the macrobus system of guadalajara

THE MACROBUS SYSTEM OF GUADALAJARA:
AN EVOLVED CONCEPT IN BRT PLANNING AND
IMPLEMENTATION FOR MEDIUM CAPACITY CORRIDORS
Dario Hidalgo, PhD
EMBARQ, The WRI Center for Sustainable Transport
Yorgos Voukas, German Freiberg,
Amilcar Lopez , Saul Alveano
Center for Sustainable Transport, Mexico
NACTO BRT Workshop #1
New York City
April 6-7, 2010
Sustainable
Urban Transport
•
Pedestrian and
Bicycles
•
Public Transportation
•
Transit Oriented
Development
•
Disincentives to Car
Use
http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/images/sidewalks/ps_rendering01.JPG
What is a Bus Rapid Transit system?
“Is a flexible, rubber-tired form
of rapid transit that combines
stations, vehicles, services,
running ways and ITS elements
into an integrated system with
strong identity”
TCRP Report 90 – Bus Rapid Transit – Volume
2: Implementation Guidelines 2003
“It is a high quality public
transport system, oriented to
the user that offers fast,
comfortable and low cost urban
mobility”
BRT Planning Guide – ITDP, 2007
Photo: Karl Fjelstrom - ITDP
BRT Key Components
Centralized Control
Distinctive Image
Stations with
Prepayment and
Level Boarding
Large Buses
Multiple Wide
Doors
Segregated
Median
Busways
Component
“High End” BRT
Running
Ways
•
Longitudinal Segregation
Traffic
Engineering
•
•
•
•
Geometric Adjustments
Left and Right Turn Controls
Traffic Signal Priorities for Buses
Modern Traffic Signal Technology
Stations
•
•
•
Enclosed Facilities
Level Boarding and Prepayment
Passing Lanes (when required)
Vehicles
•
•
•
Multiple doors
Easy Boarding/Alighting
Low Emissions
Services
•
•
Mixed services (local, accelerated, express; short loops)
Design according to the service needs
ITS
•
•
•
Automatic Vehicle Location/Centralized Control
Traffic Signal Priority
Electronic Fare Collection/Fare Integration
Component
“High End” BRT
Quality of Service
• High User Acceptance
Travel Time
• Easily Accessible
• Low waiting time
• High commercial speed
Reliability
• Low variability (intervals, speeds)
• Low breakdowns, incidents
Comfort
• Accepatable Occupancy Levels (buses, platforms)
• Good user information
• Seamless integration with other transport modes
• Perception of safety and security
Cost
• Relative low capital and operational costs
• High capital and operational productivity
Externalities
•
•
•
•
Low level of accidents (fatalities, injuries)
Low emissions
Congestion relief (attraction of motor vehicle users)
Increased land values
About 68 systems in developed and
developing countries
11
15
20
2
16
4
USA-Canada
Latin America
Europe
Africa
Asia
Australia-New Zealand
Curitiba, RIT, 72 km median busways
1.2 million pax/day
Initial Corridor 1974
Quito, Metrobús-Q, 37 Km median busways,
440,000 pax/day
Initial corridor in 1995
Bogotá, TransMilenio, 84 Km median
busways, 1,6 million pax/day
Initial Corridor 2000
Photo ITDP
Bogotá TransMilenio
Eje Ambiental Avenida Jiménez
Expressway Lanes
TransMilenio, Bogota
Sao Paulo, 104 Km median busways +
preferential buslanes, 5,761,000 pax/day
Initial busways 1980, Reconstructed in 2003
León de Guanajuato, México, Optibús, 25 Km
median busways (60% segregated)
Initial corridor 2003
México City, Metrobús, 30 Km median busways,
450,000 pax/day
Initial Corridor 2005
Pereira, Colombia, Megabús, 27 Km Busways,
155,000 pax/day
Initial Operation in 2006
Pereira, Colombia
Photos courtesy of Megabus,
Pereira, Colombia
Guayaquil, Ecuador,
Metrovía,
16 Km Busways,
96,000 pax/day
Initial Corridor 2006
Photos by D. Hidalgo
Santiago, Chile, 19 Km busways + 63 Km of road improvements,
Integrated Network for 5 Million Trips/day
Initial Operation in 2007
Guatemala City, February 2007
Photo: Sapfan (Jan Pesula)
Photo: Metrocali
Cali, Colombia 27 Km busways
130,000 pax/day
Initial Operation in 2009
“Green Line” Curitiba
18 Km busway
2010
Photos: Prefeitura de Curitiba, Parana
Bucaramanga, Colombia
8.4 Km busways
14 Km prority buslanes
Started Operation in Dec 2009
http://www.metrolinea.gov.co/index.php?option=
com_content&view=article&id=39
Guadalajara, Jalisco, México
Area:
- City 151 km2 (58 square miles)
- Metro 2,734 km2 (1056 square miles)
Population (2008)
- City 1,579,174
- Density 10,458/km2 (27,227/square mile)
- Metro 4,300,000
- Metro Density 1,572/km2 (4,071/square mile)
Macrobús, Guadalajara, México
16 Km, 27 Stations, 41 Articulated Buses + 103 Feeder Buses
Macrobús, Guadalajara, México
Initial Operation:
March 10, 2009
Total Ridership:
127,000 passengers/day
Peak Load:
5,000 passengers/hour/direction
Commercial Speed:
20.8 km/hour (12.2 mph)
Operational Productivity:
10 passengers/bus-km
(5.9 boardings/bus-mile)
Capital Productivity:
3,100 passengers/bus/day
Infrastructure Investment:
USD 46.2 million
USD 2.9 million/km (USD 1.7 million/mile)
Equipment Investment:
~USD 15 million
USD 0.9 million/km (USD 0.5 million/mile)
User Fare:
USD 0.38/trip (+ 0.08 feeder + 0.19 LRT)
Macrobús, Guadalajara, México
Good integration with Light Rail and feeder services
Wide stations with adequate space for internal circulation and sliding
doors
Passing lanes in every station
Good pavements and protection devices for the bus lanes;
Buses with advanced emission control (Euro IV) and use of ultra low
sulfur Diesel
Wide zebra crossings at signalized intersections
Good static information, including maps, signs, and instructions
consistent with the overall system image
Smaller occupancy standards than similar systems in Latin America
Flexible payment system: coins + smartcard
Macrobus, Guadalajara, Mexico
Component
“High End” BRT
Running
Ways
•
Longitudinal Segregation
Traffic
Engineering
•
•
•
•
Geometric Adjustments
Left and Right Turn Controls
Traffic Signal Priorities for Buses
Modern Traffic Signal Technology
Stations
•
•
•
Enclosed Facilities
Level Boarding and Prepayment
Passing Lanes (when required)
Vehicles
•
•
•
Multiple doors
Easy Boarding/Alighting
Low Emissions
Services
•
•
Mixed services (local, accelerated, express; short loops)
Design according to the service needs
ITS
•
•
•
Automatic Vehicle Location/Centralized Control
Traffic Signal Priority
Electronic Fare Collection/Fare Integration
Component
Advances
Elements to Improve
Running
Ways
• Strong longitudinal segregation
• Median Busways
• Good pavement structure
• Geometry in selected points
(narrow returns)
• Quality of the reflective material
Traffic
Engineering
• Left turning movements
eliminated
• Adequate Changes in Roadway
Geometry
• Signs to channel left detours
• Complete pedestrian crossing in
far side of stations
• Complete traffic signals
Stations
• Wide enclosed facilities
• Level Boarding and Prepayment
• Passing lanes for express routes
• Complete interior signage
• Open far side doors and
pedestrian crossings (expected)
Vehicles
• Articulated vehicles (18 m), with
Euro IV ULSD
• Easy Boarding/Alighting
• Improve internal ventilation
Services
• Combination of local and express • Adjust service plan to demand
services
• Introduce dual services (feeder +
• Integrated feeder services
trunk, to reduce transfers)
ITS
• CCTV, Centralizad Dispatch
• Central control and dispatch
• Variable message signs
Component
Advances
Elements to Improve
Running
Ways
• Strong longitudinal segregation
• Median Busways
• Good pavement structure
• Geometry in selected points
(narrow returns)
• Quality of the reflective material
Traffic
Engineering
• Left turning movements
eliminated
• Adequate Changes in Roadway
Geometry
• Signs to channel left detours
• Bus priority systems
Stations
• Wide enclosed facilities
• Level Boarding and Prepayment
• Passing lanes for express routes
• Improve internal signage
Vehicles
• Articulated vehicles (18 m), with
Euro IV ULSD
• Easy Boarding/Alighting
• Improve internal ventilation (AC?)
• Secure hangers
Services
• Combination of local and express
• Introduce dual services (feeder +
services
trunk, to reduce transfers)
• Feeder services
ITS
• CCTV, Centralized Dispatch
• Automatic Vehicle Location
• Variable message signs
Component
“High End” BRT
Quality of Service
• High User Acceptance
Travel Time
• Easily Accessible
• Low waiting time
• High commercial speed
Reliability
• Low variability (intervals, speeds)
• Low breakdowns, incidents
Comfort
• Acceptable Occupancy Levels (buses, platforms)
• Good user information
• Seamless integration with other transport modes
• Perception of safety and security
Cost
• Relative low capital and operational costs
• High capital and operational productivity
Externalities
•
•
•
•
Low level of accidents (fatalities, injuries)
Low emissions
Congestion relief (attraction of motor vehicle users)
Increased land values
Component
Advances
Elements to Improve
User
Acceptance
• High users approval (90%) and
rate (7.8 out of 10)
• Monitor user perception
through periodic surveys
• Enhance user education,
especially on the use of card
vending/recharging machines
Travel Time
• Good accessibility through atgrade pedestrian crossings at
signalized intersections
• Acceptable frequency: 5 minute
intervals
• High Commercial speed: 20.8
km/hour
• Complete the implementation
of traffic signals for
pedestrians
• Further increase the
commercial speed for buses
through improved driver’s
training
Reliability
• Regular dispatch at terminal
points using radio controlled
operations
• Complete the implementation
of automatic vehicle location
(GPS) for the bus fleet
Component
Advances
User
Acceptance
• High users approval (90%) and
rate (7.8 out of 10)
• Enhance user education
Travel Time
• Good accessibility through atgrade pedestrian crossings at
signalized intersections
• Acceptable frequency: 5 minute
intervals
• High Commercial speed: 20.8
km/hour
• Further increase the
commercial speed for buses
through bus priority at
intersections
• Regular dispatch at terminal
points using radio controlled
operations
• Complete the implementation
of automatic vehicle location
• Monitor and manage reliability
Reliability
Elements to Improve
Component
Advances
Elements to Improve
Comfort
• Bus stations provide very good
protection - wide, tall and well
ventilated
• Bus occupancy, especially in
non peak hours is low
• Very good and comprehensive
maps, signs
• Good connectivity with other
modes
• Improve the ventilation inside
the buses
• Activate variable message
signs in stations to provide
real time information on bus
arrivals
• Introduce dual services
Cost
• Low capital investment cost
(USD 3.8 million /km)
• Low operational costs (USD
1.9/ bus-km trunk services)
• Collect data on capital and
operational productivity
Externalities
• Expected reductions in
emissions, accidents, urban
development
• Monitor and report
externalities (accidents,
emissions, land use
development)
Component
Advances
Elements to Improve
Comfort
• Bus stations provide very good
protection - wide, tall and well
ventilated
• Bus occupancy, especially in
non peak hours is low
• Very good and comprehensive
maps, signs
• Good connectivity with other
modes
• Activate variable message
signs in stations to provide
real time information on bus
arrivals
• Introduce dual services
Cost
• Low capital investment cost
(USD 3.8 million /km)
• Low operational costs (USD
1.9/ bus-km trunk services)
• Collect data on capital and
operational productivity
Externalities
• Expected reductions in
emissions, accidents, urban
development
• Monitor and report
externalities (accidents,
emissions, land use
development)
Key Questions About the System
Was BRT the best technological option for transit
improvement in the selected corridor?
Was it appropriate to start operations without all the
components in place?
Are trunk-feeder operations better than an open
system?
How much is the reserved capacity?
Cost Benefit-Analysis
16 Km, 5K pax/hour/direction, 100K pax/day,
Average Trip Distance 8 Km, Value of Time USD 0.7/hour
400
43
49
14
8
Present Value 12% 20 Years
(USD Million)
200
162
48
32
147
31
24
113 56
31
16
-200
Do Nothing
Busway-28
Light Rail
Metro
BRT -104
-400
-600
-800
-866
-1,000
-1,068
-1,200
-1,400
-1,368
-1,600
-1,609
-1,800
Time Savings
Operational Cost Savings
Other Benefits
Costs
Net Benefits
Incomplete implementation did not cause
major disruptions of the service
BRT operations improved transport conditions for
most users, even with incomplete components at
the beginning
All the components were completed in the first
fourth months
Gradual implementation also allowed for focused
attention on critical aspects
Political interference was reduced (commissioning
happened before the start of local elections
campaigns)
Most convenient operational design
Feeder- trunk (closed system)
Very good control of the trunk
section
Enhanced speed, capacity and
reliability, in the trunk section
Reduced fleet and vehicle-km;
reduced emissions and
decreased system costs
High proportion of the trips
requiring at least one transfer.
May result in user
inconvenience and lack of
system acceptance
Open system
Direct connections to the users
without the need for transfers,
Increased fleet, costs and
emissions.
Control in the trunk section is
difficult and operations are
slower and unreliable
Dual – Hybrid Operation
Reduced transfers; higher user
acceptace
Good control in the trunk
section
Controlled costs (fleet, vehiclekm)
How much is the reserved capacity?
Nsp
Ca[Pax/hou r]   X i 
i 1
3600[sec/h our]
 Cp[Pax/bus ]
Tsb[sec/bu s]  (1  Diri )  To[sec/bus ]
Ca[pax/hour]
Capacity in a given section, passengers per hour per
direction
Nsp
Number of stoping bays
Tsb[sec/bus]
Loading/undloading time.
To [sec/bus]
Interval between two succesive buses
(1-Diri)
Percent of the buses that stop at the stoping bay
Cp[pax/bus]
Bus load
Xi
Accepted saturation level
A
B
A
B
Tsb[sec/bus]
16.3
16.3
Tsb[sec/bus]
16.3
16.3
To [sec/bus]
14.5
14.5
To [sec/bus]
14.5
14.5
(1-Diri)
50%
50%
(1-Diri)
50%
50%
Cp[pax/bus]
150
150
Cp[pax/bus]
110
110
Xi
0.6
0.6
Xi
0.6
0.6
14,305
14,305
10,490
10,490
Bus Bay
Ca[Pax/hora]
Total Practical
Capacity [Pax/hora]
28,610
5.7 times
Bus Bay
Ca[Pax/hora]
Total Practical
Capacity [Pax/hora]
20,980
4.2 times
Lessons from Guadalajara
The BRTS has been a successful project: rapid
implementation, relative low cost, high quality, good
performance and high user acceptance
The BRT improved the current practices in Latin
America: median busways with good pavements,
strong segregation, wide/well ventilated stations,
passing lanes, good operational planning
System has extraordinary reserved capacity
The system still requires some improvements,
especially the implementation of a performance
monitoring system to enhance reliability and comfort
Guadalajara BRTS:
important reference for transit
professionals considering
low cost, rapid
implementation, high impact
transit alternatives
¡Gracias!
Diego Monraz, SITEUR
Sebastian Nieto, MACROBUS
Enrique Hernandez (SDG), Aleida Martinez (SI99), Claudio Varano (Consultants)
Universidad de Guadalajara
D.K. Radio
EMBARQ Global Strategic Partners
CATERPILLAR FOUNDATION
CTS Mexico – Guadalajara Project Partners
Hewlett Foundation
Andean Development Corporation CAF
www.embarq.org