Quantifying the Benefits of Bus Rapid Transit Elements August 2010 FTA-DC-26-7308-2010.1 Quantifying the Benefits of Bus Rapid Transit Elements Funded by the Federal Transit Administration Project Manager: Helen M. Tann Transportation Program Specialist FTA Office of Mobility Innovation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 1 Quantifying the Benefits of Bus Rapid Transit Elements Project Team: William Vincent, Breakthrough Technologies Institute John Niles, Global Telematics Elizabeth Delmont, Breakthrough Technologies Institute Sandra Curtin, Breakthrough Technologies Institute August 2010 NOTICE This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. The United States Government does not endorse products of manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this report. 2 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors wish to thank Mr. Walter Kulyk, Mr. Venkat Pindiprolu, and Ms. Helen Tann of FTA’s Office of Mobility Innovation for their support and guidance in implementing this project. The authors also want to thank the many organizations that participated in the workshop organized at the beginning of this project, including: • Chicago Transit Authority • Center for Urban Transportation Research/National Bus Rapid Transit Institute, University of South Florida • Federal Transit Administration • Lane Transit District • City of Los Angeles • Maryland Transit Administration • Montgomery County DOT • Nelson/Nygaard • Pace Suburban Bus • Parsons Brinckerhoff • Santa Clara VTA • University of Washington • Washington State DOT • Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority • The World Bank The authors would also like to thank the transit agencies that provided data for this project: • Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority • TransLink Vancouver, British Columbia • Metro Transit King County, Washington • Chicago Transit Authority • Lane Transit District, Eugene, Oregon • Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada, Las Vegas • Kansas City Area Transportation Authority • Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority • York Region Transit, Ontario 3 Form Approved REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMB No. 0704-0188 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES August 2010 COVERED 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING/GRANT Quantifying the Benefits of Bus Rapid Transit Elements NUMBER 6. AUTHOR(S William Vincent, John Niles, Elizabeth Delmont, Sandra Curtin DC-26-7308 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT Breakthrough Technologies Institute Global Telematics NUMBER 1100 H Street, NW. Suite 800 4005 20th Avenue West, Suite 111 Washington, DC 20005 Seattle, Washington 98199 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSORING/MONITORING Federal Transit Administration AGENCY REPORT U.S. Department of Transportation Website: NUMBER 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE http://www.fta.dot.gov/research Washington, DC 20590 FTA-DC-26-7308-2010.1 11. SUPPLEMNTARY NOTES 12a. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE Available From: National Technical Information Service (NTIS), Springfield, VA 22161. Phone 703.605.6000, Fax 703.605.6900, Email [[email protected]] 13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words). The purpose of this study was to quantify the benefits of elements of Bus Rapid Transit. Data was collected through voluntary surveys sent to transit agencies across North America, and information was solicited from European systems as well. The final data set included information on 119 individual rapid bus and BRT lines from 9 different transit agencies across North America. Agencies included Los Angeles, Eugene, King County, Vancouver, Las Vegas, Chicago, Kansas City, Washington D.C., and York Region. From the collected data, datasets were built for the AM peak, PM peak, and the combined AM/PM Peak. A stepwise regression was conducted using travel time as the dependant variable. Independent variables included route length, station density, dedicated lanes, traffic signal priority (TSP), low floor buses, and number of boarding doors. The effects of other BRT elements, such as off-board fare collection, are believed to be implicitly captured by the model. The results found significant and consistent travel time benefits for a number of BRT elements. However, the travel time benefits for TSP were not conclusive, in some cases showing decreased travel times, while in other cases showing increased travel times. Additional research is needed to better understand the travel time benefits of TSP. Moreover, future research would benefit from standardized data reporting and collection, to ensure that metrics and data are consistent across transit agencies. 14. SUBJECT TERMS: Bus rapid transit, BRT, elements, components, travel time 15. NUMBER OF PAGES savings, benefits, rapid bus 77 16. PRICE CODE 17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 18. SECURITY 19. SECURITY 20. LIMITATION OF OF REPORT CLASSIFICATION CLASSIFICATION ABSTRACT Unclassified OF THIS PAGE OF ABSTRACT Unclassified Unclassified 4 5 Contents ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................................................ 3 LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................................... 7 LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................................ 8 TABLE OF ACRONYMS ............................................................................................................................ 9 FOREWORD .............................................................................................................................................. 10 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................ 11 I. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 16 a. Background ..................................................................................................................................... 16 b. Study Objectives ............................................................................................................................. 17 c. Approach ......................................................................................................................................... 17 II. STUDY CONTEXT ............................................................................................................................ 18 a. Defining BRT .................................................................................................................................. 18 b. Description of BRT Routes Included in the Study.......................................................................... 21 i. Los Angeles, California- Metro Rapid and Orange Line Busway .............................................. 22 ii. Vancouver, British Columbia – B-Line and TransLink Frequent Service Network .................. 23 iii. King County, Washington – King County Metro ....................................................................... 24 iv. Chicago, Illinois - Express and Limited Bus Lines .................................................................... 24 v. Eugene and Springfield, Oregon- EmX ...................................................................................... 25 vi. Las Vegas, Nevada - MAX ........................................................................................................ 26 vii. Kansas City, Missouri - MAX .................................................................................................. 26 viii. Washington, DC Metro Area – Express Bus Service ................................................................ 27 ix. York Region, Ontario - VIVA ................................................................................................... 28 III. LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................................................... 30 a. Running Way .................................................................................................................................. 33 b. Stations ............................................................................................................................................ 34 c. Vehicles........................................................................................................................................... 36 d. Fare Collection ................................................................................................................................ 38 e. Intelligent Transportation Systems ................................................................................................. 39 f. Service and Operations ................................................................................................................... 42 g. Branding .......................................................................................................................................... 43 IV. QUANTIATIVE ASSESSMENT OF BRT ELEMENTS .............................................................