Bus Rapid Transit SystemSUBMITTED BY : Sankalp suman chandel Dhavir patel Jay shah
CONTENTS1.Definitions2.Evolution of BRTS3.Why BRTS ?4.Features and components BRTS5.Types of BRTS6.Operational and administration aspect of BRTS7.Benefits and challenges8.BRTS across the globe: comparison and rating9.Case study: 1. Success story : Istanbul 2. Success story : Curitiba 3. Learning from Delhi BRT10.Comparison of BRTS and LRT.11.Future of BRTS12.Learnings
BRTS DEFINATIONLloyd Wright ITDP (2002)“It is a high quality public transport system, oriented to the user that offers fast, comfortable andlow cost urban mobility”Levinson et al. (2003)“BRT flexibly combines stations, vehicles, services, running ways, and intelligent transportationsystem (lTS) elements into an integrated system with a strong brand that evokes a uniqueidentity.”Diaz et al. (2004)“BRT has the potential to provide a higher quality experience than possible with traditional busoperations due to reduced travel and waiting times, increased service reliability and improvedusability”Wright and Hook (2007)“BRTS is a rubber-tired mode of public transport that enables efficient travel”PNUMA (2010)“BRTS is also capable of improving local and global environmental conditions.”
BRTS HISTORY• In 1972, Jaime Lerner, then Mayor of Curitiba had a brilliant idea to transform the face of his city. He was an Architect and urban planner. At the time Curitiba was a small but rapidly expanding city in the south of Brazil.• His aim was “To develop a plan for the city that could accommodate growth without the sprawl and congestion”• His plan, which would later be replicated throughout the world, called for an above-ground subway system that would use buses instead of rail. Up to this point buses were used in ways that most of us are familiar with.• Bus rapid transit has been so instrumental in Curitiba’s fight against congestion and sprawl, that Curitiba known as “the most innovative cities in the world” and other cities are beginning to take note.• In this way the concept of Bus Rapid Transit System came.
Why BRTS ????Problems with bus system Benefits of metro system•Slow •Very fast•Unreliable •Regular and frequent•Not always frequent Gap •Travels long distance at filling•Takes the long way less timearound •comfortable•Uncomfortable •High technology•Technologically backward •universal design•No universal design •Very high capacityBRTS tries to solve issues of bus system and incorporates benefits of metro system
Components of BRTS1)Dedicated Lanes2)Prepaid Stations3)Buses With Multiple Doors,High Capacity And LowEmissions4)Differentiated ServicesExpress And Local5)Intersection Priority6)Coordination With OperatorsOf Buses Of Lower Capacity7)Fare Integration8)Use Of its & CentralizedControl
Types of BRTLevel of BRT CharacteristicsFull BRT • Metro quality service • Integrated network of routes and corridors High level • Closed, high quality stations BRT • Off-board fare collection • Frequent and rapid service • Modern, clean vehicle • Marketing identity • Superior customer serviceBRT • Segregated bus-way • Typically pre-board fare payment/verification • Higher quality stations • Clean vehicle technology • Marketing identityBRT Lite • Some form of bus priority but not full segregated bus-ways • Improved travel times • Higher shelters • Clean vehicle technology • Marketing identityBasic • Segregated bus-way/single corridor servicesBusway • On-board fare collection Low Level BRT • Basic bus shelters
BRTS operation & administrationOperational requirements of BRTS Administration requirements of BRTS• BRT Infrastructure (Running • BRT Infrastructure providers Ways) (public, private)• BRT stations & platforms • BRT operators• BRT vehicle fleet • BRT planning and regulator• BRT ITS agency• BRT integration • BRT services and operational• BRT fare plan• BRT marketing and branding• BRT Infrastructure supporting facilities• BRT fleet supporting facilities and services
BRTS-benefitsShort Term Benefits: Medium-Term Benefits:1.Efficient, reliable and frequent 1.Containing urban sprawlservices 2.Promoting social inclusion instead of2.Affordable fares isolation3.A safe and secure public transport 3.Direct and indirect job creation in both thesystem transportation and construction industries4.Universal design Long-Term Benefits:5.A decrease in road congestion, 1.Economic development in and around the6.Decrease energy consumption and areas of BRT operationvehicle emissions 2.Reduction in pollution7.An enhanced urban environment 3.Growth of a united, inclusive Johannesburg8.Recapitalization of the publictransport fleet 4.Reduction of harmful pollutants and greenhouse gases
COMPARASION OF BRT ACROSS THE WORLD Transmilano : metrobus Sit, optibus Sit, optibus Janmarg Trans via: Metro BRT-1 jakarta MACROBUS: TRANS-SANDIAGO: MEGABUS Metrobus, quito High Good: quito Good: brts brts Good: Aend Good: level Good: Metrobus, Good: low •Capital productivity ButOperationdemand Good: with lowproductiv •Operationaland capital has Peak load productivit • ••Operation operation SPEED Passenger passenger operationallevel BRTS •Medium productivity productivity Lacksfare in: •passenger: demand ••Speed Speed User in Peak load •Lacksinfare per KM Lacks incost productivi •Capital:: Productivity per km •PeakCapital productivity •• load User Capital cost Operational ••speed : User fare Lacks : in :cost per km •Lacks Lacks : inproductivity Capital Capital in•speed in : •User inLacks fare User fare speed Operationallevel BRTS •Medium productivity ••Capital cost Passenger demand Cost productavity •Peak load •High costTransmilenio, Bogota Has Pioneered Brt System In All Aspects. Where As Janmarg ,Ahmedabad Performs Good In Speed, User Fare, Operational And Capital ProductivityWith Average Capital Cost
COMPARASION OF BRT ACROSS THE WORLDMETROVIA, METROBUS, TRANSMILANO are the BRTS to look at where as Janmarg’sperformance is decent
BRTS case study : Metrobus,Istanbul Study focus : high end brts WHY metrobus, Isatanbul???? Fastest BRTS. International linkage
System FeaturesParameters FiguresRoute length (km) 52Stations 44Total Vehicle 430Operating vehicles/day 400Trips/day 3,330Pax/day 700,000Time Periods Intervals (Headways)Peak hours 15-20 sec.Off-peak hours 45-60 sec.Night (20:00-01:00) 45 sec-5 min.Night (01:00-01:30) 7-10 min.Night (01:30-05:00) 30 min.• Metrobus travels at an average speed of 41 km/hrs.• The daily travel distance of vehicles have been reduced by 1,16,261 kms.• The total daily vehicle-km saving from the buses was 95,554 kms. At peak time it hasa frequency of 45sec generating 24000 passengers per hours.
Why BRTS:• Rapidly increasing population and vehicles• Severe congestion• 23% of Istanbul commuters spend greater than 3 hours in traffic• 22% of Istanbul commuters spend 2-3 hours in traffic• The existing mass transit system is inadequate
Four phases of BRT:Upon completion of phase 4, the 52 km line will have 42 stations and 350 vehicles andwill serve 865,000 passengers/day
Stations:• Most platforms sized for two buses (three at some)• Centre platforms, requiring counter flow operation for regular buses• 8 stations are currently accessible to physically challengedpassengers• Modernization of other stations continues
Red Light Violation Security Lane Violation detection System Detection System
Success Story• “Opening of the Metrobus Corridor on the 1st Day gives Istanbul Traffic Breathing Room”• Travel time reductions of 1 hour or more “Before, people in cars used to look at those of us stuck in busses as 3rd class citizens… Now, as we speed past them, we look at the people in cars stuck in traffic as 3rd class citizens.” 93% people happy & satisfied
ConclusionThe BRTS provides a faster and cost effective transit solution. The metrobus has also achievedits sustainability aims. The improved ridership and capacity proves that metrobus achieves oneof the highest patronage which in turn proves effective operation of metrobus. Before After
BRTS case study : Curitiba,Brazil Study focus : TOD, LANDUSE AND TRANSPORT INTEGRATION WHY Curitiba, Brazil ??? First BRTS implemented in the world Landuse and transport integration
case study : Curitiba, Brazil When population travel demand increase _•During 1950s and 60s - rapid population growth - Curitiba had one of the highest population growths, 6% / yr.•Master Plan (1966) to meet these demands,which included a consolidated bus transit systemo restructured the city’s radial configuration into a linear model of urban expansiono transportation land use and road systems can be used as integrative tools of development; backbone for development and growth of the cityo direct linear growth by attracting residential and commercial density along a mass transportation laneo The Research and Urban Planning Institute of Curitiba (IPPUC) was created to monitor the implementation and operations of the BRT.
case study : Curitiba, Brazil• The key concept is the structural axis• Land Use: - The highest levels of residential and commercial development are concentrated in the two blocks at the center of the spine. thus preserving large areas for low-rise residential development in the sectors between axes.• Transportation System: -Road hierarchy (spider web network) -Types of routes: feeder, inter district, and expressExpress buses travel as fast as subway cars, but at one eighth the construction costs
case study : Curitiba, BrazilSerete Plan Transportation Systemoad System: R - Central Road with dedicated lanes for buses - External Roads: outbound and inbound Hierarchy roads fast flow of Streets: - Pedestrian streets - Local streets -Collector Roads -Express Roads -Rapid Roads Red - express bus(Main arteries along the Structural Axis ) Grey – direct buses to the suburbs Green – suburb buses link to red express buses Orange – feeder bus from the outskirts link to the suburbs
case study : Curitiba, BrazilStarted 1974 • Curitiba, BrazilBusway length 72 Km.Daily passangers > 20,00,000 – The first BRT integrated with land use and road traffic as well asAvg. speed 25 km/hr excellent management andheadway • 50-second headway at peak operation times, • 2 to 3 minutes at other times at the central stationBus/bus stops 2,000 buses 200+ bus tubes 25 terminalsManagement Contract basis but owned by GovermentFeatures Bus coloring with hierarchical netwwork busways on the local streets Land use control along with busways Bus terminal with public service facilities
case study : Curitiba, BrazilBus DesignBuses:•Three doors: - 2 exiting - 1 boarding•Turbo engines•Wider doors•Lower floors•Bi/Articulated for greater passenger capacity (170-270 passanger) • Red - express bus(Main arteries along the Structural Axis ) • Grey – direct buses to the suburbs • Green – suburb buses link to red express buses • Orange – feeder bus from the outskirts link to the suburbs
case study : Curitiba, BrazilBus Station Design• Three functions: shelter, pre-boarding payment and level boarding• Universal design• Tube station has become city icon• Modular design• Easy to handle Bus Tube• Level boarding• Well lid• Safety
case study : Curitiba, BrazilFare System• One fare policy: can take you from anywhere within the system (40+ miles worth of travel)• Smart card• Shorter rides subsidize longer ones.• Installed automatic ticket vendors at stops and terminals to decrease dwell time.• The system is entirely financed by these fares and without any subsidies.• A 1990 laws dictates that revenues can only be used to pay for the system. This avoids fare inflation.
case study : Curitiba, BrazilMIXED PARK PARK MIXEDTRAFFIC & & TRAFFIC RIDE RIDE
case study : Curitiba, Brazil• Low cost fare, possibility to attract car users.• 80 per cent of travellers use the BRT• The bus fare is the same wherever you go.• No one lives more than 400 metres from a bus stop.• Urban growth is restricted to corridors of growth - along key transport routes. Tall buildings are allowed only along YEAR POPULATION DAILY bus routes. PASSANGER 1960 361,300 143,100• This is cheaper to run than subway 1970 608,400 532,760 system. Some employers subsidized 1980 1,024,975 757,899 their employees who use it. 1990 1,285,571 1,194,688 2000 1,587,315 1,542,041 2010 1,746,896 2,039,769
case study : Curitiba, BrazilComponent 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Real time Bus stop Shelter Tube tation information B100Conventional Articulated Articulated buses Articulated buses buses buses Electronic ticketing Manual ticketing Overtaking at Trunk and feeder Special service Direct busbay service service station• The Integrated Transportation Network promote the use of public transport and reduce the use of private cars.• This change will reduce congestion, fuel consumption, air pollution,• better environment for the entire population.
BRTS case study : DelhiBRTS Study focus : Issue and problems WHY Delhi, BRTS???? Indian context Major issues with implementation.
Learning from: Delhi BRTS• Median lane bus ways on Arterial – open system• Small shelters with narrow platforms – insufficient bays• Mixed fleet• Manual fare collection – on board, no central control• Multiple bus service- 57 different routes by DTC and private blue line
MAJOR PROBLEMS OF DELHI BRTS1. Traffic signal cycles were long (4 minutes in the peak hour)2. General traffic lanes experienced long queuing3. Bus queues were longer than the station platform length, with some passengers4. alighting and boarding outside the platforms5. There were bus breakdowns that affected the operation of the bus lanes and the stations6. Pedestrian jaywalking was common7. Some motor vehicles encroached the bus lanes8. Bus occupancy levels were high, specially in the peak period9. Bus operation displayed high variability in intervals and commercial speeds10. Two wheelers encroached the bicycle tracks to jump the motor vehicle queues11. Space for bicycles was reduced to create an additional turning lane for general traffic in Chirag Delhi junction.
Poor Strategies By DIMTS1. Increasing cycle time: Negative impact to people travelling in buses2. Signal cycle inc. Wait time for all user.3. Longer signal cycles result in longer wait times for pedestrians at the signalized intersections.4. Greatly increase the likelihood of jaywalking.5. Encroaching into the bicycle lane: Negative impacts in safety and performance
Wide media coverage, specially focused on the problems For motor vehicle users and accidents
IMPACT OF DELHI BRTS1. average travel time for motorized travel reduced to19%.2. This is the combined effect of a 35% reduction in travel time for bus users.3. 14% increase in travel time for personal motor vehicles users. Buses vehicles are only 2% by mode but carry 55% of people. QUIET AMAZING ???
CONCLUSIONDelhi BRTS is a success story but portraitas failure story by media1. But recent development has been in support of Delhi BRTS.2. Hence fore, DIMTS has been planning relaunch of Delhi BRTS and including new phases.
Comparing Bus based system to RailBRT PROS LRT PROS• Flexibility • Greater demand and greater comfort• Requires no special facilities • Greater max. capacity• Lower capital costs • Increases property values near transit• Lower operating costs stations• It is used more by people who are transit • Lower operating costsdependent • Less air and noise pollution• Can serve a larger geographical area • Higher ridership• Can phase in service instead of waiting for • Provides superior service qualityentire system to be completed • Less environmental impact (Electric trains)BRT CONS LRT CONS• Buses have poor public image • Higher initial costs• Poor quality service • Higher infrastructure costs• Can cause traffic disruption • Skewed Benefits• Lower ridership • More stops=Longer trips• Higher operating & maintenance (O&E)• A temporary solution
Comparing bus based system to rail Rapid Transit Mode Statistic BRT LRTROW Options Exclusive or Mixed Traffic Exclusive or Mixed TrafficStation Spacing 1/4 to 1 Mile 1/4 to 1 MileVehicle Seated Capacity 40 to 85 Passengers 65 to 85 PassengersAverage Speed 15-30 mph 15-30 mphP/H/D (exclusive ROW) Up to 30,000 Up to 30,000P/H/D (arterial) Up to 10,000 Up to 10,000Capital ROW Cost/Mile $0.2M to $25M/Mile $20M to $55M/MileCapital Cost/Vehicle $0.45M to $1.5M $1.5M to $3.5MO&M $65 to $100 $150 to $200
COMPARASION BRT TO RAIL : Construction period HOW MUCH TRANSIT DOES 1 billion US $ buy ????? 7 Kilometers of SUBWAY 400 Kilometers of BRTCONSTRUCTION TIME Metros > 5 Years Bus Rapid Transit < 18 months 14 Kilometers of ELEVATED RAIL
COMPARASION BRT TO RAIL : Bangalore v/s Bogota Bangalore Bogota1.Per capita income Rs. 49,000 1.Per capita income Rs. 1.7 Lakh.2.Population : 77 Lakhs 2.Population : 82 Lakhs3.Area : 1600 sq. km. 3.Area : 740 sq. km. Bangalore is comparable to Bogota in size and population Bogota opted for the BRT. It has proven to be very successful. Even though Bogota’s per capita income is 4 times Bangalore’s, they felt that the Metro was costly for them.
FUTURE OF BRTS MINI BRTS BRTS LITE -CONCEPT -CONCEPT 1. Partial Segregation Of Bus Lane 2. Partial Level Of Its1. Suites to Indian context & can be 3. Responds To Low Passenger Demand developed in narrow ROW 4. Acts As An Feeder Connectivity.2. With bus capacity of 27-32 5. Provides Last Mile Connectivity.3. Responds to low Passenger demand 6. Both Side Door4. Acts as an feeder connectivity. 7. Acts As Feeder Service5. Provides last mile connectivity.
FUTURE OF BRTSINNOVATION IN BUS SECTOR:1. Flat floor buses2.Large capacity3.Wider door and increased numbers of doors4.Ride comfort bus5.Bus with low carbon foot prints
Learnings1. Since Curitiba BRTS success; BRTS has been popular across the globe & so in India.2. The innovation & technology and success story of Curitiba, Bogota and Istanbul; BRTS is go places where Metro cant go.3. Growing BRTS will lead to increase popularity of public transport system and hence leading to sustainable transport system.4. Also, BRTS, MINI BRTS and other innovation can act as feeder service to other existing modes and hence developing a integrated multi modal transport system.5. Like Bogota BRTS can also help in developing better transport and land use integration and also transit oriented design.
THANK YOU…BY : • Sankalp suman chandel • Dhavir • Jay shah