brt as a precursor of lrt?
DESCRIPTION
BRT as a Precursor of LRT?. Lyndon Henry Data Analyst Capital Metro • Austin, Texas. David Dobbs Publisher, Light Rail Now! Website. TRB/APTA Joint Light Rail Transit Conference Los Angeles 20 April 2009. BRT as Precursor to Rail (Already). Guadalajara. Dallas. Miami. Seattle. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
BRT as a Precursor of LRT?
Lyndon HenryData Analyst
Capital Metro • Austin, Texas
TRB/APTA Joint Light Rail Transit Conference
Los Angeles
20 April 2009
David DobbsPublisher, Light Rail Now! Website
BRT as Precursor to Rail (Already)
• Guadalajara
• Dallas
• Miami
• Seattle
• Los Angeles
BRT vs. LRT – Comparative Issues
• BRT investment total cost typically lower (but total life-cycle costs may be higher)
• Signal protection system? Compatible?• BRT can use existing maintenance
facilities, but these may need expansion• Rail – longer life, higher salvage value• Rail – tends to attract more riders, longer
trips, lower unit O&M costs, more TOD
More…
• BRT – major investment with 30-year life, possibly impediment to LRT
• Curbside alignments not optimal
• BRT typical cross-section: 20-54 ft• LRT typical cross-section: 30-35 ft• Different horizontal and vertical geometric
constraints and vehicle envelopes of BRT buses and LRT railcars
• If eventual conversion planned, LRT design requirements should rule
BRT as Precursor to LRT – Advantages
• Build ridership in corridor, bolster case for LRT
• Some infrastructure elements could benefit LRT (e.g., signal prioritization, communications, PID system)
• Urban renovation elements (e.g., pedestrian amenities) could benefit LRT
• Stations, if movable/upgradable, could benefit LRT
Case Examples
Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel
• 1.3 miles long, and has five stations• Intended for conversion to LRT, with tracks laid in
the busway pavement • Rails insufficiently insulated against stray current
leakage, insufficiently cushioned for noise control• Platforms too low to permit level boarding• $45 million overhaul necessary
Seattle: I-90 Transit/HOV Project and East Link LRT
Seattle: SR-99 RapidRide
• Pacific Highway South/International Boulevard (State Route 99)
• Intended to build transit ridership for eventual rail extensions
• Minimalist design, including mixed-traffic operation and lack of heavy infrastructure, may make conversion more feasible
Ottawa: Transitway
• 16.0 miles dedicated “transitways" (busways), 26 stations + 1.2 route-miles CBD reserved lanes + 2.0 miles of mixed-traffic running + 6.6 miles of freeway shoulder lanes = 25.8 route-miles
• Severe CBD bus crowding
Ottawa BRT-to-LRT Conversion Problems
• Service disruption during conversion• Value for money not sufficient to justify
conversion
Austin: Capital MetroRapid
• Limited-stop service operating in mixed traffic
• 2 routes: N. Lamar/S. Congress and Burnet/S. Lamar.
• Lamar-Guadalupe-Congress route may build transit ridership for eventual LRT
• Minimalist design, low cost ($28 to$38 million) may make conversion to LRT more feasible
Conclusions
Conclusions
• Initial system design to facilitate conversion is critical
• BRT facilities should not represent an obstacle to the subsequent LRT
• BRT-specific infrastructure (including stations) should be designed to be very low in cost so sunk cost for BRT is not impediment to eventual conversion to LRT
More…
• Conversion of “high-end” exclusive BRT facilities to LRT tend to involve some degree of transit service shutdown or disruption during conversion process
• In contrast, “lower-end” express-bus or limited-stop types of BRT service can probably continue parallel service on adjacent highway or arterial lanes during conversion period
More…
• Alignments that have appropriated railway ROW for BRT make it virtually impossible to maintain a true parallel bus service – thus representing a serious obstacle facing conversion to LRT
• As planned BRT-to-LRT conversions become operational, updated assessments should be performed.