Categoría: News & Events

Xiamen BRT to take measures to ease rush hour jam

Source: What’s On Xiamen
 

According to an online survey on passenger satisfaction released by Xiamen BRT, 90% of the passengers rated the BRT service as ‘crowded’. In order to ease the rush hour jam, Xiamen BRT will take measures suggested by passengers starting from June 15th, reports Strait Herald.
 
First, LED screens at BRT platforms will be remade. Passenger information systems in LED screens will be distinguished by red, green and yellow. The new information system is expected to be finished in mid-July.
 
Second, rails will be set up to direct passengers to queue up for the BRT buses orderly.
 
Third, considering short-distance passengers (1-3 stations) accounting for a large proportion, BRT may raise prices of the short-distance ticket to limit passenger flow volume during rush hours. (It takes less time for short-distance passengers to take buses than BRT)
 
Fourth, based on passenger flow volume, BRT lines will be adjusted and directly sent to some stations with large passenger flow, such as Xiamen Railway Station (daily highest passenger flow volume: 40,000) in rush hours (7.am-8.am and 5.pm-6.pm).
 
Finally, some seats will be removed to offer more space for passengers. However, considering long-distance passengers, it is impossible to remove parts of seats in all BRT‘s.
 
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

PCMC to get consultants to assess impact of BRT

Source: The Times of India
Photo: Wikipedia
 
PUNE: The Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation (PCMC) will soon appoint consultants who will assess the impact of the proposed Bus Rapid Transit projects on the industrial township, before and after its implementation. The consultants will monitor and evaluate the project.
 
The BRT route has been planned on a total of 130 km on various roads in the twin township. Some of the projects have been largely funded under the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission.
 
Besides, the corporation has also proposed to take up the construction of two road-cum-BRT corridors under the Global Environment Facility’s sustainable urban transport project.
 
The two corridors are Kalewadi KSB chowk to Dehu-Alandi Road (13.2 km), and Nashik phata to Wakad, a distance of 7.8 km. The corporation has availed funds from GEF and International Bank for Reconstruction and Development for improvement of urban transport infrastructure and services.
 
Civic officials said the consultants will be monitor, evaluate and identify performance indicators for the two GEF-funded BRT corridors.
 
With the help of performance indicators, the consultants would track the impact of the project before its implementation, during the implementation and also after its completion. The consultants will also be involved in tracking the project to ensure that the objectives of scheduled adherence, cost reduction, efficiency and customer satisfaction are achieved. The consultancy is expected for a period of four years.
 
Other roads where the PCMC is planning to implement BRT under JNNURM include the Mumbai-Pune highway stretch from Nigdi to Dapodi, Aundh-Ravet Road, Telco Road, Dehu to Alandi road, Nashik phata to Moshi, Hinjewadi to Dehu Alandi road, Vishrantwadi to Alandi and Kiwale to Bhakti Shakti.
 
While the construction of BRT stations on the Mumbai-Pune stretch has started, the widening of the 14.4-km stretch between Aundh and Ravet has been delayed in some areas due to delays in transfer of defence land to the PCMC.
 
After the meeting held last week, between PCMC officials and defence authorities to discuss the issue, civic officials said the defence authorities were positive about transferring the land to the corporation.
 
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) unveils Bus Rapid Transit plans

Source: RedEye Chicago
Photo: TrippChicago
 
CTA riders who take a Jeffery Boulevard bus on the South Side could see their commutes shortened by up to seven minutes during rush hour, under the proposed bus rapid transit plans the CTA unveiled Wednesday.
 
It takes the No. 14 Jeffery Express about 71 minutes, 30 seconds to travel from 103rd Street and Stony Island Avenue to Washington and Jefferson Streets in peak hours, the CTA estimated.
 
That commute time would be cut to nearly 65 minutes if bus-only lanes were implemented on the South Side of Jeffery Boulevard and buses on that street got priority in traffic over cars, the agency said.
 
The CTA showcased its bus rapid transit plans at an open house Wednesday in Avalon Park. The CTA was awarded an $11 million federal grant last year to test bus rapid transit on Jeffery Boulevard. The CTA is in the design phase of the project. Construction is expected to take place spring through summer next year with service anticipated to begin in fall 2012.
 
Antonio Reed of Englewood said it takes him about an hour to ride the No. 14 bus everyday from 95th Street and Jeffery Boulevard to State and Madison Streets.
 
«I like the project but I’m still trying to figure out what it will look like overall,» said Reed, 19.
 
Meanwhile, the Active Transportation Alliance, which advocates for walking and bike and transit riding, said it’s on board with the bus rapid transit proposal.
 
«The new BRT elements that the CTA is implementing on the Jeffery Corridor are exciting improvements to service for riders and a big step forward toward implementing a full-scale BRT network in Chicago,» said Lee Crandell, the group’s director of campaigns.
 
Among the CTA’s proposals:

• Bus-only lanes: The area between 67th and 83rd Streets on Jeffery Boulevard would be for buses only on the northbound side from 7-9 a.m. and on the southbound side from 4-6 p.m. During the other times, cars would be allowed to park in the lane. Bike lanes are not expected to be implemented for this area.
• New and improved bus shelters: Thirteen existing shelters would be upgraded, including two shelters at Michigan Avenue and Jackson Boulevard. Nine bus shelters would be added between 67th and 103rd Streets on the northbound side of Jeffery Boulevard. The shelters would have Bus Tracker displays, sidewalk ramps accessible for people with disabilities, bike racks and landscape planters.
• Fewer stops on Jeffery Boulevard: On the South Side, many stops would be at major intersections, about a half-mile apart, instead of at every block. The No. 15 Jeffery Local route would supplement service.
• Showcase showdown: A «commercial showcase» station would be built at 71st Street and Jeffery Boulevard. The shelter would have a weather canopy, a farecard vending machine and crosswalk paving. Meanwhile, a «residential showcase» station at 100th Street and Paxton Avenue would have special crosswalks for pedestrians.
• Transit signal priority: Traffic signals between 73rd Street and 84th Street on Jeffery Boulevard would provide an early or extended green light so buses could get through the intersection more quickly. Meanwhile, a bypass lane would be set up on Jeffery Boulevard at Anthony Avenue. A special traffic signal there would allow the bus to go through an intersection ahead of general traffic.
• Bus enhancements: Fifty-three buses from the 103rd Street garage would be updated. Buses could be equipped with Bus Tracker so riders could anticipate transfer and arrival times.

 
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Opinion Pieces: What if money did not matter?

Opinion Pieces: since 2007, Prof. David Hensher has written an opinion column in the Australasian Bus and Coach magazine, where he monthly discusses a lot of different transport-related hot topics. In this section we are revisiting these columns.
 
June 2010
 
I have just returned from Abu Dhabi (AD) as part of a series of meetings with the AD Department of Transport, to develop graduate education training back to Australia for the new generation of planning and policy nationals. What is amazing is the amount of investment in infrastructure, all to be completed by 2030 under the Master Plan, which will involve buses, LRT, heavy rail and metro systems. The Abu Dhabi planners have set themselves the challenge to move the 97 percent modal split in favour of the car to 40 percent in 2030, a challenge I believe will be impossible to achieve. The only bus I saw was a tour bus (see photo) apart from mini vans moving the thousands of ex pat workers shipped in to assist the building frenzy (including knocking down and rebuilding buildings when they reach 10 years – easier than retrofit!). The SUV is still supreme, with no taxes and fuel at 45 cents per litre.
 
 
I gave a lecture on sustainable transport and value for money – in an environment in which money is no object and everything is owned by the Royal family (ies). The mere mention of the need for efficient pricing is such an alien notion when money flows as fast as oil comes up from below the ground. Abu Dhabi has the largest carbon footprint per capita anywhere in the world, and the response in part has been to develop Masdaq City – a zero carbon new city about 26 square kilometers in which cars are banned and the main transport mode is personal rapid transit (PRT), with car parks around the periphery (see the circular car parks in the picture).
 
 
 
What can we learn from the Abu Dhabi approach? The most interesting lesson is to build excess capacity well out beyond the needs of the planning period which we westerners tend to define as less that 20 years and hence get exacerbated when we fail to allow for growth opportunities. However a warning has to be made – Abu Dhabi really believes in the power of planning and does not recognize that the market will ultimately dictate the outcome – so whether they can get people out of their SUV’s is a big question – providing air conditioned bus stops has been mooted as a solution, but one wonders.
 
Food for thought
 
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Cities in focus | Indore

Source: EMBARQ
Photo: Gunjan Karun
 

In 2005, EMBARQ began advising AICTSL (Atal Indore City Transportation Services Limited) on setting up a formal transit agency in the city of Indore. Over time the agency has grown from a fledgling organization with only basic public transportation experience, to a city-wide agency that includes over 250 buses in service, and plans for it’s first Bus Rapid Transit corridor.
 
EMBARQ continues to work with the city to improve and expand services to meet the needs of the people of Indore.
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

EMBARQ Brasil hosts workshop on marketing BRT

Sharing best practices of branding, marketing and communications for improving urban mass transit.
 
Source: EMBARQ
 
Municipal transport leaders and communications coordinators from nine Brazilian cities attended a workshop, “Marketing BRT: How to Attract and Captivate Users”, to understand the importance of marketing, branding and communications for the successful planning and implementation of mass transit systems, particularly bus rapid transit (BRT).
 
The event was held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil at the South America Convention Center on May 25-26. It was co-organized by EMBARQ Brasil and the Secretary of Transportation of Rio de Janeiro, and sponsored by Fetranspor, a federation of bus operators for the state of Rio de Janeiro. A representative from Fetranspor said the workshop was the best event the federation had ever sponsored.
 
During the workshop, EMBARQ launched a new publication,“From Here to There: A Creative Guide to Making Public Transport the Way to Go” published in English and Portuguese, to help guide cities and public transit agencies in making mass transit a competitive and desirable alternative to private vehicles. The guidebook presents powerful BRT marketing case studies and generated a significant amount of national press coverage.
 
Workshop participants included the following transport and communications experts:

• Alexandre Sansão Fontes, Municipal Secretary of Transport, Rio de Janeiro
• Affonso Nunes, Communication Coordinator, Municipal Secretary of Transport, Rio de Janeiro
• Lélis Marcos Teixeira, President, Fetranspor
• Suzy Balloussier, Public Relations, Fetranspor
• Toni Lindau, President, EMBARQ Brasil
• Rejane D. Fernandes, Strategic Relations & Development Director, EMBARQ Brasil
• Richard Katz, Communication Coordinator, EMBARQ Brasil

 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

MIT Transit Leaders Meeting

On June 16-17, 2011 the MIT Transit Research Group hosted the 4th annual MIT Transit Leaders Roundtable in Cambridge, MA.
 
Photo: Mikel Murga, Juan Carlos Muñoz, Rosário Macário, Fred Salvucci, Nigel Wilson, John Atanucci
 
The Roundtable brought together 29 executive-level managers from ten large-city transit agencies from Europe and North America: Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA/Boston), Massachusetts (State) Department of Transportation, Transport for London, Régie Autonome des Transports Parisiens (RATP/Paris), Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA/New York), Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA/Washington D.C.), TransLink of Vancouver (B.C., Canada), Metro Transit of Minneapolis-St Paul, Utah Transit Authority (UTA/Salt Lake City), and the Rhode Island Public Transit Authority (RIPTA/Providence). Also participating in the meeting were several faculty, staff and graduate students.
 
The Roundtable was held at MIT and generated many lively and interesting discussions. The program was structured using an initial “scene-setting” presentation from an academic or agency perspective followed by short agency state-of-the-practice updates and further open discussions.
 
The major topics discussed included:
 
How Can Transit Respond to Higher Demand and More Constrained Resources at the Same Time? Charles Monheim, Chief Operating Officer, New York MTA
 
 
Strategies for High Quality Bus/BRT in Major Cities Juan Carlos Muñoz and Nigel Wilson PDF presentation

• What strategies have you used, or do you plan to use, to improve bus service quality in terms of:

– Reserved bus lanes and transit signal priority
– Speedier fare collection
– Increased frequency
– Active headway management (hold or express buses, «leapfrog» operations)
– Timed transfers/network connectivity

• What is the evidence on effectiveness of these strategies?
 
 
Innovative Partnering to Increase Ridership and Revenue Fred Salvucci PDF presentation

• Business levy to support transit infrastructure investment: London Crossrail case
• Employer-based monthly transit passes
• PPPs for infrastructure delivery and operation
 
 
Emerging IT Strategies George Kocur PDF presentation

• Developing system integration capability versus relying on vendors (make versus buy, in some cases), and how knowledgeable should transit organization be in IT, telecom and other technology areas
• Integration with other municipal IT infrastructure: traffic signal priority, emergency incident management, social service benefit programs, employee IDs (possibly used for payment), road operations (snow removal, etc.), and others
• Open standards/open data. Role of open source and developer community; using performance versus technical interface standards in procurements, others
• Legacy modernization. Shifting resources from legacy maintenance to development of new capabilities and cost reduction.
 
 
Advanced Customer Information Strategies John Attanucci PDF presentation

• How are you going about improving customer information (pre-trip and real-time)?
• What is your strategy for maximizing the value of AVL/train tracking data in customer information?
• What is your current and expected future reliance on fixed signs (at stops/stations or in retail activity centers) versus wireless devices?
• Should all real-time operations data be made public, and how do you sort the wheat from the chaff of privately- developed phone apps?
 
 
Monitoring and Improving Service Reliability Nigel Wilson and Juan Carlos Muñoz PDF presentation

• How do you measure service reliability?
• What service planning and scheduling strategies (e.g., more layover or recovery time, more or fewer timepoints) are you using to improve service reliability? With what degree of success?
• What operations control and management strategies are you using (dispatch/driver interaction, AVL system displays, or messages to drivers) to improve service reliability? With what degree of success?
 
 
 



 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Metrobús, Argentina’s first BRT system, launches in Buenos Aires

Source: ITDP
 
Photo: ITDP
 
The public, government officials, and members of the press gathered this morning in the neighborhood of Palermo for the inauguration of the country’s first bus rapid transit system, Metrobús. Mayor of Buenos Aires Mauricio Macri, who was accompanied by City Transportation Secretary Guillermo Dietrich, spoke about the benefits that the 12 km corridor will bring to the city.
 
“The implementation of Metrobus in Buenos Aires, the first BRT corridor in Argentina, represents significant progress in the development of urban transportation, allowing for an increased quality of life of more than 100,000 people,” said Macri. “Our main goal, as those responsible for urban planning, is to restore the quality of public transportation, for which the support of the W.J. Clinton Foundation and ITDP has been crucial in the process of development and implementation of a world-class BRT system. In the coming years, based on the success of this first phase, we plan to continue the expansion of the BRT network in the City of Buenos Aires.”
 
Construction on the line was completed in just seven months, showing the huge savings that BRT provides in construction time, cost and logistics when compared to a fixed rail system. The citizens of Buenos Aires now have a new transportation option that connects two commuter rail stations on opposite sides of the city in a trip that takes 40% less time than before.
 
Metrobús runs along Avenue Juan B. Justo and its 21 stations are served by both articulated and standard length buses. The system includes other standard features of BRT, including physically separated lanes that run in the middle of the street, elevated station platforms and countdown clocks. The city expects the line to draw additional ridership as people adjust to the new system, growing to an anticipated 100,000 daily riders.
 
“In a remarkably short amount of time the City has helped improve conditions for walking downtown, dramatically increased the availability of high quality bike lanes, and provided a public bicycle system,” said Andrés Fingeret, Director of the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy’s Argentina office and CCI City Director for Buenos Aires. “And now Metrobús will add another high quality transportation option that will get residents where they need to go, quickly, with less pollution and without getting stuck in traffic. We commend Buenos Aires on their continued commitment to sustainable mobility.”
 
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Marketing BRT in Brazil

Source: The City Fix by Erica Schlaikjer
 

 
Photo: Curitiba, by Robert Blackie
 
“More than 70 percent of people in Rio de Janeiro already use public transportation; most people use buses,” Rio de Janeiro’s Secretary of Transport Alexandre Samson said at the opening session of the “Marketing BRT: How to Attract and Captivate Users” workshop, held on May 25-26 in Rio de Janeiro. “Our biggest challenge is to rationalize and structure the system.”
 
Bus rapid transit, which originated in Curitiba in the 1970s, remains prominent in Brazil, but its environmental and social benefits are still not fully known or understood by the public.
 
“BRT must be sold as a product that has importance to the city, not just to the operators or those directly involved, like the manufacturers,” said Lellis Teixeira, president of Fetranspor, a federation of 10 bus syndicates responsible for 81 percent of public transport in Rio de Janeiro. ”It goes beyond that because BRT allows for the re-organization of the entire city.”
 
IMPROVING CITY LIFE
 
In the lead-up to the 2014 World Cup and 2016 Summer Olympics, Brazil has been working diligently to upgrade its urban infrastructure, with a special focus on BRT. The country’s rapid economic growth, too, has required massive investments in improving mobility for people living in fast-growing cities. The country already has 20 cities with more than 1 million people.
 
“We must show the population that the only possible path to quality of life will involve mass transit,” Teixeira continued. “BRT represents a change of paradigm. It will attract car users to public transportation and thus we will save time, lessen the costs of road maintenance, and reduce pollution.”
 
Marketing the concept of BRT has become even more important now that the city is developing four new BRT corridors, in time for the 2014 World Cup. Undersecretary of Transportation for the Municipality of Rio de Janeiro Carlos Maiolino stressed the importance of continuing to invest in high quality public transport, such as the city’s TransOeste, an east-west BRT corridor currently under construction. Another planned corridor, TransCarioca, will link Barra da Tijuca to the Tom Jobim International Airport.
 
Many people are still unfamiliar with the concept of BRT, which poses a communications challenge for the local transit authorities.
 
“The word ‘marketing’ for transport might not even be the adequate word,” Secretary of Transport Samson said. “We have to educate people and clarify and explain to people the benefits of public transportation.”
 
CASE STUDY OF TRANSIT MARKETING: BUS RAPID SERVICE
 
Rio has initiated a transport project called Bus Rapid Service (BRS), which borrows some of the elements of BRT, such as segregated bus lanes, in an effort to relieve congestion and cut travel times. Only taxis, emergency vehicles and police cars are allowed to use the corridor. To implement the new system, the city launched a marketing initiative to brand the new corridors and make it easier for passengers to hop on board.
 
Below is a summary of some of the efforts that were made to ensure the system’s success, as explained by Edmundo Fornasari, the executive director of business for RioCard, a smartcard system used for public transport in the state of Rio de Janeiro:
 
Small Gestures
Little details make a big difference in establishing customer loyalty. For example, BRS employees distributed roses to women with children on Mother’s Day this year, generating extremely positive feedback from the users. “It was a small experience that shows how you aggregate value,” Fornasari said.
 
On the Street
BRS staff often go out into the streets to distribute flyers and pamphlets with important information and answer questions from passengers. For example, when some existing bus stops were removed from the corridor during the development of the re-organized routes, BRS deployed its employees to explain how the new changes would affect people’s commutes, especially targeting youth and the elderly.
 
Open to Feedback
Fetranspor displays a customer service toll-free number behind all its buses to give users feedback on quality of service—and it’s completely voluntary. Fornasari said 80 percent of calls are about trip itineraries and schedules, with some occasional driver complaints.
 
One Thing at a Time
“You have to promise one thing at a time and you must not make big promises because the public is not prepared for great transformations,” Fornasari said. “If I delivered what I promised, my product is considered good; otherwise I cause frustration.” BRS’s marketing promise was that it would provide more-than-average speed. The promise was fulfilled: average travel times have been reduced by 11 percent to 13 percent.
 
Emotional Appeal
BRS works conscientiously to incite people’s desire to use public transportation, especially the youth’s, who may one day desire a car, Fornasari said.
 
The new BRS system does its best to maintain an image of being fast, cheap, clean and safe. BRS distributed pamphlets and advertisements encouraging people to ride a bus down the notoriously long stretch of Copacabana, displaying the iconic lifeguard stations as being very close together. “It was an emotional appeal where we make people feel like Copacabana is smaller.”
 
At first, Fornasari said, there was some resistance to the name “BRS,” considering they are more accustomed to “BRT.” “People were wondering, ‘What is this? This doesn’t make sense!’ he said. But after some time, and a conscious marketing push, the public’s perception fo the system is improving.
 
“Regardless of what it means, the name is successful,” Fornasari continued. “This is BRS: the fast bus.”
 
User-Friendly
Sharing customer service information and data in a simple and visually appealing way is one of the key elements of creating good user information systems.
 
Before BRS re-vamped the corridors, only 0.29 percent of bus stops had information, Fornasari said. Now, bus shelters include a route map with strong BRS branding, and all buses are clearly identified, with bus lanes clearly painted on the ground.
 
All these efforts have paid off. Veja, a prominent magazine, wrote a headline: “It’s better to go by bus.” Survey results showed that 14 percent to 41 percent of people like the new buses, and half of those interviewed said traffic has improved very much.
 
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

New study: U.S. recapturing global leadership in Bus Rapid Transit

Source: The City Fix
 
Photo: Eugene, Ore.’s bus rapid transit, by functoruser.
 
The Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP) released an independent study ranking the five U.S. cities on the cutting edge of bus innovation. Titled, “Recapturing Global Leadership in Bus Rapid Transit,” the study rates Los Angeles, Cleveland, Las Vegas, Eugene and Pittsburgh as the cities leading bus-based transportation, mainly due to their implementation of bus-rapid transit (BRT). Though all still in construction, the study also rates San Francisco Bay Area, Montgomery County of Maryland and Chicago as the three cities with BRT systems that have the best prospects of achieving a “gold-standard,” a certification awarded by the international non-profit Gold Standard in recognition of the system’s greenhouse gas reductions. This certification has never been awarded to a U.S. city.
 
“By far the most important reason for this failure is that U.S. cities have far fewer transit riders and far more private car owners than most of the cities where gold-standard BRT systems have been implemented,” the study explains. “As a result, it is difficult to make a direct comparison between some of the global best practices and the U.S. cases.”
 
The study also provides a historical analysis of BRT’s in the U.S. and acts as a guideline for cities embarking on new BRT projects. The study explores service planning strategies, infrastructure requirements, design principles, service quality and information-sharing systems to aid cities who are evaluating their current systems or considering implementing new BRT’s. The study also looks at transit integration, like including bicycle lanes, and accessibility, like pedestrian cross-ways, as criteria to create a comprehensive transport system for mass transit riders.
 
According to ITDP, today’s transit ridership in the U.S. is at a five-decade record high, with buses accounting for more than half of these trips. Yet, there is always room to improve, especially when the nationwide average bus speed is at 12.5 mph. “Passengers must often contend with limited service frequency, and with buses that don’t always run according to schedule,” ITDP explains.
 
“[BRT] systems are poised to redefine how Americans see and use buses, critical at a time of increasingly scarce transportation funding,” says Walter Hook, ITDP Executive Director. “But based on what we’ve seen in our work in cities around the world, we think there’s still more that could be done. Getting at least one truly world-class BRT system built in the U.S. could inspire cities around the country to rethink the way they use buses in the fight against increasing traffic congestion and rising fuel prices.”
 
Download ITDP’s study here.
 
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

The silly argument over BRT and rail

Source: The Transport Politic by Yonah Freemark
 
Photo: BusWay in Nantes, France, from City of Nantes
 
Reserving respect for each mode.
 
As if operating in parallel, Toronto’s Globe and Mail and The Wall Street Journal each published articles last week describing the merits of bus rapid transit, which each newspaper described as the future of urban transportation.
 
Both noted that BRT was cheaper to construct than rail lines. Each suggested that in an age of government pull backs and general skepticism over the value of public investment, BRT could offer substantial benefits to a transit system at a reasonable price. And each article concluded with a warning by rail proponents that buses wouldn’t be able to attract people out of their cars.
 
This is a sensationalized opposition between two modes of transportation that should be thought of as complementary. There are advantages to improved bus service in some corridors, reasons to support rail in others.
 
What is clear is that for the majority of American cities — excluding only a few in the Northeast — buses will remain the predominant mode of public transit for most riders, even after major expansions in train networks planned for cities from Charlotte to Phoenix. So even cities that choose to invest in rail projects must also spend on the improvement of their bus lines.
 
Nor is the difference in costs between rail lines and BRT nearly as great as some would argue. The Journal article quotes Dennis Hinebaugh, head of a transportation center at the University of South Florida, saying “You can build up to 10 BRT lines for the cost of one light-rail line.” That might be true if you’re comparing a train operating entirely in its own right-of-way with a bus running in a lane painted on the street. But a streetcar is probably cheaper than a busway. Just ask Hartford, whose busway project will cost $60 million a mile to build.
 
Just as importantly, the argument made in the Journal by Simon Fraser University Professor Anthony Perl that “Rail has a proven record of being able to take people of their cars; buses don’t,” is quite frankly premised on antiquated views about the differences between buses and trains. A well thought-through BRT line, operating in its own right-of-way, can offer riders most, and sometimes more, of the comfort, convenience, and accessibility of a rail line.
 
The Globe and Mail notes that “LRT advocates often argue that light rail has better interaction with the streetscape and is a better way of achieving dense, transit-oriented development than BRT,” and indeed, that point is frequently made. But plenty of vibrant neighborhoods in American cities have developed just fine without rail. The City of Seattle, whose first modern light rail line opened in 2009, nevertheless has been densifying for decades, increasing in population from 494,000 in 1980 to 609,000 in 2010 (with no annexation).
 
The best argument for rail is that it has the ability to provide massive rush-hour passenger-carrying capacity without destroying the city through which it runs. Whether buried in a subway or operating quietly along in grassy medians, trains can be integrated into the public realm without diminishing the pedestrians-friendly qualities all urbanists should hope to encourage. BRT boosters often argue that their mode of choice can carry a similar number of riders, but neglect to mention that this is only possible when buses arrive every 10 seconds along highway-like four-lane corridors. These are conditions that destroy the walking environment.
 
Fortunately for American cities looking to invest in new public transportation infrastructure, there are few places that demand the passenger-carrying capacity provided by those freeway-based BRT lines in places like Bogotá. In most metropolitan areas, a two-lane busway inserted on an arterial is perfectly appropriate and sometimes even beneficial for a city. Indeed, as we all know, the story that is too complicated for any mainstream paper to explain is that BRT can mean any number of things. The most rudimentary elements of BRT — the nice buses, the well-articulated stops, the traffic signal priority — are basics we should expect from all of our bus lines. Pushing for their implementation along certain corridors shouldn’t arouse much controversy.
 
But these points are rarely discussed when the argument between modes are made.
 
The real divisions between bus and rail are political: For those who would fight for improved transit systems in their cities, the truth is that rail projects do certainly have more appeal among members of the public. Thus a billion-dollar rail project may be easier to stomach for a taxpaying and voting member of the citizenry than a quarter-billion BRT line. While the former is qualitatively different than what most car drivers are used to, the latter mode is too easily lumped in with the city bus, which car users have already paid to avoid.
 
Better transit can come in many forms, but in a country in which the vast majority of people have no contact with public transportation this side of Disney World, making the argument for investments in more buses is difficult, to say the least. BRT is just not sexy until you’ve experienced it. Which is why the considerable success of BRT in South America has not convinced many U.S. cities to abandon their ambitions for more rail.
 
Articles like those in the Journal and the Globe and Mail, despite their positive assessments of the potential for BRT, nonetheless reinforce the sense that BRT is inferior to rail by putting the two in contrast to one another, rather than focusing on the relative benefits of each. By continuously describing BRT as an economical way to get something like light rail, all that comes across is that it’s cheap.
 
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Opinion Pieces: Is there a simplified generic payment formula for bus contracts?

Opinion Pieces: since 2007, Prof. David Hensher has written an opinion column in the Australasian Bus and Coach magazine, where he monthly discusses a lot of different transport-related hot topics. In this section we are revisiting these columns.
 
April 2010
 
The ongoing commitment to contracting the delivery of bus services through competitive tendering or negotiated performance-based contracts has been accompanied by as many contract payments schemes as there are contracts. With the accumulation of experiences throughout the world, are we in a position to identify a few key features of the diverse suite of payment formulae to establish a simplified and generic payment formula that can capture the great majority of ‘desirable’ characteristics from a social and a commercial perspective?
 
Talking with many operators and some regulators throughout Australia, there is support for a simplified payment formula; however what this might be is the big question, and the big challenge. What all agree with is the desire to reduce the number of variations that are inextricably tied in with voluminous documents penned by lawyers on what the deal is and is not. The administration and transactions costs are unnecessarily high for all parties. One operator has said to me that an average cost per kilometre is all we need, that sensibly allows for differences across operators that are either not under the control of the operator (e.g., traffic congestion), as well as local environmental restrictions.
 
Candidate options can be classified as: (i) A pure cost-based model associated with cost per kilometre and no incentives, (ii) A hybrid model based on patronage allocation and residual cost per kilometre without incentives, (iii) a pure cost-based model with incentives, and (iv) a hybrid model with incentives.
 
A pure cost-based model associated with cost per kilometre is typically a conversion of a total cost, and is determined by operating conditions and efficiency of scheduling. It is often calculated as a function of some key cost sources – operating conditions such as average peak speed, spread of service hours over each weekday and weekend, and vehicle utilisation*, dead running time, fleet financing (although this should be of relevance only under economic deregulation since the contract under competitive regulation should have agreed terms of depreciation, risk and economic life of assets), and scheduling efficiency issues such as layovers between trips, which are often influenced by the degree of union influence in scheduling, but it is likely to affect vehicle scheduling as well.
 
Patronage and service kilometre incentive payments also exist in a growing number of contracts, and are based on a range of approaches. In simple terms, the patronage incentive payment should be linked to growth in patronage above an agreed benchmark; and service kilometres must be related to some gain in patronage otherwise it is an inefficient cost driver.
 
One very appealing proposition is as follows:
 
1. The Authority would define the budget for the services, set minimum standards and a growth target. The minimum standards would be based on passengers per kilometre. Bidders or negotiators would have data on the current services and patronage. If it is a negotiated context then the incumbent is the same as the negotiating operator; if it is a competitive bid then that is not the case).
 
2. The offers would be in the form of required compensation per passenger. This amount would be indexed for both monetary changes (standard indices) and operating speed (based on average timetabled speed), spread of service hours and bus utilisation, given that these latter three context-specific influences not under the control of the operator are key drivers of the differences in gross cost per service kilometre.
 
I welcome suggestions from operators and regulators who must be asking similar questions, and hopefully have some clues as to what the answer(s) might be.
 
Food for thought
 
 
* Similar to the cost allocation formula used to use for costing contracts in Britain before competitive tendering, which allocated costs according to three variables – bus km, bus hours and peak vehicle requirement.
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Buses take off, but not everybody is on board

Source: The Wall Street Journal
 
One of the hottest trends in urban mass transit is—the bus.
 
Not your old-fashioned bus lines. Cities all over the world are switching to bus rapid transit, or BRT, a modern transit system that combines the flexibility of buses with the speed, comfort and reliability of rail.
 
With BRT, buses run frequently in exclusive lanes, offering local and express services. Small, technologically advanced stations take the place of the traditional bare-bones bus stop: Vending machines sell fares, slightly elevated platforms make boarding easier, and monitors wired into a Global Positioning System network tell waiting commuters exactly when the next bus will arrive.
 
Sixteen systems were completed world-wide last year, and 49 more are under construction. Cities in the U.S. and Australia have built BRT systems, but so far there is generally less demand in developed countries. Rather, the trend is most popular in the developing world—especially Asia and Latin America.
 
«BRT will be an important option for transit systems in the future, especially in cities where transit demand is high and budgets are tight,» says Walter Hook, executive director of the New York-based Institute for Transportation and Development Policy.
 
The city considered to have the most successful, and first, BRT system is Curitiba, Brazil, with 2.26 million passengers a day and 45 miles of lanes. From three bus corridors in the late 1970s, the system has grown to six, all added in combination with zoning and land-use policies that promoted industrial and residential development.
 
In the U.S., adoption of BRT has been slow, in part because cars are so prevalent, and because commuters who use public transit have shown a preference for rail. But difficulties in funding new rail projects may make BRT more attractive in the future.
 
«There will be less dollars available from the federal government for rail, so we’ll see an increase in BRT,» says Dennis Hinebaugh, director of the National BRT Institute at the Center for Urban Transportation Research at the University of South Florida, in Tampa. «You can build up to 10 BRT lines for the cost of one light-rail line.»
 
To date, five U.S. cities use BRT for parts of their public-transit systems. Los Angeles has a BRT system that comprises about 14 miles; Cleveland, seven miles; and Eugene, Ore., four miles. Eight to 10 other systems are under consideration, including routes in San Francisco and Chicago, according to the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy.
 
But BRT critics say that just because the systems are successful in Latin America and Asia doesn’t mean they’re the best option in the U.S.
 
«Rail has a proven record of being able to take people out of their cars; buses don’t,» says Anthony Perl, professor and director of urban studies at Simon Fraser University in Vancouver, British Columbia.
 
Still, Mr. Perl says BRT could make sense in North America if it were implemented by converting lanes in existing roads to dedicated bus lanes. «I’m for taking road space and using it more efficiently, but not building roads,» he says. «If we talk about building, I think you might as well build rail.»
 
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Pune BRT: Recreating a vision

Source: ITDP
 
Pune, cultural capital of Maharashtra, has begun to develop a new, robust public transport system in the form of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). The Pune metropolitan region is comprised of two municipal corporations—Pune and Pimpri-Chinchwad—with a population of over five million. The twin cities face a daunting challenge: how to preserve sustainable and equitable mobility when hundreds of new cars and motorcycles are being registered in the city daily. According to the Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC) Environment Status Report 2009–2010, the city now has 473 private vehicles for every 1000 people, but only one bus for every 6,250 people!
 
Citizens and the administrations of the two municipal corporations have voiced concerns over the future mobility needs of the region and BRT systems are increasingly being recognized as a key solution. It is also essential to ensure safety for pedestrians and to provide dedicated lanes for cyclists, who compete for road space with a rapidly growing number of motor vehicles.
 
ITDP is advising and assisting the Pimpri-Chinchwad Municipal Corporation (PCMC) in BRT planning and design. ITDP is also working with the Pune Mahanagar Parivahan Mahamandal Limited (PMPML), the municipal public transport agency, on the planning and structuring of public transport operations with an emphasis on BRT.
 
PCMC’s four BRT corridors, funded in part by the central government’s Jawarharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission, measure a total of 50 km and will be built with median stations and high quality pedestrian and cycling infrastructure. Nearly 500 new buses with unique specifications are being procured for Pune and Pimpri-Chinchwad.
 
Today, PMPML has a fleet of 1,200 buses on a 1,900 km network, that carries over one million trips per day. The regular buses are subject to traffic delays, leading to irregular and infrequent schedules. There is a unique opportunity to restructure PMPML’s 331 existing bus routes to increase service frequencies on the busiest corridors while making the route network more legible for new customers.
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

In Washington, exploring a sales tax for BRT funding

Source: The City Fix
 
Photo: C-Tran
 
The board of directors of C-Tran, the transit agency that serves Clark County in Vancouver, Wash., voted to add a ballot measure for a 0.1 percent sales tax increase to fund the proposed bus rapid transit (BRT) project, the Oregon Live reports. The ballot measure will be up for voting either in the upcoming August or November 2012 elections. However, it’s not clear who in Clark County will be able to vote on the measure.
 
“The three Vancouver city councilors on the board, however, blocked language that would require the vote include all voters in the C-Tran district, under threat of a block veto,” the article explains. “That leaves open the possibility that the agency could form a smaller subdistrict to vote on the measure and within which the tax would be collected.”
 
But Vancouver Mayor Tim Leavitt suggests pausing on the subdistrict idea until the district voters decide on core bus funding in the November vote. “We’ll have a better idea then of what kind of support we’re going to have in our community for public transit,” Leavitt said.
 
C-Tran’s BRT Project is still in its early planning and development stages. The project, known as “the Fourth Plain BRT,” is mainly an effort to improve economic development opportunities along the proposed corridor and connections to and from neighborhoods and job centers. The project is less about traffic congestion and more about addressing slow bus speeds, poorly managed passenger vehicle access, inadequate bike and pedestrian facilities, and economic revitalization, according to the project’s website.
 
The BRT proposal comes at a time when the C-Tran district projects a 30 percent to 40 percent population and employment increase in the corridor by 2030, which would also cause an increase in traffic in the next 20 years. Accordingly, the project forecasts an increase in transit ridership and transit run times, which ultimately would degrade transit performance and schedule.
 
Based on the projected statistics and the unique needs of Clark County, the Southwest Washington Regional Transportation Council (RTC) completed a two-year Clark County High Capacity Transit (HCT) System Study and recommended the BRT as a preferred solution to serve the transit needs of the county and connect its residents to nearby Portland, Oregon. The BRT was concluded as the best solution based on cost effectiveness, ridership and potential environmental impacts, the project’s website explains.
 
In an effort to further investigate the feasibility of the BRT, C-Tran hired Parsons Brinckerhoff, an international infrastructure development and operations firm, in a $1.5 million project to study and advise on alternatives leading up to the funding vote, Oregon Live reports.
 
“[Parsons Brinckerhoff] will meet with community groups to determine what a bus rapid transit line and the stations along it might look like,” the article says. “It will also study alternatives, including changes to existing bus service. The firm will also examine the potential environmental impacts of the project to ensure it meets federal and state regulations.”
 
Chuck Green, C-Tran’s BRT project manager, explains that the firm’s study could provide information on how to make traditional bus service more efficient, which would be worth the cost even if C-Tran chooses not to pursue the BRT.
 
The early estimates expect the BRT project to cost $2.1 million, of which 80 percent will be paid by a Federal Transit Administration grant. C-Tran will be responsible for the remainder of the cost.
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

MyCiTi buses start rolling in Cape Town

Source: ITDP
 
The second week of May, Cape Town unveiled the first phase of the MyCiTi bus service, between Table View and the Civic Centre, on its Integrated Rapid Transit System. The new service is already transforming the way residents view buses. The bus is a salve to many who previously dealt with a complicated network of taxis, buses and rail. One passenger, whose commute was reduced to only 30 minutes, commented, “I used to sit in traffic for two hours…I’m falling in love with the bus already”.
 
City officials have also praised the system, saying that it will improve the city’s transport system and lessen traffic congestion. However, ANC Mayoral Candidate Tony Ehrenreich, would like to see more priority given to extending the service to the city’s poor, who travel from Khayelitsha and Mitchells Plain (the largest townships outside of Cape Town) on over-crowded trains and buses.
 

The launch follows lengthy negotiations with the local taxi operators, a similar situation that Johannesburg’s Rea Vaya experienced. A contract was finally signed on Sunday May 8, less than a day before the My CiTi launch. ITDP has played a critical role in the business and financial planning for the system.
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Bus Rapid Transit: State-of-the-art in performance and benefits

 
BRT short course at ITLS – University of Sydney
Date: Wednesday 29 June 2011 8.45am-12pm
Cost: Free (limited places)
 
 
BRT is delivering high quality public transport efficiently in cities around the world. How can Sydney benefit from this innovative form of public transport?
 
ITLS Visiting Professor John Nelson will present a half-day short course highlighting recent developments in BRT including state-of-the-art in performance and benefits.
 
Professor David Hensher will introduce the short course by showcasing our ALC-BRT Centre of Excellence development, of which ITLS is a partner.
 
 
Download full program here.
 
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Smartmatic signs deal for Bus Rapid Transit in Cartagena, Colombia worth US$370 million

Source: Green Technology World
 

Cartagena, the most important touristic and cultural district of Colombia, selected joint-venture partners Smartmatic and Dataprom, for the task of implementing and operating an automated fare collection and fleet management system for the new Integrated Mass Transportation System, targeted for a service life span of the next 18 years.
 
The financial, technology and management services which Smartmatic will supply to the transit authority Transcaribe will cover the city of Cartagena and surrounding municipalities. It will comprise a number of advanced systems, including a fare collection system based on the latest and most secure smart card payment technologies, a real-time fleet management and control system for public transportation buses, a passenger information system, and fare card vending machines, with access locations spread throughout the territory for the convenience of passengers. The system is expected to be operational in 2012.
 
«We are overly pleased at having been selected by the Colombian authorities to bring our contributions and expertise to their transportation system. It is Smartmatic’s commitment to keep working to help create the future smart cities, and also to create a better and farther-reaching quality of life,» stated Antonio Mugica, Smartmatic’s CEO.
 
According to Transcaribe, the adjudication was a result of a cmpetitive offer, after a highly demanding public bidding process. The winning consortium, led by Smartmatic, submitted the proposal with the best price and most sustainable solution, designed and adapted to the specific challenges presented by Cartagena, and thus received the highest score out of five bidders. The proposed price will translate into savings of more than US$30 million, which can be destined to health and other social investments, among other specific benefits.
 
Dataprom, a Brazilian company specializing in advanced transportation systems, has an impressive track record in transit systems in Brazil, including the world-renown implementation done in the city of Curitiba, which has become an international reference when it comes to modern, smart, and sustainable public transportation systems. Further, Smartmatic, a supplier of cutting-edge technological solutions, has ample experience in the development and implementation of high-volume transactional platforms and in the deployment of mission-critical projects having a significant social value for citizens. This partnership heralds a successful project, and a first-class automated transport system.
 
Cartagena is a relevant economic centre in the Caribbean, the most important touristic destination and cultural district of Colombia, as well as the country’s fifth largest city. The port, fortresses and monuments of the Colonial City have been declared by the UNESCO as a World Heritage Site. With the new BRT, both residents and visitors will benefit from an automation solution toward modern, efficient and safe public transportation.
 
About Smartmatic
 
Smartmatic is a multinational company that designs and deploys technological solutions aimed at helping governments fulfill, in the most efficient way, their commitments with their citizens. It is one of the largest cutting-edge technology suppliers, with a wide and proven experience in the United States, Asia, Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean. Smartmatic’s competitive advantage lies in its cutting-edge technology and its experience in three key areas: Elections, Identity Management and Smart Cities (Public Transportation, Citizen Security, and Census).
 
About Dataprom
 
Dataprom Computer Equipment and Industrial Services is a company with 22 years of experience in the development and design of intelligent technology solutions, associated with the quality of life of citizens. Dataprom uses the latest technology in all production processes and operations, complying with its values and mission towards developing innovative products that meet the needs of its customers.
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Opinion Pieces: The most powerful instrument for decision making – people’s opinions

Opinion Pieces: since 2007, Prof. David Hensher has written an opinion column in the Australasian Bus and Coach magazine, where he monthly discusses a lot of different transport-related hot topics. In this section we are revisiting these columns.
 
March 2010
 
For some time I have felt a need in Australia to have a regular survey of the opinions of residents of Australia in regards to transport. We have ongoing surveys of consumer sentiment (e.g., the Westpac survey), but no record of how society views developments or the lack thereof in the provision of transport infrastructure and services. ITLS decided to do something about this and in 2009 we developed a methodology, joined in partnership with Interfleet Technology and launched the quarterly survey on March 23rd. In time we can build an informative and influential profile of opinions every 3 months from a sample of residents throughout the country on transport matters that they have views on.
 
Transport Opinion Survey interviews are conducted by Taverner Research by telephone using trained interviewers. Telephone numbers and the household response are selected at random. The quarterly survey is based on 1,000 adults aged 18 years and over, across Australia. This survey was conducted over 13-28 February 2010. The data reflect Australia’s population distribution.
 
What did we find in the first quarter 2010?

• Over half of Australians (58%) say the highest priority issue for transport in Australia is public transport improvements, more than twice as many as road improvements (23%).
• Less than one in five Australians (19%) think transport in their local area has improved in the last year, with NSW residents the least positive.
• Only one in five Australians (20%) think transport in their local area will be better in one year’s time, with about half thinking it will be the same as now. Victorian residents are most confident transport in their local area will be better in one year’s time.
• A quarter of Australians (25%) think transport in Australia will be better in one year’s time than now, while slightly more (27%) think it will be worse. NSW residents are the least confident of any state, while South Australian residents are clearly the most confident about transport improving.
• Australians are more confident that transport in Australia will be better in 5 years than in 1 year, with almost half (46%) thinking transport in Australia will be better in 5 years. NSW residents are the least confident of any state.
• 53% of Australians think their state government is most responsible for transport with West Australian residents most likely to nominate their state government as responsible (60%), and South Australian residents least likely (43%). 27% of Australians nominate both the state and Australian federal governments and only 14% nominate the Australian federal government.
• 44% of Australians think the private sector should be more involved in the provision of public transport, while 29% think the private sector should be involved less. NSW residents were noticeably more positive than Victorian residents on private sector involvement in public transport.

 
Since the readers are public transport people you will be interested in the following graph.
 
What do you think is the highest priority issue for transport in Australia now?
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Food for thought
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Development-Oriented transit: Minimizing taxpayer investments, maximizing community value

Source: The City Fix by Mark Huppert
 
There is a lot of talk throughout the United States about transit-oriented development (TOD). The term describes the planning of private development around station areas for new transit system investments, a process that often involves some form of public-private partnership to achieve the goal of adding density of housing, jobs and services around station nodes. In some U.S. cities, TOD is fraught with complications due to the often conflicting goals of the transit agency, the local governing jurisdictions and private developers. For example, the Seattle transit agency Sound Transit is investing $16 billion in capital costs for a second phase of regional rail investments, but the level of density achieved in station areas is often lower than the market potential due to concerns of neighbors and lack of vision and leadership to fully address long-term regional growth trends and needs.
 

The Sound Transit LINK Light Rail at Othello Station in Seattle. Photo by Seattle Transit Blog.
 
The strategic error of conventional TOD is that the business model often completely neglects the importance of creating a built-in, long-term customer base for the taxpayers’ massive capital investment. Instead, project sponsors often cave to the pressure of a small minority of vocal individuals, rather than looking out for the good of the transit ballot community and the economy at large. The result of this surprisingly short-term focus for such massive, long-term public investments is an unrecoverable, lost economic opportunity. Communities spending billions of dollars in new rail investments are left with few ways to finance the non-transit infrastructure required to make the necessary new density at transit nodes livable.
 
Without enough customers, new measures will often fail, or perhaps even worse, the costs to taxpayers of the approved transit investments will skyrocket over time.
 
PUTTING DEVELOPMENT FIRST
 
In Hong Kong, where station-area planning has dominated the development landscape for more than three decades, the region’s public agencies and developers face the opposite of the lost opportunity problem. Driven by a much different land ownership scheme, where government owns nearly all land and sells development rights to private companies on a land-lease basis, the dominant concept is not transit-oriented development but development-oriented transit.
 
There is a lot of discussion about the development around rail stations in Hong Kong, as sky-high towers above dense retail podiums are springing up atop rail stations throughout the city. The intensity of use achieved through the development-oriented financing scheme appears to be the ultimate manifestation of good planning practices, but the outcome of these developments are seeing mixed reviews. The partnership typically works like this:

• Mass Transit Rail (MTR) Corporation, a privatized company since 2000, buys the land from the government via a bifurcated long-term lease consisting of an up-front capitalized lease payment and an ongoing percentage of revenue lease payment.
• MTR develops a rail station.
• MTR builds private commercial and residential towers above the station.

The towers above the rail stations house high-end shopping malls, hotels, restaurants, housing and more. Profit from these private developments offsets the capital cost of the station development. Therefore, the only expense left for the stations is the cost of day-to-day operations. It’s a financially sustainable transit option—practically unimaginable in North America. The relatively small ongoing costs, paired with the increase in rail customers served by the new stations, results in surprisingly cheap fares for rail users. The low cost to users is an added bonus to riders and a key to the system’s success.
 
URBAN “CATHEDRALS”
 
The primary measures of project success used by the transit agency and local government are the amount of agency revenues, in both the short and long run, that are received from the overall development activity (transit infrastructure + private development) and the number of system customers that can be accommodated in the new station area with supporting housing, jobs and services. The end result in the urbanized areas of Hong Kong is often huge, multi-story station podiums filled with retail and services, coupled with large towers of residential and commercial uses.
 
Architect Eugene H.K. Leung, who researched the podium developments as a graduate student at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, calls the station nodes “the new cathedrals of the city” because they become centers around which development occurs and communities congregate. As the importance of these developments in the city’s urban fabric continues to grow, the controversy around them is magnified. These monolithic structures are extremely productive financially for the transit agency, the local government and the developers. However, more often than not, these mega-projects fail to meet the needs and goals of individuals who interface with the project at the pedestrian level.
 
According to Dr. Sujata Govada, a leader in Hong Kong’s urban design community, the block-style mega-developments — particularly those that swallow up existing portions of granular street grid — have been a major cause of the Hong Kong population’s awakening interest in planning and urban design. Activists in this realm range from academics like Leung, to industry professionals, to neighborhood concern groups. While that’s not unusual for U.S. cities, where public comment processes are often fundamental to land use (and “NIMBY-ism” is often a stubborn roadblock to innovative development and land use), it’s something of a breakthrough for Hong Kong, where opposition to development has historically been seen as opposition to progress and economic growth.
 
Stakeholders from various backgrounds are working to answer one fundamental question: how might two seemingly irreconcilable approaches to the same basic problem be resolved?
 
 
Photo: Union Square at Hong Kong MTR Kowloon Station, by jimbowen0306.
 
CUSTOMER-CENTRIC
 
The remedy might be as simple as re-framing the goals for these types of developments. In his master’s thesis, “Transportation Hub as the New Urban Center,” Leung proposes just such a solution. He suggests adding another metric to the conventional, financial success criteria of the development-oriented transit project: permeability of the public pedestrian zones at the station podium. Rather than having the podium act as a fortress against the surrounding neighborhood, as is the case at many of Hong Kong’s most urban stations, Mr. Leung’s solution creates a net to draw in people from the community surrounding the project.
 
Whatever the dominant framework for planning development around transit—whether it is the U.S. model or the model prevalent in Hong Kong—this emphasis on the internal and external customers of a development allows success to be realized by the greatest number of project stakeholders. A permeable design fortifies the fabric of the neighborhood as a whole, which fulfills an important function of TOD. Meanwhile, the economic opportunity to minimize the taxpayers’ share of the transit investment is still fully realized through maximizing the value of land development rights sold or leased to private parties within station areas. The ultimate outcome of this customer-centric approach to station area planning should be lasting sustainability for TOD investment financially, as well as socially.
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

The 20 best and worst cities in the US for public transit

With gas prices rising and family budgets strained, more commuters are looking for efficient ways to get to work without a car. But are America’s transit networks up to the task? To find out, the Brookings Institution analyzed 100 metro areas in the U.S. to see which cities are getting it right and which aren’t.
 
Source: TIME
 
With gas prices rising and jobs still scarce, more commuters are looking for efficient ways to get to work without a car. But are America’s transit systems up to the task? To find out, the Brookings Institution looked at U.S. public transportation systems in the nation’s 100 largest metro areas and analyzed which cities were best at getting their residents to their workplaces in a timely and cost-effective manner. By researching coverage, service frequency and percent of total employed residents who can use public transportation, the report aimed to rank cities based on the most convenient overall commute. Take a look at the 20 cities with the best and worst job access via city transit systems — the number one metro area might surprise you.
 
 
Best Cities:

 
 
Worst Cities:

 
 
See the full Brookings report.
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Urban transport: A little less conversation, a little more action

Professor David Hensher, Director of ITLS, discusses transport priorities for New South Wales* (NSW) over breakfast in Sydney with 150 people – 16 May 2011
 
Source: ITLS News & Events
 
Over 150 people attended the Powered by Research Breakfast hosted by The University of Sydney Business School and held at Cockle Bay Wharf. For the recently elected NSW government, urban transport remains a priority challenge. At the breakfast forum ITLS Director, Professor David Hensher, presented his research on whether an increase in funding for public transport is the best way to see a significant improvement to traffic congestion. Professor Hensher noted that over 80% of trips in Sydney are currently made in motor vehicles and questioned whether significant modal changes will be made achieved unless the government addresses pricing the use of cars to reflect the cost they’re imposing through congestion. Professor Hensher emphasised the need for a commitment to networks and systems, the state of public transport, funding sources, special funding instruments, and the User Pays system.
 
Professor Hensher’s address was followed by a lively panel discussion with Paul Forward, Principal of Evans and Peck (former CEO of the NSW Roads and Traffic Authority), and Andrew West, Senior Journalist at the Sydney Morning Herald. The panel was chaired by Helen Dalley, best known as the presenter of Sunday, the Today Show and A Current Affair on the Nine network, and now the host of Sky News Sunday Business.
 
 



 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Download full video of event.
 
Download Professor Hensher’s presentation.
 
 
* New South Wales (abbreviated as NSW), is Australia’s most populous state, and is located in the south-east of the country, north of Victoria, south of Queensland, east of South Australia, west of Jervis Bay Territory and encompasses the whole of the Australian Capital Territory. Source: Wikipedia.
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Transit ridership up due to rising gas prices

Source: AltTransport by Joseph Cutrufo
 
It was only a matter of time: Transit agencies are reporting increased ridership in USA due to higher gas prices.
 
With the national average for a gallon of regular unleaded now at $3.98, motorists across the nation are switching to public transportation. We saw it in 2008, when the national average reached $4, and we’re seeing it all over again.
 
According to the American Public Transportation Association, $4 per gallon is the tipping point where people begin to drive less and use transit more – a lot more. If gas prices stay this high, we can expect an additional 670 billion transit trips made this year nationwide.
 
In Boston, transit ridership is up 5 percent overall, with 7 percent increases on rapid transit lines. Highway and airline traffic are also up, but this is mostly attributed to the recovering economy.
 
The Gold Line, a light rail line that connects Pasadena, CA to Union Station in Downtown Los Angeles, saw a 10 percent increase in ridership in March 2011 over March of 2010. Transit officials expect even higher ridership as the area’s 12 percent unemployment rate goes down and people head back to work.
 
It’s not just in big cities with subways and light rail where travel behavior is changing. In Wichita, KS, ridership is up 5 percent despite a recent $.25 fare increase. Wichita Transit expects even more new riders when the average gas price hits $4 a gallon there.
 
Ridership is up 4.7 percent in Wilkes-Barre, PA in the first quarter of 2011 compared to the first quarter of 2010. The Luzerne County Transit Authority secured a flat $2.56 per gallon price on diesel that will last through June, and they’re replacing older buses with diesel-electric hybrids in 2012.
 
In McAllen, TX, it’s not just gas prices but also flashy new lime green buses and cheap fares that transit officials are giving credit for increased ridership in 2011.
 
With all this increased ridership nationwide, let’s hope a transit-friendly transportation bill passes. It’s probably not a good idea to slash funding for public transportation when we have so little control over the cost of the alternative.
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Can the clean development mechanism bring Bogota's 'surface subway' to your city?

Source: E&E Publishing by Nathanial Gronewold
 
BOGOTA, Colombia — A 10-year public transit project here has fast become a model for developing cities the world over. But could it next be the model for a major expansion in international carbon offsetting efforts?
 
Fully operational from 2001, the TransMilenio service is famous as an ideal bus rapid transit system, an innovation that by some estimates is roughly 1,000 times cheaper than building a subway. The model is now being copied elsewhere in Latin America, Africa, Asia and even the United States.
 
Less well-known, TransMilenio was the first public transportation project in the world to win U.N.-approved greenhouse gas emissions offset credits. Developed in tandem with the United Nations’ Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), the methodology for counting the climate change-combating benefits of mass transit was designed with TransMilenio in mind. It is now being adopted by other municipalities eager to trade reduced carbon dioxide emissions for CDM cash.
 
Alone just a few years ago, TransMilenio is now one of six registered CDM transportation projects, with 36 more in the works. Advocates are hoping that hundreds more will follow, eager as they are to spread the benefits of carbon reductions, cleaner air and smoother commuting in rapidly expanding developing-world cities while simultaneously reducing the dominance of China, India and Brazil in the CDM.
 
But some say that the slow growth of transportation projects in the CDM shows why one of the best options for diversifying the geographic spread of these international carbon offsetting projects may fail to live up to expectations.
 
Daunting paperwork needs to be simplified
 
While some see transportation becoming one of the fastest-growing areas of the CDM, others knowledgeable of Bogota’s experience doubt that such projects will ever expand in number beyond the handful that exist today. The complexity of counting the avoided CO2 from reduced car trips, policed rigidly by U.N. regulators eager to avoid fraud or scandals, is too great for many city governments to bother, they say.
 
«If you don’t simplify the process, you will have large projects come for it, but they will be a minority of projects,» said Jürg Grütter of Grütter Consulting.
 
Grütter’s firm helped Bogota with its CDM application and is busy with other projects around the world. It aided with the second successful transportation applicant to the CDM, a bus rapid transit system in Guangzhou, China, and has team members in India, Brazil and Vietnam.
 
But in an interview, Grütter complained that the hurdles such projects have to go through to win the CDM credits, known as Certified Emission Reductions (CERs), are so numerous that they will never proliferate at the rate that the most optimistic proponents would like.
 
Aside from the difficulties of proving that projects need the CER income to be viable, the costs and complications from counting and tracking the cuts in CO2 levels attained make it likely that most developers will choose to stay away from the CDM, he and his team believe. Counting emissions reductions from thousands of tailpipes, it turns out, isn’t nearly as straightforward as dealing with a single source.
 
«When the public sector is involved, they are very fearful of this type of contract,» Grütter said. «It’s much more difficult to define the product and define the quality and to define what you are in fact contracting.»
 
The operators of the Bogota system themselves, however, are more optimistic that CDM administrators and public transit advocates can find the right balance. The reason, they say, is that every time they host a foreign delegation on a tour of TransMilenio, they are asked in detail how they managed to secure CDM financing for the project.
 
«That is one of the top presentations that we have,» said Arturo Fernando Rojas Rojas, deputy general manager of TransMilenio, in an interview.
 
Designated bus lanes unsnarl traffic
 
With more than 50 miles of designated bus lanes separated from the normal traffic flow, TransMilenio is still the largest bus rapid transit, or BRT, system in the world, though it’s modeled after a much older one in Curitiba, Brazil.
 
The concept is often called «surface subway» by its proponents.
 
Using streets freed from passenger vehicles, pre-boarding fare payment systems and transfer stations, bus rapid transit operates very similarly to a rail system but is much less expensive, relying largely on existing infrastructure. Transportation experts say it costs roughly $1 billion to build a mile of below-ground subway track in the United States, whereas costs for bus rapid transit are put close to $1 million per mile.
 
Commuters say that within the past decade, TransMilenio has managed to tame Bogota’s famously snarled city traffic, especially the notorious congestion on Caracas Avenue. A trip that once took an hour and a half is now estimated to last only 45 minutes using the buses. Green «feeder buses» deliver passengers to the main stations, where they can board the articulated red buses on the physically separated lanes.
 
To date, Rojas estimates that TransMilenio has earned his public firm about $2.63 million selling CERs, all on a contract with the government of the Netherlands. The money is but a small fraction of the cost of operations, but TransMilenio officials insist that it is money badly needed to finance sustainability efforts and environmental monitoring of their system.
 
Andres Jara, who runs the Bogota office of the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP), said the system has completely transformed his hometown. TransMilenio is now undertaking phase three of its 30-year expansion plan, which the city hopes will eventually include more than 200 miles of designated bus lanes and will incorporate all of the dozens of remaining independent bus operators into one centralized system.
 
Copycats look for CDM money
 
«The situation right now in developing countries and developing cities is that we have a lack of resources,» Jara said. «So what we showed with TransMilenio and BRT systems is that you can develop a strong transportation system with high quality, high efficiency, at a fraction of the cost.»
 
That lesson hasn’t gone unnoticed. Jara estimates that he has traveled to more than 100 countries in the past four years educating city planners on the BRT model, including China, where he aided Guangzhou’s efforts. The idea has since spread to South Africa, India and Indonesia, and new growth is expected in Mexico, Brazil, Argentina and possibly Tanzania.
 
Like Rojas at TransMilenio, Jara says that all transit planners he has met with expressed interest in tapping the CDM. He says it’s a wise move and he can see transportation CDM projects booming in popularity in the years to come.
 
«It’s not a lot, but it’s an additional income that is always helpful, useful, if you want to make more research on how you can improve the operation,» Jara said.
 
The CDM offices in Bonn, Germany, usually require project developers to show that their efforts couldn’t happen without the benefit of the carbon offset credit sales. But that hard requirement, termed «additionality,» has been watered down over the years as developers complain it is too rigid and has stymied the spread of CDM projects to smaller developing nations.
 
TransMilenio SA officials admit that they don’t need the CER cash to survive. But experts point out that public transportation projects are rarely profitable and almost always rely on significant outside financing for support, a strong argument in favor of CDM support. And much of the cash goes back into the emissions monitoring regime demanded by Bonn regulators.
 
«There are difficult aspects that we have to bear in mind, and the money helps us to be more sustainable,» Rojas said. «We can in fact work without this extra income. However, this income is very important for us.»
 
The other potential benefits for cities looking to follow Bogota’s example are numerous.
 
Cuts in traffic, pollution and crime
 
By taking cars and dirtier buses off the road, the city estimates, TransMilenio has prevented more than 2 million tons of CO2-equivalent greenhouse gases from entering the atmosphere. The city smog has been reduced, and health officials expect there will be fewer asthma-linked deaths. Residents even report that safety and security have greatly improved — robberies in traffic jams or on the city’s minibuses were common occurrences, so the city combats this with cameras in buses and stations and police patrols.
 
If future growth plans are rolled out as scheduled, Bogota officials expect further reductions in traffic, air pollution and crime, even as the city’s population expands and cars get cheaper. By 2030, TransMilenio officials say, 100 percent of Bogota’s public transit network will be theirs, cutting the number of total buses from 16,000 on the streets today to just 12,000.
 
And though he enjoys the CDM income today, Rojas admits that he’s worried about what may happen should nations fail to reach agreement on a new international climate change treaty and extend the life of the carbon offsetting system. The credits should continue to come in for another 10 years, as the European Union will still trade in CERs up to 2020, but beyond that, Rojas said, he will either have to seek out deals in the voluntary carbon market or come up with an alternative solution.
 
With the December 2012 Kyoto Protocol deadline looming, carbon offsetters will face pressure to get CDM projects registered as soon as possible. But Grütter says the cost and hassle involved in getting all the paperwork sorted out ahead of time will keep developing world public transportation projects from ever becoming as big a part of the CDM as he and others would like.
 
«If transport is to really play a larger role, you have to simplify the whole procedure quite a lot,» he said. «Very large cities with very large projects, they might go for it. But when you have a huge amount of intermediate cities, between half a million to 1 million, in developing countries, the project itself currently will be too small to warrant all these transaction costs.»
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Opinion Pieces: Plans, plans and action! Or is it a promise?

Opinion Pieces: since 2007, Prof. David Hensher has written an opinion column in the Australasian Bus and Coach magazine, where he monthly discusses a lot of different transport-related hot topics. In this section we are revisiting these columns.
 
February 2010
 
February 2010 has been a month of new plans to ‘sort out’ Sydney’s ailing transport system. First we had the Sydney Morning Herald (SMH) Transport Blueprint with an almost total emphasis on public transport (some have said it should have been a transport and land use plan and not a public transport plan!). Then we had the NSW Government’s Metropolitan Transport Plan (previously announced as a Blueprint but downscaled). In many ways the SMH blueprint has outshone the government’s plan (the latter printing 50 shiny copies which is also available online here).
 
Now that the dust has settled, what might we observe about the two plans? First we have to recognize that much of what is offered will not even be started until well after the government’s current term in office. However this is not unusual since major infrastructure takes time to put in place. However, given that what we now have is at least the 5th plan with little action (in line with the plan) over the last 10 years, and that many of the proposed projects have been lightly appraised in respect of impact on key objectives, such as reducing congestion, improving accessibility and delivering value for money, it is not unreasonable to ask about the chances of specific projects ever happening?
 
The most dramatic feature of the government’s plan is the scrapping of the Metro and the almost total focus on central business district (CBD) centric transport investment. This may prove to be a mistake given that it was meant to go out West to Westmead and was more than a CBD metro, and most importantly was designed to create competition and to break the stranglehold on Cityrail and union power in the delivery of rail services which have been anything but efficient and effective. So this is a win for Cityrail, the union and wasteful spending. What we now have is a promise for line duplication to the west and the north.
 
The $50.2bn metropolitan transport plan pledges $6.7bn for a new train service to outer northwest Sydney (the Hills district), with work to commence in 2017. But while the blueprint promises «quadruplication» of the rail line between Chatswood and St Leonards on Sydney’s north shore, it makes no commitment to extra capacity on the harbour crossing. Two new rail tunnels will be needed under the harbour, at an estimated cost of $3-4bn. I commented in the Australian recently that «If a quadrupling of the line is needed because there’s evidence to suggest demand will require it and it will remove a bottleneck, there’s going to have to be recognition of getting across the Harbour Bridge.» and “likely public opposition to any proposal to add an extra deck to the bridge would leave the government with no option apart from tunnelling.” «What we’ve got here is very high-level commitments to projects that were once on the books and were taken off, but are now back on for political reasons.» A weakness of the transport blueprint was its assumption future rail users would want to take trips in and out of the city rather than making «circumferential» journeys. «Why are we quadrupling the line there in the first place?» A spokesman for NSW Transport Minister David Campbell said that an additional harbour crossing would be considered in the future.
 
When and if the north-west rail link is recommenced as a project, it would be appropriate to revisit the options that were considered almost eight years ago. These include bus rapid transit in tunnels along the lines of the Brisbane system (and yes it can deliver the same capacity as a tunnelled railway for considerably lower cost, making it look like, smell like and act line a rail system).
 
Most importantly however, the continued failure to look at more efficient and fairer charging schemes for car usage (apart from a flat $30 registration increase for most car classes), denies the system of an opportunity to raise sizeable sums of money to put back into the overall transport system so car users and public transport users (and the freight sector) can all benefit. It remains a puzzle as to what certain politicians believe that ‘roads should be free’. Clearly this is sending a message that people put little value on saving travel time!
 
 
Food for thought
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Raising revenues through bus advertisements

Source: The City Fix by Itir Sonuparlak.
 
Photo by Willamor Media
 
The Charlotte-Area Transit System (CATS) signed a five-year, $2.6 million contract with Titan, a transit advertising company, to allow advertisements on its fleet of buses and light rail. The agreement gives Titan the exclusive right to sell and manage advertising on the city’s public transit vehicles. The contract will allow exterior and interior advertising for buses and exterior advertising on the CATS light rail system. In return for the exclusive right to prime transit real estate, Titan guaranteed a $5 million profit to CATS in a span of five years.
 
CATS removed advertisements from its public transit vehicles in 2000 because the project was not cost-effective. CATS Marketing and Communication Manager Olaf Kinard believes the project will be more successful this time around because of the growth in Charlotte’s transit system. According to WSOC-TV, an ABC-affiliated television station in Charlotte, CATS’s fleet of buses grew from 120 to 330 since 2000. The LYNX Blue Line, the region’s first light rail service, is also a fairly new addition to the region’s public transit system, having started service in 2007. Overall, CATS provides transport to 25 million people annually with 70 bus and light rail routes.
 
This is an especially lucrative time for companies to advertise in Charlotte since the 2012 Democratic National Convention is scheduled to be held in the city’s Time Warner Cable Arena on September 3, 2012.
 
Charlotte is not alone in offering transit real estate for advertisements. New York City makes subway cars, buses, stations, panels on entryways to stations, and even the backs of metro cards available for advertisements, exposing these messages to millions of people who ride public transit every day.
 
But what do these advertisements mean to commuters? Kinard explains that the profits from this service can help cover costs, which could avoid an increase in fares. “It helps us manage our costs, especially with rising fuel prices,” he said in the interview with WSOC-TV.
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

EMBARQ India conducts training workshop on bus operations

Putting learning into practice to improve mass transit.
 
Source: EMBARQ
 
EMBARQ India, in association with the Institute of Urban Transport (IUT), conducted a three-day training workshop on bus operations for 27 officials from transport organizations and municipal corporations in 23 cities across India.
 
The workshop was based on materials contained in Bus Karo, a guidebook on bus planning and operations developed by EMBARQ India. The workshop covered topics including the role of buses in sustainable urban transport systems, planning for bus operations, including demand estimation and routing, methods of bus priority, technology and vehicles for bus operations, and financial analysis. The attendees also participated in field exercises in the city of Panjim, Goa.
 
In addition to three EMBARQ India staff – Madhav Pai, Amit Bhatt and Ashwin Prabhu – the workshop also saw presentations by Kishore Nathani from the Urban Mass Transit Company and Manjiri Akalkotkar of the Center for Environmental Planning and Technology University (CEPT).
 
As part of the Jawarharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JnNURM), the Government of India provided 61 Indian cities with funding to procure more than 15,000 new buses. As a consequence of this program, city and state road transport projects have been undergoing a process of fleet expansion and renewal. Many cities without urban bus systems are planning to launch services with these new buses. Given the general lack of technical capacity in transport planning at the city and municipal government level, training in bus operations for transport officials is essential for developing high quality bus-based public transport systems.
 
The Ministry of Urban Development (MoUD) recently launched a large national capacity-building initiative in the field of urban transport. The Institute of Urban Transport (IUT), an undertaking of MoUD, is the nodal agency for implementing this initiative. This workshop was the first in a series planned by IUT in the coming year. EMBARQ India was invited to serve as the faculty for this workshop.
 
Funding for the workshop was provided by the Sustainable Urban Transport Project (SUTP), in partnership with Global Environment Facility (GEF) of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Opinion Pieces: Going Dutch – listen to the future

Opinion Pieces: since 2007, Prof. David Hensher has written an opinion column in the Australasian Bus and Coach magazine, where he monthly discusses a lot of different transport-related hot topics. In this section we are revisiting these columns.
 
January 2010
 
There is a slow but growing realization that the future of public transport depends on the future of road pricing related to vehicle use, with a portion of revenue raised to be earmarked to public transport as a way of obtaining stakeholder buy in. The Dutch government is leading the way – it plans to scrap the road tax as well as the purchase tax on all new cars when the system is introduced in 2011. The Minister of Transport says this will provide a fairer system which taxes vehicle use, rather than ownership. Indeed, the minister says that more than half of Dutch road users will actually pay less under the road user charging scheme. According to calculations by motoring organizations, only motorists who drive more than 18,000kms a year are likely to be worse off under the new scheme. Currently in Sydney Private cars average 12,500km per annum, Household business cars average15,000kms per annum, and company cars average 22,000kms per annum.
 
A first implementation takes place in The Netherlands by 2011 for truck traffic and as of 2012 to 2016 for passenger cars. The motor vehicle tax (MRB) and the purchase tax (BPM) will be replaced by a system whereby the motorist pays depending on location, time and environmental aspects. The Automotive Telematics On-board unit Platform ATOP from NXP makes it possible to introduce pay-as-you-drive. It is safe, simple and very cost effective: it really is possible!
 
The Dutch government has determined that the costs of operating the national road user charge will not exceed five per cent of the proceeds. On November 16 last year the Dutch Cabinet agreed to the km charge for cars: 3 euro cents/km in 2012 increasing to 7 euro cents in 2017, equivalent of A$0.05/km in 2012 (or 50c/litre) or A$750 per annum (15,000km), compared to current registration fees (typically in Aust. around $300-$400). The 3 Euro Cents per km will increase to 6.75 Euro cents per km in 2018. The 3 euro cents is an average but varies by class of vehicle based on energy efficiency (A,B, C…). Hybrid vehicles will pay approximately 0.5-1 Euro cents per km. In 2012, however as part of a phase in program, the new charging regime will apply to only 20% of cars (selected via a lottery), with 100% covered by 2018. The charge will be a flat rate per km per class up to 2018; however from 2018 a peak rate will start, but only in Amsterdam, with a lower base (non-peak) rate when the peak rate is introduced. The entire scheme is designated as revenue neutral. It is claimed that 58% of people in entire country will be better off with significant reductions in congestion.
 
We look with great interest to the Netherlands. Will Australia like what it sees? It will certainly be much fairer than the very unfair (inequitable) system we have in place.
 
 
Food for thought
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

T-MAPPER website launched

Online database tracks actions to mitigate transport emissions.
 
Source: EMBARQ
 
EMBARQ and its partners are pleased to announce the launch of a new report and website, Transport Measures And Policies to Promote Emission Reductions (T-MAPPER), that provides information and data on national policies that help mitigate greenhouse gas emissions from the transport sector.
 
The transport sector currently accounts for a fifth of global carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, and transport energy-related CO2 emissions are predicted to increase by 1.7 percent per year from 2004 to 2030. A large proportion of these emissions take place outside of Europe, and the largest growth is anticipated in developing countries.
 
The European Commission (EC) commissioned the T-MAPPER study to better understand and support the actions being taken outside of the European Economic Area (EEA) to mitigate transport emissions.
 
The project team was led by the Transport Research Laboratory (TRL), with support from the Istituto di Studi per l’Integrazione dei Sistemi (ISIS), the Energy Research Centre of the Netherlands (ECN), the Clean Air Initiative for Asian Cities (CAI-Asia), the German Technical Cooperation (GIZ) and EMBARQ.
 
According to the website, the project aims to:

• Provide a comprehensive understanding of policies being enacted outside the EEA to reduce the climate impact of the transport sector, some of which could be transferred to EEA countries, and;
• Provide information on possible mechanisms to support the reduction, or avoidance, of increases in Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions from transport (in other areas of the world).

 
To learn more, download the full report, two-page summaries for each of the 20 countries currently included in the database, or the data spreadsheets. EMBARQ contributed information about transport emissions reduction policies in the United States, Canada, Colombia, Mexico and Brazil.
 
Transport and climate experts are encouraged to submit information about policies that help cut transport-related greenhouse gas emissions by filling out this simple online form.
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Event wrap-up: "Best Practices in Integrated Transport Systems and BRT in Latin America"

Inaugural conference in Guayaquil, Ecuador draws more than 150 participants
 
Source: EMBARQ
 

More than 150 representatives from cities across South America, Europe and Asia participated in the inaugural conference of Best Practices in Integrated Transport Systems and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) in Latin America, also known as Congreso SIBRT, on April 25-27 in Guayaquil, Ecuador.
 
The four-day conference was hosted by the Latin American Association for Integrated Transport Systems and Bus Rapid Transit (SIBRT) and co-organized by Metrovía Foundation and EMBARQ, with the support of the Municipality of Guayaquil.
 
Senior representatives from Latin America’s most influential transit agencies shared experiences and best practices of integrated transport and BRT systems.
 
«Congreso SIBRT emphasized the benefits of developing sustainable transport systems in Latin America cities», said Fernando Paez, president of SIBRT. «It provided a space for cities to exchange goals and solutions to improve quality of life».
 
Paez underscored the importance of the SIBRT association, which is a strateg partner of our CoE, and for which EMBARQ serves as Technical Secretariat, for exchanging experiences and lessons learned among transit authorities, suppliers, traders, academics and citizens.
 
«It was a great opportunity to bring together representatives from cities that are different in terms of population and available resources,» said Daniel Marx Couto of BHTrans from Belo Horizonte, Brazil. «It is important for each one to know about all the different transport projects and to deploy those that best fit their city’s reality. This, surely, will help improve mass transit in Latin America.»
 
General Secretary of SIBRT Marcos Isfer, who is also the president of URBS in Curitiba, Brazil, shared similar sentiments: «It’s wonderful to have this opportunity to share successful experiences in implementing such transit systems, showing the managers of public transportation agencies that this is the solution of sustainable transport.»
 
Dr. Carlos Dora from the World Health Organization (WHO) emphasized the importance of data collection and benchmarking. «If this group of representatives from public transport agencies makes assessments about improvements in quality of life and public health, before and after the implementation of these transport systems, they can change the perceptions of public policies in this sector,» he said.
 
Luis Gutierrez, EMBARQ’s Latin America Strategic Director and member of our CoE, stressed the relationship between transport and health: «The lecture by Dr. Carlos Dora prompted many comments and people showed interest in developing metrics for the impact of transportation projects on three dimensions of health: air pollution, accidents and lack of physical activity.»
 
Several members of our CoE assisted and made presentations during the event. Juan Carlos Muñoz presented the ALC-BRT Centre of Excellence and its members, describing also its vision, goals, objectives and the work we are doing and plan to do in the short and long term.
 
Dario Hidalgo described the Status of the BRT Industry, which is part of the CoE ALC-BRT Observatory. He summarizes it as follows: «We advanced a survey of BRT around the world that shows an impressive growth of this type of applications, specially on the last decade. The influence of the Latin American systems has worldwide impacts. BRT has proven to be low cost, rapid to implement, and with high performance and significant positive impacts. BRT is now present or is an aspiration of most cities. Despite the evident success, several systems in the developing world suffer problems resulting from poor planning, implementation and operation, due to financial, institutional and regulatory constraints. In particular, high occupancy levels, resulting from the need to cover capital and operational costs out of the user fare, is hampering the attractiveness and medium term sustainability of the bus systems.»
 
Toni Lindau made a presentation at the event on Mobility for Big Events: FIFA World Cup and the Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro, where he described the challenges imposed to the city by these and other mega events occurring from 2011 to 2016 and the hundreds of km of BRS (Bus Rapid Services) and BRT systems that are under planning/implementation stages (for more information, read this interview to Toni).
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Opinion Pieces: Beyond the words – action is now increasingly more visible

Opinion Pieces: since 2007, Prof. David Hensher has written an opinion column in the Australasian Bus and Coach magazine, where he monthly discusses a lot of different transport-related hot topics. In this section we are revisiting these columns.
 
December 2009
 
2009 was a watershed year with more State governments finally showing an increasing positive active commitment to public transport, as well as earlier initiatives starting to deliver tangible patronage growth outcomes. Whether we agree with the specific infrastructure and service propositions or not, there is now very tangible evidence that investment in improved public transport has begun. In Sydney we see planning well advanced on rail projects (e.g. The Metro in the CBD and out to Westmead, the South- West Rail link), and the roll out of 300 additional buses. In Victoria we see the high frequency Smartbus Route network grow to 198 kms.
 
The Bus Association of Victoria suggests that the success of bus patronage growth is attributable to frequency, span of hours, better network planning, and geographical coverage. We would not argue with this, but would also add capacity. We might also remind governments of all persuasions that within the limits of likely funding on public transport, achieving these four objectives will requires some careful thought on how much of the financial pie is available to serving the entire metropolitan network. We are seeing a risk associated with a focus on a few corridor specific projects that will leave little for the rest of the system.
 
The author, with Professor Corinne Mulley of ITLS-Sydney, and a PhD student at the University of Newcastle (UK) recently evaluated the impact of a high quality bus service known as Superoute (having some similarities to the SmartBus Routes in Melbourne), which can be delivered with relatively low amounts of financial investment. The ‘Superoute’ brand was designed and introduced to offer passengers high quality services across a number of the major corridors on local services within Tyne and Wear, to encourage greater use of public transport. Buses operating on a ‘Superoute’ offer higher frequencies than other routes, bus priority measures where appropriate to secure better punctuality, a high standard of shelters and information at stops, and modern vehicles including easy access for wheel chairs and prams. A total of 40 ‘Superoutes’ are operating across Tyne and Wear following their launch in 2002. Patronage on the ‘Superoutes’ is on an upward trajectory since the introduction of quality improvements, whilst the rest of the network continued to decline. On average there has been a 30 percent growth in patronage over each two year period.
 
These examples highlight the need for greater partnership between government and operator, as well as a rethink about how restrictive existing contracts are in encouraging any initiatives such as the one above. In particular we would suggest that there are greater opportunities for Local Government to engage much more with bus operators (beyond current activity which mainly relates to the provisions of roadside furniture such as bus shelters) in sharing financial inputs where State Governments are not involved, since relatively small investments in quality partnerships like the Superoute initiative in the UK (which was not funded by Central Government) can deliver strong transport benefits while taking pressure off of the road budget.
 
 
Food for thought
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Planning for the future of Indian cities

 
EMBARQ experts highlight importance of sustainable transport.
 
Source: EMBARQ
 
Naya Raipur Development Authority (NRDA) and EMBARQ organized a half-day workshop on March 25 highlighting the importance of sustainable transport in Indian cities.
 
The workshop involved more than 50 senior goverment officials and delegates from the state of Chhattisgarh.
 
Dario Hidalgo presented on «Urban Transport: Problems and Perspectives» to share principles of sustainable transport from around the world. EMBARQ India’s Senior Transport Specialist Amit Bhatt gave a presentation exploring the possibility of extending a bus rapid transit (BRT) system in the new city of Naya Raipur.
 
Naya Raipur, a greenfield city, is being planned as the new administrative capital of Chhattisgarh. Naya Raipur is planning a BRT system that would improve mobility for people living in the new developments of Naya Raipur, as well as the current capital city of Raipur.
 
EMBARQ is assisting NRDA in planning and designing the new city. Further meetings are planned with the Raipur Municipal Corportation and Raipur Development Authority.
 
Other workshop participants included:

• Mr. Rajesh Munat, Minister for Urban Development, Housing & Environment, Government of Chhattisgarh
• Mr. P. Joy Oommen, Chief Secretary, Government of Chhattisgarh
• Smt. Kiranmai Nayak, Mayor of Raipur
• Mr. Anil Baijal, former Secretary, Ministry of Urban Development, Goverment of Indi

 
The following it the presentation by Dario Hidalgo:
 

 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

OUT NOW: Updated and improved "Modelling Transport" 4th Edition, John Wiley & Sons

 
«…a book which should be on the shelf of every theoretical modeller and practitioner…» (Euro Jnl of Transport and Infrastructure Research, Vol.2, No.2, 2002)
 
Authors: Juan de Dios Ortúzar, Luis G. Willumsen
 
Already the market leader in the field, Modelling Transport has become still more indispensible following a thorough and detailed update. Enhancements include two entirely new chapters on modelling for private sector projects and on activity–based modelling; a new section on dynamic assignment and micro–simulation; and sizeable updates to sections on disaggregate modelling and stated preference design and analysis. It also tackles topical issues such as valuation of externalities and the role of GPS in travel time surveys.
 
Providing unrivalled depth and breadth of coverage, each topic is approached as a modelling exercise with discussion of the roles of theory, data, model specification, estimation, validation and application. The authors present the state of the art and its practical application in a pedagogic manner, easily understandable to both students and practitioners.
 

• Follows on from the highly successful third edition universally acknowledged as the leading text on transport modelling techniques and applications.
• Includes two new chapters on modelling for private sector projects and activity based modeling, and numerous updates to existing chapters.
• Incorporates treatment of recent issues and concerns like risk analysis and the dynamic interaction between land use and transport.
• Provides comprehensive and rigorous information and guidance, enabling readers to make practical use of every available technique.
• Relates the topics to new external factors and technologies such as global warming, valuation of externalities and global positioning systems (GPS).

 
For more details, you can find the book on Amazon.
 
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Opinion Pieces: Towards a higher level of trust between operators and the regulator

Opinion Pieces: since 2007, Prof. David Hensher has written an opinion column in the Australasian Bus and Coach magazine, where he monthly discusses a lot of different transport-related hot topics. In this section we are revisiting these columns.
 
November 2009
 
 
Legally binding Commercial Arms-Length Contracts will work better if there is greater trust in the partnership between operator and regulator
 
The 11th International Conference on Competition and Ownership in Land Passenger Transport (Thredbo 11) was held in Delft, The Netherlands in late September (2009). A number of bus operators, consultants and regulators from Australia attended (including all the Executive Directors of the Bus and Coach Associations in New South Wales [NSW], Queensland and Victoria and the President of BIC). Over 4 days we discussed and debated developments in reform agendas throughout the world as well as updating experience with contract systems already in place. A number of very useful experiences and recommendations were tabled. Some of the most pertinent ideas and actions around the world that should be shared with Australia are summarized below. As NSW in particular begins its next round of contract negotiations in the next 12 months, it is timely to reflect on what we have learnt.
 
In terms of the experiences with the NSW contracts, research undertaken by the author has identified a very low degree of contract clarity in respect of ‘incentives to improve performance and grow patronage’, ‘contract renewal procedures’, and ‘ad hoc claims’. There was however a high level of contract clarity on ‘maintenance of accreditation currency’, ‘obligations regarding bus maintenance with the contract’, ‘agreements and obligations in respect of rights of operators in adjacent locations in joint service provision (integrated networks)’, and ‘payment procedures’. We also investigated how successful the bus operation has been under the contract in addressing (or resolving) issues that have arisen during this first contract period. We found that the most successful issues that have been resolved through communication are ‘contract renewal procedures’, ‘maintenance of accreditation currency’, ‘contract end procedures’, and ‘adherence to contract matrix’. The issues where success has been perceived as quite ineffective have been ‘depot upgrades and expansion’, ‘change events’, and ‘incentives to improve performance and grow patronage’. This evidence should be taken into account in the next round of negotiations. Overlaying all this evidence was a finding that where operators reported a higher level of trust between themselves and the regulator, there was greater communication and quicker resolution of issues, saving money and time.
 
Looking to other countries we find that:

1. Building and using Trust is not a vacuous construct but one with pre-conditions: Stakeholder Competence, Confidence, Consistency, Commitment, Common core objectives (The 5 C’s), Contract Clarity (before signing the contract), and Clarity of obligations once the contract is signed.

2. Evidence suggests that the greatest challenge in terms of ambiguity after a contract is signed is on the demand side with Service planning, Network design, and Marketing.

3. There is growing support for Gross Cost Contracts (GCC) which include strong and effective incentives and profit and loss sharing, mindful of budget constraints of Treasury. An example in Holland is Gross cost plus BIG incentives, with bonuses based on Satisfaction of passenger, Satisfaction of authority (with operator), and Growth in patronage. There is a shared benefit (25%) of extra passenger revenue, and a maximum bonus of 1 million Euros p.a. (approx 4-5% of turnover). There is also a recognition of a sensible budget constraint (crucial issue often neglected – which helps Treasury).

4. In Holland however, there is a strong interest in revenue-based contracts with budget subsidy incentives, although it is too early to decide their effectiveness.

5. Net cost contracts have come under criticism in Europe. The problem for the authority is managing evidence on revenue, and operators not reinvesting super profits back. As well, operators often have little or no risk over fares, network and actual potential market.

6. Up-skilling of all stakeholders but especially regulator/PT authority is crucial in building trust.
 
Finally a crucial challenge that regulators should recognise and advise on is ‘how much of patronage growth can be attributed to the specific contract design, and how much is due to other factors?’
 
 
Food for thought
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

New videos of our projects!

We uploaded some new videos of our current projects to our YouTube Channel. We hope you enjoy them!
 
These are the topics:
 
Development of a Framework to Measure and Model the Performance of BRT Systems ITLS
David A. Hensher
Corinne Mulley
John Stanley
Institute of Transport and Logistics Studies – The University of Sydney
 
Implementing BRT: Controversies, Alliances and Emergent Actors pt1
Implementing BRT: Controversies, Alliances and Emergent Actors pt2
Claudia Gutierrez (PUC)
Manuel Tironi (PUC)
Onésimo Flores (MIT)
Chrispher Zegras (MIT)
 
Assessment of Needs in Training and Educational Gaps
Rosário Macário
José Viegas
Instituto Superior Técnico – Universidade Técnica de Lisboa
 
Exploring the Complexity of Policy Design
Rosário Macário
José Viegas
Instituto Superior Técnico – Universidade Técnica de Lisboa
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

New video: Guangzhou’s Bus Rapid Transit system

Source: The City Fix and Streetfilms.
 

 
 
Streetfilms, in collaboration with the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP), recently released a video highlighting Guangzhou, China’s bus rapid transit (BRT) system. Guangzhou’s BRT system won the 2011 Sustainable Transport Award for making great strides in increasing mobility, reducing greenhouse emissions and air pollution, and improving safety for pedestrians and cyclists.
 
The 23-kilometer (14.3-mile) corridor is the first BRT in China that integrates bicycles in its design. According to Karl Fjellstrom, vice-director at ITDP, there are 5,000 bikes and 5,500 parking docks included in the BRT.
 
“What the Guangzhou BRT has done is to raise the bar,” Fjellstrom says. “So this is more than three times bigger than any other BRT system in Asia, 800,000 passengers a day and 27,000 passengers per hour carried in a single direction.”
 
The most significant improvement in the views of the citizens has been the decrease in travel time. Distances that once took 40 minutes to an hour have now been reduced to 10-20 minutes thanks to the multi-modal integrated BRT.
 
You can learn more about Guangzhou’s BRT by visiting their website.
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Opinion Pieces: Talking about road pricing

Opinion Pieces: since 2007, Prof. David Hensher has written an opinion column in the Australasian Bus and Coach magazine, where he monthly discusses a lot of different transport-related hot topics. In this section we are revisiting these columns.
 
October 2009
 
The Bureaucrats are at Least Talking about Road Pricing, but can Federal Talk translate to State action UNLESS there is a sting in tail?
 
It is very pleasing to see the Head of Treasury in Canberra promoting road pricing reform as a headline in his tax reform agenda. Ken Henry said that “There would be few areas in economics [road pricing reform] where such a clear and rational set of policy directions have so consistently lagged in practice.”
 
It is well known that, most of the time, cars impose minimal costs on other road users. However, in major cities we experience significant congestion during extended peaks, seven days a week, when each vehicle imposes costs on other drivers and does not contribute to the cost of so doing. This results in a… “predictable ‘tragedy of the commons’ estimated to waste around $9 billion a year in avoidable congestion costs, increasing to around $20 billion by 2020. Such costs will only increase with faster population and economic growth.”
 
Ken Henry makes an admirable stance “In the face of these [congestion] costs, why have we stuck to the traditional ‘fuel tax and rego’ model for roads, when sensible pricing seems to offer such large benefits? The Federal government likes its fuel tax, and the State govt likes its vehicle registration charges.
 
While it is pleasing to see a senior Bureaucrat talking about Road Pricing, one wonders how Federal Talk is likely to translate into State action UNLESS there is a sting in the tail? The concern that needs addressing is that a congestion charge is very likely to be collected by State governments and not Canberra, and so one wonders what incentives have to be put in place for any suggestions from Canberra to be actually taken seriously by the States.
 
The Premier of NSW Nathan Rees (Front page Sydney Morning Herald Sat 1 Nov 2008) soon after his appointment said: “…there should be a public debate about whether or not congestion charging should be introduced for the CBD” AND”.. he wants cashless tolls on all of Sydney’s major roads so motorists pay varying fees at different times of the day – an effective congestion tax to cut peak-hour traffic.” This is encouraging. However we have a climate where the NSW government has announced its intention to remove the toll from a major tollroad next February. Hence one wonders about the preparedness to consider much more sensible efficient and fair pricing regimes. It is apparent that at least one State government believes that roads should be ‘free’, and that they are hence committed to paying with time and frustration, rather than with money. Feel free to oppose it, but do not complain about the traffic. Opposing efficient pricing means you are choosing to endure continual congestion problems.
 
Food for thought
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Opinion Pieces: The new era of zero emissions is in sight – good news for public transport? Maybe

Opinion Pieces: since 2007, Prof. David Hensher has written an opinion column in the Australasian Bus and Coach magazine, where he monthly discusses a lot of different transport-related hot topics. In this section we are revisiting these columns.
 
September 2009
 
There is a growing swell of opinion that the energy sources that has the current highest probability of replacing fossil-fuels is electricity via ‘replacement advanced battery technology’. For those in the know, there is a lot happening in the development of vehicles driven on battery-power accompanied by a network of battery replacement stations (much like petrol stations).
 
It was announced on October 23, 2008 that Australia will become the third country in the world to have an electric car network (up by 2011) in a bid to run the country’s 15 million cars on batteries powered by green energy. The international company Better Place (head office Canada) has teamed up with AGL Energy and Macquarie Capital Group to set up a network of «charging spots» and «battery exchange stations» to power electric vehicles in Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne. The electric car networks, as they are called, allow zero emission vehicles to run on clean energy grids in order to reduce the dependence on oil. As we all know, but often fail to remember, there may be a shortage of oil but there is no shortage of energy.
 
Denmark and Israel have already begun to lead the way on this initiative by moving to establish the world’s first electric car networks. Under the plan, charging spots, to top up batteries, are being located in places where cars park, such as home garages, shopping centres and office carparks. The charging spots, which would look like parking meters, provide cables to connect batteries to a green energy grid. AGL Energy provides the power from renewable sources including hydro and wind. On the urban fringe and on freeways, «battery switching stations» would exist for trips longer than 161 kilometres. A driver would enter a switching station (much like they do toady with filling up the fuel tank at a petrol station), and replace the car’s battery before continuing on their journey.
 
Most notably, the advanced battery technology which looks very much like a flat disc will be slid into the undercarriage of a car and as a new battery is able to deliver power for up to 160 kilometres, which is plenty spacing between existing petrol stations which will become battery switching stations. As one approaches the battery switching station, one enters a facility that in a maximum of 40 seconds (once one is out of the queue), the flat battery is attached to the ground unit, slid out and a new battery placed in the undercarriage and away you go (after paying naturally! using electronic equipment much like an ETAG for a toll road). Battery technology at present has a maximum of 160 kms before recharge (or switching), and this deteriorates over time. After a number of recharges the batteries being switched in the long distance interurban context loose power and can be relocated to other switching stations in metropolitan areas where the kilometres between switching and hence recharge are less. There will come a point in time after a number of recharges where the battery will no longer be of use (much like batteries in mobile phones).
 
It has been estimated that the operating costs of these vehicles will be as low as 3c/km, in comparison to 12c/km for petrol-powered vehicles. With less moving parts the maintenance costs will also be lower. We are told that such vehicle swill cost around $20,000 to purchase. This all sounds too good to be true! But it is happening and Canberra has started the process.
 
Although the focus is on cars initially, the evidence, if realised, will send a message about the carbon footprint of cars and (which should almost disappear – even allowing for the sourcing of battery technology and its power), and provide encouragement for the entire bus industry to move this way where it will be much easier to implement the battery switching network.
 
There must be a downside surely? Well if we fail to rethink the whole charging regime for car use, we will end up with much greater car use and hence traffic congestion in the big cities. In the rural and regional areas the lower cost of fuel and vehicle prices should mean that some who are disadvantaged but can drive will be better placed to buy a car. Hence it the cities this may signal greater urgency in introducing variable user charging where you pay per kilometer, so that we can properly reflect the cost of lost time, something I have explained in detail in previous opinion pieces. The bus industry can both benefit through lower operating and maintenance costs but also worry about the possible increase in costs due to traffic congestion and the move away from buses in favour of low cost energy-efficient zero carbon footprint cars.
 
Food for thought
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Buenos Aires Bus Rapid Transit line takes shape

Source: ITDP
Photo: Lope de Vega Station
 
Buenos Aires residents are counting down the days until the first Bus Rapid Transit line in Buenos Aires, indeed in all of Argentina, opens for business. ITDP has provided technical assistance to the Government of the City of Buenos Aires and served as the leader of a team of experts.
 
The first line was originally slated to open in 2010 but the system planners wanted to construct additional infrastructure to prevent flooding in case of major storms. The system now appears to be on schedule for May 2011. Stations and dedicated running ways are rising along the 12 km corridor, that will connect opposite ends of the city, linking two major train stations and two subway lines.
 
The fully accessible, 21 station system is expected to cut travel time by 40%, providing a faster, smoother and more comfortable ride for the anticipated 100,000 daily users.
 
As opening day for Line One draws closer, ITDP continues to work as part of a group, which includes LOGIT, GSD+ and IRV and is financed by the Corporación Andina de Fomento (CAF), on data collection and planning for lines two and three.
 
Learn more about Metrobus in Buenos Aires.
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Bogotá's rise and fall

Can Enrique Peñalosa restore a tarnished municipal model?
 
Source: The Economist
 
The bright-red articulated buses of Bogotá’s TransMilenio, with their dedicated lanes and station-style stops, were once the symbol of a city that had been transformed from chaos and corruption in the 1980s into a model of enlightened management admired and imitated across Latin America. Today the chaos and corruption seem to be back. The TransMilenio buses are horribly overcrowded even at off-peak times, attracting muggers and pickpockets. Though murder rates continue to slide, only 20% of those asked in a poll in September said they felt safe in their city and 27% said they had been victims of crime in the previous year. Road-building at more than 200 separate points across the city of 7.4m people is choking traffic. Things will get worse in May when work starts on Carrera Septima, one of the main arteries.
 
Bogotanos blame this backward slide on their mayor, Samuel Moreno, a populist from the left-wing Democratic Pole party. In a poll last month by Gallup, 85% of respondents disapproved of his administration. Contractors claim that the mayor and his brother, a senator who resigned this month from the Democratic Pole, have demanded kickbacks for public works. “Lies, lies, lies,” says the mayor. The government’s independent inspector-general has begun an investigation all the same. The inspector has already forced the sacking of the city’s comptroller, Miguel Angel Moralesrussi, and banned him from public office for 20 years.
 
Whatever the outcome of the inquiries, the city is due to elect a new mayor in October. The candidate comfortably leading the Gallup poll is Enrique Peñalosa (with 39%). As mayor from 1998 to 2001, he did much to change the face of Bogotá. As well as TransMilenio, he built more than 200km of cycle paths, a network of public libraries and got private schools to run new public schools in the poorer south of the city.
 
But Mr Peñalosa, who was once talked of as a future president of Colombia, is better at urban management than at politics. Mr Moreno beat him easily in 2007 by promising to start building a metro—a pledge which he has yet to keep. Mr Peñalosa, ever the technocrat, pointed out in vain that TransMilenio offered much better value for money.
 
Can he win this time? His political alliances are wide but potentially contradictory. He is standing for the Green Party, co-led by another former mayor, Antanas Mockus. But Mr Peñalosa also enjoys the backing of Álvaro Uribe, Colombia’s conservative president between 2002 and 2010. Mr Mockus unsuccessfully ran for president last year against Juan Manuel Santos, the man whom Mr Uribe eventually backed as his successor. Mr Uribe is anathema to many of the Green Party’s leftish rank and file. Several prominent members have defected; others have tweeted their disgust. Many in the U Party of Mr Uribe and Mr Santos are not happy either, arguing that they should field their own candidate.
 
Mr Peñalosa doubtless hopes that the voters will be less sectarian than the activists, and that above all they want their city to be run well. But he is taking no chances. “Having several metro lines would be extraordinary,” he said recently. Extraordinarily expensive, he might add.
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Opinion Pieces: I tolled you so!

Opinion Pieces: since 2007, Prof. David Hensher has written an opinion column in the Australasian Bus and Coach magazine, where he monthly discusses a lot of different transport-related hot topics. In this section we are revisiting these columns.
 
August 2009
 
Have you ever stopped to think about how much people spend each year on tolls, compared with petrol, in using their cars in cities where there is an extensive and growing tolled road network? Let’s look at Sydney (see the Figure below).
 
It is generally assumed that the average kilometres that a car is driven per annum (privately and company registered vehicles) is 15,000 kms. Given the current average retail price of unleaded petrol of around $1.25 (accounting for premium unleaded in the mix), and an average fuel efficiency of say 9 litres per 100kms, then the average fuel bill per annum is $1,687. Depending on where one lives in Sydney, as well as where one visits (including the work location), tolls paid per annum can be as high as $4,400 per annum for someone living in the Hills district, working in the CBD and using the M2/Lane Cove Tunnel/Harbour Bridge each day of the week for 45 weeks per annum. If you choose to avoid Lane Cove Tunnel, the annual toll impost is $3,100 per annum. Tolls in Sydney for those regularly using tollroads from the Hills district put the price of fuel in perspective!
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Figure: The network of Sydney’s Toll roads
Note: Metroad is the non-tolled metropolitan freeway network
Source: NRMA
 

 
 
Of course, not everyone uses toll roads, and indeed the 38 kilometres of tollroads do not cover all trip contexts. Indeed 18 percent of all residents in Sydney regularly use tollroads, and from the Hills District we are talking about over 80,000 trips each way per day where tolls are paid, the equivalent of approximately $125m per annum. This is equivalent to approximately $3,300 per car per annum.
 
The fact that tollroads are getting expensive for many trip situations around the Sydney metropolitan area, should raise questions about how long people will be willing to pay increasingly high tolls? The answer must lie in part with the travel time savings offered and the service levels of alternative modes of transport. It is interesting to note that 9 of the top 10 roads with the slowest speeds in Sydney in the peak periods are toll roads (the worst road in Sydney being a free road – Victoria Road). With buses benefitting by a dedicated lane on a number of the tollroads, and which are often seen speeding past the crawling car traffic, the elements of a clear message that bus services can do a better job than the car is starting to emerge. What also is emerging, however, is the apparent patience of many commuters who would still sit in their air conditioned/heated car, especially in the cooler months, without coughing commuters on buses and trains, and having to stand for quite a high percentage of the journey. Clearly we are prepared to pay
a lot for getting a seat, which is guaranteed with car use but not for bus and train (and appears to be getting worse for train in particular).
 
Food for thought
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

"Plan of Action" defined to improve Lima's Metropolitano BRT

Source: EMBARQ
 
The Center for Sustainable Transport and Health in the Andean Region (CTSS-Andino) and Peru’s Development Finance Corp. (COFIDE) defined a «Plan of Action» to overcome operational problems of Lima’s Metropolitano bus rapid transit (BRT) system.
 
The recommendations follow an intensive Value Assurance Review (VAR) of the system. Results were presented to the Mayor of Lima Susana Villarán, who agreed to allocate $20 million to deal with problems confronting the city’s BRT.
 
Recommendations are related to operations, production cycles and programming, technology platforms, institutional aspects, and economic and financial performance. Problems and corrective actions were identified by a team of international experts, overseen by EMBARQ Latin America Strategic Director Luis Gutierrez, and CTSS-Andino Director Jorge Jara.
 
The plan of action requires an integrated set of corrective actions to be implemented both in the short term, within the next five months, as well as in the longer term, by December 2011.
 
These activities are part of the agreement signed between CTSS-Andino and COFIDE on January 17 to execute an ambitious five-year program to support urban development and sustainable mobility in nine Peruvian cities.
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Indore rides into the future

City expands bus fleet in preparation for new bus rapid transit system.
 
Source: EMBARQ
 
The city of Indore added 63 modern, comfortable buses to its public transport fleet—an important step towards launching its new bus rapid transit (BRT) system.
 
The new vehicles joined the existing fleet of 103 buses operated by Atal Indore City Transport Services Ltd (AICTSL), an agency that was established in December 2005 with the objective of developing a support system for improving transport infrastructure in Indore. By mid-2011, 62 more buses will be added to the fleet.
 
New features of the buses include GPS tracking, passenger information systems, color-coded buses and special accommodations for women.
 
Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh Shivraj Singh was one of the chief guests who attended the launch event on February 19.
 
The buses were funded by the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JnNURM), a nationwide initiative launched by the central government in December 2005 to modernize 63 Indian cities with heavy investments in infrastructure and governance, totaling more than $20 billion over 7 years. Under the JnNURM, the Central Government announced financial assistance for fleet expansion of urban public bus service systems and other sustainable development in select cities, including Indore.
 
Indore received one-time assistance funding to procure 175 buses. Of these, 125 will be used for the city bus service, and the remaining 50 will be used for the new BRT system, which is expected to launch with a pilot corridor on AB Road by mid-2012.
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Opinion Pieces: Keeping the BRT dream alive

Opinion Pieces: since 2007, Prof. David Hensher has written an opinion column in the Australasian Bus and Coach magazine, where he monthly discusses a lot of different transport-related hot topics. In this section we are revisiting these columns.
 
July 2009
 
I thought I had exhausted my plea to take Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) much more seriously in a country still driven by the emotion and ideology of rail solutions (which is some situations are eminently sensible, but not as an automated view that this is the only form of public transport for high capacity corridors). However a recent compliment on my submission to the Senate Inquiry in funding public transport has reignited the need to keep reminding all about the merits of BRT. A commentator with reputation emailed me and said “It’s the first time that someone has made me take it seriously.” The essential message from my Submission is summarized below.
 
The advantage of BRT systems, if properly designed, is that they can, for given finite resources, provide much better coverage of the network in delivering the necessary services. One of the great risks of more expensive heavy rail – and I would say, to some extent, light rail, although it has a lot of similarities to BRT – is that we must not focus on just trying to solve the central business district (CBD) problem, because the rest of the network, which is about 60 per cent of all trips in Sydney, is not going to have any money to be treated.
 
BRT, as we have seen in Brisbane and in many parts of the world, has the opportunity to provide the level of service that I think we need, given the capacity requirements of all the key corridors throughout the metropolitan area, not just in the CBD; to actually deliver much higher value for money. Generally speaking, although you could argue about the numbers, you can roughly get 100 kilometers of BRT for the price of a kilometer of rail, making assumptions about equivalent infrastructure like tunneling and so on. That is why I also would say that, if you want to know how to do it, Brisbane has done it extremely well, and yet in other States there is some reticence to even want to know what the Brisbane system is. It is almost heritage stuff these days. You travel around the world and there are five BRT systems and, if you are serious about looking at value for money pubic transport solutions, you would spend a few weeks in Brisbane. I have to also say that a lot of this is working because of the institutional environment, where you do not have many organizations planning the outcome.
 
From a Federal perspective, at the end of the day where will the money come from to fund significant public transport infrastructure? I would like to think that we would have a closer look at infrastructure bonds -I might even say expressly public transport infrastructure network and network bonds – (I was pleased to hear Lindsay Fox supporting this). I would also like to suggest that we have to rethink the whole issue of hypothecation, because we have underpriced this sector and we need to get it right, but we need to demonstrate what we are going to do with the revenue, so that those who use the system can see some return for the impost. I think one of the failings is that those who use the system at the moment, and who complain bitterly about the congestion and lack of time, are willing to pay but they want to see the benefit. It has to be made much more explicit, and I think the London congestion charging scheme with hypothecation is an excellent example of how you sell pricing to the community: you do not sell pricing, you sell revenue return.
 
Food for thought
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Latin America’s Bus Rapid Transit boom offers lessons for the U.S.

Source: The City Fix
 
Bus rapid transit (BRT) is often the most feasible, quickly implemented and cost-effective way to improve mobility in the United States, concluded a distinguished panel of transport experts at this morning’s event at The Brookings Institution, “Latin America’s Bus Rapid Transit Boom—Lessons for Improving U.S. Public Transportation”.
 
The event, organized by the Latin America Initiative, invited guests to discuss lessons learned from some of the widely regarded best practices of BRT in Latin America and their applicability in the U.S., where rapid population growth, increasing congestion and shrinking municipal and federal budgets present an urgent need to find appropriate transportation and infrastructure improvements.
 
Panelists included Marc Elrich, councilmember for Montgomery County, Maryland; Robert Puentes, senior fellow at Brookings; Sam Zimmerman, urban transport advisor for The World Bank; and Dario Hidalgo, director of Research and Practice for EMBARQ. The discussion was facilitated by moderator Mauricio Cardenas, senior fellow and director of the Latin America Intiative at Brookings. The looming question: If BRT works so well in Latin America, how come we don’t see as many examples of it in the U.S.?
 
BUS RAPID TRANSIT BOOM
 
EMBARQ’s Dario Hidalgo gave an introductory Powerpoint presentation, “BRT: Made in Latin America”, on some of the global trends of BRT, highlighting examples of successful systems in Latin America. He recently compiled key indicators and status updates on major BRT systems around the world, showing that there are about 120 cities with BRT or bus corridors, with 97 of the cities launching their bus systems in just the last 10 years. Latin America, China and South Asia are leading this growth. According to Hidalgo’s research:
 
The existing BRT and bus corridors comprise about 280 corridors, 4,300 kilometers, 6,700 stations and 30,000 buses, serving about 28 million passengers per day.
In 2010, 16 cities completed new systems—including 14 in the developing world—and seven cities expanded their current systems. As of January 2011, about 49 new cities are building systems, 16 cities are expanding their corridors, and 31 cities are in the initial planning stages. This impressive growth may be attributed in part to the successes of Curitiba, Brazil; Bogotá, Colombia; México City, Mexico; Istanbul, Turkey; Ahmedabad, India; and Guangzhou, China. These cities show low-cost, rapid implementation and high performance BRTs, with significant positive externalities.
 
In Latin America, alone, there are 32 cities with BRT, representing one quarter of the world’s total length of BRT corridors. These systems serve a whopping two-thirds of global BRT ridership, or 18 million people per day.
 
Like all stories about BRT, the starting point of this morning’s discussion began with a short history of Curitiba, Brazil, commonly known for being the birthplace of BRT. The city launched its first bus corridor in 1972 and expanded it into a high-level BRT system 10 years later, with features like off-board fare collection and multiple entryways onto the buses. In Curitiba, BRT became the “backbone of a very well-thought out and developed land use and transport plan,” Hidalgo said.
 
The success of Curitiba spread across the continent, inspiring other cities to build similar systems, like Transmilenio in Bogota, Colombia, which has the highest throughput of all cities with BRT, with 45,000 passengers per hour in each direction—a rare feat, even for rail corridors. In short, Bogota became like “Curitiba on steroids,” Hidalgo said, adapting to the conditions of an already built city with bigger transit needs. Bogota proved that it could reduce car use, while increasing biking and walking and maintaining the level of mass transit ridership. The results? A drastic reduction in traffic fatalities, lower emissions, less congestion and faster travel times.
 
WHY BRT?
 
“[BRT] is mainstream now; it’s not on the edge of what you do,” Hidalgo said. He provided a dozen examples of new BRT systems in Latin America, including cities like Sao Paulo, Brazil; Leon, Mexico; Pereira, Colombia; Santiago, Chile; and Guatemala City, Guatemala. The ridership on these systems in one hour is comparable to what some mass transit systems in the U.S. see in one day. Operational speeds average at about 20 kilometers per hour (potentially, this could be even higher, like in Istanbul, where the Metrobus BRT runs 40 kilometers per hour on expressways.) Capital costs are also relatively low, making the systems attractive for cash-strapped city budgets. What we’re seeing now is that “BRT is a feature or an aspiration of most Latin American cities and should be for the U.S.,” Hidalgo said.
 
However, BRT is not a cure-all and does not exist without some barriers, Hidalgo stressed. Often, systems face rushed implementation, especially as politicians struggle to meet election deadlines. (Luckily, the flexibility of bus-based systems allows for them to adapt and improve over time, even after they’ve started operations.) There are also obstacles with tight financial planning. User fares on BRT are low, so financial sustainability requires high occupancy rates, but that can make the passenger experience less than ideal. An advantage worth noting, however, is that the vehicles and operations of all BRT systems in Latin America, besides Santiago, are fully paid by user fares.
 
Brookings’ Maruicio Cardenas noted that BRT in Latin America goes beyond pavement and buses. “These are more than transit systems; these are cultural transformations,” providing an anecdote of a member of the Bogota City Council who got kicked out of office because his car unlawfully invaded a dedicated BRT busway. “The community does not tolerate that.”
 
OBSTACLES TO OVERCOME
 
The World Bank’s Sam Zimmerman noted several other impediments to BRT, particularly in the United States. For one, there are aggressive lobbies for rail, as well as aggressive lobbies against BRT and buses. Railway manufacturing and engineering companies also have a stake in making “big money” from rail projects, so often they discredit bus systems. But even proponents of traditional bus operations threaten support for BRT by simply making the case for better quality bus systems, which ironically gives rail lobbyists ammunition to claim that BRT is “just another bus.” Finally, there are the upwardly mobile politicians and transit officials who think the best thing for their reputation is to build a rail system or rail line extension. “How many mayors who want to be president are running on the basis of promoting a metro?” Zimmerman asked.
 
There are also many misconceptions and “myths” working against BRT. Among them: buses are slow, unreliable, polluting, noisy, uncomfortable and low-capacity. In the case of high-level BRT systems, this simply isn’t true. Part of the problem contributing to these myths is that BRT doesn’t have consistent branding or marketing, or even a common definition. There may also be some racial or economic discrimination against bus systems, left over from a time period when people who rode the bus couldn’t afford any other choices.
 
Finally, there’s the notion that bus systems can’t be permanent, and therefore, aren’t appealing to real estate developers. However, this has been untrue in places like York, Ontario; Pittsburgh, Penn.; and Cleveland, Ohio, where there has been billions of dollars in public and private development around BRT stations. Of course, to truly spur development around BRT, there must be some supportive public policies, like “upzoning” or tax abatement. The argument of “impermanence” is itself a myth, according to Zimmerman. “It’s important to remember that BRT “is not a bus service; it’s an integrated system that includes stations, terminals and running ways,” he said. “We have to start thinking of BRT as a development tool, not just transportation.”
 
In the United States, there is an added obstacle to BRT at the federal level, among Federal Transit Administration staff, independent consultants, and local and regional authorities. The rigorous “alternatives analysis,” which forces planners to consider all transit options (not just their preferences) and the cost-effectiveness evaluations of transport projects are about to be eliminated. Part of the reason is that the process takes too long, Zimmerman said. Or, the evaluation criteria don’t always satisfy the particular stakeholders in question. “There is political pressre on the administration and Congress to dumb the process down to include foggy evaluation criteria,” Zimmerman said. “Land use and economic development are key issues, but there has to be be some kind of objective analysis of those effects.”
 
BRT IN THE ‘BURBS
 
Montgomery County’s Marc Elrich offered his experiences of generating support for BRT in Maryland as a concrete case study of how BRT might apply to the United States. Montgomery County, a suburb of Washington, D.C., is home to 1 million people and boasts several “mini-cities” or nodes of high-density development, especially along metro corridors. The county experiences the same dismal rates of traffic congestion as big cities like Los Angeles, New York and Chicago. In response to these trends, the county has an aggressive plan for 120 miles of transit corridors to connect residential communities to job centers.
 
Elrich, who ran his election campaign based on “no growth without infrastructure,” realized there was no way to “build our way out of this problem” with traditional roads. When searching for alternatives, he admitted that he was biased towards rail at the beginning. But he quickly realized that rail solutions wouldn’t be feasible for his county, considering the cost (too expensive) and capacity (a quick Google search on “bi-modal rail vehicles,” for example, showed a model in Japan that could accommodate only 25 passengers.)
 
The most convincing argument Elrich found for presenting BRT to his skeptics was showing the cost-effectiveness of all the other options, including light rail, the county’s proposed Corridor Cities Transitway (CCT), busways and rapid bus. “Rail-like vehicles,” as he describes BRT, proves to be the most attractive option, and it can adequately meet the county’s transport demand. “You don’t have to love buses, but what else are you going to do?” Elrich asked.
 
MODE NEUTRAL
 
While BRT is attractive for many reasons, it still is only one option. Brookings’ Robert Puentes urged the audience to be open-minded about all types of transportation ”We can’t be religious about these different modes; it’s just not that helpful,” he said. “We can’t have ‘the bus guys’ and ‘transit people’ and ‘highway guys.’…We have to think about this more as an integrated system, as opposed to what particular mode is best overall, because all of these things matter as part of a larger metropolitan plan.”
 
As Hidalgo said, “It’s not important if it’s a steel wheel or a rubber tire; what’s important is the service to the people.”
 

 
Read also a reference on the subject in The New York Times Green Column by Timothy Gardner
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Opinion Pieces: Individualised marketing of public transport – time to take it seriously?

Opinion Pieces: since 2007, Prof. David Hensher has written an opinion column in the Australasian Bus and Coach magazine, where he monthly discusses a lot of different transport-related hot topics. In this section we are revisiting these columns.
 
June 2009
 
The recent ‘debacle’ with changed timetables and routings on buses in Sydney is a salient reminder about the power of the customer. All good intent was exercised by the operator to improve services; however the residual crumbs of discontent were not factored in.
 
Is it not time to actually visit households and identify the types of bus services (timing and routing) that would make a difference? This bottom up customer-focused individualised planning pays dividends. We know – just look at the accumulating evidence on the travel smart voluntary travel behaviour change program in South Australia in particular, that shows how many individuals have been informed one-on-one about specific services that might be of value to them (which are often not well known by potential users of public transport). Such an approach is especially useful when households have recently moved into a neighbourhood and are less familiar with the options, and possibly more open to consider public transport before habit sets in, provided that the information provided is seen as being tailored to suit the needs of the potential switcher to public transport. After all we buy a car, borrow money, and work with a travel agent to construct a vacation or business trip as a one-on-one arrangement, so why not do it for planning regular commuting and other local travel?
 
How does the travel smart program work? There are various versions, but essentially, a telephone survey can be used to sample individuals and then to classify them as ‘regular users’ (R) of alternatives to the car, and for householders to nominate themselves as ‘interested’ (I) in reducing their car use. The sampled households so classified can be offered access to a range of maps and brochures on travel options. Following the delivery of the information face to face by the public transport operator, they might be provided with a free travel pass for one month as an expression of interest. Importantly all participants who ordered information must be given a reward. For regular users of public transport it might be in the form of a letter from the public transport operator, or a small gift. Following the identification of the sample of interested persons, a follow-up meeting to take a close look at the person’s current trip activity and where public transport may be able to be used would be worked through, and the free pass used to encourage trying a particular bus and/or rail service.
 
While the human resources might be substantial, so is the task of attracting people out of their car. Since there are so many reasons why people stick with their cars, then why not try and identify those people who are sufficiently close to considering public transport but need a little help from the bus operators or regulator to assist in identifying ways of making the switch. The focus on the population as a whole is far too aggregate in nature if we want to make a difference where it can count. This also includes being on the look out for pockets of serious discontent that would react the way people did in Sydney last month when a major timetable change occurred.
 
It is time that we also started to question the information that is provided in the spaghetti format of hard copy glossy timetables. I have great trouble understanding most of them. I wonder what the public think. Do we ever ask them?
 
Food for thought
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Mobility, sustainability and quality of life

 
Since 2003, ITLS Sydney organizes the Leadership and Policy Seminar Series, and last March they invited Enrique Peñalosa. This presentation was a joint venture between ITLS-Sydney, the Bus Industry Confederation, the Major Cities Unit (Department of Infrastructure and Transport), Infrastructure Australia and our Centre of Excellence. Please find the presentation details bellow.
 
 

Photo:
Dorte Ekelund, Executive Director of the Major Cities Unit at Infrastructure Australia
David Hensher, Director of ITLS
Enrique Peñalosa, Former Mayor, Bogota, Colombia
 
 
Date: 11th Mar 2011
 
Speaker: Enrique Peñalosa, Former Mayor, Bogota, Colombia; President, Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP), New York
 
Topic: Presentation by the Mayor who transformed Bogota into one of the world’s leading examples of mobility and equity
 
Bio: Enrique Penalosa is currently President of the Board of the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy based in New York. He has lectured all over the world in governmental, academic and citizens’ forums. Mr Penalosa is an urban strategist whose vision and proposals have significantly influenced policies in numerous cities throughout the world. As former Mayor of Bogota, the 7 million inhabitants’ capital of Colombia, Mr Penalosa profoundly transformed the city, turning it into an international example for improvements in quality of life, mobility and equity to developing world cities.
During his tenure as Mayor, Mr Penalosa created TransMilenio, a bus rapid transit (BRT) system that is regarded as the world’s best for its capacity, speed and cost efficiency. A similar system in Curitiba, Brazil, was its inspiration.
An accomplished public official, economist and administrator, Mr Penalosa served as mayor from 1998 to 2001. Mr Penalosa helped develop a model for urban improvement based on all people having equal access to quality transportation, education and public spaces. During his tenure, Mr Penalosa was responsible for numerous initiatives to make the city more pedestrian-friendly, including building hundreds of kilometers of protected bicycle paths, pedestrian-and-bicycle-only promenades, greenways and parks.
Mr Penalosa is a 2009 recipient of the Goteborg Award for Sustainable Development; past Award recipients of the prestigious award include Al Gore. He received the Stockholm Challenge Award for organizing a Car-Free Day in 2000, banning car use throughout the entire city for one weekday in the year. He also removed 40% of cars during regular peak hours as part of a license plate restriction program. Mr Penalosa’s work and ideas have been featured in many international media including The New York Times, Financial Times, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, BBC World, PBS, and others.
 
Download presentation here.
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Making Bus Rapid Transit safer in Belo Horizonte

CTS-Brasil provides technical recommendations following road safety audit.
 
Source: EMBARQ
 
The Center for Sustainable Transport in Brazil (CTS-Brasil) completed a «road safety audit» in Belo Horizonte along Ave. Antonio Carlos, a planned 16-kilometer bus rapid transit corridor.
 
Philip Gold, the road safety auditor, worked with the support of CTS-Brasil, as part of the Bloomberg Global Road Safety Program, funded by Bloomberg Philanthropies. The final report, including safety recommendations, will be delivered to city officials in March.
 
A road safety audit involves a careful examination of a proposed project to ensure that it performs to a high standard from a road safety perspective. Problems in the design are identified before construction begins, which helps save costs.
 
CTS-Brasil recommended that BHTrans, the city’s public transit agency, create a technical team of road safety experts to perform future audits and offered to train the staff. Director of CTS-Brasil Toni Lindau also suggested that BHTrans create a fully equipped BRT station, including bus docking and a loading and unloading process to provide future users a taste of a real BRT experience.
 
CTS-Brasil is highly involved with BRT projects in Belo Horizonte, working on issues ranging from accessibility and public health to operations and marketing. CTS-Brasil is also advising on how to reduce traffic bottlenecks using the EMBARQ BRT Simulator, a computer software tool that tests and improves the design of proposed BRT systems.
 
As the 2014 FIFA World Cup approaches, improving urban mobility has become a top priority for Belo Horizonte and other Brazilian cities hosting the games.
 
CTS-Brasil signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Belo Horizonte in August 2010 and has been providing technical support to improve the quality of the city’s BRT system.
 
The recent road safety audit was made possible with technical support from the following experts:
• Toni Lindau, President-Director of CTS-Brasil
• Brenda Medeiros Pereira, Transport Projects Coordinator of CTS-Brasil
• Marta Obelheiro, Transport Engineer of CTS-Brasil
• Philip Gold, Road Safety Expert from Gold Projects
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

The explosive growth of Bus Rapid Transit

Source: The Dirt – Connecting the Built & Natural Environments
 
Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) existed in just a few cities twenty years ago but has quickly turned into a viable solution for the massive transportation challenges facing cities. With more than half of the world now living in cities and total global population expected to reach nine billion, perhaps more cities should be looking at how to include BRT, a relatively cheap, sustainable, and flexible transportation option in comparison with building more highway overpasses and underground metro systems.
 
Dario Hidalgo from EMBARQ, the sustainable transportation think tank at the World Resources Institute (WRI), kicked off a session at Transforming Transportation 2011 by explaining that 120 cities now have BRT with bus corridors. Worldwide, there are now 200 dedicated bus corridors running over 4,000 kilometers. These networks have 7,000 stations, providing stops for 30,000 buses. Each day, 27 million people, or about one percent of the global urban population, is now riding BRT. Los Angeles, the site of one of the few major BRT systems in the U.S., is in the lead in terms of number of kilometers covered, but falls behind when considering the number of residents using the system each day. Both China and India are seeing exploding growth in BRT ridership.
 
In addition, more cities are catching on — more than 15 cities started BRT operations in 2010, representing 13 per cent growth over 2009. Another seven cities are expanding their systems, 49 cities have BRT under construction, and 31 are starting to plan out new systems. Still, with the rapid expansion of BRT, there are growing issues as well, including “rushed implementation, tight financial planning, high occupancy rates, deterioration of infrastructure, and fare system fragmentation.”
 
BRT Expands Across the Developing World
 
Walter Hook, head of the Institute for Transportation & Development Policy (ITDP), outlined some of the better designed BRT in developing countries as well as those facing challenges.
 
In Guangzhou, China, the BRT is a “hybrid full-featured direct service” system that carries some 800,000 passengers each day. Combined with a set of walkable, bikeable paths along the BRT stations, the system “has totally transformed the way the city feels.” The system is very smart: Existing municipal bus lines can rapidly enter and exit the dedicated BRT lane, which enables the city to leverage existing municipal “feeder” bus networks. Stations along the BRT route are off-set so there’s “more right of way.” In addition, BRT is integrated with the undeground metro system – “there’s a seamless network” and “no transfer penalty.”
 

Photo: Karl Fjellstrom, itdp-china.org
 
In contrast with Guangzhou’s system, TransJakarta, the BRT in Indonesia’s largest city, has had some teething pains. The buses run on clean natural gas (CNG), but the CNG refueling depots were placed way off the BRT paths, creating lots of logistical issues that raised the cost of running the network. While CNG was used to address Jakarta’s air quality issues, Hook says it’s important to deal with the “logistical problems” first when trying to reach environmental goals. In addition, lane enforcement in Jakarta has been “lax” in many places, meaning cars and bikes have taken over the lanes dedicated to rapid bus.
 
In Ahmedabad, India, there’s a 30 kilometer long system that serves 50,000 each day. It has all the features of BRT but includes new “squared roundabouts” that have been tricky because they require faster timing with traffic lights if only BRT is going to use them.
 
In Johannesburg, South Africa, Rea Vaya, Sub-Saharan Africa’s first BRT, is off to a solid start. Created in advance of the FIFA World Cup soccer tournament, Rea Vaya has “world class stations” and European buses. There are also plans to implement express and limited stop services, only possible because the city’s BRT infrastructure has multiple dedicated lanes. In addition, in some areas, stations were plopped down in the middle of one way streets, which was “very bold,” but they’ve largely worked.
 

Photo: Scania South Africa
 
Still, rolling out that city’s BRT system wasn’t easy. “There were regulatory and institutional issues,” largely due to the number of taxi associations involved and their ongoing wars with each other. “The taxi wars have led to a number of deaths.” One result of all of this has been revised certification processes for the city’s cabs, with the goal of making it easier to track cabs and deny some access to new BRT paths. This has been controversial because while denying cabs access to some routes is needed to preserve demand for BRT, it also means a loss of revenue for cab drivers. To address the cab drivers’ losses, the city had to spend extra, an almost 30-40 percent premium, to get the BRT in place.
 
Bogota’s Model BRT
 
Bogota’s BRT, TransMilenio, has been going for more than ten years now. There are 1.7 million daily trips but still “lots of politics” around BRT in the city, said the system’s general manager, Fernando Paez, largely because they’ve meant removing car lanes. The network is now 52 miles in length and will soon reach 72 miles. That’s just the first few phases — more than eight phases are planned. The city’s BRT has one control center, 1,215 buses and 515 feeder buses. More than a quarter of all bus trips in the city are now on TransMilenio’s dedicated lanes.
 
Interestingly, Paez said there were some two million square meters of public plazas and parks along the BRT network. When asked, Paez said the BRT network and plazas were developed together as part of an “integrated design strategy.” The adjacent parks and plazas help drive BRT usage. Research has been done on per capita usage of the public spaces around the BRT stations. In addition, Paez said they now have a “green street” pilot project along one of the lines to test how they can leverage the BRT infrastructure for stormwater management.
 

Photo: Transmilenio
 
Overall, there have been many upsides — economic development, an increased sense of civicness caused by the positive identity of the BRT, and improved safety and security. However, Paez said the city still needs to do more to “consolidate opportunities in urban development” offered by the BRT. Also, the city needs to increase the number of buses to deal with high occupancy rates, and address traffic control through feeder buses, an issue caused by congestion.
 
Implementing BRT in “Challenging Situations”
 
Colin Brader, a consultant for the World Bank, reviewed some challenges in implementing the BRT in Lagos, Nigeria and other cities like Jakarta and Johannesburg. He explained that “all have BRT in place so have been successful.” However, getting each system live “involved significant institutional or regulatory changes,” quite a bit of compromise, and flexibility so systems could “evolve to optimize and meet changing demands.”
 
Lagos residents previously faced horrendous travel conditions: Public buses had “variable fares,” passengers were subjected to “violence and intimidation,” and on top of that, there were “multiple transfer points.” A 12 kilometer ride could take 2-3 hours, certainly not unheard of in many big developing world cities like Bangkok. “Users want safety, security, and reliability” and the city largely gave them what they wanted. All major local politicians in the city got behind the concept, seeing it as a “people’s project,” and a massive consultation helped “depoliticize the implementation.”
 
Now Lagos’ BRT, which runs at 13 km per hour, has “dramatically improved” the lives of 170,000 people each day at a cost of $1.4 million per kilometer. In addition, it also exemplifies gender-sensitive design. Before the addition of queues, only the strongest could push their way aboard. “Women appreciated the imposition of the queuing systems.”
 
In a separate session, there was discussion on the need to collect better transportation data worldwide in order to build the case for more sustainable transportation options. While almost all countries have pretty good international air and rail travel data, very few have solid local data on walking, biking, or transit, which is crucial to putting funds behind more sustainable, low-cost urban options. Given good data is often at the foundation of good policy, more funds should be allocated to gathering and sharing data and even getting existing pockets of local data moved up to the national and international levels, enabling comparisons in the process.
 
One group, the Partnership on Sustainable Low-Carbon Transport, is calling for “Global Transportation Intelligence.” The Inter-American Development Bank also called for a set of urban “observatories” that can track transportation usage in cities and help inform sustainable transportation investments. As Sanjiv Lohia, Ministry of Urban Development in India, said, “instead of gazing at the stars, these observatories should be rooted at the ground level” where there is still so much unknown about human travel behavior.
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet
 

Metrobus and equity / El Metrobus y la equidad (in Spanish)

Source: El Universal editorial by Onesimo Flores
 
El uso de carriles confinados para el transporte público es un tema que genera agrios debates en todo el mundo. En la ciudad de Los Ángeles, hace apenas semanas, se recortó un proyecto BRT (Bus Rapid Transit) que circularía sobre el boulevard Wilshire, debido a protestas de los automovilistas. En León, Guanajuato, hubo un alcalde que rebajó las multas por invadir los corredores del sistema Optibús y que promovía que los agentes de tránsito animaran a los automovilistas a utilizarlo en hora pico. Sí, oponerse o sabotear estos novedosos sistemas es atractivo políticamente, sobre todo cuando el grupo gobernante busca ganarse las simpatías de una clase media cada vez más autodependiente.
 
Sin duda, el automovilista se siente agredido por el confinamiento de carriles, particularmente cuando la implementación no incluye ajustes a las vías aledañas o a los sistemas de semaforización para mitigar el tráfico. Muchas de sus voces críticas se unen a la exigencia de invertir en trenes o metros, bajo la idea de que estos modos de transporte circularían sobre derechos de vía abandonados o bajo tierra. El discurso opositor se repite de diversas formas, pero diciendo lo mismo: inviertan en transporte público, siempre y cuando al hacerlo no afecten «mi derecho» a circular sin contratiempos en automóvil.
 
La actitud refleja una profunda inequidad. En nuestras ciudades, más del 70% de los viajes se hacen en transporte público, y sin embargo nadie habla de confinar el 70% de las avenidas. A lo mucho, se pide un carril por cada lado, que de cualquier manera ya está ocupado por estacionamientos o por cientos de microbuses que serían retirados con la implementación del sistema. Muchos gobiernos temen a la crítica, sobre todo cuando proviene de una clase media alta con recursos y acceso a micrófonos. ¿Y por qué no decirlo?, muchos tomadores de decisiones no son usuarios del transporte público, por lo que sufren “la pérdida” de un carril en carne propia sin entender realmente el beneficio.
 
Nadie discute la superioridad del automóvil sobre el transporte urbano. Es más cómodo, rápido y práctico. Sin embargo, nuestras ciudades no tienen ni la infraestructura ni el presupuesto para acomodar a una población donde la mayoría se desplaza en coche, por lo que estas ventajas disminuyen entre más lo utilizamos. La congestión, la contaminación, la elevada accidentalidad, la pérdida de escala humana y la segregación social tienen entre sus causas el explosivo incremento del parque vehicular en nuestras ciudades. Cada automóvil adicional que se incorpora al tráfico disminuye nuestra capacidad conjunta de disfrutar nuestra ciudad. Por ello, aunque parezca un reto titánico, es urgente fortalecer alternativas de movilidad para las próximas décadas.
 
Hoy por hoy, muchos ciudadanos evitan el transporte público porque es inseguro, poco confiable, lento, complicado de entender y porque no va adonde queremos ir. Utilizarlo representa la última opción, frecuentemente reservada para quien no puede pagar otra cosa. Corresponde al gobierno solucionar esta problemática, intentando al menos aparejar los cartones. Las vías exclusivas representan un “premio” para quien está dispuesto a renunciar a la comodidad de la movilidad privada. Ellos, los que contaminan y congestionan menos, quienes hacen más ejercicio y no evitan la convivencia, merecen circular más rápido.
 
Por esto celebro que el gobierno de Marcelo Ebrard meta el acelerador para lograr el crecimiento del Sistema Metrobús. Han pasado sólo algunas semanas del arranque de la Línea 3 y su secretario de Transporte ya anunció los corredores 4 y 5. El sistema es imperfecto, le falta integración con otros modos de transporte y tiene profundas problemáticas que resolver. Además, fueron 10 los corredores prometidos en campaña y el tiempo se agota. Sin embargo, el engranaje parece estar en marcha, y qué bueno. La Ciudad de México será muchísimo mejor cuando moverse en transporte público sea más rápido y conveniente que moverse en coche.
 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!
 
 
Tweet