What We Can Learn From City Busways

[M II A II R II K]

What We Can Learn From City Busways


Dec 20, 2011

By Eric Jaffe

Read More: http://www.theatlanticcities.com/commute/2011/12/best-big-city-busways/764/


.....

While BRT is gaining popularity in the United States, true busways are still a rarity — particularly in major metropolitan areas.

- Hartford's proposed busway has a lot going for it. The exclusive roadway will enable commuters to bypass congestion on Interstate 84. The system's 11 stations will have great connectivity with smaller bus transit lines and have an ultimate terminal connection with Amtrak at Hartford's Union Station. The Hartford system will also have all the other hallmarks of great BRT [PDF]: off-board fare collection, elevated boarding platforms and signal priority at intersections with auto traffic. When it opens in 2014, the line is expected to carry 16,000 passengers a day, and buses will make the trip from New Britain into Hartford in 20 minutes — down from up to 52 with current service.

Here's a look at four other busways operating in major cities around the country:

Silver Line (Boston) - The Silver Line has two segments. One goes from Roxbury into downtown Boston along Washington Street, while the other travels from South Station to Logan Airport. Only the latter line, known as the Waterfront system, can really be considered a busway. Even that is a bit of a stretch. Of the route's 9 miles, only about 1 moves along a completely dedicated road — most of that through a tunnel. The average speed of the line is only 14 miles per hour; that's actually slower than the previous system, because the buses must switch from diesel to electric before entering the tunnel.

.....

Orange Line (Los Angeles)

.....

- Still the Orange Line has its critics. According to a report by the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy [PDF], the system suffers from a decision to grant signal priority at intersections to car traffic. That's led to speeds of about 18 miles per hour, instead of 25 to 30 mph. An analysis by Light Rail Now — though clearly biased — found that ridership is about 25 percent lower than some might expect from a light rail system along the same route. With that said, light rail remains a possibility for parts of the corridor.

Miami Busway

.....

- Ridership on the busway, which parallels U.S. Route 1, increased about 50 percent in the first year of operation and, as of 2002, was about 71 percent above the previous system on weekdays, according to a report [PDF] by the National BRT Institute. Still the time savings aren't great. According to the same NBRTI report, buses frequently interact with car traffic; as a result they save less than 10 percent of travel time over the previous bus system. Such failures of the line have caused some officials to call for converting the busway into a shared road with high-occupancy vehicles. Proponents of such a plan include the auto-oriented Reason Foundation.

Pittsburgh Busway

.....

- But while the Pittsburgh system is considered a success, it also lacks several distinguishing elements of great BRT, according to a 2006 evaluation by Reconnecting America [PDF]. Those include elevated boarding platforms, advance fare collection, and light-rail style stations. The buses itself also lack a modern look. What the Pittsburgh busway lacks in amenities it makes up for with travel options for passengers: it's the only "direct service" model in the country, providing local, limited and express lines on the same busway.

.....




Hartford Busway

 

[RedRocket191]

- But while the Pittsburgh system is considered a success, it also lacks several distinguishing elements of great BRT, according to a 2006 evaluation by Reconnecting America [PDF]. Those include elevated boarding platforms, advance fare collection, and light-rail style stations. The buses itself also lack a modern look. What the Pittsburgh busway lacks in amenities it makes up for with travel options for passengers: it's the only "direct service" model in the country, providing local, limited and express lines on the same busway.

The greatest danger we can make when engaging in transportation planning is doing something just because another city has done it. Yes, some cities do use high-floor, stylized buses with level boarding platforms and others use stylized stations, but I think it's a mistake to judge a system because it doesn't have those features. As I've said before, transit planning must not be a penis measuring contest. Just because _____ has implemented _____ number of ______ doesn't mean we have to.

 

[Justin10000]

BRT systems should be judged. Cities have built "BRT" lines that are little more than different liveried buses with less frequent stops. BRT needs to be better defined, or cities are just going to build a couple of VIVA type bus routes, that do not really improve ridership.

 

[ShonTron]

There's BRT and BRT-lite. I have no problems with BRT-lite, if done well. Viva, Zum are both good examples. Both transformed crappy suburban transit systems to something with an image. Brampton was more successful as they combined the new bus routes with improvements to the rest of the route with the goal of creating a feeder network, and pushed the new routes to major trip generators well beyond the city limits.

Calgary's "BRT" routes are similar, planned as precursors to future LRT extensions.

The only true BRT in Canada is Ottawa, though the 196's busway is a great limited example here. Sure, in the beginning, it offered minor improved travel times, but now that the subway construction is well underway, it save 15-20 minutes easy avoiding all the congestion on Keele and Finch.

 

[RedRocket191]

The only true BRT in Canada is Ottawa, though the 196's busway is a great limited example here. Sure, in the beginning, it offered minor improved travel times, but now that the subway construction is well underway, it save 15-20 minutes easy avoiding all the congestion on Keele and Finch.

According to that article, Ottawa doesn't count as a "great" BRT because it doesn't have level boarding and it doesn't have stylized buses. This is the point I was trying to make - Ottawa has an excellent system, and judging it on the basis of not having those two features is not constructive.

 

[Markster]

According to that article, Ottawa doesn't count as a "great" BRT because it doesn't have level boarding and it doesn't have stylized buses.

Don't forget off-board payment.

 

[RedRocket191]

Don't forget off-board payment.

They do allow you to board at the back when you have a monthly pass, but you're very right. They are clearly running a terrible system in our nation's capital. How will they ever become a world class city???

 

[gweed123]

They do allow you to board at the back when you have a monthly pass, but you're very right. They are clearly running a terrible system in our nation's capital. How will they ever become a world class city???

They also let you do rear door boarding on Transitway routes if you have a valid transfer (which is time-based). Just and FYI, haha.

Weighing in on the whole BRT and BRT-Lite thing, I think that BRT suffers from the same sort of thing that LRT suffers from: a lack of a clear consensus over what it actually is. Everyone knows what you mean when you say Subway or Metro. There's very little debate and very little wiggle room with the definition (yes, I know there are some systems that go outside what is regularly considered, but they are exceptions to the rule).

With LRT, you can get a whole spectrum, from glorified streetcar all the way to a subway running LRT rolling stock. Same thing with BRT, you can get a glorified bus route with special shelters and curb side cutouts and queue jump lanes, all the way to a completely grade-separated Transitway.

And the reality is, BRT and LRT are going to continue to be used to describe everything in the above-mentioned spectrum, because we don't have any other commonly accepted definitions available. From my perspective, the characteristics of a system can be grouped into 3 main categories: Operating Environment, Fare Payment, and Station Design.

Operating Environment: The degree by which the line is separated from general traffic. Pretty self explanatory.
Fare Payment: The spectrum from on-board fare payment, to automated ticket booths at stops, to actual fare gates.
Station Design: The spectrum from a post with a sign on it on the edge of a curb, to a completely underground station.

In order to be qualified as 'rapid transit', I believe that at least 2 of those categories need to be sitting at least in the middle of their respective spectrums. If the line is only a curb side lane (not very high on the Operating Environment spectrum), it better have automated ticket booths at the stops, and the stations better be at least half decent. If not, it's just a glorified bus route.

Ottawa's system therefore qualifies, because it has a high degree of total grade separation (it does have some sections where it is only curb side lanes however). And some of the stations are pretty extensive. The only category where it's really lacking is in the fare payment department.

Just my two cents.