Mass Transit Options

Division 44 Environment and Infrastructure Sector project: “Transport Policy Advice”

Sustainable Transport: A Sourcebook for Policy-makers in Developing Cities Module 3a: Mass Transit Options

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH OVERVIEW OF THE SOURCEBOOK Modules and contributors Sustainable Transport: A Sourcebook for Sourcebook Overview, and Cross-cutting Issues of Policy-Makers in Developing Cities Urban Transport (GTZ) What is the Sourcebook? Institutional and policy orientation This Sourcebook on Sustainable Urban Transport 1a. The Role of Transport in Urban Development addresses the key areas of a sustainable transport Policy (Enrique Peñalosa) policy framework for a developing city. The 1b. Urban Transport Institutions (Richard Meakin) Sourcebook consists of 20 modules. 1c. Private Sector Participation in Transport Infra- structure Provision (Christopher Zegras, MIT) Who is it for? 1d. Economic Instruments (Manfred Breithaupt, The Sourcebook is intended for policy-makers GTZ) in developing cities, and their advisors. This 1e. Raising Public Awareness about Sustainable target audience is reflected in the content, which Urban Transport (Karl Fjellstrom, GTZ) provides policy tools appropriate for application in a range of developing cities. Land use planning and demand management 2a. Land Use Planning and Urban Transport How is it supposed to be used? (Rudolf Petersen, Wuppertal Institute) The Sourcebook can be used in a number of 2b. Mobility Management (Todd Litman, VTPI) ways. It should be kept in one location, and the different modules provided to officials involved Transit, walking and cycling in urban transport. The Sourcebook can be easily 3a. Mass Transit Options (Lloyd Wright, ITDP; adapted to fit a formal short course training GTZ) event, or can serve as a guide for developing a 3b. Bus Rapid Transit (Lloyd Wright, ITDP) curriculum or other training program in the area 3c. Bus Regulation & Planning (Richard Meakin) of urban transport; avenues GTZ is pursuing. 3d. Preserving and Expanding the Role of Non- motorised Transport (Walter Hook, ITDP) What are some of the key features? The key features of the Sourcebook include: Vehicles and fuels < A practical orientation, focusing on best 4a. Cleaner Fuels and Vehicle Technologies practices in planning and regulation and, (Michael Walsh; Reinhard Kolke, where possible, successful experience in Umweltbundesamt – UBA) developing cities. 4b. Inspection & Maintenance and < Contributors are leading experts in their fields. Roadworthiness (Reinhard Kolke, UBA) < An attractive and easy-to-read, colour layout. 4c. Two- and Three-Wheelers (Jitendra Shah, < Non-technical language (to the extent World Bank; N.V. Iyer, Bajaj Auto) possible), with technical terms explained. 4d. Natural Gas Vehicles (MVV InnoTec) < Updates via the Internet. Environmental and health impacts How do I get a copy? 5a. Air Quality Management (Dietrich Schwela, Please visit www.sutp-asia.org or www.gtz.de/ World Health Organisation) transport for details on how to order a copy. The 5b. Urban Road Safety (Jacqueline Lacroix, DVR; Sourcebook is not sold for profit. Any charges David Silcock, GRSP) imposed are only to cover the cost of printing 5c. Noise and its Abatement (Civic Exchange and distribution. Hong Kong; GTZ; UBA) Comments or feedback? Resources We would welcome any of your comments or 6. Resources for Policy-makers (GTZ) suggestions, on any aspect of the Sourcebook, by Further modules and resources email to [email protected], or by surface mail to: Further modules are anticipated in the areas Manfred Breithaupt of Driver Training; Financing Urban Transport; GTZ, Division 44 Benchmarking; and Participatory Planning. Postfach 5180 Additional resources are being developed, and 65726 Eschborn an Urban Transport Photo CD (GTZ 2002) is Germany now available. aa2 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 i Module 3a: About the contributors

Mass Transit Options The Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP) was established in 1985 to promote By Lloyd Wright transport options that are environmentally, (Institute for Transportation and Development economically and socially sustainable. ITDP is Policy) an international non-governmental organization and Karl Fjellstrom that particularly focuses upon the promotion of (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische public transport, non-motorised transport, travel Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH) demand management, and improved land-use planning. ITDP works exclusively in developing (With additional contributions from Armin Wagner countries and economies in transition, where the and helpful review comments on the Bangkok consequences of inadequate basic mobility are Skytrain system by Phil Sayeg of Policy Appraisal the most keenly felt, and where the adverse social Services Pty Ltd.) and environmental effects of rapid motorisation are causing the greatest economic and environmental Editor: Karl Fjellstrom problems. To fulfil its mission, ITDP has three core Manager: Manfred Breithaupt activities: (i) Catalysing demonstration projects with GTZ Transport and Mobility Group, 2003 progressive municipalities; (ii) Communicating successful options and Findings, interpretations and conclusions technical information; and expressed in this document are based on (iii) Encouraging better policy making at the local, information gathered by GTZ and its consultants, national, and multi-lateral levels. partners, and contributors from reliable sources. GTZ does not, however, guarantee the accuracy or completeness of information in this document, and cannot be held responsible for any errors, omissions or losses which emerge from its use.

Cover photo: Bangkok’s Victory Monument, Dec. 2001. Photo by Karl Fjellstrom

aa2 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 i Module 3a: Mass Transit Options

1. Introduction 1 4. Comparison on key parameters 16 1.1 Outline of the module 1 4.1 Cost 16 2. Mass Rapid Transit concepts 2 Capital costs for rail-based MRT 17 2.1 terminology 2 Capital costs for Bus Rapid Transit 18 2.2 Defining features of MRT 3 Operating costs 18 Use of space 3 Rolling stock 19 Speed and passenger capacity 3 Public finances 20 Integration 4 4.2 Planning & construction time 20 Level of service 4 Project development and planning 20 2.3 The strategic importance Construction 20 of MRT systems 4 4.3 Passenger capacity 22 3. Current applications in 4.4 Flexibility 23 developing cities 5 4.5 Speed 24 3.1 Bus Rapid Transit 5 4.6 Institutional capacity for Latin American experience 6 successful implementation 24 Asian experience 8 The scope of the challenge 25 North American experience 9 Role of the private sector 25 European experience 9 Supportive policy setting 26 Australian and New Zealand programs 10 4.7 Long term influence on 3.2 Light Rail Transit 11 city development 26 Current applications 11 MRT and city form 26 LRT and Metro lines in Shanghai 11 MRT and development 26 3.3 Metros 12 4.8 Poverty alleviation 27 The Bangkok Skytrain (BTS) 13 4.9 Environmental impact 28 3.4 Commuter rail 15 5. Conclusion 29 Current applications 15 Resource materials 30 Positive experience with concessioning of commuter rail services 16

ii This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 1 Module 3a: Mass Transit Options

1. Introduction leading consideration is cost (including cost of construction, rolling stock, and operation); Choices on public transit options are choices others include planning & construction time, about a city’s future. Will there be congestion? flexibility in implementation, passenger capac- Will there be high levels of air and noise pollu- ity, speed, and institutional issues. Longer term tion? Will transport be affordable? Will services effects on poverty, city form, and the environ- be available to all? The type of public transit ment are also assessed. In terms of maintaining system will have a big impact on the answers to a transit-friendly city form and ensuring the these questions (Figure 1). urban poor have access to employment, contacts and services, a crucial factor when comparing This module aims to provide policy-makers systems is the potential for a Mass Rapid Transit in developing cities – and those advising them system to secure long term advances – or at least – with guidance on choosing appropriate Mass stabilisation – in the share of people travelling Rapid Transit (MRT) systems. The module begins by public rather than private transport. by briefly describing some basic concepts and defining features of MRT in developing cities. Current applications of each of the main MRT “Choices on transit options are options are then described, focusing on applica- choices about a city’s future” tions in developing cities. Since Metros and Light Rail Transit are still relatively uncommon The module ends with a discussion of what the in low income developing cities, most of this comparison of the different options reveals. It discussion focuses on the recent development of is seen that although there is no single MRT Bus Rapid Transit systems throughout the world. solution fitting all cities, for all but the major corridors of relatively wealthy and dense devel- The main section of the module then compares oping cities which are planning to develop an each of these MRT options in the light of key MRT system, the best option will often be a parameters for developing cities. Naturally, a form of Bus Rapid Transit.

Fig. 13 Which future? Choices about Mass Rapid Transit concern the kind of city we want to live in. Lloyd Wright, 2002 ii This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 1 Sustainable Transport: A Sourcebook for Policy-makers in Developing Cities Module 3a: Mass Transit Options

2. Mass Rapid Transit concepts Metro Metro is the most common international term 2.1 TERMINOLOGY for subway, heavy rail transit, though it is also The distinction between many MRT concepts commonly applied to elevated heavy rail sys- is fluid, and many different approaches are tems. In this module we use “metro” to refer to commonly used to distinguish the different urban grade-separated heavy rail systems. They modes and features of various MRT systems. are the most expensive form of MRT per square Apart from basic defining features such as cost, kilometre, but have the highest theoretical capacity. capacity, and technology, other features used to Commuter rail systems delineate MRT systems might include distance between stops, extent of right-of-way, opera- Commuter rail or suburban rail is the portion tional regimes and guidance systems. For the of passenger railroad operations that carries purposes of this module we have distinguished passengers within urban areas, or between urban between four general forms of Mass Rapid areas and their suburbs, but differs from Metros Transit: Bus Rapid Transit, Metros, Commuter and LRT in that the passenger cars generally are Rail, and Light Rail Transit. heavier, the average trip lengths are usually longer, and the operations are carried out over tracks Mass rapid transit that are part of the railroad system in the area.

Mass rapid transit, also referred to as public tran- Bus Rapid Transit sit, is a passenger transportation service, usually local in scope, that is available to any person Many cities have developed variations on the who pays a prescribed fare. It usually operates on theme of better bus services and the concept re- specific fixed tracks or with separated and exclu- sides in a collection of best practices rather than sive use of potential common track, according a strict definition. Bus Rapid Transit is a form of to established schedules along designated routes customer-orientated transit combining stations, or lines with specific stops, although Bus Rapid vehicles, planning, and intelligent transport Transit and trams sometimes operate in mixed systems elements into an integrated system with traffic. It is designed to move large numbers of a unique identity. people at one time. Examples include Bus Rapid Bus Rapid Transit typically involves busway Transit, heavy rail transit, and light rail transit. corridors on segregated lanes – either at-grade or grade separated – and modernised bus technol- Heavy rail transit ogy. However, apart from segregated busways A heavy rail transit system is “a transit system BRT systems also commonly include: using trains of high-performance, electrically < Rapid boarding and alighting powered rail cars operating in exclusive rights- < Efficient fare collection of-way, usually without grade crossings, with < Comfortable shelters and stations high platform stations” (TCRP, 1998). < Clean bus technologies Light Rail Transit < Modal integration < Sophisticated marketing identity A light rail transit (LRT) system is a metropoli- < Excellence in customer service. tan electric railway system characterised by its ability to operate single cars or short trains along Bus Rapid Transit is more than simply operation exclusive rights-of-way at ground level, aerial over exclusive bus lanes or busways. According structures, in subways, or occasionally in streets, to a recent study of at-grade busways (Shen and to board and discharge passengers at track et al., 1998), only half of the cities that have or car floor level (TCRP, 1998). LRT systems busways have developed them as part of a sys- include tramways, though a major difference is tematic and comprehensive package of measures that trams often operate without an exclusive as part of the city mass transit network that we right-of-way, in mixed traffic. would identify as a BRT system. While Bus Rapid Transit systems always include some form of exclusive right-of-way for buses,

2 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 3 Sustainable Transport: A Sourcebook for Policy-makers in Developing Cities Module 3a: Mass Transit Options

Fig. 25 the applications we consider in this module are 2.2 DEFINING FEATURES OF MRT The amount of space mostly at-grade, street-level busways. Elevated Use of space required to transport busways or tunnels may be needed for traversing the same number of some city centres, but in many developing cities Similar space-efficiency considerations (see passengers: car, bicycle, funds will not be available for extensive grade Figure 2) apply to all the MRT modes, although and bus. separation. in practice is arises as a policy issue only with Poster displayed at the City of Muenster regard to buses and some versions of LRT, since Planning Office, August 2001 Bus lane (or priority bus lane) rail systems are already fully segregated from A bus lane is a highway or street reserved prima- other traffic. BRT and LRT often involve re-al- rily for buses, either all day or during specified location of existing road space in favour of more periods. It may be used by other traffic under efficient modes, whereas Metros are normally certain circumstances, such as while making a fully grade separated and have no impact on turn, or by taxis, bicycles, or high occupancy road capacity, unless they are elevated in which vehicles. case there may be a small reduction in road Bus lanes, widely used in Europe even in small capacity. cities, are increasingly applied in developing cit- Speed and passenger capacity ies such as Bangkok, where counter-flow buses can move rapidly through peak period congestion. All forms of MRT operate with relatively high speeds and passenger capacities, and the basic Busway requirement of MRT in a developing city is that A busway is a special roadway designed for it carry large amounts of passengers, rapidly. exclusive use by buses. It may be constructed Where Metros are applied in developing cities at, above, or below grade and may be located in they are often by far the fastest mode of MRT, separate rights-of-way or within highway cor- while LRT and BRT systems typically operate at ridors. Some form of busway system is a feature average speeds of between 20 and 30 km/hr. of many Bus Rapid Transit systems.

Integration < Passenger information < Climate control All MRT systems require interchanges with < Modal integration other elements of the public transport system, < Integration with major trip attractors. and integration with other modes of transport such as cars, walking and cycling. Shanghai, Rail-based systems have historically performed for example, provides excellent Metro/bicycle better on ‘level of service’ indicators, although and Metro/pedestrian interchanges, and good recent Bus Rapid Transit successes are challeng- Metro/bus interchanges at some major stations. ing these traditional conceptions. Mexico City’s Metro is physically integrated with the international airport and major bus 2.3 THE STRATEGIC IMPORTANCE OF stations. Curitiba’s BRT system includes excel- MRT SYSTEMS lent integration with pedestrian streets and taxi Developing cities are experiencing rapidly stands. Sao Paulo’s BRT integrates well with the worsening traffic and related environmental Metro system. Poor integration is a feature of conditions. As a first step, political commitment some under-performing rail-based MRT systems, to give priority to efficient modes of transport such as in Kuala Lumpur and Manila. (transit, walking, cycling) is needed. Level of service Experience in developed cities shows that MRT MRT systems usually offer a superior level systems tend to have little impact on land use of service compared to unsegregated road- patterns. This leads many experts to recom- based modes such as regular buses, taxis, and mend that ‘adaptive’ MRT systems be used, not paratransit. to attempt to influence land use patterns, but rather to adapt to the existing land use patterns Superior service is evident for example with: (e.g. Cervero, 1998). In many developing cities, < Terminals & interchanges however, the influence of MRT on land use < Cleanliness patterns is likely to be much stronger, since such < Sophisticated marketing image cities are often undergoing rapid spatial expansion. Current trends – e.g. geared toward gated communities and greenfields housing estates in many Southeast Asian cities – often favour car-dependent urban forms, but a quality MRT system can help counteract such trends by maintaining growth along main corridors and in city centres (Figure 3). While theoretically we are told that cities should follow a ‘balanced’ approach, using ‘complementary’ MRT systems appropriate to local circumstances, in practice – especially in developing cities – once a particular MRT system is developed, resources tend to be devoted to that system, while other transit modes are neglected. Developing cities often lack the institutional capacity to simultaneously develop multiple systems. This is apparent in almost all developing cities which have Fig. 35 recently pursued rail-based systems, including Corridors in Bogotá where the TransMilenio system operates: Many for example Kuala Lumpur, Bangkok, Cairo, developing cities, even though increasingly traffic-saturated, retain a Buenos Aires and Manila. In all these cities, bus corridor orientation which is conducive to Mass Rapid Transit. transit has been neglected. Enrique Penalosa, 2001

4 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 5 Sustainable Transport: A Sourcebook for Policy-makers in Developing Cities Module 3a: Mass Transit Options

3. Current applications in Table 1 are discussed in more detail below, and developing cities in Module 3b: Bus Rapid Transit.

We now survey world-wide applications of the 3.1 BUS RAPID TRANSIT different MRT systems, focusing on developing Various BRT systems operate in cities: cities. < In Asia: Istanbul, Kunming, Nagoya, Taipei. Rail-based systems in developing country < In Europe: Bradford, Clermont-Ferrand, Metros carry about 11 billion journeys each Eindhoven, Essen, Ipswich, Leeds, Nancy, year, surface rail about 5 billion, and light rail Rouen. about 2.5 billion. While the proportion of pub- < In Latin America: Belo Horizonte, Bogotá, lic transport trips by rail exceeds 50% in Seoul Campinas, Curitiba, Goiania, Porto Alegre, and Moscow, rail systems dominate only in a Quito, Recife, Sao Paulo. very few cities (World Bank, 2001). < In North America: Ottawa, Pittsburgh, Some typical MRT systems in developing cities Seattle, Los Angeles, Honolulu, Orlando, are outlined in Table 1. Several of the systems in Miami, Vancouver. < In Oceania: Brisbane, Adelaide. Table 1: Performance and cost of various MRT systems. World Bank, Cities on the Move, Urban Transport Strategy Review (Oct. 2001

Table 8.1. Performance and Cost of Some Typical MRT Systems

CARACAS BANGKOK MEXICO KUALA TUNIS RECIFE QUITO BOGOTA PORTO ALEGRE LUMPUR EXAMPLE (TRANSMILENIO, (LINE 4) (BTS) (LINE B) (PUTRA) (SMLT) (LINHA SUL) BUSWAY PHASE 1) BUSWAYS Suburban rail Category Rail metro Rail metro Rail metro Light rail Light rail Busway Busway Busway conversion Electric Electric, Electric, Electric Electric Electric, AC Electric Articulated diesel Technology Diesel buses Steel rail steel rail rubber tyre Driverless steel rail steel rail duo-trolleybus buses 11.2 (+ext Length (km) 12.3 23.1 23.7 29 29.7 km 14.3 41 25 5.0) 20% elevated At grade, Vertical 100% 100% 100% 95% at grade At grade, At grade 55% at grade At grade Partial signal segregation tunnel Elevated elevated 5% elevated Mainly segregated No signal priority 25% tunnel priority Stop spacing (kms) 1.5 1.0 1.1 1.3 0.9 1.2 0.4 0.7 0.4 Capital cost, ($m) 213 1,110 1,700 970 1,450 435 166 110.3 25 of which: (inf only) Infrastructure/TA/ 833 670 560 n.a 268 149 20.0 322 25 Equipment ($m) Not included Not included Vehicles ($m) 277 1,030 410 n.a. 167 18 80 (113 vehs) (private operation) (private operation) Capital cost/route 90.25 73.59 40.92 50.0 13.3 11.6 10.3 5.2 1.0 km. ($m) Initial (ultimate) 40 (convoy vehicles or trains / 20 (30) 20 (30) 13 (26) 30 n/a 8 operation 160 n.a. hour /direction planned) Initial maximum 21,600 25,000 19,500 10,000 12000 9,600 9,000 20,000 pass capacity Maximum pass. 32,400 50,000 39,300 30,000 12000 36,000 15,000 35,000 20,000 carrying capacity Ave operating 20+ (stopping) 50 45 45 50 13/20 39 20 20 speed (kph) 30+ (express) Rev/operating cost 115% in n.a. 100 20 >100 n.a 100 100 100 ratio 1998 Public (BOT Public Public Private Private, Ownership Public Public Public Public under infrastructure, infrastructure, (BOT) (BOT) consideration private vehicles private vehicles 1995 2000 Year completed 2004 1999 2000 1998 1998 2002 Mostly 1990s (ext 2000) (1998 prices) Sources: Janes Urban Transport System; BB&J Consult. 2000; J. Rebelo, and G Menckhoff.

Bogotá’s TransMilenio: BRT systems are under planning or construction stop only at special tube stations generally set at initial results in the following cities: every 3 km. For the same flat fare, the passenger Results of the first few years < In Asia: Bangalore, Delhi, Jakarta. can thus transfer from one bus to another at of operation of TransMilenio < In Latin America: Barranquilla, Bogotá any of the terminals, extending public transport have met the high (expansion), Cartagena, Cuenca, Guatemala access to 90% of the city (Meirelles, 2000). expectations of the system’s City, Guayaquil, Lima, Mexico City, Panama Curitiba has inspired improvements else- developers: City, Pereira, Quito (expansion), San Juan, where. Even Los Angeles, perhaps the most • The system is moving San Salvador. 700,000 passengers each car-dependent city in the world, is developing < : Albany, Alameda and In North America Bus Rapid Transit after a recent visit of a delega- day (Sept. 2002) Contra Costa, Boston, Charlotte, Chicago, • Most users of TransMilenio tion of leading city officials to Curitiba. Cleveland, Dulles Corridor, Eugene, have gained more than 300 hours per year to themselves Hartford, Las Vegas, Louisville, Montomery Bogotá, Colombia • 11 % of TransMilenio’s rid- County, San Francisco, Toronto. With over 6 million inhabitants, Bogotá has ers are former private car < In Oceania: Auckland, Perth, Sydney. proven that Bus Rapid Transit is suitable drivers even for the largest of cities. Bogotá’s new Latin American experience • Average speed is higher TransMilenio system went into operation in than 25 km per hour Curitiba, Brazil January 2001. The existing two lines already by • With the 72% of the total December 2001 served over 600,000 passenger number of buses the sys- It was in Curitiba in the early 1970s that the tem moves about 60,000 Bus Rapid Transit idea first evolved. The city has trips per day, greatly exceeding initial projec- passengers in peak hours implemented many other measures such as car- tions (see margin note). When the full system • Noise and air pollution have free zones and large green spaces to become one is completed in 2015, TransMilenio will serve been reduced by 30% of the world’s urban success stories. 5 million passengers each day with 388 km of where TransMilenio runs busways. Curitiba is one of the best examples of inte- • 344 buses in operation Bogotá’s TransMilenio system was briefly • Ticket fare of US$ 0.40 grated transport and urban planning. It has a • 35.5 km in operation population of 1.5 million and about 655,000 described in Module 1a of this Sourcebook, and • 56 stations in operation and motor vehicles. Public transport is managed by is discussed in more detail in Module 3b: Bus 6 under construction. a public company, URBS, and is operated by 10 Rapid Transit. private companies under concession contracts. Sao Paulo, Brazil The public transport system runs 1,677 buses – many of which are 270-passenger bi-articu- Sao Paulo operates probably the largest Bus lated buses – which carry on average 976,000 Rapid Transit system in the world in terms of passengers per day. The 65 km of busways along kilometres covered. Sao Paulo, the most impor- five main routes are “fed” by 340 km of feeder tant financial and industrial centre in Brazil, has routes that concentrate passenger demand on 9.9 million inhabitants and 4.8 million vehicles. strategically placed interchange terminals. These Bus public transport is managed by a public terminals are linked in turn by 185 km of circu- company, SPTRANS, and is operated by 53 lar interdistrict routes. Acting in support of this private companies. The public transport system network are 250 km of “Speedy Bus” routes that runs 12,000 buses, which carry an average 4.8 million passengers per day. The city has 35 bus transfer terminals, 28 km of median busways and 137 km of bus lanes. New bus corridors Fig. 44 are planned to integrate the inter-city bus lines, In Curitiba, boarding suburban rail and Metro systems, and the local tubes support 5-door bus routes (Meirelles 2000). boardings on locally manufactured buses. The system links outlying metropolitan areas Doors open outwards, to Sao Paulo’s successful underground system. and ramps drop down Thus, similar to Hong Kong and Singapore to allow same-level where bus services are well integrated with boarding. Metro systems, Sao Paulo is an example of bus Manfred Breithaupt, 1999 and Metro systems being mutually beneficial.

6 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 7 Sustainable Transport: A Sourcebook for Policy-makers in Developing Cities Module 3a: Mass Transit Options

Buses are the backbone Even where extensive rail systems have been built Even cities with several subway and surface rail lines typically serve many more passengers with bus systems than with the rail systems. Mexico City’s Metro, for example, is more than 150 km in length and Fig. 65 has 11 lines, but serves less The on-line median busway in Quito, Ecuador, than 15% of all motorised covers operating costs at a fare of only US$0.2. trips. Likewise the Buenos Lloyd Wright, 2001 Aires Metro has 5 lines but serves only 6% of trips in the some units as old as 35 years. The electric trol- metropolitan area. A similar situation applies in Singapore, ley-bus also delivers additional environmental Sao Paulo, Bangkok and gains through the substitution of diesel-fuelled other developing cities with buses with units powered by hydro-generated high cost rail-based mass electricity. The overwhelming popularity of the transit systems. In all these Quito trolley-bus has exceeded expectations cases buses continue to Fig. 55 and in a sense created an unexpected problem. serve the large majority of Sao Paulo has the world’s most extensive bus With over 200,000 commuters now using the public transport trips, with rail lane network, with 28 km of median busways system daily, its maximum capacity has been serving less than 15% of trips. and 137 km of bus lanes. reached, and thus has prompted calls for further In nearly all developing cities the majority of pub- US Federal Transit Administration, 2001 expansion. The municipality plans to deliver an lic transport is bus based. additional 73 kilometres of busways by 2006. Exceptions include the Quito, Ecuador For cost reasons, Quito’s new Eco-Via line ‘motorcycle cities’ such as Quito’s trolley-bus system and recent Eco-Via utilises Euro II diesel buses rather than continue Ho Chi Minh and Denpasar, addition are dramatic examples of BRT cost-ef- with electric trolley technology. Likewise, the where buses serve less than fectiveness and the applicability of BRT even planned expansion will be utilising clean diesel 5% of trips, as well as rail- dominated Moscow. under stressed economic conditions. Ecuador technology for its buses. Another notable partial ex- has experienced several tumultuous years of po- Porto Alegre, Brazil ception is Hong Kong, though litical and economic misfortune. In 1998, rains even there buses still serve Porto Alegre, Brazil has shown that BRT can be from the El Niño climatic effect destroyed much a majority of public transport of the nation’s infrastructure. Then, in 1999, on delivered at a relatively low-cost. In this case, the passenger trips. Railways are the heels of the emerging global market crisis, system was reportedly built for less than US$1 forecast to handle about 40% Ecuador’s banking sector virtually collapsed. million per km. The city has 17 bus transfer ter- to 50% of the total public Two governmental administrations during the minals, 27 km of median busways and 1 km of transport passenger board- late 1990s only survived a short time in office. bus lanes, along 5 radial routes (Meirelles, 2000). ings in Hong Kong by 2016, However, in the midst of this rather chaotic increasing from 33% in 1997 Porto Alegre employs a unique “Convoy” (Env. Protection Dept., Govt. scene, Quito has developed and expanded an technique in organising its route structure. of Hong Kong SAR, 2002). impressive transit system featuring 25 km of ex- Platoons of buses operate of main corridors and Shanghai, with its two clusive busways. The system covers all operating stop simultaneously at station bays that provide new subway lines, elevated costs with a fare of only US$0.20. space for three buses. At the end of the main Pearl LRT line, and suburban Quito’s existing fleet of privately run buses corridors, the same buses continue onto separate rail line, combined with the poor and deteriorating traffic has taken an environmental and health toll on community routes. Thus, rather than switching conditions for buses, may be the city. Until recently, the average bus age of to feeder buses at transfer terminals, customers can complete their entire journey without following a similar trend, at the private sector fleet has been 17 years, with least in the central city area. transfers.

Initial results from Taipei Initial results from Taipei, China, have also been very positive, including: • Improved traffic orderliness • Improved operating efficiency of roadways • Reduced traffic interference by bus stops • Savings in travel times Fig. 75 • Reduced frequency and se- Porto Alegre, Brazil. verity of accidents Lloyd Wright, 2001 • Improved bus operation, in terms of both efficiency and Asian experience reliability Fig. 9 • Increased ridership of public Kunming, China 5 transport (Jason Chang, Through a partnership with the city of Zurich, Nagoya, Japan, marks the bus lanes with a 2002). Switzerland, Kunming has become the first city coloured road surface. Taipei (China), along with Courtesy of John Cracknell, TTC, and the US Transportation Research Board. in China to adopt the BRT concept. Bogotá and other leading systems, is discussed in more Hong Kong, China < A network of dedicated bus lanes detail in the Module 3b: Bus < High quality transfer environments The Hong Kong bus system displays many fea- Rapid Transit. < Green buses tures of BRT, including bus priority measures, < Intelligent Transport System (ITS) advanced fare collection, comprehensive cover- applications, including innovative passenger age, clean buses, and passenger information. information systems The system is well integrated with Hong Kong’s < Transit-oriented development. Metro, with an extensive bus feeder network comprising more than 140 bus feeder shuttle Taipei has pursued a number of innovative solu- routes connecting with railway stations includ- tions to finding lane spaces for buses. ing the MTR, KCR and Airport Express.

Japan Japan is currently hosting a 16-city Transport Demand Management program in which eight of the cities are developing bus improvement initiatives.

Taipei, Taiwan (China) Taipei has developed a bus lane network of 57 km since March 1998 (at an average cost of US$500,000 per kilometre), in the context of a wider policy framework emphasising:

Fig. 84 Nathan Road, Hong Kong. Franchised bus operators concentrate along major traffic corridors where major Fig. 105 commercial centres are Taipei commuters ponder the benefits of bus located. travel. Karl Fjellstrom, June 2001 Jason Chang, 2002

8 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 9 Sustainable Transport: A Sourcebook for Policy-makers in Developing Cities Module 3a: Mass Transit Options

construction in the corridor leading to the downtown. The near term benefit/cost ratios were much higher for the relatively inexpensive outer segments than for the costly CBD links. Also, forecasts of future transit use indicated that the building of a costly tunnel or any other grade-separated facility in the downtown area could be safely deferred for 20 to 25 years (Shen et al., 1998).

USA Fig. 115 Bus Rapid Transit is a succss story of technology With an initial 17 city program, Bus Rapid transfer from the developing world to the devel- Transit is rapidly expanding in the US. oped. Invented in Curitiba, Brazil, Bus Rapid Courtesy of US Federal Transit Administration Transit is quickly being replicated in North America, Europe, and Australia. In the United North American experience States, the initial 17-city program is rapidly expanding, and benefiting greatly from a national Ottawa, Canada information sharing program. Ottawa has one of the most successful BRT systems in North America with 26 kilometres of Honolulu’s successful CityExpress system has exclusive busways, and a total system length of now been expanded to connect the system with over 60 kilometres. Up to 200 articulated buses a unified intercity service called CountyExpress. operate on the system per hour and handle peak Pittsburgh initiated its busway program back in capacities of approximately 10,000 passengers 1977 and now has three lines on 26 kilometres per hour per direction. The system is currently of exclusive busways. handling 200,000 passengers each day for an Results from the US Bus Rapid Transit program annual total of over 85 million passenger trips. are encouraging, as Table 2 shows. In virtually The system is well integrated with other trans- every case, travel times have been reduced and port infrastructure including train stations, Park ridership levels have seen dramatic gains, though and Ride lots, and cycleways. The system also from a low base. provides good examples of features such as traffic signal prioritisation and queue jumping for Table 2: Positive initial results from the US buses (Leech, C., personal communication, OC Bus Rapid Transit program. Transpo, Ottawa, 2002). US Federal Transit Administration Travel time Ridership Ottawa’s visionary system was developed at a City time when many other cities were looking to reduction increase much more expensive rail-based mass transit Pittsburgh 50% 80–100% solutions, and in combination with transit- Los Angeles 25% 27–41% friendly land use development policies. Faced Miami N/A 70% in the 1980s with anticipated increases in the Honolulu 25–45% N/A metropolitan population, employment and tran- Chicago 25% 70% sit ridership, the transit operating agency OC Transpo strove to increase the efficiency and use of the existing bus system in the region. European experience OC Transpo considered that the region would France be best served by an “outside-in” rapid transit France also has an ambitious Bus Rapid Transit development strategy. The downtown seg- agenda with such cities as Grenoble, Lyon, ment was the most expensive to construct and Nancy, and Clermont Ferrand in Paris opting was therefore deferred in favour of less costly for improved bus services.

The Brisbane Busway Impressive initial results Brisbane’s Southeast Busway, which opened in April 2001, led in the first 6 months of operation to an increase in ridership of 12% along the same Fig. 124 routes, compared to the previous year. The modern Civis bus The Busway rapidly gained further popularity. After a year of operation, the service was on a busway in Rouen. recording 27,000 extra passengers per week, Courtesy of John Marino (Irisbus) and the US Transportation Research Board with patronage on core bus services up by 45%. A study in 2002 showed that property values Great Britain along the Busway had risen substantially, though property values have also risen elsewhere in the Busways are becoming increasingly common in city over the same period. such English cities as Leeds, London, Reading, and Ispwich. A long term solution for a rapidly growing metropolitan region The Southeast Busway, to be followed by the Inner Northern Busway (due for completion in late 2003), is aiming to fulfill the long-term mobility Fig. 134 needs of the city. It is seen as a long-term Ipswich, England. solution for the rapidly growing metropolitan area, The unpaved centre rather than a transitional measure toward a rail- strip reduces costs based system. sonsiderably, and also As in Bogotá, implementation of the BRT reduces noise. system is done in stages, with e.g. major Courtesy of US Transportation Research extensions such as the Inner Northern Busway, Board and regular ongoing improvements at particular stations, interchange facilities, etc. For more Australian and New Zealand programs information please see http://www.transport. qld.gov.au/busways/. Several cities in Australia and New Zealand have launched Bus Rapid Transit programs. Operating systems are in place in Adelaide and Brisbane (see margin note on the Brisbane Busway). Systems are also being planned in Perth, Sydney, and Auckland.

Fig. 1435 The Brisbane Busway features excellent station design, 50 new natural gas “green buses”, good passenger support and information, and excellent modal integration and marketing. It has extensive grade-separation, elevated and underground, in the city centre area. Karl Fjellstrom, April 2001

10 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 11 Sustainable Transport: A Sourcebook for Policy-makers in Developing Cities Module 3a: Mass Transit Options

3.2 LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT Rail system descriptions Light Rail Transit (LRT) systems are a relatively and maps, world-wide new and promising concept for application in For a comprehensive and certain urban locations, though more relevant to reasonably up-to-date wealthy than to developing cities. Comparable listing of current rail systems and projects world-wide, to BRT systems in terms of capacity, LRT pro- including for example rail duces no local emissions. projects and expansion plans As with BRT, LRT lines are usually segregated in Bangkok, Guangzhou, from other means of traffic by barriers or slightly Shanghai, Taipei, Santiago, elevated tracks, or by full grade separation. Sao Paulo, Manila, Kuala Lumpur, and Hong Kong Current applications (several different projects) see http://www.railway- LRT ranges from the conventional on-street Fig. 165 technology.com/projects/ tramways of Eastern Europe and Egypt to the el- The MRT system in Shanghai has had a index.html. evated and segregated systems of Singapore and positive impact on land use, with densification Maps of rail systems Kuala Lumpur. With the exception of the ex- occurring along Metro routes. world-wide are available at http://www.reed.edu/~reyn/ tensive tram systems of Central Eastern Europe Karl Fjellstrom, Jan. 2002 transport.html. and the former Soviet Union, LRT systems exist, or have been planned, only in relatively wealthy city centre. A second line is being built to form a developing cities such as Hong Kong, Shanghai, rough circle with the existing LRT line. Tunis and Kuala Lumpur, or for high income The system provides excellent examples of developments such as the Tren de la Costa of well-planned modal integration. The northern Buenos Aires. point of the Red Metro line connects with the Recent examples of LRT systems in developing long distance train station. Bicycle parking is cities include the elevated Putra and recently provided near all MRT stations. The major opened (July 2002) monorail systems in Kuala Shanghai Stadium interchange is located next to Lumpur, and Shanghai’s Pearl line. a major bus terminal. Figure 16 (see also Figure 20) shows the positive influence the MRT can LRT and Metro lines in Shanghai have on land use in the city, with a row of high density developments focusing on the Shanghai The elevated (for 80% of its length) “Pearl” Stadium area; a major transit interchange. LRT line (see Figure 15) in Shanghai serves high density, high-rise apartments to the north of the On the downside, it is doubtful that the system can be expanded at a pace to match the rapidly expanding city. New developments in outer areas combined with a frenetic road-building program tend to promote car-dependency. Traffic conditions and speeds in the city centre are already poor for buses, and will worsen.

The decline of trams in developing cities Trams, historically a feature of many developing cities, retain a role in some cities, such as Hong Kong, but are in decline. In Cairo the percentage of all motorised trips by tram has fallen from 15% in 1971 to 2% in 1998 (Metge, 2000). Historically many developing cities had tram Fig. 155 systems along major corridors, but these were ‘Shanghai City Plan’ shows the two Metro lines dismantled to make way for increasing private in Green and Red, and the LRT line in purple. car traffic. Tram lines, now largely paved over, Shanghai Tourist Map, Tourism Administrative Commission, 2001

are still visible in streets in many developing cities in Asia and Latin America. Cairo (Figure 17) is one of the few developing cities with a functioning tram system, though this has gradu- ally dwindled to one line.

Renewed interest in wealthier cities In many richer cities the trends of tram decline are reversed (see Figure 18). A European best practices report notes that the decline in tram use in Munich, for example, has been reversed and patronage has increased in the last 10 years through a program of tram priority at intersec- tions and integration with other rail services (Atkins, 2001). Many other European cities have introduced and expanded tramways, both in the inner city (e.g. Amsterdam, Vienna, Frankfurt), and serving outlying commercial and leisure facilities (e.g. Oberhausen, Germany). Fig. 175 Cairo’s dwindling, neglected tram system, In North America, many cities have successfully though averaging only around 11 km/hr speeds, combined public transport projects with a policy offers a pleasant community atmosphere and a of revival of its city centre. Well-designed and fare from the upmarket Heliopolis to downtown planned LRT systems are attractive to passen- Cairo of less than US$0.07. gers, even in car-dominated, low density North Karl Fjellstrom, March 2002 American cities. In the last 20 years, 14 cities in the US and Canada have introduced LRT systems. Building ‘transit malls’ with LRT access, trees and pedestrian zones (see e.g. Figure 18) can encourage private investment in city centre office blocks, shops and apartments.

3.3 METROS Metros in developing cities carried about 11 billion journeys in 2000, more than twice the ridership of commuter rail and more than four times the ridership of LRT systems. Both Metro and commuter rail systems require exclusive right-of-way (ROW) and safety measures due to relatively high speeds. To provide Fig. 184 exclusive ROW many heavy rail systems are City-centre tram LRT built underground or elevated, causing very high lines in Sapporo, Japan costs. Metro systems may cover their operational (top) and Frankfurt, costs in urban areas with high population den- Germany. In both cities sity, such as in Hong Kong or Sao Paulo, but the trams act as feeders normally they require subsidies. A successful to extensive Metro Metro also requires integration with existing systems. transport modes and policies, and planned den- Karl Fjellstrom, 2002 sification around Metro stations.

12 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 13 Sustainable Transport: A Sourcebook for Policy-makers in Developing Cities Module 3a: Mass Transit Options

Metro systems are being developed or expanded in several developing cities, such as Bangkok, Santiago de Chile, Kuala Lumpur, Sao Paulo, Buenos Aires, Mexico City (Figure 19), Cairo (Figure 20), Manila, Shanghai, and Hong Kong (see www.railway-technology.com/projects for a list). Older, generally successful systems include Mexico City, Buenos Aires, and Sao Paulo, though in all cases the Metro ridership is far Fig. 195 below the ridership of the bus system. In this Mexico City has an extensive Metro system, module we describe the cases of Bangkok and with 11 lines. Fares are low at a flat 2 peso, Kuala Lumpur in more detail, as these cases though the service is often overcrowded and illustrate the strengths and weaknesses of Metro run-down. An entrance is shown here, to the applications in developing cities. While the right of a bus lane. Bangkok Skytrain system is described following, Karl Fjellstrom, Feb. 2002 the Kuala Lumpur heavy rail and LRT systems are described in next section of the module, comparing costs of the various MRT options.

The Bangkok Skytrain (BTS) Three separate mass transit schemes were initiated in Bangkok in the 1990s: < The Bangkok Transit System (BTS or better known as the Skytrain), initiated by the Fig. 216 Bangkok Metropolitan Administration Victory Monument, < The failed Hopewell elevated rail project, Bangkok. BTS trains initiated by the then Ministry of Transport run on dual tracks, and Communications carried on a 9 metre < The Blue Line, initiated by the Mass Rapid wide viaduct, supported Transit Authority (a 20km underground rail on single box viaduct line due to open in 2004 connecting to the girders, each 12 metres suburban and BTS systems). above the road level. Karl Fjellstrom, Jan. 2002

Fig. 205 Cairo’s 63km, two-line Metro carries 700 million passengers per year. Its stations, marked by a distinctive “M”, have promoted development along its route (top) and also serve poor areas (above). Karl Fjellstrom, Feb. 2002

The Skytrain, which opened in late 1999, is an elevated heavy rail system running above some of Bangkok’s busiest commercial areas. Bangkok Skytrain service It has a peak capacity of around 45,000 pas- innovations sengers per hour per direction. Trains run on 5 Recent Skytrain innovations to 7 minute headways from 6 am to midnight, include regular promotional events. All are advertised, though as demand increases and for special oc- both in the mass media and casions such as New Year’s Eve, headways can Fig. 225 be shortened to 2 minutes (Sayeg, 2001) and at the BTS stations. Each car is air-conditioned, and the BTS offers In October 2001 a free running time extended. The BTS has two lines, a comfortable and fast ride through the central shuttle bus service for pass- with a total length of 23.1 km and 23 stations. city area. holding Skytrain passengers The lines intersect at the city centre station. Karl Fjellstrom, Dec. 2001 was implemented on 5 different routes. BTS cannot Tender documents for a turnkey BTS system charge for these services. were issued in March 1993 to five consortia. stations), road traffic to the central area becomes If they could, and BTS was The agreement was later amended to cover not even more difficult, integration with other able to determine routing, this just the construction, but maintenance and op- modes is improved, and complementary mass would put pressure on the eration of the completed network. (For further transit systems are completed. BMTA to change. Hence, a discussion of private sector participation in the Despite the initially disappointing ridership, an multi-modal concession for BTS see Module 1c: Private Sector Participation International Finance Corporation (one of the the BTS extensions (under in urban Transport Infrastructure Provision.) construction) may be a good system’s investors) funded study indicates that: idea. Singapore’s northeast Fares, ridership and operating costs At present, BTS is covering operating and main- corridor is an example of a Fares range from 15 – 40 Baht, or around tenance costs through the fare box. ... As the multi-modal concession, with marginal cost of carrying passengers on the BTS is US$0.37 to $1.00. This is relatively expensive, SBS – a bus operator – now well below the average cost, its cost recovery will also running trains. even compared to air-conditioned bus fares for increase markedly as patronage grows (IFC, 2001). long trips, which are less than $0.50, or around $0.11 for shorter trips. Economy bus fares are Modal integration much cheaper, from around $0.05 for short trips Integration of BTS with other modes of up to $0.20 for long trips. transport is poor; a contributing factor to the First year ridership was only one-quarter of disappointing ridership. The Bangkok Mass forecast ridership. Though it is improving, in- Transit Authority, Bangkok’s monopoly bus creasing from around 160,000 to 200,000 trips services provider, has been slow to act. The BTS per day in its first two years of operation (average meanwhile has taken steps to provide its own 280,000 weekday passengers in Oct. 2002), this feeder services (see margin note), but they are is still only one-third of the forecast. Similar disap- severely constrained. Some clear opportunities pointing ridership has been recorded for recent for modal integration were missed, with the urban rail systems in Kuala Lumpur (discussed northern line terminating only around 2km later in this module) and in Manila (Metrostar). from the newly constructed northern bus termi- Diversion from car drivers to the BTS system ap- nal, and no feeder service or pedestrian walkway pears to be relatively high, however, with around connecting the two. 10% of passengers being former car drivers. Facilities for bicycles are either not provided, Interestingly, one-third of BTS trips are new trips. or are located in an unsupportive environment Ridership should, however, continue to increase, for cyclists, and are therefore unused (such as especially as densification around stations takes at Ekkamai station). Eight stations are directly place (encouraged by rising land values near connected to adjacent shopping complexes.

14 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 15 Sustainable Transport: A Sourcebook for Policy-makers in Developing Cities Module 3a: Mass Transit Options

Rolling stock Twenty-seven three-car, 1,100 passenger capacity trains, 65.1 metres long, are currently operated. The quality, cleanliness and reliability of the system are all outstanding. The three-car trains can in future be doubled in length at peak times.

Future arrangements From the start of commercial operations, all operating revenue for the following 30 years was to be handed to BTSC. However, the current situation is that the BTS has been transferred back to the BMA, although BTSC still carry out the system maintenance.

The (inevitable) need for expansion Almost all developing cities which are con- sidering MRT applications or extentions Fig. 235 are expanding at a rapid rate. It is therefore An overloaded commuter train in Jakarta, inevitable that Metro systems, which are very Commuter rail in Bombay Indonesia. Commuter/suburban rail services expensive and therefore often limited to one or are in decline in many developing cities. two short lines, soon come under pressure for Kompas, 17 -Jun-01 expansion to serve new areas of the city. This has also happened in Bangkok. BTS system expansion was approved in 1999, and construction has commenced but is proceeding slowly due to problems of cost and complexity. The three approved extensions add up to an extra 19.2 km (see further http://www.bma.go.th/bmaeng/ Six million passengers body_traffic_and_transport.html). per day are carried by suburban rail in 3.4 COMMUTER RAIL Bombay, India. Manfred Breithaupt, Feb. 2002, Current applications Churchgate Station, Bombay Commuter or suburban rail services are mostly provided by general railroad companies and they share track with freight and long-distance Fig. 245 transport. While in theory the capacity would Radial commuter rail lines have influenced the be limited to the number of available seats, in urban form in Buenos Aires. practice these services are often run at crush pas- Nora Turco, 2001 senger loads in developing cities (Figure 23). Suburban railways in developing cities are As shown in Bombay, where each day 6 million usually radially oriented into the city centre. passengers are carried by suburban railways, this Market differentiation Although even in relatively well-served cities like mode may even serve as a backbone MRT for a in Bombay extends to Bombay, Rio de Janeiro, Moscow, Buenos Aires developing city. Like Metros, suburban railways women-only carriages, and Johannesburg, they carry less then 10% need an independent institutional body which allocates funds and distributes earnings, as well similar to Cairo’s Metro. of trips, they can be important in supporting Manfred Breithaupt, Feb. 2002 a transit-friendly city form and maintaining a as fare and timetable intregration with other strong city centre (Figure 24). transport services.

Measures which can increase capacity and 4. Comparison on key parameters safety include the elimination of at-grade road crossings (or introduction of safety equip- Though ideally cities developing an MRT ment), the purchase of double-deck-trains and system will draw from different combinations improvement of boarding/alighting facilities, of road and rail-based MRT, experience shows though in all cases the cost implications may be most developing cities will probably focus on too large for many developing cities. As with one choice for an MRT system. Once one form all other MRT systems, high ridership on com- of MRT is implemented, it is likely that other muter lines requires feeder services (e.g. by bus) MRT options will be neglected. It is therefore and good interchange facilities. important that this choice be well informed. The rehabilitation and improvement of suburban railways show good cost-benefit-ratios and 4.1 COST can contribute to poverty alleviation, as poorer For any municipality, the infrastructure cost of a people generally live further from the city centre. transit system is a pre-eminent decision-making The most serious obstacles to rail developments factor. Bus Rapid Transit is relatively economical are frequently institutional. When operated by to develop. Without costs of excavation and ex- national rail organisations, suburban railways pensive rail cars, Bus Rapid Transit can be over tend to be given low priority – in particular in 100 times less expensive than a Metro system. comparison to the road lobby – and are poorly coordinated with other urban public transport “New subway systems in the US services. In many cases the weakness of publicly show that costs have been well owned national rail undertakings leaves their capacity severely underdeveloped (as in Manila, above, and ridership well below, Jakarta, and Surabaya). forecasts made when the projects were approved. This has also been Positive experience with concessioning of commuter rail services the experience of many rail transit systems in developing countries.” In Module 1c: Private Sector Participation in Urban Transport Infrastructure Provision, it was Gregory Ingram, World Bank, Patterns of seen that positive experience is possible where Metropolitan Development: What Have We Learned?, these weaknesses are addressed. A program of Urban Studies, Vol. 35, No. 7, 1998 concessioning to the private sector in Buenos The cost difference extends to other infrastruc- Aires revitalised the system, doubling patronage ture items, such as stations. A busway station over a five year period while at the same time in Quito, Ecuador costs only about US$35,000 reducing the budget burden of the system by while a rail station in Porto Alegre that serves a nearly US$1 billion per year; although the sys- similar number of persons costs US$150 million. tem still requires an ongoing operational subsidy and operating conditions have considerably worsened in 2002. In Brazil the transfer of responsibility for suburban railways from the highly centralised CBTU (Companhia Brasileira de Trens Urbanos) to local (state) control, together with a government BRT station in Quito, Rail station in Porto Alegre: funded rehabilitation program, has improved Ecuador: US$ 35,000 US$ 150 million service in most of the major cities. Assisted by a Thus, for the same amount of investment, a program of concessioning, it is greatly reducing Bus Rapid Transit system can serve as much as the fiscal burden. 100 times the area of a rail-based system. A city with enough funding for one kilometre of Metro might be able to construct 100 km of BRT.

16 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 17 Sustainable Transport: A Sourcebook for Policy-makers in Developing Cities Module 3a: Mass Transit Options

Capital costs for rail-based MRT Table 4: Factors influencing Metro capital Further information on Capital costs usually cover planning and con- costs. comparisons, and transit struction costs as well as technical equipment Adapted from Allport 2000 levels of service and rolling stock. The capital costs of US LRT Influence Factor More information on transit level of service, relevant systems are on average US$ 21.6 million per Dominant - Management/organisation quality to comparisons between kilometre. - New system, or progressive modes – although from expansion of existing system The capital costs depend on the extent of a North American rather Large - Ground conditions (underground than developing country grade separation and right-of-way, as well as construction, and foundations for perspective – can be obtained on specific geological conditions and the prices elevated viaducts) of building materials and labour, but also - Urban constraints and topography from the Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual extend to planning procedures and institutions. (utilities diversions, proximity (http://kittelson.transit.com), Allport (2000) shows also that the effectiveness to buildings, ability to divert traffic, environmental constraints, prepared for the Transit of planning procedures contributes to a large earthquake protection) Cooperative Research extent to capital costs. The study found that - Design and safety requirements Program (TCRP), 1999. similar Metro systems in developing countries - Financing costs were much more expensive, for example, than - Depth of water table (can make cost prohibitive for underground) a system implemented in Madrid (see Table 3). Table 4 provides a rough assessment of fac- Moderate - Land costs - Competition in the equipment tors influencing rail-based MRT capital costs. supply and construction market Similar factors and influences can be assumed to Small - Labour costs apply to BRT systems. - Taxes and duties Table 4 shows, perhaps counter-intuitively, that - System features (long trains, AC, special access, etc) it is not the construction phase (with labour and equipment costs) or details in system features, but rather strategic decisions on management Table 5: Impacts of alignment on cost: rail- and organisation that have the greatest influence based MRT. on MRT capital costs. Additionally the integra- Allport 2000 tion in the urban fabric and the fundamental Vertical All-in cost (US$m) per Ratio alignment route km Table 3: Capital costs of various rail systems. At-grade 15 - 30 1 UTSR 2001; Allport 2000; GTZ 2001 Elevated 30 - 75 2 - 2.5 Cost/km Underground 60 - 180 4 - 6 Railway Type Notes (US$) West Rail Heavy 38% 220m decision of vertical alignment will have a major Hong Kong Metro tunnel bearing on capital costs. Kuala Lumpur Elevated, LRT 50m - Putra driverless Table 5 underlines the impacts of alignment Kuala Lumpur Heavy Largely decisions on capital costs for rail MRT systems. 50m - Star Metro elevated Manila - Line Light 50m Elevated 3 extension Metro Bangkok Metro 74m Elevated Skytrain Caracas - Metro 90m Venezuela BRT: US$ 1–10 million per Metros: US$ 55–207 million kilometre per kilometre Mexico City Metro 41m Madrid Metro 23m Tunis LRT 13m Recife - Brazil Comm Rail 12m

Two systems at the same cost: Operating costs (1) Rail When comparing such operating cost values between mass transit modes (e.g., BRT with rail), one must be certain that a “like for like” comparison of variables is being made. BRT systems typically amortise vehicle purchase costs within the operating cost calculation, while rail systems sometimes list rolling stock as a capital cost. Further, because of rail’s high cost structure, certain maintenance and replacement part items are sometimes capitalised. To make a correct comparison, adjustments will need to be made (2) Bus Rapid Transit to ensure capital and operating costs are appro- priately categorised. Rail systems do have an apparent operational cost advantage from the standpoint of labour costs, specifically with regard to the cost of a driver. Bus coaches each require a driver while several rail coaches connected together only requires a single driver. However, in developing nations, the lower wage differentials mean that this advantage is largely overwhelmed by the other components. Porto Alegre, Brazil offers a Table 6: Infrastructure cost components of unique opportunity to compare urban rail and Bogotá’s TransMilenio BRT system. BRT operating costs on an even basis. The city Lloyd Wright, 2002 has both types of systems operating in similar circumstances. The Trensurb rail system requires Total cost Cost per km Component (US$ million) (US$ million) a 69% operating subsidy for each passenger trip Trunk lines 94.7 2.5 (Thomson, 2001). By contrast, the city’s BRT Stations 29.2 0.8 system has a comparable fare structure, but Terminal 14.9 0.4 operates with no subsidies and in fact returns a Pedestrian profit to the private sector firms operating the 16.1 0.4 overpasses buses. Bus depots 15.2 0.4 Profitability of bus systems in Control centre 4.3 0.1 developing cities Other 25.7 0.7 Public transport by bus in developing countries Total 198.8 5.3 is already characterised by a high level of cost recovery, and usually such services operate at a Capital costs for Bus Rapid Transit profit. The fact that such services can be profit- Whereas rail-based MRT’s may cost from US$ able under inferior and deteriorating operationg 20 – 180 million per kilometre, Bus Rapid conditions (chiefly congestion), and a poor and Transit systems are an order of magnitude unsupportive regulatory and planning frame- cheaper: US$ 1 – 10 million per kilometre. work, indicates that where a range of operational and regulatory improvements encouraging com- We can view these cost differences graphically, petition and service innovation are implemented in terms of the length of MRT system achiev- along with physical measures such as bus prior- able for roughly the same cost. ity, there is little doubt that BRT in developing Table 6 summarises costs of Bogotá’s cities will be profitable. TransMilenio BRT system, discussed in more detail in Module 3c: Bus Rapid Transit.

18 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 19 Sustainable Transport: A Sourcebook for Policy-makers in Developing Cities Module 3a: Mass Transit Options

Fare Box Ratio In addition, the form of many developing cities Extra costs of new is still suited to transit, as development is often The Fare Box Ratio gives an indication of eco- technologies still channelled along major arterials rather nomic viability of an MRT system. It describes Providing refueling than dispersed to all areas of the city. Even car- the ratio between fares collected and operational infrastructure can also be saturated cities such as Bangkok can be more costs. Table 7 indicates that five railway opera- a consideration. According accurately considered “car-saturated transit tions are able to cover operational costs and to to the International cities” rather than “car-dependent cities”. These use the surplus for depreciation of infrastructure. Energy Agency, refueling circumstances (unlike in car-dependent cities These are exceptional: Most railway operations instrastructure and other support system costs for fuel where activities are highly dispersed), tend to are subsidised by an agency or surpluses in other favour a high ridership. cell buses cost approximately branches of the city budget. US$5 million. Rail system operating costs Fare Box Ratios of BRT systems A major additional cost for new technologies such as fuel Operating costs include salaries, fuel and main- The Fare Box Ratio of BRT systems in Porto cells, which is not included tenance of both vehicles and infrastructure. The Alegre, Curitiba, Bogotá and Quito exceeds one, in Table 8, is the cost of re- operational costs depend partly on the amount as do most bus systems throughout the develop- search and development for of cars required to provide a service. The higher ing world. the transit agency concerned. operating speeds the lower the circulation time and in consequence the number of cars needed Furthermore, as shown in Module 3c: Bus for a single line. Rapid Transit (see Figure 6) revenues from the TransMilenio BRT in Bogotá do not only cover operating costs for the trunk line operators, but “The construction costs of Metros also cover a range of other costs, including the in developing countries are so high costs of the feeder services, the system planning that they crowd out many other and regulatory body (3% of fare revenues), the investments. ... Most systems have fare collection company, the funds administra- tor, and a contingency fund. operating deficits that severely constrain local budgets, as in Pusan Rolling stock and Mexico City” Table 8 provides an approximation of the cost Gregory Ingram (op cit) difference between buses with different propulsion systems, compared to a standard rail car. A recent US survey (GAO, 2001) confirms The purchase cost does not include substantial that operational costs of LRT systems are much and ongoing additional costs such as specialised higher than for BRT. The report compares six maintenance, and research and development needs US cities having both LRT and BRT systems. It that accompany the most advanced technologies. refers to three categories of operating costs: < Costs per vehicle hour Table 7: Fare Box Ratios, selected rail MRTs. < Costs per vehicle revenue km TCRP 1999, Allport 2000, GTZ (edited) < Costs per passenger trip. Railway Fare Box Ratio Operating costs per vehicle hour of 5 LRT Regional Metro Porto Alegre 0.25 systems are between 1.6 to 7.8 times higher than Kuala Lumpur Putra LRT 0.50 those of BRT systems. LRT operating costs per vehicle hour ranged from $89 to $434. Similar Buenos Aires Metro 0.77 findings were made for operating costs per vehi- Kuala Lumpur Star Metro 0.90 cle revenue kilometre. Sao Paulo Metro 1.06 The World Bank (2001) provides some figures Singapore Metro 1.50 for developing countries (see also Table 1). Santiago Metro 1.60 Operating costs per passenger range from Manila Light Metro 1.80 US$0.61 in Hong Kong to $0.19 in Santiago, Hong Kong Metro 2.20 while revenues per passenger range from $0.11 in Calcutta to $0.96 in Hong Kong.

Construction time Table 8: Costs of various bus technologies, 4.2 PLANNING & CONSTRUCTION TIME advantages of bus rapid compared to a standard rail car. Project development and planning transit International Energy Agency, 2002. The project development and planning process Bangkok’s Skytrain system Cost per vehicle Propulsion technology is generally quicker for BRT than for rail-based took four-and-a-half years (US$) to establish, from the time of MRT systems. The BRT planning process for a New diesel, constructed in signing of the construction 30,000 - 75,000 developing country ‘world class’ BRT system, described in Module contract to first operation. 3c: Bus Rapid Transit, takes about one year and New diesel (Euro II) 100,000 - 300,000 Bogotá’s TransMilenio BRT costs around US$400,000 – US$2 million. system – with 56 stations CNG, LPG bus 150,000 - 350,000 compared to the Skytrain’s Hybrid electric bus 200,000 - 400,000 Due to the relatively low costs, financing is also 25 stations and with a large generally easier and quicker for BRT than for Fuel cell bus 1.0 - 1.5 million range of associated improve- rail-based systems. Jakarta, Indonesia, for exam- ments such as pedestrian Metro rail car 1.7 - 2.4 million ple, decided in late 2001 to implement a BRT and cyclist facilities, public system, and the government was able to quickly parks and so on – took less Public finances allocate funds from the routine city develop- than 3 years from concept ment budget. to full implementation. The In terms of public sector affordability, BRT is actual physical construction the most favourable form of MRT system. BRT of the entire system, including systems require a relatively small initial outlay. “Mayors who are elected for only the associated public space Bogotá, for example, was able to build the entire three or four years can oversee a improvements, took only system of around 40 km without taking out loans. around 8 months. BRT project from start to finish” Savings, meanwhile, can be used in other areas, such as health and education, public space facili- Construction ties, and conditions for pedestrians and cyclists. The simpler physical infrastructure of Bus Rapid Rail systems – both LRT and Metros – require Transit means that such systems can also be built much greater initial outlays and ongoing in relatively short periods of time, often in less subsidies. Though the advent of private sector than 18 months. Underground and elevated rail concessionaires was expected by many to change systems can take considerably longer, often well this situation, the evidence is that the various over three years. new Build-Operate-Transfer projects are all in financial trouble and are nowhere achieving This time difference has a political dimension. profitability (see further Module 1c). Alone Mayors who are elected for only three or four among rail MRT systems, the Hong Kong Metro years can oversee a BRT project from start to funds all its costs (capital, asset replacement and finish. Successfully implemented BRT systems operating) from its mainly farebox revenues, and have positively influenced the re-election and can be considered profitable. All other rail MRT political careers of mayors in cities such as systems require support from the public sector; Curitiba and Bogotá. often very substantial (Allport, 2000). The problems en- Construction time countered by new rail MRT systems in developing cities are in many ways illustrated by the experience of the Star and Putra rail MRT systems in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (see text BRT: < 18 months Metros: > 3 years box). Lloyd Wright, 2001 (Bogotá) K. Fjellstrom, Feb-02 (Sao Paulo)

20 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 21 Sustainable Transport: A Sourcebook for Policy-makers in Developing Cities Module 3a: Mass Transit Options

Rail-based MRT in Kuala Lumpur Airport Express line, opened in April 2002 but at Gov’t completes takeover only 3,000 passengers per day (and a hefty fare of of two LRT operators Malaysia has developed several new rail MRT US$10), ridership has been well below forecasts. 1:51pm, Fri: (AFP) - The systems, often portrayed as paragons of government today completed technological progress and sophistication. But are the takeover of two they sustainable? The systems include STAR Light debt-ridden light railway Metro (operating from Dec. 1996) Putra LRT (from companies in its largest ever Dec. 1998), the KLIA Airport Express (from Apr. restructuring exercise, dealers 2002), and the Monorail LRT (from July 2002). The said. various rail systems all intersect at the city centre. The government issued four tranches of bonds to- talling RM5.467 billion with maturities of five, seven, 10 Fig. 275 and 15 years in a debt con- Kuala Lumpur’s city centre monorail has version scheme to settle the experienced many delays in construction since two companies’ debts, bond 1997. Though it will serve thriving commercial dealers said. areas and interlink with the other rail systems, The serial bonds will be after the experience with STAR and Putra, the issued to creditors of Projek government must be questioning the financial Usahasama Transit Ringan viability of its rail-oriented MRT strategy. Automatik (Putra) and Sistem Fig. 265 Transit Aliran Ringan (Star) in Putra’s grand Dang Wangi station is often the debt replacement, they added. deserted. Pedestrian access is difficult, with no The deal, made through crossing provided in front of the station. a special purpose vehicle Syarikat Prasana Negara, In its first three years of operation Putra’s would see the government ridership increased 10-fold, from 15,000 to acquiring 80 percent of the 150,000 passengers per day. This increase in assets of both operators, the ridership, however, was only achieved after New Straits Times said. substantial fare reductions which probably had a The railway networks are to negative overall effect on revenue (Sayeg, 2001). be leased back to the private Despite this ridership gain, however, Putra has firms to operate. been a financial failure and along with STAR the Putra, which is owned by venture was nationalised in late 2001. After only 3 debt-ridden conglomerate years of operation, Putra had accummulated debts Renong, is the biggest debtor of more than US$1.4 billion (see margin note).* among the two, with total The Monorail and KLIA airport services debts amounting to RM4.27 KL’s monorail, linking the LRT lines, was due to billion, the newspaper said. open in mid 2002. However, a mishap during a trial run in July (a wheel fell off, striking a journalist) has Fig. 28 led to the opening being delayed until early 2003. 5 Major commercial areas and trip attractors – many This makeshift tent (above) serves as the currently under construction – line its route. major bus stop at Kuala Lumpur’s largest Two rail connections to the city’s International shopping mall (top left). Buses are infrequent Airport, 70km from the city centre, are also being and overloaded, and passengers are forced to built. One of these, the US$260 million, 57km KLIA scramble past taxis (above). The megamall is

* Note: On 1 Sept. 2002 Syarikat Prasarana Negara actually only around 1.5 km from an LRT Berhad (SPNB), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the station, though no feeder bus service to the mall Minister of Finance, completed the sale and purchase is provided, and nobody walks from the LRT of the assets and business operations of Sistem Transit station to the megamall, as the walkway is pot- Aliran Ringan Sdn Bhd (STAR) and Projek Usahasama holed, very narrow, and unprotected from the Transit Automatik Sdn Bhd (PUTRA) from the Renong sun and rain (top right). Group. SPNB said it will continue operating STAR and Putra. Photos Karl Fjellstrom, Dec. 2001

Under-achieving new 4.3 PASSENGER CAPACITY urban rail systems in the Misconceptions abound about the potential Asia-Pacific region of BRT, especially in dense developing cities. Star, Putra, and KLIA A common misconception is that, “Any city Airport Express MRTs in seriously wishing to move toward sustainability Kuala Lumpur, Metrostar in by changing the private car/public transport Manila (17km, Dec. 1999), the Sydney Airport rail link equilibrium … must move in the direction of (10km, June 2000 and electric-rail-based transit systems” (Newman now in receivership), the & Kenworthy 1999, p90). Table 9 draws from Hong Kong Airport Express Newman & Kenworthy’s book to present – and Rail (34km, mid 1997), the then counter – several typical “myths” of BRT. Bangkok Sky Train, and the Brisbane Airtrain airport Another misperception is that Bus Rapid Transit Fig 29 link: all of these new MRT 5 cannot serve high passenger numbers. The rail systems have shown People walking or taking a bus to the megamall results in Colombia and Brazil show that Bus disappointing ridership, (see Fig. 28) must cross a busy road with Rapid Transit can handle passenger flows in generally about about one- no help from signals or road markings. Not the range of 20,000 to 35,000 passengers per quarter the projected levels. surprisingly, almost everyone gets to and from hour per direction. Table 10 shows passenger From these systems the the mega-mall by car or taxi. Long queues form numbers actually recorded for different systems longest in operation, Star, all day for taxis. in selected cities. Some of the biggest factors de- has stabilised at around 20- termining capacity is not the mode of transport 25% of projected ridership. Rail at the expense of bus services? but rather the techniques used for boarding and Brisbane’s Airtrain opened Though Kuala Lumpur has made much recent alighting. in May 2001 and operates progress, including many initiatives to improve without government subsidy. conditions for pedestrians in the city centre, Table 9: Some ‘myths’ of Bus Rapid Transit. However the Airtrain has and major new rail facilities, bus services remain an uncertain future, with unreliable, unintegrated, unprofitable, and ‘Myth’ In fact... ridership of just 6,000 neglected (The Star, 21 Dec. 2001). May be true in some per week compared to a The lack of attention to buses is reflected in Only rail systems cases, though a recent projected 52,000 per week. the poor conditions at Kuala Lumpur’s main bus are fast enough to study (GAO, 2001) shows An important factor here is station. The bus station is a stark contrast to the compete with the that in 5 of 6 US cities private car (p.90) with both BRT and LRT, the fare: the Singapore and shiny new expressways and rail lines of modern BRT was faster Hong Kong successful MRT KL. Litter is scattered around and water forms systems have fares com- standing pools. The litter and water, combined Buses are effective Success to date with in transit cost BRT has come from cities parable to air-conditioned with the confined exhaust smoke (there are no bus services, and, relative to recovery only where other than developing exhaust fans and little circulation), foul odour, there are large Asian cities, including income, are about one-quar- slippery stairs, and poor lighting, contributes to numbers of captive Latin America and ter as expensive as fares in a wholly unpleasant experience for passengers. users, as in newly Canada. Curitiba has the Bangkok, Manila, and Kuala (This situation should be rectified by a major new developing Asian largest car-ownership in Lumpur (Sayeg, 2001). bus terminal under construction in the city centre, cities (p.117) Brazil, after Brasilia which integrates directly with the Star MRT line. Rail systems offer a Many developing Further improvements were achieved with the “more fundamental cities have tragically way to recover opening in 2002 of KL Central, the new central rail wasted scarce transit costs” (p.117) station, which links the Metro and LRT systems development funds on and are “cheap in with the commuter rail lines.) expensive infrastructure comparison to … It is not just Kuala Lumpur which is preoccupied megaprojects. BRT is a any highway option” with large-scale projects to the detriment of cheaper option (p.155) bus systems and non-motorised transport. In Buses cannot Passenger flows in many developing cities ranging from Jakarta to Buenos cope with a high BRT systems regularly Aires, Bangkok to Guangzhou, Ho Chi Minh City to passenger demand reach more than 25,000 Surabaya, policy-makers have consistently given (p.196) pax/hr/dir more attention to large-scale, expensive projects LRT is a natural BRT is implemented as such as expressways, ring roads, LRT, and progression ‘up’ a long term strategy in Metros, rather than to lower cost approaches. after BRT (p.200) many cities

22 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 23 Sustainable Transport: A Sourcebook for Policy-makers in Developing Cities Module 3a: Mass Transit Options

Table 10: Actual maximum ridership, selected lines and then feeding large passenger numbers Flexibility in operation MRT systems. into a single corridor. Sometimes this situation Bus-based systems’ ability (* Theoretical max., not actual ridership. Putra ridership is approx. 150,000 per occurs due to geographical constraints (Hong to operate both on and day; BTS less than 300,000 passengers per day). Lloyd Wright; GTZ; from various sources, 2001 Kong), but it is often due to a lack of funding off a busway or bus lane for a city-wide Metro system. Thus, in a sense, provides Bus Rapid Transit Ridership Line Type the flexibility to respond to (pass/hr/dir) the high capacity figures become inevitable. However, such situations can be avoided by of- operating problems. For Hong Kong Metro 81,000 fering more distributed systems. example, buses can pass Sao Paulo East Line Metro 60,000 disabled vehicles, while Light Santiago La Moneda Metro 36,000 Whether a city is utilising bus or rail transit Railtrains can be delayed London Victoria Line Metro 25,000 systems, system designers may wish to keep behind a stalled train or other Buenos Aires Line D Metro 20,000 capacity figures within manageable bounds. If vehicle on the tracks. Thus, Buenos Aires Line E Metro 5,000 a system is operating at over 50,000 pphd and the impact of a breakdown of Mexico Line B Metro 39,300 a technical or operational problem occurs, the a Bus Rapid Transit vehicle is Bangkok BTS Metro 50,000* entire system can become overwhelmed with limited, while a disabled Light Kuala Lumpur Putra LRT 30,000* passenger backlogs very quickly. Further, very Rail train may disrupt portions of the system (GAO, 2001). Bogotá TransMilenio BRT 33,000 high capacity lines can be uncomfortable and Recife Caxanga, Brazil BRT 29,800 unsafe for passengers if tight passenger “packing” Belo Horizonte, Brazil BRT 21,100 becomes necessary. Goiania, Brazil BRT 11,500 Sao Paulo 9 de Julho BRT 34,911 Porto Alegre Farrapos BRT 25,600 4.4 FLEXIBILITY Porto Alegre Assis BRT 28,000 Unlike rail-based options which are by nature Quito Trolleybus BRT 15,000 more fixed, BRT allows a great deal of flexibility Curitiba Eixo Sul BRT 15,100 for future growth. Making new routings and Ottawa Transitway BRT 10,000 other system changes to match demographic changes or new planning decisions is fairly easily Capacity and patronage are cardinal points when accomplished. Bogotá’s plans for a phased BRT it comes to assessing the financial viability of an expansion (diagram following, and Figure 31) MRT. Capacities up to 30,000 passengers per provides a good example of matching technology hour per direction (pphpd) are currently han- to the dynamics of urban centres. dled by bus while capacities exceeding 35,000 Growing and changing with the city: pphpd can only be handled by Metros. The maximum recorded ridership of most LRT systems are limited to approximately 12,000 pphpd, although the Alexandria-Rami (Egypt) line serves 18,000 pphpd. Capacities up to 30,000 passengers per hour per TransMilenio 2001 TransMilenio 2015 direction (pphpd) are currently handled by bus TransMilenio, SA, Bogotá, Colombia while capacities exceeding 35,000 pphpd can only currently be handled by Metros. BRT systems provide greater flexibility than The necessity for very high capacity flows in part LRT in implementation and operation. depends upon the structuring of a system. Cities Improvements such as signal prioritization and such as London and New York are fairly dense interchanges, which improve capacity and bus and enjoy high usage of their Metro systems. speed, can be added incrementally. However, peak capacities are only in the area of Since buses approach and leave busways at inter- 20,000 – 30,000 pphpd. This occurs because mediate points, many different routes can serve these systems feature multiple lines distributing a passenger catchment area, with fewer passen- passenger flows about the city. In cities such as ger transfers than would be required in a fixed Hong Kong and Sao Paulo, the higher capacities guided system. This is an important feature of are achieved by offering a limited number of

4.5 SPEED Grade separated Metros, LRTs and BRTs can operate at high speeds. Street-running LRT systems like Alexandria-Madina (Egypt) perform less well due to interferences from street traffic and maintenance problems. A recent comparative study between BRT and LRT systems in the same city found that bus systems on segregated bus lanes can easily match urban rail transit in terms of velocity (Figure 31). Thus, low-cost bus systems can match the travel times of expensive rail systems. ��

��

�� Fig. 305 A medium term goal in Bogotá is to expand the ��

TransMilenio BRT system so that 85% of the �� city’s 7 million inhabitants live within 500m �� of a TransMilenio line. Such an expansion �� program would be unrealistic for a rail-based �� MRT system. �� Enrique Penalosa, 2001 ��

� Curitiba’s successful system, where express buses �� combine some feeder features at the extremity �� of the route, thereby minimising transfer needs �� Fig. 315 of passengers. Bus Rapid Transit can also more �� In five of six cities with both BRT and LRT closely match capacity and service quality to �� changing passenger demands and special events, ��systems, BRT speeds were higher. The one ��exception was Los Angeles, where the BRT and buses are more able to segregate the market, �� system does not provide dedicated bus lanes. providing a range of services (air-conditioned, �� GAO,2001 (from National Transit Database and six transit agencies) express, etc). �� “Expanding and adjusting a rail 4.6 INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY FOR system is much more costly and SUCCESSFUL IMPLEMENTATION complex” Institutionally, rail-based systems are demanding: Without high standards of operations, mainte- In terms of flexibility to expand and adapt to ��nance and administration [Metros]�� will rapidly a changing city, Bus Rapid Transit offers clear deteriorate [...]. The culture, managerial standards advantages over a rail-based system (Figure 30). and attitudes often found in bus companies and Expanding and adjusting a rail system is much railway corporations of developing countries are unsuitable for a Metro. Accordingly it is usually more costly and complex. Developing cities fol- necessary to set up a new institution with new lowing rail-based MRT approaches have quickly people and fresh ideas (Allport, 2000). encountered a need to expand their initial limited systems. Bangkok is a typical example; A BRT system also poses major institutional similar situations apply in Cairo, Shanghai, challenges. The need for a ‘new institution’ cited Buenos Aires, and virtually all developing cities above probably also applies to BRT in develop- which have developed rail-based MRT systems. ing cities, as the experience of Bogotá suggests. Bogota created a new institution to plan and regulate TransMilenio.

24 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 25 Sustainable Transport: A Sourcebook for Policy-makers in Developing Cities Module 3a: Mass Transit Options

The scope of the challenge TransMilenio & the private sector Various basic prerequisites of successful rail- TransMilenio S.A., a publicly owned company, based MRT projects include: provides PLANNING, MANAGEMENT, and < Corridors with outstanding trip volume CONTROL. (more than 700,000 trips per day) Infrastructure is developed and paid for by the local government: < More than 5 Million inhabitants or linear spatial development • Trunk lines • Stations < At least US$1800 per capita annual income at • Maintenance the city level facilities < A city management with positive experience • Complementary with traffic regulation infrastructure. < Integration of other modes/fares Fare collection is < Competitive fares managed by the private < A strong institutional framework sector: < Steady population growth combined with • Smart cards economic prosperity • Financial management and < City center growth (Allport, 2000). disbursements. Even where such circumstances exist, institu- Bus operations are tional capacity may be insufficient for Metro provided by through 4 implementation in developing cities. Even where concessioned private corridor size, city income, growth prospects, city sector bus companies centre growth, low cost alignment, fares policy, (plus an additional 7 city management, and Metro management companies providing needs are met, Allport (2000) compare the op- feeder services): tions and conclude that: • System operation • Bus procurement Metros are a different order of challenge, cost and • Employee management risk … most likely to be applicable to serve the • Maintenance. largest corridors of the biggest and more affluent developing cities. rail MRT systems in 2001. Reasons for the fail- Institutional challenges – and associated risks ure of the private sector involvement included: and costs – are much higher for rail-based MRT < Overestimation of demand compared to BRT. < Weak sectoral policies (no private car restraint; poor integration with buses; no Role of the private sector integrated land use and transport policies; Private sector involvement in MRT construction and a new tollway along a similar alignment) and operation can be highly beneficial to all par- < Inadequate institutional arrangements, ties, provided the government is able to establish with both fragmentation at the level of an appropriate regulatory setting. The case of implementation and excessive centralisation Bogotá provides an excellent illustration of how at the level of policy-making contributing to successfully draw upon the private sector to to a lack of transparency and a poor policy build and operate a BRT system (see text box). framework for making MRT investments. Buenos Aires is often cited as a success story of Bus-based systems throughout the develop- concessioning of suburban rail services to the ing world, on the contrary, are often operated private sector, although in the case of rail-based without subsidy by the private sector, even in systems the situation is more complicated in that a highly unconducive policy setting and poor the government will almost always be required to and deteriorating operating conditions. Where provide an ongoing subsidy. private sector involvement is well-regulated, In the case of Kuala Lumpur, this ongoing sub- a quality MRT service can be provided at a sidy resulted finally in the nationalisation of the relatively low fare, providing profit to the private sector operators and operating without subsidy.

Long term benefits of Supportive policy setting It may, however, be unrealistic to expect major reductions in road congestion in developing mass rapid transit Successful MRT projects require additional cities. MRT infrastructure projects have only Perhaps the major long- measures in urban transport policy. Ideally minor impacts on car ownership and use. Car term benefit of a mass infrastructural and institutional improvement rapid transit system, rail or ownership is generally more influenced by park- will complement one another. The high capital bus-based, is the effect it ing space supply and ownership costs rather costs of rail based MRT – and also but to a has in concentrating a city’s than by MRT supply. This applies particularly lesser extent BRT – will not be justified if short- development along transit- in traffic-saturated developing cities like Bangkok. comings in urban and transport planning offset accessible lines and nodes, In Bangkok, 10% of all BTS passengers were previ- the benefits and harm operating conditions. and resisting urban sprawl. ously car drivers, although there seems to be such Strong public transit sys- Supportive policy settings include transport de- a pent-up, suppressed demand that reductions in tems and transit-oriented mand management, suitable land use planning, congestion are quickly absorbed by new trips. development are an essential economic instruments, modal integration with ingredient in any strategy to non-motorised transport, public awareness and The smart office buildings that line the corridors reduce the level of “auto-de- support, viable financing, and so on (see Module of Curitiba’s bus system bear witness to the positive pendency” of a city. 3c: Bus Rapid Transit). This integrated and developmental impacts of Bus Rapid Transit Cairo’s MRT reduces comprehensive approach to transport planning (Figure 32). Businesses locate near bus lines and pressures for urban sprawl is evident in the successful MRT cases such as stations because of the synergies with customer This is evident for example in Cairo, Egypt, where an Bogotá, Curitiba, Singapore and Hong Kong. traffic. And likewise, the development helps provide a critical mass of customers to make the impressive 60km heavy rail Experience from several developing cities shows transit system economically viable. metro network along major that this supportive policy setting for MRT will corridors now carries 20% be easier to achieve where one institutional body MRT and development of all motorised passenger provides MRT planning and regulation. trips in Greater Cairo. Without Mass Rapid Transit stations help catalyse new the metro network, north- economic and employment opportunities by south corridors and the city 4.7 LONG TERM INFLUENCE ON CITY acting as nodes of development. centre would have been DEVELOPMENT overwhelmed by congestion, This has been the experience in Bogotá, with MRT and city form and development would have rising land values in the vicinity of TransMilenio been forced into peripheral Importantly for land use patterns and transit- stations and strong demand from land-owners areas much earlier (Metge, friendly development, nearly all MRT systems and businesses for the construction of stations 2000). enable continuing city centre growth. A mass in their local areas. Bogotá implemented an transit system is an indispensible aspect of a innovative value capture scheme in which the sustainable transport system for a large city, and windfall benefits to landowners in the form of in developing countries can play an important rising land values was partially diverted to help role in shaping future development of the city, fund the construction of the stations. leading to a transit-friendly city form. Rail-based MRT systems can have similar effects, though in the case of bus and rail the government plays a crucial role in promoting development around stations and along routes. However at the city-wide level the effects on city structure will be weaker than hoped for when unrestricted car use and weak building laws encourage urban sprawl and lower urban Fig. 324 densities. Hong Kong’s success, for example, Curitiba’s 5 BRT lines results both from a well-designed and highly are lined with high productive MRT-system and an enforced policy density apartments, of high-density residential or commercial areas offices and commercial around the stations. In Paris the concept of five developments. edge cities was fostered by the implementation Karl Fjellstrom, Feb. 2001 of a heavy rail system (RER) linking these edge

26 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 27 Sustainable Transport: A Sourcebook for Policy-makers in Developing Cities Module 3a: Mass Transit Options

cities with the center of Paris. In the city centre MRTs: Poor service for the the RER is integrated with the underground urban poor? network. However even in Paris, where the city We shouldn’t assume low centre is served by an excellent public transport fares are the most important system, car use has been increasing and densi- factor for low income users of ties falling, due to the lack of a policy of strong public transport in developing restriction of car use. cities. Surveys in the Indonesian cities of Denpasar and Surabaya, for example, 4.8 POVERTY ALLEVIATION have revealed that factors In the World Bank Urban Transport Strategy such as reliability, personal Review, Allport (2000) points to a ‘dilemma’ in safety, frequency, speed and MRT policy for developing cities: comfort (especially not being cramped) are often rated as At the centre of MRT policy for developing cities more important than low fares. is the apparent conflict between tackling poverty Fig. 335 Secondly, it may be mis- alleviation, for which affordable service is critical, A typical low income area of Cairo. Paratransit taken to assume that a high and attracting car users, for whom service quality provides a feeder service to the Metro terminus. quality MRT system would is critical. Karl Fjellstrom, Mar. 2002 necessarily be priced beyond Experience with BRT, and with quality bus the reach of poor users. High the outskirts and along traffic arteries. They are services in general, show this may be a false quality BRT systems in devel- heavily affected by noise and pollution. dilemma. Cases such as Curitiba, Bogotá, Sao oping cities can operate at a Paulo and Quito show that BRT systems in Improved transit possibilities will provide faster low fare. One of the success- developing cities can provide an excellent service access to work-places and enable more people es of Bogotá’s BRT is seen as its socially integrating effect, popular with high and low income users, and to work. The MRTs in Cairo, Mexico, Bogotá and elsewhere are used extensively by poor riders with rich and poor rubbing be profitable at a low fare. In comparison, rail shoulders in the bus. In many who profit from quick access to the city centre systems provide a more limited geographical ways it is a social experiment, coverage – especially for poorer people relying and hence additional employment possibilities. not just an MRT system. on road-based transit (see Figure 33). Mass Rapid Transit can play an important role in alleviating – or exacerbating – poverty. It is the poorest people who most depend upon public transit for access to jobs and services. In some cities the urban poor pay up to 30% of their income on transport. The poor also typically live in lower rent areas on the outskirts of the city (see Figure 34), and in some cases spend two to four hours commuting each day. Most importantly, public funds which are not poured into road-building and rail can be spent on improving health, education, public space and quality of life of the urban poor. Concentrating on the transport modes of poor people calls for the provision of affordable forms of public transport, although public transport Fig. 345 should not be viewed as only for the poor, as Miami, Buenos Aires, Paris... The rail-based MRT systems of Sao Paulo wealthy European and Asian cities show. probably seem as inaccessible as the cities advertised on the billboards to the Large cities in the developing world are centres urban poor living on the outskirts of Sao Paulo. Bus Rapid Transit, with of economic growth and magnets for poor its potentially greater geographical reach, offers more hope to low income people from the countryside, who often settle in communities on the outskirts of all developing cities. Karl Fjellstrom, Feb. 2002

4.9 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Table 12: Trends in public transport use in an Energy use by different transport modes, which international sample of cities, 1970 to the mid is closely related to emissions, is presented in 1990s Table 11. Rail is the most environmentally Barter 1999; GTZ SUTP friendly type of MRT in terms of energy use per Percent of all motorised trips by public transport person-kilometre, though only where occupancy 1970 1980 1990 ‘93–’96 is very high. Emissions vary greatly depending Tokyo 65 51 48 ? on the power source used to generate electric Hong Kong ? traction (for rail), and the bus and fuel technology in a BRT system. In addition, not all developing Seoul 81 74 63 ? nation rail systems are electrified, and thus there Singapore 42 ? ? 51 are sometimes local emission impacts. Manila ? 70 67 70 From an environmental perspective, however, Bangkok 53 ? 39 ? the main point to note is that virtually all MRT Kuala Lumpur 37 33 32 24 systems offer environmental advantages to the Jakarta 61 58 52 53 extent that they replace trips by private motor Surabaya ? 36 35 33 vehicles. Perhaps most important in the long term, in terms of reducing emissions, is the house gases, noise, and visual intrusion. Table impact of an MRT system on the modal split, 12 describes the progressive decline of public or percentage of people travelling by public transport in a selection of cities. There are some and private transport modes. In this regard exceptions in cities which have experienced in- experience shows that in developing cities it is creasing shares of passenger-kilometres by transit the BRT systems such as Bogotá and Curitiba (e.g. Zurich, Vienna, Washington and New that have enabled public transit to maintain or York: WBCSD, 2001) and increasing transit even increase modal share compared to private modal shares (e.g. Singapore), but in general transport. In other cities public transit has the trend is for declining transit modal shares of tended to decline, with corresponding negative around 1 – 2% per year in large cities. environmental impacts not just in terms of local In the longer term, then, the MRT systems pollutant emissions, but also in terms of green- which can be expected to have the best environmental impact are those which can halt Table 11: Energy use per passenger kilometre, or reverse the declining modal share of public various modes and operating conditions transport. In the case of lower income develop- Armin Wagner, 2002, from various sources ing cities such an impact on overall modal Energy use per share in the city is probably possible only with System passenger-km bus-based MRT, rather than rail. Due to the [Watt-hours] larger cost, new rail systems can be developed in Bicycle (20 km/h) 22 only very limited areas of a developing city, and Highly occupied Metro-systems 79 do not have the capacity of BRT to reach and (Tokyo, Hong Kong) cover larger areas, or the flexibility to adapt to a Buses (Khartoum, Sudan) 99 changing and expanding city. Buses (Occupancy 45%) 101 Paratransit (Mini-Bus, Khartoum) 184 In terms of air quality the crucial factor in Less occupied Metro systems developing cities is not so much the emission 184 - 447 such as Germany performance of the different MRT modes, but Metro (occupancy 21%) 240 rather their potential in getting people out of Paratransit (occupancy 67%/ cars and off motorcycles, and into transit. To the 317 Minibus/Aleppo (Syria)) extent that a BRT system can do this better than Rail-based systems USA (22,5 a rail system (with much more limited coverage), 577 passengers per unit/USA) BRT has a greater positive environmental Buses (8,9 passengers / USA) 875 impact.

28 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 29 Sustainable Transport: A Sourcebook for Policy-makers in Developing Cities Module 3a: Mass Transit Options

5. Conclusion

After comparing MRT options, in general we can conclude that there are few reasons for developing cities to favour rail-based systems where passenger capacities would be less than 25,000 passengers per hour per direction. Unless specific circumstances apply – such as when visual image of the system is quite important and a city is sufficiently wealthy to handle the higher capital and operational costs – this kind of rail-based transit for developing cities compares unfavourably with BRT systems on most terms, and especially for key parameters such as cost, flexibility, time frame, and institutional demands. There is however no single “right” transit solution. The best system for a city will depend on local conditions and preferences and will involve “Think rail, use bus.” a combination of technologies. Bus Rapid Transit may not be the solution in every situation. When passenger flows are extremely high and space for busways is limited, other options may be better, such as rail-based public transit; although we have seen that BRT can accommo- date passenger volumes to match demand even in very large cities. In reality, it is not always just a choice between bus and rail, as cities like Sao Paulo, Brazil have shown that Metro and BRT systems can work together to form an integrated transport package. It must however be recalled that city investments in Mass Rapid Transit systems come at a high opportunity cost. Funds used to build and sub- sidise the operation of a limited Metro could be used for schools, hospitals, and parks. Bus Rapid Transit has shown that high quality public transit that meets the needs of the wider public is neither costly nor extremely difficult to achieve. Many organisations are ready to help municipalities in developing cities make efficient public transport a reality. With political leader- ship, everything is possible.

Karl Fjellstrom, Jan. 2002 (Shanghai’s Hengshan Rd. Station)

Resource materials Urban Transport Strategy Review < Roger Allport, Urban Mass Transit in Reference on choice of MRT Developing Countries, Halcrow Fox, with The World Bank’s Urban Transport Strategy Traffic and Transport Consultants, 2000,http: Review includes a report which, like this module, //wbln0018.worldbank.org/transport/utsr.nsf offers advice on approaching Mass Rapid Transit < W.S. Atkins, Study of European Best Practice in options in developing cities. Urban Mass Transit the Delivery of Integrated Transport, Summary in Developing Countries (Roger Allport, Halcrow Report, Nov. 2001, www.cfit.gov.uk/research/ Fox, with Traffic and Transport Consultants, 2000), includes an excellent discussion of the ebp/exec/index.htm impacts, challenges and risks of rail-based < Jason Chang, Taipei Bus Transit System and projects, although in general it fails to draw Dedicated Bus Lane, International Workshop out the experience of ‘world best’ Bus Rapid on High Capacity Bus Systems, New Delhi, Transit applications such as Bogotá, since it India, 20 Jan. 2002. was released only months after the TransMilenio < Robert Cervero, The Transit Metropolis: A system began operation. Major sections of the Global Enquiry, Island Press, 1998. report include: < United States General Accounting Office • MRT options (GAO), Bus Rapid Transit Shows Promise, • MRT role Report to Congressional Requesters, • Research results Sept. 2001, www.altfuels.com/PDFs/ • Scale of challenge GAOBRTstudy.pdf. • Attitudes to MRT • Forecasting MRT impacts < Gregory Ingram, World Bank, Patterns of • Planning for tomorrow Metropolitan Development: What Have We • The private sector approach Learned?, Urban Studies, Vol. 35, No. 7, 1998 • Affordability and the private sector < International Finance Corporation (IFC), • Public transport integration Bangkok Mass Transit (Skytrain) Externalities • Economic viability Study, prepared by Policy Appraisal Services et • Poverty alleviation al., July 2001 (unpublished) • Land use and city structure < Alexandre Meirelles, A Review of Bus Priority • The environment Systems in Brazil: from Bus Lanes to Busway • MRT planning Transit, Smart Urban Transport Conference, • Implementation and operations Brisbane, 17–20 Oct. 2000. This report can be obtained downloaded free of charge at the Urban Transport Strategy < Hubert Metge, The Case of Cairo, Egypt, World Bank Urban Transport Review web site, http://wbln0018.worldbank.org/ transport/utsr.nsf Strategy Review, Nov. 2000, http:// Many more online resources on MRT topics wbln0018.worldbank.org/transport/utsr.nsf can be obtained through the Univ. of Nottingham’s < Peter Newman & Jeff Kenworthy, Sustainable Urban Travel: Comprehensive Sustainability and Cities: Overcoming bibliography lists of relevant contacts, addresses, Automobile Dependence, Island Press, and worldwide Websites, www.nottingham.ac.uk/ Washington, 1999. sbe/planbiblios/bibs/sustrav/ < Philip Sayeg, Smart Urban Transport Magazine, www.smarturbantransport.com 2001, < Thomson, I., UN Economic Commission < David Shen et al., At-Grade Busway Planning for Latin America and the Caribbean Guide, Florida International University, Dec. (UNECLAC), The Impact of Social, Economic 1998, www.cutr.eng.usf.edu/research/nuti/ and Environmental Factors on Public Transport busway/Busway.htm in Latin American Cities, International < Transit Cooperative Research Program Seminar on Urban Transport, Nov. 2001, (TCRP), Transit Capacity and Quality of Bogotá, Colombia Service Manual, Kittelson & Associates, < World Bank, Cities on the Move: An 1999, www.trb.org (many excellent reports Urban Transport Strategy Review, 2001, available for download) www.worldbank.org/transport

30 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 Sustainable Transport: A Sourcebook for Policy-makers in Developing Cities

30 This is for demonstration purposes only. A full colour print version available from GTZ from March 2003 Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH Dag-Hammarskjold-Weg 1-5 Postfach 51 80 65726 Eschborn Telefon (0 61 96) 79-1357 Telefax (0 61 96) 79-7194 Internet: www.gtz.de

Sourcebook enquiries: [email protected] [email protected] www.sutp-asia.org

On behalf of: