MISC | Bus Rapid Transit

[Northsider]

I just read a few months ago that Curitiba, the bastion of BRT, now needs a metro line because the BRT cannot handle the demand.

[Tiago Costa]

This is not entirely true. The demand is not bigger than the capacity of the system in all sections, just in the north-south corridor. In fact, there is nothing wrong with the replacement of the nort-south corridor by a metro line, because BRT is not a substitute of metro, just a mass-transit system that serves demands that are much less than the necessary for making a metro line comercially sustainable. There are demands which a BRT is viable, and there are demands which a BRT is not viable, because it can't handle. When the demand of a BRT system reaches 80% of its capacity, there must be a plan for replacing the corridor by light/medium (or even high) capacity metro.

[Northsider]

Exactly, which falls into my point of BRT not being a replacement or alternative to a metro line like so many BRT advocated tout.

[Mo Rush]

Originally Posted by JustinB

Exactly.

BRT advocates love to sell BRT as a cheap alternative to rail. It's not. BRT can never, ever come close to rail in terms of capacity, and prominence, no matter how much money they pour into sites such as nbrti.org, Calstart, or Breakthrough Technologies.

Instead of trying to compete with rail, BRT advocates would do better to sell BRT as a mode that can complement rail, or where the demand does not justify rail. But advocates would prefer to compete against rail, and it has not been a successful campaign so far.

BRT IS A glorified bus, and it should be sold as such, because a glorified bus is still better than the local bus.

Exactly why Cape Town maintains that rail forms the backbone of our transport system,which it does and will continue to do.

Cape Town's BRT will align itself with rail services and provide additional services where the cost of a new rail service exceeds the benefits. Cape Town also benefits from an existing reasonably extensive rail service.

[JustinB]

That's a smart move. Get people to the trains quickly, and in an attractive manner.

[greg_christine]

Now that this thread has devolved into the usual Bus Rapid Transit versus Light Rail Transit debate, I'll share some numbers from website of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. Los Angeles has the Orange Line BRT and Gold Line LRT, which are roughly the same length and operate through corridors with similar population density.

http://www.metro.net/news_info/facts.htm

Date Opened
Gold Line LRT: July 26, 2003
Orange Line BRT: October 29, 2005

Average Weekday Boardings (March 2009)
Gold Line LRT: 24,293
Orange Line BRT: 22,334

Total Annual Boardings FY2008
Gold Line LRT: 6.58 million
Orange Line BRT: 7.46 million

Route Length
Gold Line LRT: 13.7 miles
Orange Line BRT: 14 miles

Stations
Gold Line LRT: 13
Orange Line BRT: 13

Number of Railcars or Buses
Gold Line LRT: 24
Orange Line BRT: 30

System Cost
Gold Line LRT: $859 million
Orange Line BRT: $330 million

FY2009 Operations Budget
Gold Line LRT: $44 million
Orange Line BRT: $23 million

[Svartmetall]

Because Los Angeles is the best case study for the impact of public transit in a city isn't it?

[Tiago Costa]

Originally Posted by Northsider

Exactly, which falls into my point of BRT not being a replacement or alternative to a metro line like so many BRT advocated tout.

But there is a range in demand that can be served either by BRT or by light/medium capacity metro. There is not a gap, or a rigid boundary, when I can say "this demand can be served only by BRT", or "this demand can be served only by a light/medium capacity metro". The future outlooks for demand and the local population growth planned for the long term can help a lot in this cases, for example:

If a given corridor have a demand of 15.000 passengers/hour/direction, and in the next 20 years the demand is expected to grow to 20.000 passengers/hour/direction, and a BRT system can handle the future demand (which in most cases, a well-planned BRT can do), the best solution is the BRT.

But if a given corridor have a demand of 10.000 passengers/hour/direction, and in the next 20 years the demand is expected to grow to 30.000 passengers/hour/direction (a demand that a few BRT systems can handle, and not with good quality, and that a metro line can handle easily, while having a high chance of being profitable, if it is a light/medium capacity line), the best solution is a metro line. While the demand don't reaches at least 20.000 passengers/hour/direction, the minimum for a metro line that don't operates much under its capacity, a BRT line can be a temporary solution, but a metro line can't be discarded for the future, when the demand grows, and its construction can't be delayed too far, because the result maybe what happened in Curitiba.

When the subject is BRT x light rail, there are some things to deal with, especially the operation costs: BRT is cheaper than light rail. But the demands that the two systems serve, despite being almost the same, are better served by BRT when are lower, and are better served by light rail when are bigger. Adittionaly, when the demand is low, a BRT can be profitable, when a light rail can't. But when we talk about bigger demands, light rail systems deal better with it. And more, since light rail can deal with bigger (but not so much bigger, somewhat about 30.000 passengers/hour/direction with quality) demands than BRT, a light rail can serve a given demand corridor for more time than a BRT until a metro line is necessary.

Urban planning is the most important factor when dealing with future demands, because it have direct impact over it. Bad urban planning, bad future projetions, bad quality of the transport systems.

[JustinB]

Originally Posted by Svartmetall

Because Los Angeles is the best case study for the impact of public transit in a city isn't it?

Another attempt to start another LRT/BRT debate. Mr. Christine is quite obsessed with it.

I think everyone understands that each mode has it's own advantages, and disadvantages, and each installation is unique.

[niknak]

Which works better?

1) Having the bus lane in the center of the road

2) Having the bus lane on the sides of the road

[Orfeo]

Originally Posted by Northsider

Exactly, which falls into my point of BRT not being a replacement or alternative to a metro line like so many BRT advocated tout.

with the exception of a few posters, i don't think the argument is that BRT is equal to a metro, but that the debate focuses on when best to implement either system.

[JustinB]

Originally Posted by niknak

Which works better?

1) Having the bus lane in the center of the road

2) Having the bus lane on the sides of the road

With side lanes, you will have far more interactions with vehicles entering, and exiting from driveways. Center lanes avoid this, but it forces riders to cross potentially busy streets.

Personally, I think center lanes are the better choice. You can have higher speeds, and less interaction with other vehicles.

[niknak]

Are there any cities with BRT lanes on the sides of roads?

[JustinB]

It happened in Los Angeles, it's now happening in Miami.

South Miami-Dade Busway may give way to cars
Officials plan to vote on a controversial plan to convert South Miami-Dade's Busway into a highway with toll express lanes.

A proposed plan would convert the South Miami-Dade Busway into -- among other alternatives -- a four-lane highway with express toll lanes where private vehicles would share the road with buses.
A proposed plan would convert the South Miami-Dade Busway into -- among other alternatives -- a four-lane highway with express toll lanes where private vehicles would share the road with buses.

BY ALFONSO CHARDY
achardy@MiamiHerald.com

For years, motorists in South Miami-Dade have longed to drive on the two-lane bus road on the west side of the chronically congested South Dixie Highway.

Now they might get their wish if county commissioners and other local elected officials approve a proposed plan to convert the Busway into -- among other alternatives -- a four-lane highway with express toll lanes where private vehicles would share the road with buses. The revenue would then be used to fund the cash-strapped county transit agency.

The July 23 vote by commissioners and mayors who are members of the Miami-Dade Metropolitan Planning Organization would enable the Miami-Dade Expressway Authority to obtain a detailed study on ways to convert the Busway.

It would bring dramatic change to the Dadeland-to-Florida City roadway, which was built to encourage motorists to take buses that travel more quickly because they benefit from green-light priority at intersections.

But the strategy didn't work out well because Miami-Dade Transit was never able to operate many buses on the roadway. Currently, between 10 to 27 buses per hour during rush periods serving some 20,000 passengers per day use the Busway. At times the north-south roadway is practically empty.

Transit advocates now fear that modifying the Busway to allow private vehicles would further discourage commuters from using public transportation and reward solo drivers.

DIFFERING VIEWS

Katy Sorenson, a county commissioner and MPO member, provided a hint of the looming controversy when at last month's MPO meeting she urged fellow board members not to take actions that would steer people away from public transit.

''When the issue was brought up a year ago, I had some reservations, because undermining transit is the last thing I would want to do,'' she said. ``This would not necessarily undermine transit and it could provide a funding mechanism for transit. But I want to make sure that in this effort, transit is priority one and secondarily congestion relief.''

Commissioner Carlos Gimenez, also an MPO member, suggested he was more interested in relieving congestion even if that means allowing private vehicles on a bus-exclusive roadway.

''I would support moving forward,'' Gimenez said, alluding to the coming vote on the conversion study. ``If it competes with Miami-Dade Transit, so be it.''

The majority of members at the May 28 meeting seemed to support the conversion study, but not all 22 members were present.

OPTIONS

Three possible conversion alternatives were outlined to MPO members in May by an MPO staffer who said the options would be analyzed more in-depth in the Busway study.

Alternatives described by Larry Foutz, the MPO's transportation systems manager, included:

• Leaving the Busway as is, but allowing private vehicles to use it by paying a toll that would be deducted electronically via SunPass accounts.

• Adding one or two lanes, plus flyover bridges at certain or all intersections to ensure faster travel times for buses and toll-paying private vehicles.

• Building a four-lane elevated highway, moving traffic at expressway speeds along a totally rebuilt Busway from Mowry Drive in Homestead to the Dadeland South Metrorail station in Kendall.

Making no changes to the roadway and adding toll-paying traffic would cost almost nothing, Foutz said, but the option would only allow no more than 5,000 vehicles per day to use the facility and would likely slow the buses.

The other alternatives would add more vehicles to the roadway and range in cost from $228 million to $1.8 billion.

The most expensive, what Foutz called the ''Taj Mahal'' of the options, would be the elevated expressway-style alternative.

Under any option, Foutz said, toll rates would be relatively high because officials want to keep demand as low as possible to maintain fast travel times.

TOLL RATES

Tolls, in anticipated 2030 dollars, would range from $11.25 to $12.75 for travel from one end of the Busway to the other.

Depending on the toll rate and number of toll-paying vehicles, revenue would range between $11 million and $37 million per year.

The Busway was built along an old Florida East Coast railroad corridor that the Florida Department of Transportation acquired in 1988. Subsequently, the right-of-way ownership was transferred to Miami-Dade County.

[RawLee]

Originally Posted by JustinB

serving some 20,000 passengers per day use the Busway.

(...)

but the option would only allow no more than 5,000 vehicles per day to use the facility

If 4 people would be sitting in a car,they would be equal. If less,the busway would still serve more people...I dont see the reason for closing it...

[tampasteve]

Ridiculous. Closing the busway would be a travesty. Just another example of backward thinking in Florida and the USA. Hmm, maybe better marketing to the residents about the benefits of the busway would be prudent. I have personally used a combination of local bus, metrorail and busway to get from the airport to points south -- it works, and at 8:30am it is FAR faster than sitting in traffic. Using the busway with metrorail/bus is actually a viable alternative to using the packed highways in the area.

Steve

[greg_christine]

Pittsburgh operates a light rail system that is about 25 miles long and attracts about 26,000 passengers per day. Light rail advocates declare it a success. Miami operates a busway that is about 20 miles long and attracts about 20,000 passengers per day. A light rail advocate posts an article about it under the title "BRT Failure in Miami". To some, any light rail line will always be considered a success and any busway will always be considered a failure.

The article states, "... Miami-Dade Transit was never able to operate many buses on the roadway. Currently, between 10 to 27 buses per hour during rush periods serving some 20,000 passengers per day use the Busway. At times the north-south roadway is practically empty." I am left wondering if ridership wouldn't be higher if there were more funding for bus operations. The alternatives that are being considered involve giving the busway over to private automobile traffic. The alternatives do not include building additional transit.

[zaphod]

this is complete and utter bullshit along with the possible permanent death of Tri-rail over a ludicrous $2 rental car fee.

It will be less effective as transit, to be only superficially self-supporting financially as some kind of retarded HOT/HOV lexus lanes setup. Superficially because public funds built the thing, public planning obtained the land it sits on

[JustinB]

Mr Christine, it is always some sort of LRT vs. BRT with you. There is no debate. Only concern. Why are so-called BRT systems being turned into HOV/HOT lanes? It happened in Los Angeles, and now it's happening in Miami.
They were built as busways, they should remain as busways.

This is a failure of BRT, when something that is supposed to improve transit is handed over to cars.

[tampasteve]

At times the north-south roadway is practically empty.

Um...yeah, that will always be the case. Unless the buses are running end to end then there will always be times when the road looks empty. A 10 minute headway means that you will not see a bus for....10 minutes.

The same could be said for any transit. "The rails are practically empty, sometimes you don't see a train for 15 minutes straight!"

Steve