1.
Bus Rapid Transit for Africa
Manifesto for BRT Lite
Ian Barrett
Integrated Transport Planning
1

2.
Content of Presentation
• What do we mean by BRT Lite?
• What are its principal objectives?
• How do we attain those objectives?
• How does this differ from BRT Classic?
• What is the economic and financial outturn?
• What are the critical success factors?
• Worked example
2

3.
Overview of BRT Lite
• Use of the bus mode for the carriage of large
volumes of passengers at higher speed - BRT
• Focused on customer needs and economic
benefits, rather than just on infrastructure
• Prepared to accept performance compromises
to attain these consumer objectives
• Planned for an urban corridor/catchment and
defined by its service plan as the foundation
• Sensitive to the local development context
3

4.
Customer needs
• Focus on whole-of-journey, not just trunk
• Reliability and predictability, not just speed
• Maximise area of direct-service outreach
• Minimise transfers for speed and convenience
• Integrated tariffs and ticketing for transfers
• Easy boarding and alighting from the bus
• Maximum bus seats and no over-crowding
• Safety and security on buses and in stops
4

5.
Economic and financial benefits
For society:
• Return on investment recognising opportunity
cost and scarcity of development capital
• No additional requirement for operating subsidy
• Minimal reduction in general traffic capacity, and
acceptable constraints at junctions
For the passenger and operator:
• Fares no higher than previous paratransit
• Reasonable return on capital invested in fleet
5

6.
Service plan
• Direct tributary and CBD distributor services,
wherever economical to provide by large bus
• Mixture of stage-carriage, limited-stop and
express services to minimise total dwell time
• Based on measured demand in the peak hour,
and in the inter- and off-peak periods
• Update based on analysis of ticket validations
• Peak-spreading through reductions in off-peak
fares and retained service quality
6

7.
Service integration
• Integration through fares and ticketing system
• Direct service provision wherever justified
• Planned interchange where this not practical
• Facilities to minimise personal cost of transfer
• No fares penalty for transfer, and retained
benefit of any fares taper on longer trips
• Modalities for fare allocation between service
providers on linked trips
7

8.
Service contracting
• At route (or route group), not corridor level –
size of business units compatible with sector
experience and management capacity; retains
competition potential; minimises system risk
• Net-cost, not gross-cost, contracting – aligns
operator and manager incentives; minimises
revenue risk to authority; clear public service
obligations, and their associated costs
8

9.
Fares
• Integrated fares throughout corridor and
eventually across network
• Balance of benefits to operator and passenger,
so distance-related component
• Simple zonal fare structure – ca. 5km bands
• No fares penalty on transfer
• Off-peak fare reductions for discretionary
travel, using marginal cost pricing
9

10.
Ticketing
• Account-based automatic fare collection (AFC)
with cloud-based back-office administration
• Mobile ticketing as base modality, with
printed 2D bar-code tickets for casual use
• Standardised validation modality, with GPS
location, and 4G communication capability
• Validation at boarding and alighting (transfer),
and for driver control of overloading
• On-bus validators, or smart-phones for MBTs
10

11.
Intelligent transport systems
• Based on location / communications of AFC
• Automatic vehicle location and monitoring
• Real-time passenger information – mobile app
and at multi-route stations
• Holding in real time for operational control
• Control centre for BRT system manager
• Data feed to route operators and despatch
11

12.
Bus / platform interface (1)
Near-side boarding:
• Only practicable option for tributary services;
most boarding / alighting outside of trunk
• Retains value in previous bus investments, and
minimises life-cycle cost through cascade
• Provides comfort to potential bus investors
• Enables progressive roll-out with infrastructure
• Enables station lay-bys for easy insertion in RoW
12

13.
Bus / platform interface (2)
Stepped entry:
• Compatible with tributary infrastructure
• Platform over-sweep at docking for minimum
bay length in multi-bay stations, and enables
broad-echelon bay stacking if width available
• Step slope can be set for mobility impaired,
and so not act as a system entry barrier
• No significant impact on station dwell time
13

14.
Bus / platform interface (3)
Platform height and design:
• Standard kerb height – 150mm to 200mm
• Kassel kerb for passive bus guidance, so as to
minimise kerb to bus separation
• Concrete road surface for retained height only
in high wear / distortion area of station
• Block pavior construction for speed of repair
when required
14

15.
Bus specification
• Maximum length rigid bus permitted
• Maximum seating capacity in Class I or II use
• Floor height 650mm for E+1 stepped entry –
suitable for poor roads; allows front engine;
seats on wheel-boxes; wheel-chair access
• Articulated buses not suitable for poor roads;
don’t add capacity at multi-bay stations; only
economic in peak operation; depot problems
15

16.
Station specification
• Terminals only at outer end of routes
• Off-line lay-by, or passing lane for all routes
with more than one service or service type
• Extended lay-by off-line for bunched buses
• Station access by at-grade signalised crossing
• Open station (ticket validation on boarding)
• Kerbside transfers, with pedestrian provision
• Adjacent bicycle storage, where required
16

17.
Station location
• Positioned to reflect demand, not just spacing
• Kerbside in a highway with service lanes
• Kerbside in a road with low side friction
• Median only if traffic must have kerbside access
• Asymmetric location to facilitate insertion
• Location close to cross-streets for transfers
• Use road width of turning lanes at junctions
where available
17

18.
Running way location
• Within existing highway right-of-way
• Exclusive lanes, segregated but not discrete
• Reallocation of existing road space if possible
• Separated in couplets if needed for insertion
• Tidal flow option where appropriate
• Kerbside unless traffic access is essential
• Median construction to be avoided if possible
because of utilities and drainage relocation
18

19.
Running way specification
• Geometry suited to urban operating speeds
• Lane width 3.5m maximum, 3.25m ideal
• Low-height lane separators; emergency crossable
• Passive barriers to light-vehicle intrusion
• Passing lanes at all stations with multi service
• Not concretised, as axle loading is controlled, but
overlay of existing highway for durability
• Assured drainage, for operation and durability
19

20.
Junctions
• BRT Lite operating in mixed traffic at signalised
junctions and roundabouts
• Design emphasis to reduce number of phases
through restricting certain movements and
providing alternative routeings – jug-handle
• Signalised roundabout for high volume turns
with tidal flow capability
• Square-about has low queuing capacity and
no tidality; not suited to median BRT
20

21.
Non-motorised transport
• NMT access paths to / from BRT stations
• No cycle provision along line of route
• NMT crossings of BRT wherever high demand
– signalised at grade, or underpass if possible
• Specific pedestrian provision for transfers
• Sidewalks protected from encroachment by
parking, motorbikes, handcarts or hawkers
21

22.
Variances from BRT Classic
• Avoidance of ‘big bang’ launch and costs
• Migration potential for existing operators
• Phased implementation, by route not corridor
• Trip integration by ticketing not infrastructure
• Nearside stepped boarding to standard buses
• Asymmetric running ways and stations in CBD
• Avoidance of median construction, if possible
• No integrated NMT alignment along trunk
22

23.
Planning parameters
• Bus capacity dependent on local regulations
and efficiency in design – typically ca. 100
• >1,000 pphpd for large-bus operation
• >6,000 pphpd for exclusive use of traffic lane
• 85 per cent planned peak load factor
• 3 to 6 minute peak-service headways
• 5 to 10 minute off-peak headways
23

24.
Investment returns
Re-investible benefits:
• Vehicle operating cost savings per passenger
kilometre – but lower scheduled load factor
Non re-investible benefits:
• Passenger time savings – but real valuation
• Reduction in vehicle exhaust emissions
Disbenefits
• Traffic disruption during / after construction
24

25.
Errors in economic analysis
• Optimism bias: sensitivity test at 40% uplift
• Strategic bias: test against best alternative
• Under-estimate cost / delay of contested land
• High value of time: use displayed, or equity
• Expansion from peak hour: use all-day data
• External impacts: during / after construction
• Low hurdle rate: opportunity cost of capital
• Long assessment: increasing uncertainty
25

26.
Financial viability
• Should be financially viable over the vehicle life
cycle at current paratransit fares – greater
productivity and economies of scale – but load
factors will be lower in scheduled service
• May be cash negative during fleet acquisition,
depending on financing terms and duties on
imported buses where required
• Fleet assembly, driver training, and other launch
costs cannot be recovered from service operation
– initial investment support may be required
26

27.
Critical economic success factors
• Minimum transfer need within service plan
• High travel demand, both peak and off-peak
• Bad traffic congestion, both peak and off-peak
• Insertion from reallocation of existing road
space, and construction within right of way
• Low infrastructure investment cost, and little
disruption during and after construction
• Minimal land acquisition requirement in CBD
27

28.
Critical financial success factors
• Rational fare structure and tariff levels
• Mechanisms to adjust tariffs for input costs
• Low price of buses meeting functional needs
• Low lease interest rate / long tenor for fleet
acquisition
• Low duties and taxation for imported buses
and other necessities
• Return on capital attractive to investors
28

29.
Worked example - Nairobi
BRT Classic
• NPB $0.26bn
• NPC $0.88bn
• NPV -$0.62bn
• BCR 0.29
• IRR 3.9%
BRT Lite
• NPB $0.38bn
• NPC $0.21bn
• NPV $0.17bn
• BCR 1.79
• IRR 20.5%
29