Click here to load reader

Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)

  • View

  • Download

Embed Size (px)

Text of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)

Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)

Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)Presented by: Sina Vadaei, Ali Razmpa, and Nick Stoll

USP 537Introduction Combination of Bus and LR - ComparisonTo Urban Rail SystemHigh CapacityHigh Speed and QualityReliable

To BusesCost Effective ($13.5 million/mile vs. $34.8 million/mile) United States Government Accountability OfficeFlexibleIntroduction - ElementsBusway AlignmentDedicated Right of WayAlong Rail RoadMediansTunnelsElevated StructuresOff-board fare locationIntersection TreatmentPlatform-Level Boarding, ColumbiaBogotas TransMilenio BRT PerformanceU.S: 24% to 33% new riders served by new BRTBogota: 1.65 million passengers/ dayCuritiba: 2.26 millionEugene: 4,70050% increase from bus ridership$6.25 million/mile

Bus Rapid Transit (BRT): An Efficient and Competitive Mode of Public TransportPerformance MeasuresOperating SpeedsComfortSafetyEnvironmental ImpactsSocial EquityOperating Speeds: higher speeds for better built BRT services. This can be increased by grade separation, overpasses, or use of exclusive lanes. Can also be increased by fast boarding techniques like multi-door boarding electronic payment. Make sure schedule is adhered to. Also seen an increase in operating speeds when switched to formalized public services. IstanbulComfort: Usually has high marks in customer comfort. In the case of Adelaide and Los Angeles, was rated higher than on-street bus or other rail services. BRT Standard 2013 has defined standards to make BRT station comfortable: protection from weather, well-lit, and security. Safety: Grade separation can make BRT more safe than other modes of transit. However, safety can cause a modest effect in lowering efficiency of services.Environmental impacts: Likely positive. Removing cars and replacing slow moving buses likely improves conditions relative to the status quo. BRT is cleaner than LRT.Social Equity: Pro-poor. Successful is implemented with good pricing scheme and focus on the right demographics (Johannesburg the bad example)Comparisons

4 to 20 times less than LRT, and 10 to 100 times less than metrorail.BRT can do more with the same budget.

Higher Urban Density: Urban rail.

Urban rail tends to provide better quality of service

Urban rail usually better for city shaping.

Can work togetherBRT is usually the most cost-effective alternative. Provides a faster return on investment. However, generally has lower carrying capacity. Urban rail usually provides better connectivity, and tends to have stronger city shaping capabilities. Because urban rail cost more, higher urban densities are needed to justify costs. Urban rail usually provides better quality of service: higher operating speeds and coverage. BRT is often hurt by social stigma. Can be implemented in pieces (attached to existing roadways), so provides service more quickly. Takes more careful planning for BRT to be effective in shaping growth (Ottawa and Curitiba) as best examples. Infrastructure and political support crucial for success of BRT to shape city growth. For larger metro areas, BRT and Urban Rail can often work together. BRT is versatile, cheap, good in low density, feeder system, and can be a could way to link to urban rail. Curitiba: Trinary Road System

Dedicated BRT lanes. High density around BRT, with low density on the outside. Infrastructure and political support.Managed CompetitionPublic control, private operationsimilar to privatization seen last week.awarded to lowest bidder.Bogota: incentives given for service instead of number of passengers.Most BRT systems, exceptions in the developed world. public authority controls planning, policies, designing routes and schedules, fare setting and collection, services standards, and marketing. private operation control is given to the lowest bidder, who can meet the quality-control standards.Bogota: income to operators is given on the basis of services provided, and not number of people. Payment based on kilometers of service provided and quality (on time). Fined if dont meet standards. Extra money given to best performing firms. Ultimately, the obstacle to BRT development are more likely to be political than financial or technical. However, for the few political leaders who take the chance to redefine their cities with full BRT, the rewards are clear.-Lloyd WrightCheap, versatile way to move people. Often hurt by social stigma and shifting political landscapes.

A Review Over Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and Economic Development Article: Case Study of the Eugene-Springfield BRT SystemEconomies of Agglomeration : The decline in average cost as more production occurs within a specified geographical areaResearch Method and Data:The Emx BRT system is evaluated for its economic development outcomes in terms of employment change within 0.25 and 0.50 miles of BRT stations. Employment data obtained from the Local Employment Dynamics (LED) database.QuestionsMany great benefits were mentioned about BRT. What are some of the downfalls and shortcomings of a BRT system?Third world countries take advantage of BRT due to its low cost. If money is not an issue would a light rail system be a better choice? Would a new right rail system attract more new transit users or BRT?QuestionsWhat negative effects might BRT system have on job changes and distribution of employment? (Assuming in Portland)According to the graphs, Please give some reasons for considerable changes in certain jobs and distribution of employment ?

QuestionsWhat would be some good ways to improve the social image of BRT?With increased focus and environmental technologies, what do you see as the future for BRT systems?In doing a CBA for implementing a BRT vs. a LRT system, what factors would you consider?

Search related