3.3-1 ITS - Case Study Gothenburg Baltic Sea Region Project #26

Output 3.3-1

ITS - Case Study Gothenburg Baltic Sea Region Project #026 “Scandinavian-Adriatic Corridor for Growth and Innovation”

Work Package

3 Quality of Transport Infrastructures

Action

3.3 Optimised heavy goods vehicle traffic

Responsible Partner

City of Gothenburg, Public Transport Authority – Lennart Persson

Author

Thomas Lundgren - Questate AB

Version

1

Version 1 Final Draft, 12-03-07 » 1 | 15

Date

07.03.2012

Status

Final Draft

3.3-1 ITS - Case Study Gothenburg Baltic Sea Region Project #26

Document Approval Chronology Document

Revision / Approval

Version

Date

Status

Date

1

07.03.2010

Final Draft

##.##.2010

Version 1 Final Draft, 12-03-07 » 2 | 15

Status

3.3-1 ITS - Case Study Gothenburg Baltic Sea Region Project #26

Index 1 1.1 1.2 1.2.1 1.2.2 1.2.3 1.3 1.3.1 1.4 1.4.1 1.4.2 1.4.3 1.4.4 2 2.1 2.1.1 2.1.2 2.1.3 2.1.4 2.1.5 2.1.6 2.1.7 2.1.8 2.1.9 2.1.10 2.1.11 2.2 2.2.1 2.2.2 3 3.1 3.1.1 3.1.2 3.1.3 3.2 3.2.1 3.2.2 3.2.3 4 5 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 6

Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 4 Delimitations ...................................................................................................................... 4 Background, aim and objectives ........................................................................................ 4 Background........................................................................................................................ 4 Aim .................................................................................................................................... 4 Objectives .......................................................................................................................... 5 Current situation ................................................................................................................ 5 Current projects ................................................................................................................. 6 Stakeholders ...................................................................................................................... 7 Swedish Transport Administration ..................................................................................... 7 Parkeringsbolaget .............................................................................................................. 7 Traffic and Public Transport Authority ................................................................................ 7 Stakeholders' views ........................................................................................................... 7 Other systems.................................................................................................................... 9 Existing systems ................................................................................................................ 9 P-Event .............................................................................................................................. 9 P-In .................................................................................................................................... 9 Traffic count ....................................................................................................................... 9 Travelling time ................................................................................................................... 9 Web cameras / Surface video ............................................................................................ 9 SPOT ................................................................................................................................. 9 Traffic lights ....................................................................................................................... 9 VMS ................................................................................................................................. 10 MCS Åbro ........................................................................................................................ 10 Göta Tunnel ..................................................................................................................... 10 KomFram ......................................................................................................................... 10 Planned systems ............................................................................................................. 10 MCS Gårda ...................................................................................................................... 10 Congestion charge system .............................................................................................. 10 Conceivable solutions ...................................................................................................... 11 Geographical scope ......................................................................................................... 11 Level 1 – Microzones ....................................................................................................... 11 Level 2 - Event area ......................................................................................................... 11 Level 3 – City centre ........................................................................................................ 11 Functional scope.............................................................................................................. 12 Level 1 – Static signs ....................................................................................................... 12 Level 2 – Electronic signs ................................................................................................ 12 Level 3 – Total integration solution .................................................................................. 12 Costs ............................................................................................................................... 13 Next stage … ................................................................................................................... 14 Enquiries .......................................................................................................................... 14 Analyses .......................................................................................................................... 14 Timetable ......................................................................................................................... 14 Risk analysis .................................................................................................................... 14 Decision ........................................................................................................................... 14 Sources............................................................................................................................ 15

Version 1 Final Draft, 12-03-07 » 3 | 15

3.3-1 ITS - Case Study Gothenburg Baltic Sea Region Project #26

1 Introduction The aim of the P-Event Stage 2 project is to equip the traffic environment in selected parts of Gothenburg, primarily around the Event area, with signs in some form. These signs will direct motorists as efficiently as possible to the main traffic routes with the minimum of traffic jams and the least possible impact on public transport. In doing so, Gothenburg's attractiveness as an event venue will be enhanced even further and existing roads can be used optimally. The aim is for public transport, the environment and motorists to all emerge as winners as a result of quantifiable improvements.

1.1

Delimitations

Work on this preliminary study documentation has been delimited to include: 

A brief summary of the current situation as well as the aim and objectives.



Initial contact with the primary stakeholders to find out what they feel about the current situation and forthcoming projects as well as their opinions in general.



A brief description of what is currently in place and the solutions that could emerge from the project – intended mainly to provide food for thought among readers.



A brief plan for the forthcoming work where the main focus is on which enquiries, analyses and preliminary studies ought to constitute the next stage in this project.

Cost will not be examined at this stage although we have still opted to enclose a very brief and approximate cost estimate.

1.2

Background, aim and objectives

The aim of this preliminary study documentation is to present the background, aim and objectives and to analyse the current situation. This will result in an action plan for further decisions regarding enquiries and investments related to the P-Event Stage 2 project. The name of the project originates from the fact that even in the P-Event preliminary study a need was identified for an exit system. However, this was not incorporated into the budget at the time and was subsequently excluded prior to procurement.

1.2.1

Background

Gothenburg's ambition to develop as an event venue has proved successful and this has led to an increase in the number and size of the events. This trend will probably continue. This will generate an increase in the number of visitors, the majority of whom live outside Gothenburg and largely travel here by car. When the congestion charge system is introduced, there will be no charge at weekends, which will probably lead to a rise in the number of cars at weekends, which often coincides with major events. The political desire in Gothenburg is not to expand and, if possible, reduce the number of parking spaces in the city centre. The P-In och P-Event parking systems have been evaluated previously and it has been confirmed that they function very well in terms of understanding by road-users, utilisation by road-users, reduced travelling times and a subsequent reduction in emissions.

1.2.2

Aim

The aim of P-Event Stage 2 is to:

Version 1 Final Draft, 12-03-07 » 4 | 15

3.3-1 ITS - Case Study Gothenburg Baltic Sea Region Project #26



Increase attractiveness – make Gothenburg into an even more attractive city for event organisers and visitors.



More efficient utilisation – Use the existing road network as efficiently as possible by balancing and spreading out the traffic as evenly as possible.



Reduce environmental impact – Reduce emissions by minimising the time taken for traffic to move from the centre of Gothenburg to a main traffic route for the onward journey.



Minimise disruptions – Minimise the time when heavy traffic or traffic jams have a negative effect on public transport movements.

1.2.3

Objectives

The following objectives have been identified as achievable through implementation of the project. The objectives are mainly linked to the evaluation made of P-Event based on the fact that it often takes longer to travel out of the city centre following a major event. Many vehicles attempt to leave the city centre at the same time as opposed to the period prior to the event when the city centre is filled over a longer period. 

Reduce environmental impact – Reduce emissions by at least 1.5 kg of carbon dioxide per visiting vehicle. This is a saving which the P-Event survey confirms can be made.



Reduce travelling times – Minimise the travelling time per visiting vehicle from the point where it is parked to a main traffic route by at least 7 minutes in conjunction with major events and by at least 3 minutes in conjunction with minor events. This is a saving which the P-Event survey confirms can be made.



Minimise disruptions – At least halve the number of occasions and the time the traffic disrupts or impedes public transport for an equivalent event.



Profitability – Dimension the project in such a way that even at the planning stage it can be classified as profitable in accordance with the computation basis used by each party for its decisions.

1.3

Current situation

At present, traffic is directed into Gothenburg mainly with the aid of static (metal) road signs. In conjunction with an event, P-Event road-users are directed to a car park that is closest to the arena in which the event is taking place. In other parts of the city, the P-In system directs road-users to a car park that has available parking spaces in the part of the city centre where they had intended to park (if there are available parking spaces). Within P-Event, ten large car parks around the Event area are handled with around 4,500 parking spaces. Further parking facilities are available within the area that does not form part of P-Event – mainly for reasons of cost. The owners of the facilities are unable to see the financial benefit of their facility being involved in paying for P-Event. P-In handles the majority of other municipal parking facilities in the city centre as well as a number of private facilities, such as Nordstan and NK. After the end of an event or other reason for visiting the city centre, there is a limited number of static road signs that direct a road-user out to the major routes. In this context, 'limited number' means that such a sign is very rarely displayed at the car park and often does not indicate any alternative routes apart from the predetermined route to a major road. The evacuation of vehicles from the event area at present takes place mainly via the Ullevimotet and Örgrytemotet junctions and to a lesser extent via the Gårdamotet and Kallebäcksmotet junctions or other roads. Version 1 Final Draft, 12-03-07 » 5 | 15

3.3-1 ITS - Case Study Gothenburg Baltic Sea Region Project #26

From the city centre, evacuation of vehicles takes place mainly via Lilla Bommen, Järntorget and Linneplatsen and to a lesser extent via other roads.

1.3.1

Current projects

At present, the following projects and measures are either taking place or are planned in order to address the traffic and parking situation within the event area and in the centre of Gothenburg. 

TRIM measures The Traffic and Public Transport Authority is working with what are known as 'trim measures' to optimise existing traffic on existing roads and to increase access for public transport.



Swedish Exhibition Centre There are plans to expand the exhibition halls. It has not yet been confirmed how this will take place and to what extent. It is known that there is a plan to use parts of the Focus multistorey car park although it is not certain that this solution will be implemented.



Focus multi-storey car park This car park will probably be affected by the expansion plans for the Swedish Exhibition Centre. This will result in a reduction in the number of parking spaces at this facility.



Valhalla open-air car park To compensate for the probable loss of parking spaces in the Focus multi-storey car park, the Valhalla car park will probably be 'decked' and thus provide a further 300 or so spaces as a relatively temporary measure pending a more permanent solution.



Johan på Gårda multi-storey car park This car park will probably be expanded further to compensate for the parking spaces that have disappeared, or will disappear, along the northern parts of Gårda/Fabriksgatan.



Hotell Gothia Tower Hotell Gothia Tower will probably build the planned third tower directly east of the two existing towers (immediately beside the river, Mölndalsån).



Scandinavium A replacement for Scandinavium and/or a major development of Scandinavium is planned by Framtiden AB. The new arena will provide space for around 15,000 seated spectators.



Heden There are plans in place to develop the use of Heden. It has yet to be decided exactly for what purpose and to what extent but this will probably impact on traffic and parking areas.



West Link Work on West Link is scheduled to commence in 2016-2017 and will include, among other things, an underground railway station at Korsvägen. It will have a very substantial effect on the Örgrytemotet junction. West Link will possibly include a tunnel for freight (truck) and bus transport into the event area.

Version 1 Final Draft, 12-03-07 » 6 | 15

3.3-1 ITS - Case Study Gothenburg Baltic Sea Region Project #26



New river link A new river link to replace the Götaälv Bridge will be built and will possibly include a viaduct over the busiest tram routes around Central Station.



Liseberg Liseberg is planning to expand southwards and in doing so use parts of the existing car park south of the present Liseberg. This will probably require one or more new multi-storey car parks around Liseberg to replace the parking spaces that would be lost.



Ullevi Ullevi will probably be redeveloped to take 75,000 spectators at concerts (17,000 more than the present capacity). This redevelopment is scheduled for completion in summer 2012. There is also a wish to build a roof over the arena in order to compete with the new arenas currently being built in the 'immediate area'. Financing for the roof has yet to be arranged.

1.4

Stakeholders

The Swedish Transport Administration, the City of Gothenburg parking company Parkeringsbolaget and the Traffic and Public Transport Authority are probably the main stakeholders if this project is to be successful. The people within each organisation who are working on issues of this nature have been contacted during the course of the preparation of this documentation in order to pick up on their current projects, plans and thoughts regarding the P-Event Stage 2 project.

1.4.1

Swedish Transport Administration

The Swedish Transport Administration and the Traffic and Public Transport Authority have already established co-operation in a number of projects, including P-Event, within the framework of DART. The Swedish Transport Administration is also the principal for the different roads around Gothenburg and which feed traffic from the city centre. These roads will probably be affected by this project.

1.4.2

Parkeringsbolaget

The City of Gothenburg parking company Parkeringsbolaget requires co-ordination in order to pick up road-users at the exit from the car park and to begin directing them along the right road out to a main route.

1.4.3

Traffic and Public Transport Authority

The Traffic and Public Transport Authority, as the principal for the road network within the main routes that come under the Transport Administration, is probably the stakeholder that has the greatest potential for influencing the outcome of this project.

1.4.4

Stakeholders' views

The following views have emerged and have not been expressed anywhere else in this document: 

The Event area is an area that is very dynamic and very much alive. There are almost always plans, enquiries and similar processes taking place regarding new construction, redevelopment and expansion of roads, parking facilities, properties and arenas. Comment: This means that the P-Event Stage 2 project ought to result in a system that is as flexible as possible and can be rapidly adapted to the majority of conceivable changes that take place during the lifespan of the system.



In P-Event, a mixture of electronic and static (metal) signs is used. This solution was costeffective although not good from the road-users' point of view as they need to switch their

Version 1 Final Draft, 12-03-07 » 7 | 15

3.3-1 ITS - Case Study Gothenburg Baltic Sea Region Project #26

focus from electronic signs to static signs and sometimes back to electronic signs. A consistent solution is sought if signs in some form are to become part of the solution. Comment: Perhaps a usability analysis ought to be made before the technical solution in this project is procured in order to ensure maximum understanding and function in relation to the road-users. 

The Event area will be affected over the next two years and will be part of a number of extensive projects involving roads, arenas parking facilities and so forth. A wish has been expressed to "lift our sights" and try to take account of the totality rather than view P-Event Stage 2 as an individual project. Comment: P-Event Stage 2 should perhaps be rearranged into a broader "Event ITS" project that attempts to pick up all ITS-related issues, forms of impact and so forth within the event area.

Version 1 Final Draft, 12-03-07 » 8 | 15

3.3-1 ITS - Case Study Gothenburg Baltic Sea Region Project #26

2 Other systems What other systems exist, will exist or could exist that will have an influence and/or could be used by the P-Event Stage 2 project?

2.1

Existing systems

In Gothenburg, there are a number of systems that influence, direct and measure traffic. Those that exist within the largest conceivable geographical area and which at present are considered to have information to give, or the potential to influence or communicate, are the following:

2.1.1

P-Event

P-Event directs traffic using electronic signs to the car park with available spaces that is located closest to the event in question. Over 10 parking facilities are currently handled by the system and the number of parked vehicles at these facilities is counted continuously. P-Event also contains information about current and future events, with information that includes the venue, starting and finishing times and estimated number of visitors. P-Event is a real-time system where all information is available in a database.

2.1.2

P-In

P-In is similar to P-Event but contains no information about an event. Instead, it directs traffic to areas in Gothenburg where there are available parking spaces and within an area to a car park where there are available parking spaces. The number of available spaces is calculated continuously. P-In is a real-time system and all information is available in a database.

2.1.3

Traffic count

At a large number of locations within and around Gothenburg, the number of vehicles passing is counted using sensors on the road. This information can probably be used to make real-time analyses of the traffic volume along a certain section of road.

2.1.4

Travelling time

The travelling time system calculates travelling times for vehicles between approximately 50 points and for several hundred different routes within and around Gothenburg. This takes place with the aid of cameras and an IT system that identifies the vehicle registration number and stores this in encrypted form together with the time it was identified. When the same vehicle is identified at the next point, the travelling time between the two points is calculated. This system is used for statistical purposes and decision analysis and is presented as information to road-users facing possible route choices.

2.1.5

Web cameras / Surface video

Within and around Gothenburg there is a relatively large number of cameras that are used for visual control of the traffic situation in those areas that are covered.

2.1.6

SPOT

The SPOT system is a dormant system that is aimed at/will aim at optimising times for red/green in the different directions at a number of traffic lights in the city centre based on current traffic flow.

2.1.7

Traffic lights

Using different methods, existing traffic lights can be controlled in such a way that an increased flow is permitted in one direction during a certain period of time in order to facilitate heavy outward flows. This also applies to traffic lights that are not part of the SPOT system.

Version 1 Final Draft, 12-03-07 » 9 | 15

3.3-1 ITS - Case Study Gothenburg Baltic Sea Region Project #26

2.1.8

VMS

The Swedish Transport Administration has VMS signs on the major routes to help road-users choose a route and to inform about traffic disruptions. These could probably be used for information when no other important information needs to be presented.

2.1.9

MCS Åbro

Passing through Mölndal on the E6/E20 motorways, a system known as MCS has been installed which, using various forms of automatic control technology, adjusts the speed limit displayed on this stretch of road based on current traffic load. The MCS through Mölndal can be used to make it easier for traffic at the Kallebäcksmotet junction that is heading for the E6 southbound.

2.1.10 Göta Tunnel In all large tunnels there is a system installed similar to the MCS system to check and control the speed of traffic in the tunnel. For traffic leaving the area around Central Station, the MCS system in the Göta Tunnel can be used to optimise traffic flows entering the Tunnel.

2.1.11 KomFram The Traffic and Public Transport Authority has a well-developed communication system that covers Gothenburg within the KomFram system. This can probably be used in order to make joint use of the communication equipment.

2.2

Planned systems

The following systems are planned to be built in Gothenburg over the next few years:

2.2.1

MCS Gårda

This will probably be built by the Traffic and Public Transport Authority and can be used to make it easier to exit the junctions in Gårda. This system was planned although for some unknown reason it never reached the procurement stage. According to the Traffic and Public Transport Authority, there is still a need although there are no plans at the present time to activate this project – mostly due to current organisational changes. According to the Swedish Transport Administration, co-ordinated construction of P-Event Stage 2 and MCS Gårda could be possible, which could speed up their process.

2.2.2

Congestion charge system

The congestion charge system aims to reduce traffic in central Gothenburg during current peak periods and to contribute to the financing of other infrastructure projects. The present decision states that there will no congestion charge during weekends and on public holidays. This system will probably maintain full control of traffic moving into and out of all road sections in the centre of Gothenburg and can thus be run jointly with other traffic-counting systems. Perhaps this system could also calculate the speed of passing vehicles without any direct additional cost.

Version 1 Final Draft, 12-03-07 » 10 | 15

3.3-1 ITS - Case Study Gothenburg Baltic Sea Region Project #26

3 Conceivable solutions To guide traffic to the most efficient route from a car park to a major road, a solution based on signs in some form will probably be the obvious technical solution. These signs can be electronic, static or a mixture of the two. It is also conceivable that following redevelopment of exits from parking facilities, road networks and junctions, traffic can be directed even more efficiently out to the main routes than is the case today. This solution is probably not viable in practice and will most likely be more expensive. The extent to which the P-Event Stage 2 project will direct traffic and the level of functionality will be decided later. The levels described here are intended to provide a picture of possible delimitations – not to lock the project into these as the only alternatives.

3.1

Geographical scope

The conceivable geographical scope can roughly be divided into the following three levels.

3.1.1

Level 1 – Microzones

Control takes place at specific points in those places where there is the greatest need, potential or interest. Examples are the areas immediately around Korsvägen, the Focus multi-storey car park and Rantorget/Ullevimotet. Advantages The largest problem areas are covered. The cost will probably be lowest. Disadvantages Problems will persist at other places. No potential for directing traffic in the event of abnormal incidents.

3.1.2

Level 2 - Event area

Control takes place within the same area that P-Event directs traffic to at present. Generally, it covers Fabriksgatan, Örgrytevägen, Skånegatan and Ullevigatan. At present, this is the most likely alternative. Advantages The whole of the event area is covered. Road-users are already familiar with P-Event. Disadvantages More expensive than microzones. In effect, traffic heading towards Hisingen, West Gothenburg, South Gothenburg and Mölndal is not covered.

3.1.3

Level 3 – City centre

Control takes place within the same area covered by P-In and P-Event together. In effect, the whole of central Gothenburg is covered. Advantages The whole of central Gothenburg is covered by a common system. Disadvantages The most expensive alternative. Could in certain circumstances lead to more traffic being directed through the city centre to balance the problems arising out towards the E6/E20 motorways.

Version 1 Final Draft, 12-03-07 » 11 | 15

3.3-1 ITS - Case Study Gothenburg Baltic Sea Region Project #26

3.2

Functional scope

The functional scope is described here on three levels but can, based on later analyses, needs, finances and similar considerations, take on a completely different scope.

3.2.1

Level 1 – Static signs

The simplest solution is to analyse the traffic and prepare flow paths and road signs accordingly. No logic or intelligence whatsoever is needed in such a system to handle deviations in the traffic system. Advantages This is the simplest solution and thus the cheapest. A large number of signs can be erected as each sign does not represent a major cost. Requires a minimum of operation and maintenance. Disadvantages This solution is the least flexible and does not allow any adjustment of road management in the event of unforeseen incidents out on the road. The number of signs in the urban environment increases, thus running the risk that overall signage becomes too extensive.

3.2.2

Level 2 – Electronic signs

By locating electronic signs at those places where the traffic can be redirected to alternative roads to reach the right exit from the city, the routes can be varied by using simple logic or through operator intervention depending on the current traffic situation. This results in a system that reacts to incidents. Advantages This solution offers the simplest level of flexibility. Does not require as many signs compared to static signage. Disadvantages Costly in terms of both signs and supply of power to the signs. Electronic signs also take up more space than static signs. The signs and system need to be operated and maintained.

3.2.3

Level 3 – Total integration solution

By using all information in the form of car park occupancy levels, registered events, traffic calculation stations and other systems, a system is developed which can analyse and direct cars before traffic problems arise and in doing so ensure that the traffic is distributed out of the city as evenly as possible at each individual moment. Advantages A very flexible system that more or less autonomously adjusts the road management based on realtime information. Disadvantages The most costly solution. The signs and the system need to be operated and maintained.

Version 1 Final Draft, 12-03-07 » 12 | 15

3.3-1 ITS - Case Study Gothenburg Baltic Sea Region Project #26

4 Costs The task of producing this documentation for a preliminary study did not include making any formal cost calculation. However, for the current planning work, we have still opted to provide a cost indication for a sign-based solution. All costs in SEK (2011).

Area

Functionality

Planning

Number of signs

System

Cost per sign

Annual operation and maintenance for five years

Total for five years

5 1. Micro

1. Static

1 000 000

0

20

20 000

50 000

1 650 000

1. Micro

2. Electronic

2 000 000

2 000 000

10

300 000

150 000

7 750 000

1. Micro

3. Integrated

3 000 000

3 000 000

10

300 000

180 000

9 900 000

2. Event

1. Static

1 500 000

0

50

20 000

50 000

2 750 000

2. Event

2. Electronic

3 000 000

4 000 000

30

300 000

250 000

17 250 000

2. Event

3. Integrated

4 000 000

5 000 000

30

300 000

340 000

19 700 000

3. City centre

1. Static

2 000 000

0

100

20 000

50 000

4 250 000

3. City centre

2. Electronic

4 000 000

5 000 000

60

300 000

400 000

29 000 000

3. City centre

3. Integrated

5 000 000

6 000 000

60

300 000

580 000

31 900 000

In-house costs for planning, construction management, inspectors, inspections and so forth have not been included in the above cost estimates.

Version 1 Final Draft, 12-03-07 » 13 | 15

3.3-1 ITS - Case Study Gothenburg Baltic Sea Region Project #26

5 Next stage … What needs to be investigated further to determine which decisions are to be made by whom and when?

5.1

Enquiries

Measure traffic? When major events come to an end? When P-Event has reached Level 5? Over a longer period of time? Can the identified objectives be achieved? 

How do all the planned projects affect P-Event Stage 2?



How often is the traffic situation under pressure?



How often and to what extent is public transport affected by the traffic situation?



Can the identified objectives be reasonably achieved or exceeded? Should they be adjusted?



Using the objectives as a starting point, can a cost framework be established for what can be classed as a profitable level of investment for a project of this nature?



How will congestion charges affect the traffic situation?



What is the current political orientation?



Where is the biggest traffic problem?



How long does it take to empty the larger parking facilities after a major event?



Interview people stuck in a traffic jam trying to get out of the city.



How often does P-Event go up to Level 4?



Financing / Collaboration project - DART

5.2

Analyses

Can traffic flows be improved through "load balancing"?

5.3

Timetable

What is our timetable?

5.4

Risk analysis



How will projects that do not yet have a confirmed project plan or timetable affect this project?



Is it likely that within 10 years it will be very difficult, perhaps impossible, to park in the Event area thanks to political decisions and/or a desire to use the land for purposes other than parking?

5.5

Decision

Who will decide what and what documentation will be required?

Version 1 Final Draft, 12-03-07 » 14 | 15

3.3-1 ITS - Case Study Gothenburg Baltic Sea Region Project #26

6 Sources The following reports and enquiries have to a varying degree formed the basis for this document; 1. Preliminary study P-Event, Report No. 15:2001 In Swedish, the name P-Event was later changed to P-Evenemang (the name in English, however, remains the same). City of Gothenburg, Traffic and Public Transport Authority 2. Evaluation of P-In, Report No. 3:2001 City of Gothenburg, Traffic and Public Transport Authority 3. Event area, Report No. 4:2001 City of Gothenburg, Traffic and Public Transport Authority 4. Evaluation P-Event, February 29, 2008 Swedish Road Administration and the City of Gothenburg, Traffic and Public Transport Authority 5. ITS on the road, Publication 2009:75. Second edition, September 2009. Swedish Road Administration

Version 1 Final Draft, 12-03-07 » 15 | 15