This post will continue the exploration on a possible expansion of real-time data infrastructure in an attempt to improve efficient use of time for passengers (in this case, mainly UC Berkeley students). The background/introduction to this post can be found in Part I.
As I left off, if Next Bus and AC Transit were to place 2 or 3 additional pieces of real-time data hardware, where should they go given limited funds?
To begin my evaluation of the bus stops near UC Berkeley, I had to first create a set of criteria for cross-comparison. After much thought, I came up with the following to judge these locations:
- stop type: knowing if the bus stop is sheltered (like the first image) or un-sheltered (a simple post) can provide many clues about the stop. Bus shelters are much more costly than a simple pole with a route sign. If transit agencies could, I’m sure they would install bus shelters at every stop to provide seating and some protection for their customers from extreme weather. However, due to limited funds, not all bus stops are treated equal. And where would a transit agency most likely place these shelters? Simple: at locations that impact the most customers, namely stops that witness high congestion of rider-to-be. Thus, the fact that a bus stop is sheltered can (but not necessarily) hint the amount of usage at that particular stop relative to a non-sheltered stop. In addition, it is important to consider costs of installing Next Bus hardware. For example, text-based signs currently only exist in shelters and are not seen placed on simple bus stop poles as probably dictated by AC Transit guidelines. Ceteris paribus, AC Transit would most likely be more inclined to place a text-based sign in a shelter as the infrastructure already exists, while a simple bus stop pole would have to be upgraded to a shelter first, incurring additional cost to installation.
- lines: it is important to note the bus routes that use each stop. Besides hinting the popularity of the stop, the number of lines can help determine whether it is better to install a kiosk or text-based sign. As mentioned before, a kiosk is better for a stop serving many lines as it can present all information at once, while a text-based sign, which is much cheaper, rotates its display on arrival times by routes. In addition, the schedules of each line can justify installation. If bus lines at a particular stop terminate early in the evening, real-time data hardware would be unnecessary as no buses would be operating – a waste of money and energy.
- field of view: by this, I do not mean how easily the stop can be seen by pedestrians or the bus driver. Rather, this is in the perspective of the waiting customers towards arriving buses. To illustrate this, let’s say there is a stop (sheltered!) at the bottom of a canyon with a bus line that transports people from the top of the canyon to the bottom and back. Yet because of the steep gradient of the canyon, the bus must traverse a windy road that zigzags along the canyon walls. As a person waiting from the bus stop down below, you can see the bus as it makes its way up or down – a good, strategic field of view. In such a case, it is not necessary to install real-time data hardware, regardless if the bus stop is extremely popular or sheltered, because riders-to-be can see the buses approaching or leaving and can gauge the amount of time for the next arrival. The bus stop at the top of the canyon, however, may require such data signs as it may be hard or dangerous for those waiting to peer over the edge of the cliff and estimate arrival times. While similar cases exist in some locations around the world, they are rare and certainly do not present themselves in Berkeley. Sharp vertical corners like cliffs may not be around campus, but horizontal ones around neighborhood blocks and buildings can limit one’s visibility of arriving buses. In summary, the more difficult it is to see (or move to see) a bus approaching, the lower field of view a waiting customer has, and the higher the need for real-time data displays.
- personal observations: while some transit agencies, such as SFMTA, have passenger data for its lines, I was unable to locate AC Transit’s collection. Since I cannot find such data by the agency or independent organizations, I have to rely on my personal observations of these stops. Fortunately, I have used all but one of these stops, and for each I have visited, I have had multiple instances where I had to wait a lengthy amount of time for the bus to arrive. During these segments of patient waiting, I have had the opportunity to observe the surrounding area and the build-up, if any, of people at the bus stop. Additionally, as a passenger, I can recall which stops usually have many boarding passengers. Unfortunately, I am not at the bus stops all day, everyday, especially in the morning when buses are filled with students getting to their first class. Thus, I must rely on what I know or what my friends have said regarding the usage of each bus stop.
As a refresher, here is the map of the UC Berkeley campus with nearby bus lines and bus stops from Part I:
The black dots represent bus stops around the campus.* They are given numbers for the sake of this post for easy reference. Some have the letters A & B; this simply denotes that they are two “halves,” as one stop serves bus lines westbound, and the other serves routes eastbound. Once again, these are only SOME of the bus lines in the area (but all the major ones that run near the campus).
Click numbers under “Field of View” to see Google Streetview of said bus stop.
Bus Stop | Stop Type | Lines | Field of View
(0-5) |
Observations |
1 | Sheltered | 52, 65, 67 | 3.5 | Not busy; 3-5 people at most |
2 | Unsheltered | 52, 65, F | 2 | Not busy; 3-5 people at most |
3 | Sheltered | 52, 65, F | 3 | Somewhat busy; a small crowds |
4 | Sheltered | 52, F | 2 | Somewhat busy; a small crowds |
5 | Sheltered | 52, F | 2 | Somewhat busy; a small crowds |
6 | Unsheltered | 49B, 52, F | 1 | Not busy; 3 people at most |
7A | Sheltered | 49B, 51B, 52, 604, 605, 851, F | 2.5 | Very busy; large crowds |
7B | Unsheltered | 49A, 51B, 604, 605, 851 | 4 | Somewhat busy; medium crowds |
8A | Both | 1, 1R, 49B, 51B, 52, 604, 605, 851, F | 3.5 | Very busy; very large crowds |
8B | Sheltered | 49A, 51B, 604, 605, 851 | 4 | Very busy; large crowds |
9A | Sheltered | 1, 49B, 51B, 52, 604, 605, 851, F | 4.5 | Somewhat busy; medium crowds |
9B | Sheltered | 1, 1R, 49A, 51B, 604, 605, 851 | 4.5 | Somewhat busy; medium crowds |
10 | Sheltered | 1, 1R, 18, 49A, 49B, 51B, 800, 851, F | 2 | Very busy; extremely large crowds |
11 | Both | 1, 1R, 7, 12 , 18, 25, 51B, 52, 65, 67, 604, 605, 800, 851, F | 1 | Very busy; extremely large crowds |
Stops #10 and #11 are currently served by Next Bus hardware. Kiosks display information on both sides of the intersection, but the one on #10’s side is far away near the main entrance of the BART station. Due to such distance, a text-based sign has been placed in #10’s shelter. The fact that both #10 and #11 have shelters, serve many lines, have low fields of view, are extremely busy, and have Next Bus hardware indicates that these characteristics probably played a key role in the bus stops receiving such installations. Thus, bus stops with similar characteristics to #10 and #11 should be the ones deserving of Next Bus hardware. Looking at the above list, I now present those that I believe “make the cut” (I weighed Lines and Observations more heavily than Stop Type and Field of View):
8A, 8B, 7A (and maybe 4 and 5)
- 8A is the transit hub of the UC Berkeley campus. Adjacent to Sproul Plaza, the student union/store, theater, and school administration building, it serves every major line minus the 49A. So many bus routes travel there that there are 3 bus shelters (red) and two bus poles (purple). Since they are very spread out and there exists many access points, one piece of real-time data hardware will most likely not be helpful. For example, installing a text-based sign or a kiosk near shelter 1 will benefit those using it or heading from that direction but provide little assistance to those at 2, 3, 4, and 5 (or those crossing the sidewalk, entering from the sunken plaza near 2, or coming from beyond 5). Perhaps a combination of both technologies like mentioned before at Stop 10 would work best here. A text-based sign can be installed in shelter 1 and a kiosk can be placed between shelter 2 and 3 (closer to 3) against that tall building. That building, by the way, is scheduled to be demolished quite soon to be replaced by a more earthquake-resistant complex. It would be great if they can utilize this opportunity and place a large monitor inside the future building near those large bottom floor windows that would display arrival times to people waiting outside at the bus stops.
8B has its share of bus routes, but unlike 8A, it only has one shelter. While the field of view is quite high (one can easily peer from the curb and see if a bus is coming down the street far away), it is quite a popular bus stop being 8A’s eastbound counterpart and located near the Telegraph shopping district, enormous student dorms, and many restaurants. A simple text-based sign can easily be installed here. As just mentioned, many stores are around this bus shelter, so knowing that your bus will arrive in 12 & 20 minutes will allow you to calmly spend that extra time picking out the best “Cal” design t-shirt.
7A does not boast as many bus lines as other stops, but its location is quite strategic. UC Berkeley is unfortunately positioned on a sometimes steep hill – I wonder often how people in wheelchairs can reach lectures in certain buildings. This makes it quite difficult for many students who live in the Downtown area or southwest corner of campus (like west of #9B) to travel to their classes in Wurster (urban planning/architecture/environmental design), Boalt (law), Haas (business), or other buildings by foot. Instead, many take the 49A or 51B eastbound to #7B and walk to classes from there. In fact, this commute is also popular for engineering/math/physics/chemistry students even though their classrooms are located in the northeast corner of campus, close to Stops 4 and 5. Since the path from #7A to #4 is along the gradient of the hill, it does not require much energy to walk and can actually be faster than taking a bus around campus as it may require a transfer or a longer wait (the 52 and F buses are less frequent). Of course, when classes are over, these students would like to return home. Thus, many walk to the #7A bus stop to catch whatever bus arrives first as all head Downtown. The problem is that there is a low field of view. While some buses approach the stop by travelling down the hill, the 51B makes a turn into the stop. Even if one walks quite a distance to the T-intersection to look for an approaching bus, College Avenue makes an awkward angle that prohibits a clear view more than a block away. A text-based sign would be great here, not only because of the low field of view or the presence of a cafe across the street, but also because if I knew the closest bus is 7 minutes away, I would probably use that time to walk downhill to Stop 8A and catch the same bus there or another one (like the 1 or 1R), saving me time to my destination. There are not enough routes or crowds to warrant a kiosk, and a text-based sign can sufficiently do the job.
- Stops 4 and 5 are mentioned next mainly for student political reasons more than anything. This is because if the ASUC were to pursue a limited number of real-time data hardware for installation, it would want to place these in areas that would affect the most diverse population possible. As mentioned previously, more of the “left-brain” majors are located near #4 and #5. Placing hardware only on the south side of campus would create an appearance of bias towards “right-brain” majors. Hence, having a text-based sign on the northeastern side would create a sense of fairness. Also, note that these stops prevail over #7B. This is because while #7B has many more bus routes and passenger activity, as described in the section regarding #7A, it has a high field of view and most of that activity is people alighting the bus to get to classes, not waiting to board. This may explain why the stop is unsheltered. Not many use that bus stop to travel southbound; there are other bus stops popular for that.
These recommendations conclude my Next Bus series. It would be great if all bus stops could be upgraded to bus shelters with text-based signs (or kiosks if need be). Unfortunately, such universe is highly unlikely to exist now or in the near future with the currently grim financial situation. Still, that does not mean AC Transit, Next Bus, or the ASUC should not pursue any consideration of expanding the use of information technology in transportation around the UC Berkeley campus. In fact, as this post clearly suggests, they should work together to install at least two or three new signs.
I am quite confident that complaints will be minimal.
Thanks for reading! New topic next post!
——————–
*I realized after my first post that I have missed a bus stop between stops #9 and #10. This stop “9.5 A & B” are located where I drew the pair of yellow arrows to the left of 9 A & B. Both stops of #9.5 are unsheltered and have high field of view. They are not busy, with 3-5 people at most at one time. Any installation of Next Bus hardware here may be redundant as many people arrive here by walking past Stop 8A, and any person waiting can easily see buses pulling in and out from #8A down the street.
Bus stop #6 is somewhat funny. 52 and F buses sometimes stop on one side of the corner, where I placed the black dot on the map, while the 49B stops at the official stop location on the Bancroft side of the corner.