brt manual

8/13/2019 BRT manual

1/88

Division 44

Environment and Infrastructure

Sector project "Transport Policy Advice"

Sustainable Transport:

A Sourcebook for Policy-makers in Developing Cities

Module 3b

Bus Rapid TransitVersion 2.0


2/88

OVERVIEWOFTHESOURCEBOOK

Sustainable Transport: A Sourcebookfor Policy-Makers in Developing Cities

What is the Sourcebook?

is Sourcebook on Sustainable Urban Transportaddresses the key areas of a sustainable transportpolicy framework for a developing city. eSourcebook consists of more than 20 modules.

Who is it for?

e Sourcebook is intended for policy-makers indeveloping cities, and their advisors. is targetaudience is reflected in the content, whichprovides policy tools appropriate for applicationin a range of developing cities.

How is it supposed to be used?

e Sourcebook can be used in a number ofways. It should be kept in one location, and thedifferent modules provided to officials involvedin urban transport. e Sourcebook can be easilyadapted to fit a formal short course trainingevent, or can serve as a guide for developing acurriculum or other training program in thearea of urban transport. GTZ is elaboratingtraining packages for selected modules, beingavailable since October 2004.

What are some of the key features?

e key features of the Sourcebook include:

A practical orientation, focusing on bestpractices in planning and regulation and,where possible, successful experience indeveloping cities.

Contributors are leading experts in their fields.

An attractive and easy-to-read, color layout.

Non-technical language (to the extentpossible), with technical terms explained.

Updates via the Internet.

How do I get a copy?

Please visit http://www.sutp.orgor http://www.

gtz.de/transportfor details on how to order acopy. e Sourcebookis not sold for profit. Anycharges imposed are only to cover the cost ofprinting and distribution. You may also order [email protected].

Comments or feedback?

We would welcome any of your comments orsuggestions, on any aspect of the Sourcebook, bye-mail [email protected], or by surface mail to:Manfred BreithauptGTZ, Division 44P. O. Box 5180

D - 65726 EschbornGermany

Modules and contributorsSourcebook Overview and Cross-cutting Issues ofUrban Transport (GTZ)Institutional and policy orientation

1a. e Role of Transport in Urban DevelopmentPolicy(Enrique Pealosa)1b. Urban Transport Institutions (Richard Meakin)1c. Private Sector Participation in Transport Infra-

structure Provision (Christopher Zegras, MIT)1d. Economic Instruments

(Manfred Breithaupt, GTZ)

1e. Raising Public Awareness about SustainableUrban Transport(Karl Fjellstrom, GTZ)

Land use planning and demand management

2a. Land Use Planning and Urban Transport(Rudolf Petersen, Wuppertal Institute)

2b.Mobility Management(Todd Litman, VTPI)Transit, walking and cycling

3a.Mass Transit Options(Lloyd Wright, University College London;Karl Fjellstrom, GTZ)

3b.Bus Rapid Transit(Lloyd Wright, University College London)

3c. Bus Regulation & Planning(Richard Meakin)3d.Preserving and Expanding the Role of Non-

motorised Transport (Walter Hook, ITDP)Vehicles and fuels

4a. Cleaner Fuels and Vehicle Technologies(Michael Walsh; Reinhard Kolke,Umweltbundesamt UBA)

4b. Inspection & Maintenance and Roadworthiness(Reinhard Kolke, UBA)

4c. Two- and ree-Wheelers (Jitendra Shah,World Bank; N.V. Iyer, Bajaj Auto)

4d.Natural Gas Vehicles(MVV InnoTec)4e. Intelligent Transport Systems(Phil Sayeg, TRA;

Phil Charles, University of Queensland)

Environmental and health impacts

5a.Air Quality Management(Dietrich Schwela,World Health Organisation)

5b.Urban Road Safety (Jacqueline Lacroix, DVR;David Silcock, GRSP)

5c. Noise and its Abatement(Civic Exchange Hong Kong; GTZ; UBA)

Resources

6. Resources for Policy-makers (GTZ)Further modules and resources

Further modules are anticipated in the areas ofDriver Training; Financing Urban Transport;Benchmarking; and Car Free Development. Ad-

ditional resources are being developed, and anUrban Transport Photo CD-ROM is available.
http://www.sutp.org/http://www.gtz.de/transporthttp://www.gtz.de/transporthttp://maito:[email protected]/http://maito:[email protected]/http://maito:[email protected]/http://maito:[email protected]/http://www.gtz.de/transporthttp://www.gtz.de/transporthttp://www.sutp.org/


3/88

i

Findings, interpretations and conclusionsexpressed in this document are based oninformation gathered by GTZ and itsconsultants, partners, and contributors fromreliable sources. GTZ does not, however,guarantee the accuracy and completeness ofinformation in this document, and cannot be

held responsible for any errors, omissions orlosses which emerge from its use.

About the authorLloyd WrightUniversity College LondonMr. Wright is currently conducting transportplanning research at University College London.Mr. Wright formerly directed the Latin Ameri-can activities of the Institute for Transporta-tion & Development Policy (ITDP). He alsodirected the organisations International BusRapid Transit Programme. Additionally, Mr.

Wright has worked with the International Insti-

tute for Energy Conservation, the US Environ-mental Protection Agency, the US Agency forInternational Development, the United Nations,and the GTZ on transport and environmentalissues. He was also previously a fellow with theUS-Asia Environmental Partnership in Bang-kok, ailand. Mr. Wright is currently workingtowards a PhD in Urban Transport Planning atUniversity College London. He also possessesan MSc in Environmental Assessment from theLondon School of Economics, an MBA from

Georgetown University, and a BSc in Engineer-ing from the University of Washington.

Module 3b

Bus Rapid TransitVersion 2.0

Author:Lloyd Wright (University College London)

Editor:Deutsche Gesellschaft frTechnische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbHP. O. Box 5180D - 65726 Eschborn, Germanyhttp://www.gtz.de

Division 44, Environment and InfrastructureSector Project "Transport Policy Advice"

Commissioned by

Bundesministerium fr wirtschaftliche

Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung (BMZ)Friedrich-Ebert-Allee 40D - 53113 Bonn, Germanyhttp://www.bmz.de

Manager:Manfred Breithaupt

Editing:Manfred Breithaupt

Cover photo:Lloyd WrightQuito, Ecuador, 2002

Layout:Klaus Neumann, SDS, G.C.

Eschborn, May 2005
http://www.gtz.de/http://www.bmz.de/mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.bmz.de/http://www.gtz.de/


4/88

ii

PrefaceBus Rapid Transit (BRT) offers the opportunityfor developing cities to develop a high-qual-ity mass transit system at an affordable cost.is module of the Sustainable TransportSourcebook provides an overview summary ofthe BRT concept and a brief description of theBRT planning process. For a more detailedexplanation of the BRT planning process,please consult the GTZ BRT Planning Guide,

which is also available on the web site of the

Sustainable Urban Transport Project(http://www.sutp.org).
http://www.sutp.org/http://www.sutp.org/


5/88

iii

e development of this Bus Rapid Transitmodule has benefited from the experiencesof high-quality public transit projects from

around the world. e module has particularlybenefited from lessons learned to date from theTransMilenio system in Bogot (Colombia).TransMilenio represents perhaps the mostcomplete and inventive BRT system in the

world today. e former Mayor of Bogot,Enrique Pealosa, has become an internationalchampion of promoting the BRT concept.

Additionally, insights from municipal officialsand consultants involved with the BRT systemsin Quito (Ecuador) and Curitiba (Brazil) have

added greatly to the quality and relevance of thePlanning Guide. In many respects, BRT owesits existence to the creativity and determinationof Jaime Lerner, the former mayor of Curitibaand the former governor of the state of Paran.Csar Arias, who previously directed the BRTeffort in Quito and is now a consultant on theGuayaquil (Ecuador) BRT project, has also lentconsiderable information for the module. Like-

wise, Hidalgo Nuez and Cecilia Rodriguez ofQuitos Department of Transport have provided

much assistance.A number of consultancies have worked toimprove the quality of BRT initiatives. Specialthanks go to the firm of Steer Davies Gleave,

which is involved in BRT projects worldwide.Also, the consultancy of Akiris in Bogothas played a central role in the developmentof TransMilenio, and is now leading BRTefforts in several cities. Additionally, severalconsultancies in Brazil helped to create manyof the original BRT concepts; these firms and

individuals include Paulo Custodio, Pedro Szasz,the consulting team at Logit, and the consul-tancy of Logitrans.

e module has benefited not only from leadingdeveloping-nation experiences but also from thegrowing level of interest in BRT in Australia,

Western Europe, Japan, and North America. Asimilar compendium of experiences developedunder the United States Transit CooperativeResearch Program (TCRP) has been a richsource of world-wide experiences in BRT. Sam

Zimmerman and the consultancy of DMJM &Harris have been leading these efforts.

e concept of BRT owes much to the persistentsupport of key organisations that have workedto raise overall awareness as well as provide

direct assistance to interested developing-nationcities. e Institute for Transportation & De-velopment Policy (ITDP) has consistently beenat the forefront of providing direct assistance todeveloping cities pursuing sustainable transportoptions.

Finally, the module would not be possiblewithout the strong support and effort from theteam at GTZ, the German Overseas Technical

Assistance Agency. Klaus Neumann played akey role in providing the layout and formatting

for the final document. A great deal of thanksgoes to Manfred Breithaupt, Director of GTZstransport programme, who created the ideaof the Sustainable Transport Sourcebook and

who patiently oversaw the development of eachmodule.

Lloyd WrightUniversity College London

Acknowledgements


6/88

iv

1. Introduction 1

1.1 Defining Bus Rapid Transit 1

1.2 History of BRT 2

1.3 Public transport

in developing cities 4

1.4 Barriers to BRT 5

2. Planning for BRT 7

2.1 Planning Stage I:

Project preparation 7

2.1.1 Project creation

and commitment 82.1.2 Legal basis 9

2.1.3 Development team 9

2.1.4 Project scope and timing 10

2.1.5 Planning budget and financing 11

2.2 Planning Stage II: Analysis 12

2.2.1 Backgroundand situational description 12

2.2.2 Stakeholder analysis 12

2.2.3 Transportation data collection 12

2.2.4 Transportation demand

modelling 14

2.3 Planning Stage III:

Communications 15

2.3.1 Public participation processes 15

2.3.2 Communications withexisting transport operators 15

2.3.3 Marketing plan 16

2.3.4 Public education plan 16

2.4 Planning Stage IV: Operations 18

2.4.1 Corridor identification 18

2.4.2 Feeder services 182.4.3 Service options 20

2.4.4 Passenger capacity 20

2.4.5 System managementand control 23

2.4.6 Customer service 24

2.5 Planning Stage V: Business

and regulatory structure 29

2.5.1 Business structure 29

2.5.2 Institutionaland regulatory structure 33

2.5.3 Incentives for competition 34

2.5.4 Operational cost analysis 37

2.5.5 Tariff options 38

2.5.6 Distribution of revenues 39

2.6 Planning Stage VI:

Infrastructure 41

2.6.1 Conceptual study versusdetailed engineering study 41

2.6.2 Busways 42

2.6.3 Stations 46

2.6.4 Intermediate transfer stations 49

2.6.5 Terminals 50

2.6.6 Depots 50

2.6.7 Control centre 51

2.6.8 Feeder infrastructure 52

2.6.9 Integration infrastructure 52

2.6.10 Commercial space 52

2.6.11 Traffic signal control 52

2.6.12 Public utilities 53

2.6.13 Landscape 53

2.6.14 Infrastructure cost analysis 53

2.7 Planning Stage VII: Technology 542.7.1 Vehicle technology 54

2.7.2 Fare collectionand fare verification systems 58

2.7.3 Intelligent TransportationSystems (ITS) 61

2.7.4 Equipment procurementprocess 61

2.8 Planning Stage VIII:

Modal integration 62

2.8.1 Pedestrians 62

2.8.2 Bicycles 642.8.3 Other public transport

systems 65

2.8.4 Taxis 65

2.8.5 Park-and-ride 65

2.8.6 Auto restriction measures 66

2.8.7 Integrationwith land use planning 66


7/88

v

2.9 Planning Stage IX: Impacts 67

2.9.1 Traffic impacts 67

2.9.2 Economic impacts 67

2.9.3 Environmental impacts 68

2.9.4 Social impacts 69

2.10 Planning Stage X:

Implementation plan 70

2.10.1 Timeline and workplan 70

2.10.2 Financing plan 70

2.10.3 Staffingand management plan 75

2.10.4 Contracting plan 75

2.10.5 Construction plan 76

2.10.6 Maintenance plan 76

2.10.7 Monitoringand evaluation plan 77

3. BRT Resources 78

3.1 BRT support organisations 78

3.2 Technical resources 78

3.3 Links to BRT cities 79


8/88

vi

Acronyms

BRT Bus Rapid Transit

CNG Compressed Natural Gas

GEF Global Environmental Facility

GTZ GTZ Deutsche Gesellschaft frTechnische Zusammenarbeit(German Overseas Technical

Assistance Agency)

ITDP Institute for Transportation &Development Policy

ITS Intelligent Transportation Systems

LPG Liquid Petroleum Gas

LRT Light Rail Transit

MRT Mass Rapid Transit

O-D Origin-Destination

QIC Quality incentive contract

TDM Transportation DemandManagement

TOD Transit-Oriented Development

TRB Transportation Research Board

UNDP United Nations DevelopmentProgramme

UNEP United Nations EnvironmentProgramme

USFTA United States Federal Transit

Administration

USTCRP United States Transit CooperativeResearch Program


9/88

1

Module 3b - version 2: Bus Rapid Transit

1. Introduction

Effective public transit is central to develop-ment. For the vast majority of developing city

residents, public transit is the only practicalmeans to access employment, education, andpublic services, especially when such services arebeyond the viable distance of walking or cy-cling. Unfortunately, the current state of publictransit services in developing cities often doeslittle to serve the actual mobility needs of thepopulation. Bus services are too often unreliable,inconvenient and dangerous.

In response, transport planners and publicofficials have sometimes turned to extremely

costly mass transit alternatives such as rail-basedmetros. Due to the high costs of rail infrastruc-ture, cities can only construct such systems overa few kilometres in a few limited corridors. eresult is a system that does not meet the broadertransport needs of the population. Nevertheless,the municipality ends up with a long-term debtthat can affect investment in more pressing areassuch as health, education, water, and sanitation.

However, there is an alternative between poorpublic transit service and high municipal debt.

Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) can provide high-quality, metro-like transit service at a fraction ofthe cost of other options (Figure 1). is mod-ule provides municipal officials, non-govern-mental organizations, consultants, and others

1.1 Defining Bus Rapid Transit

1.2 History of BRT

1.3 Public transport in developing cities

1.4 Barriers to BRT

1.1 Defining Bus Rapid Transit

Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) is a bus-based masstransit system that delivers fast, comfortable,and cost-effective urban mobility. rough theprovision of exclusive right-of-way lanes and

excellence in customer service, BRT essentially

emulates the performance and amenity charac-teristics of a modern rail-based transit system

but at a fraction of the cost.

While BRT utilises rubber-tyred vehicles, it has

little else in common with conventional urban

with an introduction to the concept of BRT aswell as a step-by-step process for successfullyplanning a BRT system.

Of course, BRT is just one of many public

transit options. e correct choice depends onan array of local conditions and factors. For anoverview of different mass transit options, refertoModule 3a (Mass Transit Options)of the GTZSustainable Transport Sourcebook.

is introductory section to BRT includes thefollowing topics:

Fig. 1

Bus Rapid Transitprovides a sophisticatedmetro-quality transitservice at a cost thatmost cities, evendeveloping cities, canafford.Photo courtesy of Advanced Public

Transport Sys tems


10/88

2

Sustainable Tansport: A Sourcebook for Policy-makers in Developing Cities

bus systems. e following is a list of featuresfound on some of the most successful BRTsystems implemented to date:

n Exclusive right-of-way lanes

n Rapid boarding and alighting

n Free transfers between lines

n Pre-board fare collection and fare verification

n Enclosed stations that are safe and comfort-able

n Clear route maps, signage, and real-time in-formation displays

n Automatic vehicle location technology tomanage vehicle movements

n Modal integration at stations and terminals

n Competitively-bid concessions for operations

n Effective reform of the existing institutionalstructures for public transit

nClean vehicle technologies

n Excellence in marketing and customer service

Local circumstances will dictate the extent towhich the above characteristics are actually uti-lised within a system. Small- and medium-sizedcities may find that not all of these featuresare feasible to achieve within cost and capacity

constraints. Nevertheless, serving customerneeds first is a premise that all cities, regardlessof local circumstances, should follow in devel-oping a successful transit service.

Today, the BRT concept is becoming increas-ingly utilised by cities looking for cost-effec-

tive transit solutions. As new experiments inBRT emerge, the state of the art in BRT willundoubtedly continue to evolve. Nevertheless,BRTs customer focus will likely remain its

defining characteristic. e developers of high-quality BRT systems in cities such as Bogot,Curitiba, and Ottawa astutely observed that theultimate objective was to swiftly, efficiently, andcost-effectively movepeople, rather than cars.

1.2 History of BRT

BRTs history resides in a variety of previousefforts to improve the transit experience for thecustomer. e first wide-scale development ofthe BRT concept using occurred in Curitiba

(Brazil) in 1974. However, there were severalsmaller-scale efforts prior to Curitiba thathelped to establish the idea. High-occupancylanes and exclusive bus lanes appeared in theUnited States in the 1960s. Actual constructionof a dedicated busway first occurred in 1972

with a 7.5 kilometre line known as Via Expresain Lima (Peru). One year later in 1973, busways

were constructed in Runcorn (United King-dom) and Los Angeles (USA).

BRTs full promise was not realised, though,

until the arrival of the surface subway systemdeveloped in Curitiba (Brazil) in 1974 (Figure2). Ironically, the city initially aspired to con-structing a rail-based metro system. However, alack of sufficient funding necessitated a morecreative approach. us, under the leadershipof Mayor Jaime Lerner, the city began a processof developing busway corridors emanating fromthe city centre. Like many Latin American citiesat the time, Curitiba was experiencing rapidpopulation growth. Beginning at a level of some

600,000 residents in the early 1970s, the citynow has over 2.2 million inhabitants.

Today, Curitibas modernistic tubed stationsand 270-passenger bi-articulated buses representa world example. e BRT system now has fiveradial corridors emanating from the city core.e system features 57 kilometres of exclusivebusways and 340 kilometres of feeder services.

e mid-1970s also saw a limited number ofBRT applications being developed in other

cities of North and South America (Meirelles,2000). While not as sophisticated as the

ig. 2Under the leadershipf former-Mayor Jaimeerner, the BRT systemn Curitiba (Brazil)ecame a world leadern effective transit.hoto by Lloyd Wright


11/88

3


Curitiba system, variations on the concept

were developed in Sao Paulo, Brazil (1975);Arlington, USA (1975); Goiania, Brazil (1976);Porto Alegre, Brazil (1977); and Pittsburgh,United States (1977). e Sao Paulo BRTsystem is currently the largest in the world with250 kilometres of exclusive busways serving 3.2million passenger trips each day.

Despite Curitibas success and relative famewithin the transport planning profession, theoverall replication of the BRT concept wasactually somewhat slow to gain momentumelsewhere. It was only in the late 1990s thatBRTs profile became more widely known. Vis-its by technical and political teams from Bogot(Colombia) and Los Angeles (United States) toCuritiba served to launch BRT efforts in thosecities. In 1996, Quito (Ecuador) opened a BRTsystem using electric trolley-bus technology,and the city has since expanded the system withclean diesel technology.

However, it was the effort in Bogot with its

TransMilenio system that has particularly trans-formed BRTs perception around the world.As a large-sized city (7.0 million inhabitants)and a relatively dense city (240 inhabitants perhectare), Bogot provided proof that BRT wascapable of delivering high-capacity perform-ance for the worlds megacities. Today, withboth Bogot and Curitiba acting as catalyticexamples, the number of cities with built BRTsystems or with systems under development isquite significant.

OECD nations such as Australia, Canada,France, Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom,

and the United States have seen the potential

for BRT as a high-quality but low-cost masstransit option (Figures 3 and 4). e transfer ofBRT technology from Latin America to OECDnations has made BRT one of the most notableexamples of technology transfer from the devel-oping south to the developed north.

ere is no precise definition of what constitutesa BRT system and what represents simply animproved transit system. Depending on onesdefinition of BRT, there may be up to 70 sys-tems world-wide. However, the number of cities

with full BRT systems is actually more limited.e Latin American cities of Bogot, Curitiba,Goiania, and Quito probably possess the mostcomplete systems, in terms of all aspects of BRT.e systems in Brisbane (Australia), Ottawa(Canada), and Rouen (France) probably providethe best examples of BRT in the developed-na-tion context. e experiences in Africa and Asiaare more limited in number and scope. eTaipei (Taiwan), Nagoya (Japan), and Jakarta(Indonesia) systems perhaps stand out as the

more complete systems in the Asian region,although not quite reaching the level of fullBRT systems.

In developing cities, the spectrum of publictransport services can range from very basicinformal services to more sophisticated optionssuch as BRT and rail transit. Figure 5 illustratesthe progression of transit services across thisspectrum.

Higher-quality conventional bus services, while

not BRT, can be a significant improvement forresidents of most cities. e conventional bus

Fig. 3 and 4

Developed-nationcities such as Brisbane,Australia (left photo)and Ottawa, Canada(right photo) have also

benefited from BRT.Brisbane photo courtesy of

Queensland Transport

Ottawa photo by Lloyd Wright


12/88

4


systems in cities such as Hong Kong, London,

and Singapore have achieved considerablesuccess without the full application of BRTattributes. Londons bus network serves 5.4million passenger trips each day, far exceedingthe citys underground metro system. To achieveits level of performance, the London bus systemmakes extensive use of bus lanes. However, buslanes are significantly different in nature to thebusways found in most BRT systems (see Box 1).

1.3 Public transport in developing

citiesFor much of the worlds population, publictransit is a necessary evil that must be enduredrather than appreciated. For many families, theultimate goal is to one day afford individualmotorised transport, either in the form of amotorcycle or automobile. e state of publictransit implies discomfort, long waits, risk topersonal safety, and restrictions on movement.Customer satisfaction with the myriad of infor-mal and formal vans, mini-buses, and full-sized

buses that ply developing city streets is typicallyextremely low.

Under such conditions, it is not surprising that

such services are losing passengers at alarmingrates. e private vehicle continues to makegains in virtually every city. If present trendscontinue, public transport may have a ratherdoubtful future. As incomes rise in developingnations, private vehicles are gaining usage whilepublic transports ridership is almost universallydeclining. A selection of developing cities in-dicates that public transit systems are typicallylosing in the area of between 0.3 and 1.2 per-centage points of ridership each year (WBSCD,

2001).

e reasons for public transports demise arenot difficult to discern (Figure 6). Poor transitservices in both the developed and developing

world push consumers to private vehicle options.e attraction of the private car and motorcycleis both in terms of performance and image.

However, the demise in public transport isnot pre-ordained. BRT is public transportsresponse to this decline, with an attempt to

provide a car-competitive service. With theintroduction of the TransMilenio BRT system

Informal services Standard services

Bus Rapid Transit Higher-quality services

ig. 5

Progression of transitervices.hotos by Lloyd Wright and Carlos

ardo


13/88


14/88

6


profitability and even viability. In cities suchas Quito (Ecuador), the existing operators tookto violent street demonstrations to counter thedevelopment of the BRT system. Likewise, in

other cities the private transit operators havepressured political officials through recall effortsand intense lobbying. However, it should benoted that the threat to existing operators maybe more perceived than real. In most cases, aneffective outreach effort with the operators canhelp dispel unfounded fears. In reality, exist-ing operators can gain substantially from BRTthrough improved profitability and better workconditions. e existing operators can effec-tively compete to win operational concessions

within the proposed BRT system.

e barriers noted here are mostly perceivedbarriers. In each case, a concerted effort of po-litical officials in tandem with the private sectorand the public can overcome these challenges tocreate a new transit system for all.


15/88

7


Fig. 7: Overview of the BRT planning process

Stage I: Preparation

Political vision

Legal basis

Project team / structure

Work plan and timeline

Planning budget

I. Project preparationStage II: Analysis

Background analysis

Stakeholder analysis

Data collection

Modeling

Stage III: Communications

Public participation

Existing operators

Marketing plan

Public education plan

Stage IV: Operations

Corridor identification

Feeder services

Service options

Passenger capacity Contingency planning

Customer service plan

Stage V: Business structure

Business structure

Institutional structure

Incentives for competition

Operational cost analysis Tariff options

Stage VI: Infrastructure

Conceptual study vs.detailed study

Busways, stations,

terminals, depots, controlcentre, integration

Utilities, landscaping

II. Design

Stage VII: Technology

Vehicles

Fare collection systems

Intelligent transport systems

Technology procurement

Stage VIII: Modal integration

Pedestrians, bicycles, othertransit systems, taxis

Auto restriction measures

Land use planning

Stage IX: Impact analyses

Traffic impacts Economic impacts

Environmental impacts

Social impacts

Impacts on urban form

III. Impacts

Stage X: Implementation plan

Timeline and work plan

Financing plan

Staffing plan

Contracting plan

Construction plan

Maintenance plan Evaluation plan

IV. Implementation plan

2. Planning for BRT

is overview module of BRT seeks to oultinethe BRT planning process for developing city

officials. It is hoped that this planning templatewill help reduce the amount of time requiredto move from the conceptual phase through toimplementation. A focused BRT planning proc-ess can be reasonably completed in a period of12 to 18 months. An overview of the entire BRTplanning process is provided in Figure 7.

2.1 Planning Stage I:Project preparation

e first stage of the process involves galvanisingthe political and institutional support for the

project. Additionally, this stage is also a time toorganise and plan the entire BRT developmentprocess. Work plans, timelines, budgets, andthe formation of a planning team are essentialpre-requisites before proceeding further. In-vestments made early in properly structuringand organising the planning process can pay


16/88

8


significant dividends later in terms of both theefficiency and effectiveness of the overall effort.

e topics to be presented in Planning Stage I,Project Preparation, are:

2.1.1 Project creation and commitment

2.1.2 Legal basis

2.1.3 Development team

2.1.4 Project scope and timing

2.1.5 Planning budget and financing

2.1.1 Project creation and commitment

"Never doubt that a small group of

thoughtful, committed citizens can

change the world. Indeed it is the only

thing that ever has."- Margaret Mead (1901-1978)

Before a smart card is used, or before a cleanvehicle is purchased, or before a busway is built,a person or a group of persons must decide that

action is required to improve a citys transitsystem. e inspiration may come from acivic group, a bus operator, a civil servant, or apolitical official. Nevertheless, without someoneacting as a catalyst, good ideas will unlikelybecome reality.

e creation of an environment suitable to in-troducing a new mass transit system can dependupon many factors. ere is no set amount oftime required or set series of events. In the case

of cities such as Bogot and Curitiba, the elec-tion of dynamic mayors who entered office witha new vision was the determining factor. Insuch instances, the progression towards systemplanning happens almost immediately.

In other instances, a long period of persuasionand information gathering will precede thecommitment. Site visits to cities with high-quality systems can help officials and the pressvisualise the possibilities. e development ofvideos and graphics illustrating how the system

would look within a particular city can also helpthe visualisation process. Testimonials from onepolitical official to another may sometimes beappropriate. Showing how mayors and governorsthat deliver high-quality systems tend to winelections can also be helpful. e techniques toachieving project commitment are varied, andcan depend greatly upon the local context, butthe principal aim is to stimulate a demand fordramatically raising a citys transit quality.

In recent years, visits to the systems in cities like

Bogot, Curitiba, and Quito have persuaded of-ficials to other cities to proceed with projects oftheir own. By speaking with technical staff andpolitical officials in cities with existing systems,perspective system developers can understandthe possibilities in their own cities (Figure 8).

Political leadership is probably the single mostimportant factor in realising a successful BRTproject. Without such leadership, the project

will not likely have sufficient momentum to sur-vive the inevitable challenges from opposition

groups and special interests. Further, withoutleadership, it is significantly more difficult togalvanise public opinion towards supporting anew outlook on public transit.

An initial vision statement from the politicalleadership marks an important first step inmaking the case for improved transit to thepublic. is political announcement providesa broad-based perspective on the general goalsof the proposed system. is statement gives adirection and mandate for the planning teams

and will also be used to stimulate interest andacceptance of the concept with the general

ig. 8

nternational visitorsain many insightsy speaking with

TransMilenio technicaltaff in Bogot.hoto by Lloyd Wright


17/88

9


public. e vision statement should not beoverly detailed but rather describe the form,ambitions and quality of the intended project.

2.1.2 Legal basis

In most cases, a statutory or legal mandateneeds to be created prior to the project beingofficially recognised. is process then allowspublic funds to be disbursed towards theplanning process as well as permits planningstaff to be employed on the project. e actualauthorisation process will vary depending uponlocal, provincial, and national laws and regula-tions. In some cases, city councils or provincialparliaments will need to give formal approvalsbefore project expenditures can be realised. In

other cases, the mayor or governor may havegreater legal authority to approve project activi-ties independently.

2.1.3 Development team

A new mass transit system for a city is not asmall undertaking. It is unlikely to be achieved

without staff dedicated full-time to the effort.Attempting to plan a BRT system while simul-taneously juggling other planning duties willmost likely not produce a high-quality or timely

result. us, the organisation and selection of adedicated BRT planning team is a fundamentalstep towards planning the system.

2.1.3.1 Planning staff

Depending on the intended timeline for plan-ning and implementing the system, the initialnumber of full-time team members will likelyvary from three to ten. As the project progresses,the size and specialties of the team will likelygrow. Some of the initial posts to be filled mayinclude:

nProject coordinator

nAdministrative support

nProject accountant

n Public education and outreach

n Negotiator for discussions with existingoperators

n Liaison officer for international organisations

n Finance specialist / economist

nTransport engineer

nTransport modeller

nDesign specialist.

In some cases, it may be possible to outsourcesome of these activities to consultancies. How-ever, it is important to retain a certain degreeof in-house technical competence in order to

maintain a perspective that will allow for in-formed decision-making.

e composition of the team may include bothexisting municipal employees as well as newstaff with specialised skills. Since BRT is a rela-tively new concept, it is sometimes difficult tofind staff with extensive implementation experi-ence. For this reason, some training and evenstudy tours may be appropriate mechanisms todevelop local technical capacity (Figure 9).

A local team working in conjunction with ex-perienced international professionals can ideallyresult in a combination of world best practiceand local context.

2.1.3.2 Project management structure

Initially, the team will be involved in basic fact-

finding and analysis work, such as estimatingboth existing and projected transport demand.However, as the project begins to coalescetowards a more formalised and structured effort,then a specific organisational structure may beappropriate. Figure 10 gives an example of anorganisational structure for a BRT developmentproject. In this case, the mayor (or other lead-ing political official) serves as the chairpersonoverseeing the project. is type of directleadership involvement helps ensure that the

project remains a top priority throughout thedevelopment process.

Fig. 9

Study tours to citieslike Bogot, Curitiba,

and Quito can greatlyhelp build the technical

capacity of staff fromother cities.

Photo by Lloyd Wright


18/88

10


e organisational structure in Figure 10 alsoshows a steering committee consisting of keyoutside stakeholders such as non-governmental

organisations, other government agencies, andprivate sector associations. Formal inclusionof all key stakeholders in the process can helpensure the necessary buy-in to make the projecta reality. Giving a voice and ownership role tothese groups will ideally create a spirit of sharedcommitment that will drive the project towardsimplementation.

2.1.4 Project scope and timing

2.1.4.1 Work plan and timeline

Once a vision is set for the BRT system and aninitial team is formed, a detailed work plan andtimeline on how to achieve the vision will benecessary. By walking through each step of theprocess, municipal officials and the public willhave a better idea of the scope of the project andthe necessary activities to make it happen.

Invariably, cities underestimate the amount oftime needed to complete a full BRT plan. ABRT plan can be reasonably completed in 12 to18 months, but can take longer in cases of very

large and complicated cities. e actual dura-tion of the planning process will depend greatlyupon the complexity of the project and uponother local conditions.

Completing the work plan and timeline willhelp ensure that important elements such aspublic communication and education are notin-advertently left out. No matter how wellone plans, though, unexpected events willalso act to necessitate modifications. us, the

work plan and timeline should be revisited and

revised from time to time during the planningprocess.

2.1.4.2 Project phases

A BRT can be phased-in over several distinctperiods or built in a massive single effort. Typi-

cally, cities choose to construct a system over aseries of phases. e phased approach is neces-sitated for several reasons:

n Financing for the entire system may not beimmediately available

n Results from the initial phase can help im-prove the design in subsequent phases

n e limited number of local constructionfirms may not be sufficient to construct asystem across the entire city

n Phased construction reduces the disruption

that the construction process brings to citytraffic flows.

However, even if a system is to be built overa series of phases, it is still worthwhile to putforward a vision for the entire system. Such avision may consist simply of a route map show-ing where all planned corridors are intended tobe placed. us, even residents and stakeholders

who will not immediately benefit from theinitial phases of the system will see the long-term value for themselves.

A phased approach also should not be an excusefor an overly timid first phase. An extremelylimited initial phase may not produce the neces-sary results to justify further phases. BRT along

just a single corridor may not attract sufficientpassenger numbers to become financiallysustainable. If the financial model fails in thefirst phase, there may never be a second phase.

A single corridor strategy depends on peopleworking, shopping, and living on the same cor-ridor. is highly limited set of circumstances

typically means that a single corridor simplycannot achieve sufficient customer flows.

Fig. 10

e organisationalstructure for BRT

project developmentshould include political

leadership, stakeholderinvolvement, anddedicated teams to key

functional areas.


19/88

11


2.1.5 Planning budget and financing

2.1.5.1 Budgeting fundamentals

e realistic scope and depth of the BRT plan-ning process is largely determined by the avail-

able funding. However, the first step should beto determine the required amount based uponthe projected activities. An estimated budgetfor the plan can be developed from the activi-ties outlined in the work plan. e budget willinclude staff salaries, consultant fees, travel andstudy tours, resource materials, telecommunica-tions, and administrative support. Some ofthese costs may be covered by existing budgetsand overheads while other line items will neednewly dedicated funding. Since the planninghorizon is likely to encompass 12 to 24 monthsof time, any cost escalations such as projectedsalary increases or inflationary trends shouldalso be considered.

Budgets should be made as realistic as possible.Overly-optimistic projections will ultimately becompared unfavourably to actual results, which

will be used by project opponents to underminethe projects image. Unfortunately, projectingbudgets is never an exact science. Unexpectedand unforeseen events will undoubtedly arise

which will create the need for budgetary ad-justments. us, it is always wise to include acontingency amount that will help cover suchunexpected costs. e contingency is oftenrepresented as a percentage of the projectedtotal (e.g., 10% of the projected budget).

BRT planning costs have historically variedconsiderably, depending upon the scope andcomplexity of the project, as well as the degreeto which in-house expertise is utilised in com-parison to consultants. To plan the extensiveTransMilenio system of Bogot, a total of nearlyUS$ 3 million was spent in the planning process.By comparison, using principally in-house pro-fessionals, the municipality of Quito spent onlyapproximately US$ 500,000 to plan its smallersystem. In general, though, planning costs willlikely range from US$ 400,000 to US$ 5 mil-lion. It is hoped that the GTZ BRT planningguide will help cities plan a BRT system at alower cost and within a shorter time frame.

2.1.5.2 Local funding sources

In comparison to other transport projects, suchas road networks and rail systems, the planning

costs of BRT are typically much less. For thisreason, the costs are often financed withinexisting municipal or provincial revenues with-out the need for alternative financing sources

such as loans or bonds. is situation can evenbe true of low-income, developing cities. Local,provincial, and national resources should allbe quite sufficient to readily complete the BRTplanning process.

2.1.5.3 International funding sources

However, at the same time, several internationalsources stand ready to assist cities interestedin BRT. e international resources often alsobring the additional advantage of allowinggreater access to consultants with international

BRT experience. e disadvantage of manyinternational funding sources is the amount ofeffort required in the application process andthe sometimes lengthy delay in receiving projectacceptance.

Multi-lateral organisations such as the WorldBank, regional development banks, and agen-cies of the United Nations may be able to pro-vide grants to support planning activities andinitial demonstrations. Unlike loans, grant-typefunding mechanisms do not require repayment.

One such grant mechanism is the Global Envi-ronment Facility (GEF). e GEF was createdin 1991 to assist governments and internationalorganisations in their goals of overcomingglobal environmental threats. e GEF hassupported BRT planning efforts in cities suchas Santiago (Chile), Lima (Peru), Mexico City(Mexico), and Hanoi (Vietnam). Other interna-tional organisations, such as UNDP and UNEP,may also support BRT planning activities.

Additionally, bi-lateral agencies such the Ger-

man Overseas Technical Cooperation Agency(GTZ), the Swedish International Development

Agency (Sida), and the United States Agency forInternational Development (USAID) may beapproached to assist on the provision of supportand technical resources. Private foundationssuch as the Hewlett Foundation, the ShellFoundation and the former W. Alton JonesFoundation have also been supporters of BRTactivities.


20/88

12


2.2 Planning Stage II: Analysis

e demand for transit services will be one ofthe principal determining factors in designingthe system. Virtually all major decisions such as

the choosing the busway corridors, the size ofthe vehicles, the size of stations and terminals,and the type of fare collection systems willemanate from the likely passenger demand.Transport modelling tools can be useful inprojecting future system demand, and thus helpin determining the systems capacity needs overa longer time horizon.

A starting point for this type of analysis is tofully understand the current matrix of journeystaken in the city as well as the current supply of

transport services. is section outlines both atraditional transport modelling approach as wellas noting the minimum analytical requirementsfor determining the projected demand.

e topics to be presented in Planning Stage II,Analysis, are:

2.2.1 Background and situational

description

2.2.2 Stakeholder analysis

2.2.3 Transport data collection

2.2.4 Transportation demand modelling

2.2.1 Background and situationaldescription

A citys public transit system is intimately wo-ven into the existing demographic, economic,environmental, social, and political conditions.Understanding these conditions enables the

BRT planner to better align the prospectivepublic transit system with the local realities.Some of these data items will later be inputtedinto transportation models to project futureneeds. Other portions of this background infor-mation will help the planner view the proposedpublic transit system in its wider socio-eco-nomic context.

2.2.2 Stakeholder analysis

e pre-planning period is also the time to

begin identifying key groups and organisationsthat should be included in the planning and

development of improved transit services. Spe-cific agencies, departments and political officials

will all have varying opinions and interests withregard to developing a new transit system. Non-

governmental and community-based organiza-tions will be important resources to draw uponduring later public participation processes. etypes of organisations to be sought during thestakeholder identification process include:

n Existing transport operators, and operatorsand drivers associations (formal and infor-mal)

n Customers (including current transit users,car owners, non-motorised transport users,student travel, low-income communities,

physically disabled, elderly)nMunicipal transit departments

nMunicipal environmental departments

n Municipal urban development departments

n Traffic and transit police

nRelevant national agencies

nNon-governmental organisations

nCommunity-based organisations.

2.2.3 Transportation data collection

A solid understanding of existing transportchoices will help serve to define the presentand future requirements of a BRT system. edata collected on current transport supply anddemand will serve as a major input into deter-mining the design characteristics of the system.is data may also be used within a transportsoftware model to project various differentscenarios.

e accuracy and precision of the data collecteddepends in part on the funding that is available

for the analysis. Traffic counts and surveysencompassing large sample sizes will help pro-vide an accurate basis but may prove to be toocostly for many developing cities. Fortunately,in many cases, mode share and travel data havealready been collected to a certain degree.

2.2.3.1 Minimum data collection

requirements

Not all developing cities will be able to afford afull data collection process that results in iden-

tifying origin-destination pairings to any degreeof great detail. However, these cities will still


21/88

13


need to quantify existing passenger volumes on

major corridors. us, as a minimum, cities will

wish to conduct basic traffic counts on principal

transit corridors. e most important focus

of the traffic count will be the existing publictransport passenger numbers. However, since

a percentage of passengers from other modal

options (e.g., private autos, motorcycles, etc.)

will likely switch to the new BRT system, basic

counts of these vehicles and passengers should

also be undertaken.

e number of persons boarding and alight-

ing at major points along the corridors should

also be documented. e numbers will help in

determining the size of stations and the result-

ing dwell times for transit vehicles at stations.

is basic data collection process should also

include an inventory of all existing public trans-

port vehicles (e.g., standard buses, mini-buses,

vans, etc.). is inventory of transit supply can

then be correlated with the corridor passenger

counts. If cooperation with existing transit

operators is possible, then interviews to record

current routings, travel times, and passenger

numbers of each operator will be quite useful.

2.2.3.2 Detailed data collection on current

transport demand

Establishing the nature of existing travelpatterns is fundamental to projecting the

requirements for a proposed mass transitsystem. However, demand studies can be themost costly component of the data collectionprocess. Finding the right balance between theneed for accuracy and the level of costs is a keyconsideration. Funds expended on demandstudies translate directly into fewer funds forother aspects of the planning process. Commonelements of a demand analysis include an origin-destination survey (O-D survey), behaviouraldeterminants for travel, and activity data (e.g.,

opening times of shops). e most crucialelement from the perspective of developing amass transit system is the O-D survey. Figure 11provides a graphical representation of the datacollected through an O-D analysis.

2.2.3.3 Current transport supply

e demand for transport services is only partof a citys transit equation. An inventory of theexisting supply of services is also an essentialpart of characterising the current situation. edata collected on the supply side include:

Fig. 11

Illustration of theresults of anorigindestinationstudy in Bogot.Illustration courtesy of TransMilenio SA


22/88

14


n Size and capacity of road network

n Inventory of parking facilities

n Identification of public transport networks

n Quality and coverage of pedestrian infra-

structuren Quality and length of bicycle infrastructure

n Number of public transport companies (in-cluding private operators)

n Number and age of public transport vehiclesby type

n Costs of travel (both individual and masstransit modes)

n Schedules and frequency of public transportservices.

Recording the number of companies withcollective transit operations, including bothprivately- and publicly-owned entities, willprovide insight into the viability of achiev-ing competitive balances within the industry.Typically, public transit in developing cities hasgravitated towards one of two structural ex-tremes: 1.) A single, state-owned monopoly; or2.) Hundreds (or more) of individually ownedvehicles. Neither of these two predominatedesigns necessarily leads to an optimal result in

terms of customer service or economic efficiency.2.2.4 Transportation demand modelling

Modelling is a simplified representation of realworld systems that allows projections of futureconditions. Transportation modelling is quitecommonly utilised to determine expecteddemand and supply conditions that will helpshape decisions on future infrastructure needsand supporting policy measures. Modellinghelps project future transport growth as well asallows planners to run projections across manydifferent scenarios.

However, it should be noted that transportationmodels do not solve transport problems. Rather,the models are tools that provide decision-mak-ers with information to better gage the impactsof different future scenarios. e type ofscenarios considered and the type of city condi-tions desired are still very much the domain ofpublic policy decision-making.

In some circumstances, full formal modelling

may not be required at all. Instead, simplifiedscenario building utilising spreadsheet analysis

can provide the basic information required toproceed with the BRT planning process. Ofcourse, a full modelling process will provide ahigher degree of certainty for decision-makers

and planners. e decision on the degree ofmodelling undertaken is in part a question ofthe resources available (financial and temporal)and in part a question of the complexity of thecitys transport sector. A highly fragmented andcomplex urban landscape may require moreanalytic effort than a city with relatively clearand consistent transport patterns.

To project future transport trends, assumptionsrelating transport to expected economic growthcan provide basic expectations of the percentage

of annual growth. e other significant set ofassumptions will relate to the amount of modeshifting to take place. If current informal opera-tors are allowed to continue in conjunction withthe BRT system, what percentage of the rider-ship will remain with the existing operators?If the new BRT system implies an increase infare levels, what percentage of public transportusers will switch to lower-cost options such as

walking or cycling? What percentage of privatevehicle users (two-wheel and four-wheel privatevehicles) will switch to the BRT system?

In Bogot, an estimated 10 percent of privatevehicle users switched to the BRT system dur-ing the first phase of the project (Steer DaviesGleave, 2003). Most public transport usersmoved to BRT since many directly competingroutes by existing operators were eliminated.However, the slightly lower price of existingoperators has meant that a number of customershave continued using these services in cases

where they still operate.


23/88

15


2.3 Planning Stage III:Communications

Effective transport planning is not conducted inisolation. In many instances, insights from the

public, civic organisations, existing operators,private sector firms, and other governmentalentities are more relevant than merely relyingupon planning staff and consultants. Systemsshould be designed around the needs and wantsof the customer. All subsequent details withregard to technology and structure can followfrom this simple focus upon the customer. Asnoted previously, bus systems today are oftenlosing mode share because customer concernsabout convenience, safety, and comfort are not

being addressed. In developing cities, existingtransport operators represent another key groupthat can provide insights into the design proc-ess, especially with regard to costs and the finalbusiness structure of the system.

is planning stage discusses methods forengaging these key stakeholders in the designprocess as well as the key attributes in providinga customer-friendly service. e topics to bepresented in Planning Stage III, Communica-tions, are:

fully accepted and utilised by the public. Pro-fessional planners and engineers obviously doplay a key role in system design, but often such

professionals do not frequently use public

transport systems, and thus do not possess someof the design insights of the general public.Some cities are now requiring public officials touse public transport each day so as to retain abetter understanding of the daily realities.

2.3.2 Communications with existingtransport operators

"And it should be realised that taking

the initiative in introducing a new

form...is very difficult and dangerous,and unlikely to succeed. Te reason is

that all those who profit from the old

order will be opposed to the innovator,

whereas all those who might benefit

from the new order are, at best, tepid

supporters of him."- Niccolo Machiavelli

As Machiavelli noted in the 16th

Century,change is never easy and likely will be resistedregardless of the benefits of the intendedchange. BRT can improve profits and workingconditions for existing operators and drivers.However, in many countries, the sector isunaccustomed to any official involvement andoversight, and operators often carry a distinctdistrust of public agencies. In cities such asBelo Horizonte (Brazil) and Quito (Ecuador)proposed formalisation of the transport sector

has sparked violence and civil unrest.Ideally, the existing operators can come to viewBRT as a positive business opportunity and notas a threat to their future. How this key sectorcomes to view the concept, though, largelydepends on the circumstances and manner in

which BRT is introduced to them. e munici-pality will wish to carefully plan an outreachstrategy that will build a relationship of open-ness and trust with the existing operators. Atleast one planning staff member should be

dedicated permanently to liaison activities withthe existing operators. In some instances, this

2.3.1 Public participation processes

2.3.2. Communications with existing

transit operators

2.3.3. Marketing plan

2.3.4. Public education plan

2.3.1 Public participation processes

Typically, a significant barrier to the actual

implementation of a BRT system is neithertechnical nor financial in nature. More often,it is a lack of political will and a lack of com-munication and participation from key actorsthat ultimately undermines a projects progress.Communications are not only important interms of obtaining public approval of theproject but also provide the design insights ofthe people who will be using the system. Publicinputs on likely corridors and feeder servicescan be invaluable. Incorporating public views

on design and customer service features willalso help ensure that the system will be more


24/88

16


position may best be filled by a former transitoperator or another person who holds personalcredibility with the operators.

2.3.3 Marketing plan

Bus Rapid Transit is not just another bus service.However, communicating this effectively to the

public is not an easy task. e negative stigmaof existing bus systems is a formidable barrier to

Fig. 13

Examples of masstransit logos.

Fig. 12

e public holds theTransMilenio system in

high esteem.Photo by Jorge Ladino, from

TransMilen io photo contest organised

by the District Institute for Culture andTourism

overcome in selling the BRT concept. In mostparts of the world, the public transport is seenas an unsafe, uncomfortable, and unpleasantoption.

e right marketing campaign can help putBRT in a new light for the customer. e civicpride exuded from the TransMilenio system inBogot has manifested itself through severalunusual outcomes. Some couples have decidedto hold their weddings in the system (Figure 12).

e name and logo of the system is another keystarting point to impart the sense of a new typeof transit service. Creating the right marketingidentity helps create the right image in thecustomers mind. Cities that have successfully

implemented BRT have developed marketingidentities that set their product apart and excitethe publics imagination (Figure 13). In manyinstances, the use of terms such as metro or

rapid transit has instilled a modern image withthe customer.

2.3.4 Public education plan

BRT will hopefully introduce a range of cus-tomer service innovations that will provide adramatically improved transit experience for

the public. To prepare the public for BRT, aneducational campaign will be necessary. is


25/88

17


plan is in part designed to secure support andapproval for BRT but also to better prepare thepublic on how the system will be used. us,a public education campaign is similar to the

overall marketing effort, but the focus is lesson selling the system and more on providing abaseline of information to the public.

e public education process starts well beforethe system goes into operation. Informationkiosks in Brisbane (Figure 14) helped to raisepublic awareness. Generating excitement overthe look and utility of the new public transitsystem can help to ensure that the project isfully implemented. A high level of public sup-port will make it more difficult for small groups

of special interests to undermine the project.Further, the degree of public support can alsobolster political officials who may otherwise beswayed by detractors.

An actual small-scale demonstration of thesystem may in fact be one of the most effectivetypes of public education mechanisms. Citiessuch as Lima (Peru) have introduced the BRTconcept to residents through such a demonstra-tion (Figures 15 and 16). In the case of Lima, ademonstration station and vehicle was placed

in a central park of the city. While this demon-stration did not actually provide any transportservices, it did give residents a tangible exampleof the proposed system. Allowing residents topractice using the fare collection system reducesfuture uncertainty that can act as a barrier to

ridership. Further, the demonstration also isone of the best means for achieving publicexcitement over the possibilities of a new system.Citizens can actually see and feel how the newsystem will change their city and their lives.

Fig. 14

Public informationcentre in Brisbane.

Photo by Karl Fjellstrom

Fig. 157and 163

Lima (Per) held asystem demonstrationin a central park.e demonstrationfeatured both a station

and a transit vehicle,which helped citizensunderstand the systemprior to its construction.Photos courtesy of the Human City

Foundation.


26/88

18


2.4 Planning Stage IV:Operations

With the identification of travel demand char-acteristics (Planning Stage II) and inputs from

interested groups and individuals (PlanningStage III), it is now possible to prepare a con-ceptual framework for the operational aspectsof the new transit system. By knowing wherekey origins and destinations are located, theplanning team can identify the most appropri-ate initial corridors. Further, the team can alsoconsider the various types of routing and serviceoptions that are possible, such as feeder, express,and local services. Decisions are also possible onthe level of customer service quality that will be

provided within the system. Attributes such asservice frequency, hours of operation, comfortlevels, cleanliness, security, and safety will alleventually affect overall ridership levels.

e topics discussed in Planning Stage IV,Operations, are:

corridors. However, in some instances, lowerdemand corridors may be selected if the degreeof complexity in the high-demand corridorscreates implementation difficulties. System

developers may first choose to address a lesscomplex corridor in order to first gain experi-ence. If a lower demand corridor is selected,though, it must still possess a sufficient quantityof useful origins and destinations so that theinitial system will be financially viable.

Access for special groups, particularly disadvan-taged communities, may also be a determiningfactor. Some systems prefer to develop initiallines around low-income areas so as to dem-onstrate that BRT has strong developmental

linkages. Bogot, for instance, focused its initialcorridor in the lower-income south of the city.e initial corridors, though, will typicallyinclude key employment destinations such ascentral business districts. While road space insuch areas may be more limited, the concentra-tion of employment and services in central areasmakes it imperative to provide direct access.

Trunk corridors are typically selected to operateupon major arterial roads. ese roads oftenoffer several advantages:

n Population densities are often higher nearmajor arterials;

n Wider road space to accommodate both dedi-cated busways and mixed traffic lanes;

n Clear and logical connections with othermajor arterials in order to form an integratednetwork; and,

n A concentration of major destinations such asbusinesses and shopping areas.

However, major arterials are not the only op-

tion to consider as trunk corridors. In someinstances, another viable alternative is the selec-tion of a secondary street that is parallel to amajor arterial.

2.4.2 Feeder services

2.4.2.1 Trunk-feeder services versus direct

services

Providing a transit service to all major resi-dential and commercial sectors of a city canbe challenging from a standpoint of system

efficiency and cost effectiveness. e densestportions of the city necessitate high-volume

2.4.1 Corridor identification

2.4.2 Feeder services

2.4.3 Service options

2.4.4 Passenger capacity

2.4.5 System management and control

2.4.6 Customer service

2.4.1 Corridor identification

e choice of corridor location will not onlyimpact the usability of the BRT system for largesegments of the population but will also have

profound impacts on the future development

of the city. e starting point for corridor deci-sions is the demand profiles generated during

the modelling process, which will help identifythe daily commuting patterns in both spatialand temporal terms. Clearly a key consideration

is to minimise travel distances and travel timesfor the largest segment of the population. isobjective will typically result in corridor siting

near major destinations such as work places,universities and schools, and shopping areas.

us, the areas serving the highest customerdemand may be selected as the initial system


27/88

19


vehicles to achieve the required capacity whilelower-density residential areas may be most ef-fectively served with smaller vehicles. However,at the same time, customers generally prefer

not to transfer between vehicles when given thechoice. e question for BRT system planners ishow to balance these varying needs and prefer-ences. Smaller residential areas do not have tobe sacrificed from the system. A well-designedsystem can accommodate a range of populationdensities in order to achieve a true city-wideservice.

In general, there are two service options for ad-dressing the presence of both high-density andlower-density areas within a city. ese options

are:1. Trunk-feeder services; and,2. Direct services.

Trunk-feeder services utilise smaller vehicles inlower-density areas and then necessitate pas-sengers to transfer to higher-capacity vehicles atterminals. A trunk-feeder service thus operatesrelatively efficiently by closely matching vehicleoperating characteristics to the actual demand.However, such services do imply that somepassengers will need to transfer vehicles in order

to reach their destination. e process of trans-ferring can be seen as an undesirable burden forsome passengers.

Direct services avoid the need for customersto transfer since the same vehicle serves boththe feeder area and the trunk-line corridor.However, direct services incur a substantial costpenalty for operating vehicles that do not closelymatch the actual demand. us, direct servicesmay imply that a large vehicle must enter intolower-density areas where relatively few pas-

sengers will be in the bus. Alternatively, directservices may imply that small vehicles operateefficiently in feeder areas but are undersized forthe economics of trunk corridors. Direct serv-ices may still necessitate a transfer if the pas-sengers destination is a different corridor thanthe closest trunk corridor. Figure 17 provides agraphical comparison of trunk-feeder servicesand direct services.

In general, the most successful BRT systems(e.g., Bogot, Curitiba, and Quito) operate with

trunk-feeder services. However, there are alsoexamples of systems, such as Porto Alegre (Bra-

zil) and Kunming (China), which operate withdirect services. e decision to choose a trunk-feeder service or a direct service can dependon many factors, including the structure of thecity, the variation of population densities andservice demand across different sectors of thecity, distances to be travelled, and the businessstructure of the system.

2.4.2.2 Lack of feeder services

Can a BRT system operate only on major cor-ridors without any supporting feeder services?Some cities have attempted to implement abusway system without providing either feederservices or direct services into residential areas.Typically, this arrangement occurs when a citywishes to implement a limited experiment ona major corridor during a BRT projects firstphase. By doing so, the municipality can avoidaddressing many of the complicated issuesrelated to existing informal operators who serv-ice residential areas. e municipality can alsoavoid the complications related to the integra-tion of services. However, the results to date onsuch an approach have not been entirely positive.

Jakarta (Indonesia) inaugurated its TransJakartaBRT system in January 2004 with an initialPhase I corridor of 12.9 kilometres. e systemin this corridor consists of a single-lane medianbusway (Figure 18). e corridor is largely

composed of business and shopping orienteddestinations with few residential origins. e

Direct services

Feeder-trunk services

Fig. 17: Illustrative comparisonbetween trunk-feeder services and direct services


28/88

20


municipality elected not to provide any feederservices during the opening phase. e city alsoelected to allow the existing bus operators tocontinue operating in the mixed traffic lanes.Unsurprisingly, the results have not been favour-able either to the BRT system or the generaltraffic. e limited BRT system has carried just60,000 passengers per day and 6,000 passengers

per hour per direction at peak times. e con-tinued operation of the existing operators in thereduced confines of the mixed traffic lanes hasalso exacerbated overall traffic congestion levels.Retroactively, Jakarta is attempting to arrangefeeder services with existing operators but thearrangements have failed to work properly.

2.4.3 Service options

2.4.3.1 Local services and station spacing

e most basic type of transit service along acorridor is typically known as local service.is term refers to stops being made at each ofthe major origins and destinations along a route.However, in comparison to conventional busservices, the distance between stops on BRTcorridors is greater. A typical range of distancesis between 300 metres and 700 metres.

By avoiding short stopping distances, the overalltravel time is reduced due to higher averagevehicle velocities. Hail and ride services pro-

vided by private bus operators in many develop-ing cities implies that the bus will stop whenever

a customer indicates that he or she wishes toboard or alight. While this practice will reducesubsequent walking distances to destinations,the net effect of all passengers controlling stop-

ping location greatly increases overall traveltime for everyone.

2.4.3.2 Express services

Typically, a few major stations will predominateas the intended destination of customers. Formany passengers, stopping at each intermediatestation adds significantly to the overall traveltime with relatively little commercial benefitto the system operators. us, both passengersand operators can benefit from the provision ofservices that skip intermediate stops.

BRTs relative flexibility means that limited-stop services or express services can beaccommodated. e number of station stopsto be skipped depends on the demand profile.Major station areas with the largest customerflows may be the most logical stops retained ina limited-stop service. However, the system canemploy multiple limited-stop routes in order toensure travel times are minimised for the largestnumber of customers. us, limited-stop routescan differ by the stations served as well as by the

number of stations skipped by the service. Someroutes may skip 3 or 4 stations while otherroutes may skip double that number.

While limited-stop services do provide muchamenity value to customers, these services dointroduce greater complexity to the manage-ment of the system. e coordination of vehicleson the same corridor with different travel char-acteristics can be a challenge. Express servicesare thus best implemented in conjunction

with vehicle tracking technology that permits

a central control team to oversee and directvehicle movements. e provision of expressservices also implies particular infrastructurerequirements. In order to skip stops, the limited-stop vehicles must be able to pass intermediatestations. us, sufficient road space must beavailable for either a second set of exclusivebusway lanes or the provision of a passing laneat by-passed stations (Figures 19).

2.4.4 Passenger capacity

Once the initial BRT corridors are selected, thedemand forecasts for these corridors can be used

ig. 18

TransJakarta BRTystem.hoto courtesy of the Institute for

ansportati on & Development Policy


29/88

21


to determine optimum values for factors suchas vehicle capacity, vehicle load factors, servicefrequency, and dwell times. ese attributesin conjunction with the desired preferences for

service types (trunk-feeder, direct, local, express,etc.) and the configuration of stopping bayswill allow system developers to model differentoptions for meeting the expected passengercapacities.

2.4.4.1 Vehicle capacity

Vehicle passenger capacity, load factors, andrequired service frequency are all mutuallydependent. e maximum passenger capac-ity for a given vehicle is in part dependent onassumptions about culturally acceptable levels

of customer comfort at peak times. A trade-offexists between the number of seats providedversus the amount of standing space provided.In some cases, a seated passenger consumes asmuch as twice the space as that required by astanding passenger. However, for long journeytimes passengers may have a strong preferencefor seating.

2.4.4.2 Load factors

e vehicle load factor refers actual capacityusage as a percentage of the maximum pas-senger capacity. For example, if a vehicle has amaximum capacity of 160 passengers and anaverage capacity of 128 passengers, then theload factor is 80 percent (128 divided by 160).Generally, it is not advisable to plan to operateat a load factor of 100 percent. At a 100 percentload factor there is no room for system delaysor small inefficiencies, both of which are likelyoutcomes of over-crowded conditions. edesired load factor may vary between peak andnon-peak periods. In the Bogot TransMileniosystem, typical load factors are 80 percentfor peak periods and 70 percent for non-peakperiods.

2.4.4.3 Service frequency

e service frequency refers to the wait timebetween arriving vehicles. e wait time isalso known as the headway between vehicles.In general, it is desirable to provide frequentservices in order to reduce customer wait times.Customers often perceive waiting times to be

much longer than the actual duration. us, toprovide a car-competitive public transit service,

minimising customer waiting is fundamental.e targeted wait times are closely related to theexpected load factors. Longer wait periods willtend to increase the load factor as more passen-

gers will arrive at the station.

Service frequency varies between different citieswith BRT, but in general, peak frequencies ofone minute to three minutes are quite common.Non-peak frequencies are likely to be longerbut usually in a range of four minutes to eightminutes. Service during weekends may alsotend to follow non-peak frequencies.

2.4.4.4 Dwell time

Another factor affecting operating conditions is

the vehicle dwell time. e dwell time is theamount of time vehicles are stopped at a stationto allow passenger boarding and alighting. eamount of time required depends upon manyvariables including:

n Passenger flow volumes

n Number of vehicle doorways

n Width of vehicle doorways

n Entry characteristics (stepped or at-levelentry)

n

Open space near doorways (on both vehicleand station sides).

Fig. 19

e provision of passinglanes at stations inBogot greatly increasessystem capacity by

allowing for express andlimited-stop services.Photo courtesy of TransMilenio SA


30/88

22


BRT systems operate with dwell times as lowas 20 seconds. Conventional bus services canrequire over 60 seconds for boarding and alight-ing. In general, dwell times may be somewhathigher during peak periods than non-peakperiods.

2.4.4.5 Stopping bay configurations

Passenger capacities along a corridor can beincreased by providing multiple stoppingbays at the station area. A stopping bay is thedesignated area where a vehicle will stop andalign to the platform. In cities such as Curitiba,Kunming, and Taipei, only one stopping bay isprovided per station. However, in other systems,allowing multiple vehicles to stop at the sametime has proven to dramatically increase systemcapacity. Cities such as Bogot and Porto Alegre

employ multiple stopping bays within their BRTsystems. Each stopping bay represents a differ-ent set of services or routes (e.g., local servicesversus limited-stop services or routes with a

different final destination). In Bogot, thereare as many as five different stopping bays at anindividual station (Figure 20).

2.4.4.6 Vehicle velocity

System capacity is actually not strictly depend-ent upon vehicle velocity. A system can move20,000 passengers per hour at 20 kilometres perhour as well as at 10 kilometres per hour. Priorto the development of the Bogot TransMileniosystem, the city possessed a median busway thatcatered to all private bus operators. e uncon-

trolled system meant that there was considerablecongestion on the corridor. e congestion wasdue to buses stopping at random locations as

well as the over-supply of less efficient smallervehicles. Nevertheless, the previous systemmoved approximately 30,000 passengers perhour per direction, but it did so at an averagespeed of less than 10 kilometres per hour. eTransMilenio system moves a similar number ofpassengers but at an average commercial speedof approximately 27 kilometres per hour. Fig-

ures 21 and 22 provide a visual comparison ofBogot with the previous uncontrolled buswayand with the TransMilenio BRT system alongthe same corridor.

Clearly, from the perspective of minimisingtravel time and fulfilling customer preferences,a rapid service is more desirable. While velocityand capacity may not be directly dependent,many factors that affect passenger capacity alsoaffect average velocity:

ig. 20

ogot BRT stations.hoto courtesy of Akiris

ig. 21 and 22

ogot: A corridorefore and after BRTmplementation.hoto on left courtesy of Steer Davies

eave

hoto on right by Lloyd Wright


31/88

23


n Number of busway lanes

nDwell times

n Headways

n Vehicle acceleration and deceleration charac-

teristicsn Number of controlled intersections.

As the number of vehicles on the corridorincreases, the level complexity and opportunityfor conflicts also increases. In turn, these con-flicts between vehicles lead to reduced velocitiesand increased travel times.

2.4.4.7 Capacity calculations

e passenger capacity of a given corridor iscalculated based upon the discussed factors of

vehicle capacity, load factors, service frequency,dwell times, and stopping bay configurations.Quite often a software model will assist incalculating the expected capacity and flow ratesbased on these factors. In general, though, theoverall corridor capacity can be calculated fromthe following equation:

Passenger capacit y = Vehicle capacit y x Load factor x Service frequency x Number of stopping bays

Table 1 provides a sample of BRT capacityfigures for several different combinations of the

factors from the above equation. e values inthis table are merely examples; the actual poten-tial capacities for a given city will vary depend-ing on a variety of local circumstances.

e values presented in table 1 assume that thevehicles operate on a segregated, median-alignedbusway with at-level boarding. Values will belower for side-aligned busways where there are

significantly more turning conflicts with othervehicles. Further, if the vehicles have steppedpassenger entry instead of at-level entry, longerheadways will be necessary to handle the ad-ditional dwell times.

2.4.5 System management and control

Centralised control of the overall transit systemaffords many benefits for optimising efficienciesand minimising costs. Most conventional busservices lack a centralised control and manage-ment system; many do not even possess a basic

radio dispatch system. e lack of such controlsmeans that each vehicle operates individually

without the advantage of reacting collectively toservice changes.

For example, a sudden change in demand, suchas crowds leaving a sporting event, can be more

Table 1: BRT passenger capacity scenarios

Vehicle capacity1(passengers)

Load factorHeadways

(vehicle frequencyin seconds)

Number ofstopping bays

Capacity flow(passengers per

hour per direction)

70 0.85 60 1 3,570

160 0.85 60 1 8,160

270 0.85 60 1 13,770

70 0.85 60 2 7,140

160 0.85 60 2 16,320

270 0.85 60 2 27,540

70 0.85 60 4 28,560

160 0.85 60 4 32,640

270 0.85 60 4 55,080

160 0.85 60 5 40,800

270 0.85 60 5 68,850

1Standard-sized bus (12 metres): 70 maximum passengers.

Articulated bus (18 metres): 160 maximum passengers.Bi-articulated bus (24 metres): 270 maximum passengers.

readily addressed if additional transit supplyis quickly dispatched from a central control

facility to the site. A simple mechanical failureof one vehicle can stifle an entire system if arepair team or a tow truck is not immediatelysent. Additionally, if a security problem arises,


32/88

24


a control centre could provide an appropriateresponse, such as sending a security team toa station or bus. Without centralised control,these types of incidents will likely only be dealt

with locally, which limits the effectiveness ofany solution.

Further, when transporting large volumes ofpassengers through a corridor (over 10,000 pas-sengers per hour per direction), a central controlsystem becomes all the more indispensable tomaintaining smooth operations. e bunching

of vehicles within the system can easily occurwithout centralised monitoring and correctiveactions. Further, if the bunching together ofbuses occurs, this situation also likely impliesthat there will be other points in the system

where buses are too widely separated. Passengersare familiar with the situation in which two orthree buses of the same route will arrive simulta-neously, and then there will be no other buses foranother 30 minutes. Ultimately, the price paidfor failing to respond to these types of incidents

will be customer dissatisfaction and lost ridership.In a high-volume public transit system, thereis very little margin for problems or errors. Avehicle breakdown, even for just a few minutes,can create havoc on the entire system. Likewise,a breakdown of a fare verification turnstile ornon-functioning station door will create similartypes of problems. us, preparing for any andall eventualities is a fundamental part of theoperational plan. e development of backupand contingency plan will ensure that the

system can continue to function even in dif-ficult circumstances.

2.4.6 Customer service

Unlike many existing bus services in develop-ing-nation cities, BRT places the needs of thecustomer at the centre of the systems design

criteria. e quality of customer service isdirectly related to customer satisfaction, whichultimately determines customer usage and long-term financial sustainability (Figure 23).

Unfortunately, unclear maps and schedules,unclean buses, and uncomfortable rides havebeen all too frequently the obligatory price to bepaid for utilising public transport. Public transitand paratransit operators sometimes give scantattention to customer service, assuming insteadthat their market is predominated by captive

customers who have few other options. Such apredilection, though, can lead to a downwardspiral, in which poor services push more com-muters toward private vehicles. In turn, thereduced ridership curtails public transportrevenues and further diminishes quality ofservices, which again leads to a further erosionof the passenger base. e impacts of poorcustomer service may not be immediately evi-dent when the majority of the users are captiveriders who have few other transport options.

However, in the medium and long term thesecaptive riders will become discretionary riders.e discretionary riders will then likely switchto individual motorised transport the moment itbecomes financially feasible to do so.

Customer service is fundamental at each levelof operation. Are drivers courteous, profess

brt manual

Documents