Bus Rapid Transit in Asia: From Quantity to Quality. What is a Bus Rapid Transit system?

Similar documents
Best Practices in Planning and Implementing BRT in China

Two years since our book

What IS BRT, Really? Not BRT and RNY

BRTS IN DHAKA: DESIGNING UNDER CONSTRAINTS

5. OPPORTUNITIES AND NEXT STEPS

Preliminary Definition of Alternatives. 3.0 Preliminary Definition of Alternatives

Mobility of Gurugram & NCR-

Service Quality: Higher Ridership: Very Affordable: Image:

Path to achieving a good transport system:

I-26 Fixed Guideway Alternatives Analysis

Arterial Bus Rapid Transit. System Policy Oversight Committee April 7, 2014

Bus Rapid Transit. Jennifer Flynn and Cheryl Thole Senior Research Associates Commuter Choice Workshop January 2012 Tampa, FL

Mass Rapid Transit Options

State Avenue Corridor Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)

Urban Transport systems in major cities in China. Sun Kechao Senior Engineer China Academy of Transportation Sciences, Beijing, China

Safer Swifter Better Leadrail Infra Solutions Pvt. Ltd. / INDIA

BRT: What is it & Where Does it Fit? Sam Zimmerman

Istanbul METROBUS BRT. Adapted from Presentations by World Resources Institute/EMBARQ s Sibel Koyluoglu and Dario Hidalgo

Road Map for Sustainable Transport Strategy for Colombo Metropolitan Region with Cleaner Air, through Experience

Transportation Policy for Reducing GHG Emissions in Korea. Junhaeng Jo

Policy Template on Best Practices for Energy Efficient Urban Passenger Transportation

Planning for Sustainable Urban Transport Systems in India - Strengths and Weaknesses

UCLA Lake Arrowhead Conference. October 18, 2010

The Bus Rapid Transit System of Lagos, Nigeria

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

We Want Your Input! Review the design alternatives and tell us what s important to you in the design of these areas of the approved BRT Network:

Waco Rapid Transit Corridor (RTC) Feasibility Study

APPENDIX I: [FIXED-GUIDEWAY TRANSIT FEASIBILITY]

EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD, OREGON EAST WEST PILOT BRT LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT

SOME COMMENTS ON PROPOSED BRT SCORING SYSTEM. Gerhard Menckhoff ITDP Transport Systems Summit Bogotá, June 22, 2011

SOLUTIONS Training Kit Cluster 1: Public Transport.

SERVICE DESIGN GUIDELINES

FACTSHEET on Bus Rapid Transit System

Public Meeting. City of Chicago Department of Transportation & Department of Housing and Economic Development

US 29 Bus Rapid Transit Planning Board Briefing. February 16, 2017

TransMilennio Bogota Colombia 84 7m 45,000 1,300,000

UCLA Lake Arrowhead Conference. October 18, 2010

UCLA Lake Arrowhead Conference. October 18, 2010

Co-benefits in Asia s Transportation Sector: Methods and Applications. Thaned Satiennam. Khon Kaen University. Ubon Ratchathani.

Seoul. (Area=605, 10mill. 23.5%) Capital Region (Area=11,730, 25mill. 49.4%)

Kendall Drive Premium Transit PD&E Study Project Kick-Off Meeting SR 94/Kendall Drive/SW 88 Street Project Development and Environment (PD&E) Study

The Soft Side of BRT: Lessons from Developing Cities

Regional Transportation Commission, Washoe County Lee Gibson, Executive Director Roger Hanson, Senior Planner

EMBARQ, the WRI Center for Sustainable Transport

Metro Transit Update. Christina Morrison, Senior Planner Metro Transit BRT/Small Starts Project Office. John Dillery, Senior Transit Planner

VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT

PUBLIC TRANSPORT MODAL CHARACTERISTICS AND ROLES

Urban Transport Development Investment Program (RRP MON 39256) SECTOR ROAD MAP

The City of Toronto s Transportation Strategy July 2007

Key Transfer Stations - Technical Memo

Crenshaw-Prairie Transit Corridor Study Public Meetings

CA PACITY TRA MWAY. November CODATU XVII High capacity tramway November

Bus Rapid Transit: Basic Design for Non-Transit Planners

ASIA BRT CONFERENCE, 2014

ARTERIAL BRT OVERVIEW

1.0 Detailed Definition of Alternatives

Where will. BRT run? BRT will serve 20 stations along the line, connecting to bus routes and serving major destinations. How often will service run?

Modal Choice for Mass Rapid Transit

Develop ground transportation improvements to make the Airport a multi-modal regional

CITY OF LONDON STRATEGIC MULTI-YEAR BUDGET ADDITIONAL INVESTMENTS BUSINESS CASE # 6

CTfastrak Expansion. Stakeholder Meeting #4 Manchester Town Hall June 3, 2016

HOT Lanes: Congestion Relief and Better Transit

Decarbonization of the Transport Sector and Urban Form

Experience on ERTICO s cooperation. the field of ITS. TRA, 25 th April 2012, Athens Vincent Blervaque, Director Development & Deployment

Mississauga Transit 2009 Budget

Snelling Bus Rapid Transit. May 13, 2013 Technical Advisory Committee Meeting #1

TRANSIT IDEA STRATEGIC INITIATIVE On BUS RAPID TRANSIT (BRT)

Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority. Joe Calabrese CEO/General Manager

BUS RAPID TRANSIT INTRODUCTION IN METRO MANILA USING IGES CO

Public Meeting. June 15, :30 7:30 p.m.

Downtown Transit Connector. Making Transit Work for Rhode Island

BRT: NOT JUST LOW COST

THE WAY WE MOVE LRT FOR EVERYONE

PUBLIC TRANSPORT CAPACITY ANALYSIS PROCEDURES FOR DEVELOPING CITIES

PUBLIC TRANSPORT IMPROVEMENT, PLANNING AND OPERATIONS.

Bringing Bus Rapid Transit to Tanzania

MyCiTi. Changing the way Cape Town travels

CHAPTER 2: ROUTE PLANNING BASED ON DEMAND ASSESSMENTS. TTravel Time (TT). A. Rpeak locations and loads on Intermediate Public

East Bay Bus Rapid Transit Project. Downtown Oakland to San Leandro International Blvd to East 14 th St

Improving Urban Transport Systems in Dhaka. Capacity Building Workshop on Sustainable Urban Transport Index (SUTI) Colombo, Sri Lanka

VAN NESS AVENUE BUS RAPID TRANSIT

FACT SHEET. US 192 Alternatives Analysis Modal Technologies. Alternative Description/Overview

Policies on Public Transport Development and Financial Schemes in Taipei

UTA Transportation Equity Study and Staff Analysis. Board Workshop January 6, 2018

Electric Vehicle Adoption in the South African Context

V. Prakash C. Raghul Aravind. K. Ramesh P. Jagadeesh. Under the Guidance Of A.K.Anbarasan M.E Assistant Professor

Public Meeting. March 21, 2013 Mimosa Elementary School

Transit on the New NY Bridge

Ministry of Environment and Forests. Ministry of Communication

Attachment 5. High Speed Transit Planning Study REPORT SUMMARY. Prepared by: City of Edmonton Transportation Planning Branch. Stantec Consulting Ltd.

DETAILED DEFINITION OF ALTERNATIVES. July 2014 FINAL

Draft Results and Open House

Executive Summary. Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report ES-1

2011 Saskatoon Transit Services Annual Report

Brian Pessaro, AICP National Bus Rapid Transit Institute

Ex-Ante Evaluation (for Japanese ODA Loan)

World Bank Support to Urban Transport in India

Urban Mobility by BRT

Mississauga Bus Rapid Transit Preliminary Design Project

A Transit Plan for the Future. Draft Network Plan

Transcription:

Bus Rapid Transit in Asia: From Quantity to Quality Dario Hidalgo, PhD Senior Transport Engineer EMBARQ, The WRI Center for Sustainable Transport TRB Annual Meeting Washington DC, January 2009 What is a Bus Rapid Transit system? Is a flexible, rubber-tired form of rapid transit that combines stations, vehicles, services, running ways and ITS elements into an integrated system with strong identity TCRP Report 90 Bus Rapid Transit Volume 2: Implementation Guidelines 2003 It is a high quality public transport system, oriented to the user that offers fast, comfortable and low cost urban mobility BRT Planning Guide ITDP, 2007 Photo: Karl Fjelstrom - ITDP 1

BRT in Asia: Operational as Sept 2008 Japan 8 China 8 India 2 Turkey 1 Indonesia 1 South Korea 1 Total 21 Data Source: http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-59592.html Google Map: D. Hidalgo BRT Planned or Under Construction in Asia India 16 China 15 Indonesia 8 Philippines 3 Thailand 2 Bangladesh, Iran, Israel, Pakistan, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Turkey 1 Total 51 Data Source: http://www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia/1412/article-59592.html Google Map: D. Hidalgo 2

Running Ways BRT Components Component Low Level BRT High Level BRT Traffic Engineering Mixed Traffic Operations Bus Lanes Changes in Roadway Geometry Curb Parking Controls Median Busway on Arterial At Grade Busway Grade Separated Busway Left and Right Turn Controls Traffic Signal Priorities Stations Shelters Level Boarding and Prepayment Passing Lanes (when required) Vehicles Conventional One-Door Multiple doors Easy Boarding/Alighting Low Emissions ITS Manual dispatch, control, fare collection Automatic Vehicle Location Traffic Signal Priority Electronic Fare Collection Source: Adapted from TCRP 90 Volume 2, 2003 Taipei Busways (1996) Photos: Jason Chang http://ce11012.ce.ntu.edu.tw/paper%5cbeijing%20skchang.pdf 3

Taipei Busways Initial Operation: 1996 Length: 30.3 Km 10 busways (avg 3.03 Km) Stations: 143 bus stops Ridership: 1,680,000 pax/day (total bus ridership 2003); ~10,000 pphpd Frequency: 144 buses/hr Commercial Speed: 14 Km/hr (peak) Median lane busways on Arterial open system (0.1) Small shelters with narrow platfoms insufficient bays (0.25) Mixed fleet (0.25) Automatic fare collection on board, no central control (0.33) BRT Rating: 0.93 (23%) http://ce11012.ce.ntu.edu.tw/paper%5cbeijing%20skchang.pdf Kumming Busway (1999) Photo: Duan Xiaomei - GMTDC 4

Kumming Busway Initial Operation: 1999 Length: 46.7 Km busway Stations: 63 bus stops Ridership: 156,000 pax/day (w/o 14.5 Km extension); 8,600 pphpd Frequency: 140 buses/hr Commercial Speed: 11-14 Km/hr Median lane busways on Arterial open system (0.10) Small shelters with narrow platfoms insufficient bays (0.25) Mixed fleet 20 special buses (0.25) Automatic fare collection on board, no central control (0.33) BRT Rating: 0.93 (23%) Source: http://www.chinabrt.org/en/cities/kumming.aspx Beijing, BRT Line 1 (2005) Photo: Karl Fjelstrom - ITDP 5

Beijing BRT Line 1 Initial Operation: 2004 Length: 16 Km (14 Km segregated) Stations: 18 Ridership: 120,000 pax/day; 8,000 pphpd Frequency: 55 buses/hr Commercial Speed: 21 Km/hr Median Busways on Arterial and Expressways Mixed Traffic in Downtown (0.875) Stations with Level Boarding and Prepayment, Passing Lanes (1) 87 Low Floor Articulated Buses CNG, with 3 doors (0.875) Manual dispatch, control and fare collection (smart card accepted) (0.3) BRT Rating: 3.05 (76%) Source: http://www.chinabrt.org/en/cities/beijing.aspx Hangzhou BRT (2006) Photo: Karl Fjelstrom - ITDP 6

Hangzhou BRT Initial Operation: 2006 Length: 27.2 Km (7 Km busway) Stations: 17 Ridership: 40,000 pax/day; 1,500 pphpd Frequency: 40 buses/hr (15 BRT buses/hr) Commercial Speed: 15 Km/hr (center, 25+ outside center) Curbside and Mid-lanes Busways on Arterial soft segregation (0.1285) Enclosed Stations with Prepayment and level boarding (1) 48 Articulated Buses Diesel, with 4 Doors (0.875) Automatic fare collection; variable message sings (1) BRT Rating: 3.004 (75%) Source: http://www.chinabrt.org/en/cities/hangzhou.aspx Beijing, BRT Lines 2 and 3 (2008) Photo: Karl Fjelstrom - ITDP 7

Beijing BRT Lines 2 and 3 Initial Operation: 2008 Length: 39 Km (23 Km segregated) Stations: 43 Ridership: N/A; 2,000 pphpd Frequency: 20 buses/hr Commercial Speed: 16-19 Km/hr (<15 Km/hr city center) Median Busways on Arterial Mixed Traffic in Downtown (0.59) Stations with Level Boarding and Prepayment, Passing Lanes (1) Low Floor Articulated Buses Diesel, with 4 Doors (0.875) Manual dispatch, control and fare collection (smart card accepted); variable message sings (0.5) BRT Rating: 2.965 (74%) Source: http://www.chinabrt.org/en/cities/beijing.aspx Changzhou BRT (2008) Photo: Karl Fjelstrom - ITDP 8

Changzhou BRT Initial Operation: 2008 Length: 24.6 Km (21.2 Km segregated) Stations: 26 Ridership: N/A; 4,500 pphpd Frequency: 55 buses/hr Commercial Speed: 18 Km/hr Median Busways on Arterial (0.862) Stations with Level Boarding and Prepayment - Narrow (0.75) 60 Low Floor Articulated Buses Diesel, with 4 Doors (0.875) Automatic fare collection; variable message sings (1) BRT Rating: 3.487 (87%) Source: http://www.chinabrt.org/en/cities/changzhou.aspx Chongging BRT (2008) Photo: Karl Fjelstrom - ITDP 9

Chongging BRT Initial Operation: 2008 Length: 11.5 Km (6 Km busway, 3 Km fully segregated) Stations: 9 Ridership: N/A; 200 pphpd Frequency: 4 buses/hr Commercial Speed: 32 Km/hr Median Busways on Arterial and Expressway (0.521) Enclosed Stations On Board Payment Poor Access (0.25) 10 Conventional Buses with steps CNG, with 2 Doors (0.25) Manual fare collection; variable message sings (0.5) BRT Rating: 1.521 (38%) Source: http://www.chinabrt.org/en/cities/chongqing.aspx Dalian BRT (2008) Photo: Karl Fjelstrom - ITDP 10

Dalian BRT Initial Operation: 2008 Length: 13.7 Km (9 Km busway) Stations: 14 Ridership: N/A; 6,500 pphpd Frequency: 80 buses/hr Commercial Speed: 24 Km/hr Median Busways on Arterial - mainly (0.657) Shelters Prepayment Access by Stairs (0.33) 32 Conventional Buses, 32 Articulated Buses Diesel, with 3-4 Doors (0.75) Automatic fare collection; variable message sings (1) BRT Rating: 2.737 (68%) Source: http://www.chinabrt.org/en/cities/dalian.aspx Jinan BRT (2008) Photo: Karl Fjelstrom - ITDP 11

Jinan BRT Initial Operation: 2008 Length: 14.2 Km (10 Km busway) Stations: 22 Ridership: N/A; 800 pphpd (N-S routes) Frequency: 20 buses/hr Commercial Speed: 20 Km/hr (<10 Km/hr in mixed traffic) Median lane busways on Arterial, below flyover (0.714) Enclosed Stations with Prepayment and level boarding (1) 15 Articulated Buses Diesel, with 3 Doors + 40 Conventional Feeder Buses with 2 doors in each side (0.75) Automatic fare collection; variable message sings (1) BRT Rating: 3.464 (87%) Source: http://www.chinabrt.org/en/cities/jinan.aspx Xiamen BRT (2008) Photo: Karl Fjelstrom - ITDP 12

Xiamen BRT Initial Operation: 2008 Length: 40.2 Km (38.2 Km busway) Stations: 30 Ridership: N/A; 3,600 pphpd Frequency: 50 buses/hr Commercial Speed: 29 Km/hr Elevated Busway and Median Lane (0.95) Enclosed stations with prepayment narrow (0.875) Conventional buses 12m and 10 m 2 doors (0.75) Automatic fare collection, variable message sings (1) BRT Rating: 3.575 (89%) Source: http://www.chinabrt.org/en/cities/xiamen.aspx Jakarta, Transjakarta (2004) Photo: ITDP 13

Transjakarta Initial Operation: 2004 Length: 82.5 Km (120 planned by 2008) Stations: 115 stations (11 integration stations, 8 terminals) Ridership: 160,000; 3,600 pphpd Frequency: 40-10 buses/hr Commercial Speed: <15 Km/hr Median Lanes on Arterials (1) Enclosed stations with prepayment only one door (0.875) Diesel and GNC conventional buses 12m 2 doors (0.75) Automatic fare collection, problems with integration no central control, no passenger information systems (0.5) BRT Rating: 3.125 (78%) http://www.itdp.org/index.php/projects/detail/jakarta_brt/ http://www.gobusway.org/images/stories/maps/busway_map_new.jpg http://www.gobusway.org/images/stories/maps/busway_map_new.jpg 14

Madhav Pai - EMBARQ Pune BRT Pilot Corridor (2006) Photo: Madhav Pai - EMBARQ No level boarding causes inconveniences to passengers and increases dwell times Inadequate pedestrian crossings Overcrowded buses Hadapsar Terminal Pune BRT Pilot Corridor Photos: Madhav Pai - EMBARQ 15

Pune BRT Pilot Corridor Initial Operation: 2006 Length: 14.8 Km (3.6 Km busway; 94.6 Km planned) Stations: 27 bus stops Ridership: N/A; 3,600 pphpd Frequency: 30 buses/hr Commercial Speed: 14-16 Km/hr Median lane busways on Arterial open system (0.1) Small shelters with narrow platforms insufficient bays, non-level boarding (0.25) Mixed fleet (0.25) Manual fare collection on board, no central control (0.1) BRT Rating: 0.7 (18%) Source: Pai and Hidalgo, JnNURM Funded BRT Systems in India: A Review, TRB 2009 Delhi BRTS (2008) Photo: Madhav Pai, EMBARQ 16

Delhi BRTS Initial Corridor Initial Operation: 2008 Length: 5.6 Km Stations: 12 Ridership: N/A; 8,000 pphpd Frequency: 60 buses/hr Commercial Speed: 11-13 Km/hr Median lane busways on Arterial open system (0.1) Small shelters with narrow platforms insufficient bays (0.25) Mixed fleet (0.25) Manual fare collection on board, no central control (0.1) BRT Rating: 0.70 (18%) Source: Pai and Hidalgo, JnNURM Funded BRT Systems in India: A Review, TRB 2009 @ Ambedkar Marg & Mehrauli Badarpur Road Junction Photo By: Madhav Pai, EMBARQ/WRI April 26 th, 2008 Bus priority at junction Photo By: Madhav Pai, EMBARQ/WRI April 26 th, 2008 17

Delhi bus corridor had several problems during the first weeks: The traffic signals did not work properly. Signal cycles excessively long (12 minutes) Bus queuing at stations - spillovers High number of Blue Line Bus breakdowns in the bus lane. Bus drivers were not well informed of the new operations. Additional traffic wardens have helped providing instructions. Motor vehicles and two wheelers invaded the bus lanes Pedestrian jaywalking The difficulties received wide media coverage focused on the problems for car drivers 18

Most problems are being corrected, but the concept is in doubt - expansion has slowed down Delhi s problems resulted in a negative impact for BRT all over India Summary BRT Rating Xiamen Changzou Jinan Jakarta Beijing BRT 1 Hangzhou Beijing BRT 2&3 Dailan Chongging Kumming Taipei Delhi Pune 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Running Ways Stations Vehicles ITS 19

Summary Commercial Speed Xiamen Changzou Jinan Jakarta Beijing BRT 1 Hangzhou Beijing BRT 2&3 Dailan Chongging Kumming Taipei Delhi Pune 12 15 15 15 14 14 15 17 18 21 24 29 32 10 15 20 25 30 35 Commercial Speed (Km/hr) Summary Performance Xiamen Changzou Jinan Jakarta Beijing BRT 1 Hangzhou Beijing BRT 2&3 Dailan Chongging Kumming Taipei Delhi Pune 200 800 1,500 2,000 3,600 4,500 3,600 3,600 6,500 8,000 8,000 8,600 10,000-2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 Peak Load (pphpd) 20

Conclusions BRT adoption is happening very fast in Asian developing countries 6 systems started operations in China in 2008 51 systems are being constructed or planned (30% in India) National policies and funding for BRT development Quality and performance are varied Learning by doing BRT is not yet fully understood Photo: Karl Fjelstrom - ITDP Hitches, Hic-Ups What Went Wrong Planning problems Limited institutional capacity (human capital and funding) Lack of familiarity with BRT concepts (infrastructure + buses + operations + technology) Station design and integration of components Initial operations had difficulties Open systems with scarce control (bunching station spillover) Traffic signal priority is missing Accessibility issues Outstanding needs Improved institutions to plan, supervise Stress on operations and quality of service 21