang X, Xie Q (2015) Exploring suitable traffic conditions for intermittent bus lanes. J Adv Transp 49(3):309–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Rahman F, Das T, Hadiuzzaman M, Hossain S (2016) Perceived service quality of paratransit in developing countries: A structural equation approach. Transport Res Part A Policy Pract 93:23–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Ratrout NT, Rahman SM (2009) A comparative analysis of currently used microscopic and macroscopic traffic simulation software. Arab J Sci Eng 34(1B):121–133

    Google Scholar 

  31. Saidallah M, El Fergougui A, Elalaoui AE (2016) A comparative study of urban road traffic simulators. In: MATEC Web of Conferences (Vol. 81, p. 05002). EDP Sciences

  32. Smith MW, Nelson JD, Bell MGH, Dickinson KW (1994) Developing the concept of buses as probes: the integration of automatic vehicle locationing and urban traffic control systems. IFAC Proc Vol 27(12):591–596

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Thorrignac G (2008) Lessening bus journey times on congested road infrastructures: micro-modelling methodology. Case study in the region of Liverpool, United Kingdom (No. dumas-00413147)

  34. TRG (2007) Guidelines for Implementing Bus Priority at VA Junctions using iBus system, Version 3.3, July 2007

  35. Viegas J, Lu B (1997) Traffic control system with intermittent bus lanes. IFAC Proc Vol 30(8):865–870

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Viegas J, Lu B (2001) Widening the scope for bus priority with intermittent bus lanes. Transp Plan Technol 24(2):87–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Viegas J, Lu B (2004) The intermittent bus lane signals setting within an area. Transport Res Part C Emerg Technol 12(6):453–469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Viegas JM, Roque R, Lu B, Vieira J (2007) Intermittent bus lane system: Demonstration in Lisbon, Portugal (No. 07–2112)

  39. Wahlstedt J (2011) Impacts of bus priority in coordinated traffic signals. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 16:578–587

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Yang H, Wang W (2009) An innovative dynamic bus lane system and its simulation-based performance investigation. In: Intelligent Vehicles Symposium, 2009 IEEE, pp 105–110.

  41. Zhu HB (2010) Numerical study of urban traffic flow with dedicated bus lane and intermittent bus lane. Phys A 389(16):3134–3139

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references


The authors would like to thank the Committee for Advanced Studies and Research (CASR) and the Department of Civil Engineering of Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology for funding this research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Md. Hadiuzzaman.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mashrur, S.M., Haque, N., Hadiuzzaman, M. et al. Modeling Modified Intermittent Bus Lane Integrated with Transit Signal Priority Under Mixed Traffic Condition. Transp. in Dev. Econ. 8, 17 (2022).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI:


  • Intermittent Bus Lane (IBL)
  • Transit Signal Priority (TSP)
  • “Do Nothing” strategy
  • Color Code