Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner's Guide (2007)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide Page S-1 Summary SUMMARY The Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide shows transportation professionals how to identify and assess the costs and impacts of the various features that make up a bus rapid transit (BRT) system. It covers running ways, stations, vehicles, service plans, intelligent transportation systems (ITS) applications, fare collection, and branding. It complements TCRP Report 90: Bus Rapid Transit and the FTA document Characteristics of Bus Rapid Transit for Decision-Making. WHAT IS BRT? BRT has been defined by the FTA as a “rapid mode of transportation that can provide the quality of rail transit and the flexibility of buses.” TCRP Report 90 expands this definition to “a rubber-tired form of rapid transit that combines stations, vehicles, services, running ways, and ITS elements into an integrated system with a strong image and identity.” In brief, BRT is an integrated system of facilities, equipment, services, and amenities that improves the speed, reliability, and identity of bus transit. BRT is, in many respects, rubber-tired light rail transit (LRT) with greater operating flexibility and potentially lower costs. WHY CONSIDER BRT? There are many reasons why communities consider BRT as a rapid transit option: • BRT can be implemented quickly and incrementally. • BRT can be the most flexible rapid transit mode for cost-effectively serving the broad variety of urban and suburban environments and markets in the United States and Canada. • BRT can operate on arterial streets; in freeway medians, on freeway shoulders, and alongside freeways; in railroad and other separate rights- of-way; and in tunnels. • BRT can accommodate express and local services on a single facility. • BRT can provide sufficient transport capacity for most urban corridors in the United States and Canada. • BRT can be less costly to implement than a rail transit line while providing similar benefits. • BRT has little additional implementation costs over local bus service where it runs on streets and highways. • BRT can be effectively integrated into the surrounding environment and can generate significant urban development benefits. WHERE SHOULD BRT BE CONSIDERED? BRT is especially desirable in large urban areas where peak-period and all-day passenger flows are sufficient to warrant frequent service and there is a sufficient presence of buses to justify dedicated running ways. The following thresholds are suggested: • There should be one or more strong anchors, such as the city center, and a large tributary area. Current experience suggests that, in the United States or Canada, urbanized area population generally should exceed 750,000 This Guide complements TCRP Report 90 and FTA’s Characteristics of Bus Rapid Transit Decision-Making. BRT provides the quality of rail transit with the flexibility of buses.

Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide Summary Page S-2 Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide and central business district (CBD) employment should be at least 50,000 (TCRP Report 90). However, a large university or other outlying major activity center may support a BRT route or system. • Desired trunk line BRT headways should be 8 to 10 minutes or shorter during peak periods and not more than 12 to 15 minutes during off-peak periods. • Ideally, there should be at least one BRT (and local) bus per traffic signal cycle where buses operate in a dedicated arterial street BRT lane. Accordingly, BRT systems should focus on at least one major activity center, preferably with limited and/or expensive parking. Usually, lines radiate from the city center; sometimes they connect with radial rail rapid transit lines, and, in very large urban areas, cross-town BRT lines may be appropriate. BRT also can be introduced into some areas with large existing or developing suburban activity centers to attract automobile trips to transit. The systems would be developed in stages as BRT ridership grows over time. In all cases, ridership potential should be sufficient to support frequent all-day and peak-period service. PLANNING BRT Communities contemplating BRT should have a clear vision of BRT needs and opportunities. BRT lines should be planned as an interconnected system of routes and incrementally developed, with the most promising links built first. BRT should be planned and developed through a process that stresses solving demonstrated current and forecast future problems and needs. Planning requires a realistic assessment of demands, costs, benefits, and impacts for a range of alternatives that includes a “base case” and may include one or more rail rapid transit options. Continuous community and decision-maker support is essential. Objectives BRT should provide attractive and reliably fast transit service that • Serves demonstrated current and forecast future transit demand and needs, • Provides reserve capacity for future growth, • Attracts automobile drivers to transit, • Relates to and reinforces transit and pedestrian-oriented development, and • Has affordable initial implementation and ongoing operating and maintenance costs. BRT plans should focus on major markets, take advantage of incremental development opportunities, and promote complementary “Transit First” policies. “Deconstruction” of a BRT system by removing elements critical to its success to cut costs should be avoided. The addition of unnecessary, capital cost–intensive features also should be avoided. Steps An open, objective planning process should meet FTA Alternatives Analysis Requirements for “New Starts” (more than $75 million in investment) and “Small Starts” (less than $75 million in investment). Each option should be compared with a “base case” that includes low-cost transportation system management treatments. The BRT planning process has five key steps: BRT can operate in many different configurations. Incremental development of BRT is possible.

Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide Page S-3 Summary 1. Establishing goals and objectives for transportation and related quality-of- life concerns 2. Evaluating current problems and future needs 3. Identifying investment alternatives, including running ways and stations 4. Evaluating each alternative in terms of costs, benefits, and community impacts (including ridership, travel times, constructability, operating feasibility, land development benefits, environmental effects, and capital and operating costs) 5. Selecting, refining, and detailing a preferred option (for which realistic and reliable estimates of costs, ridership, and benefits are essential) Principles The following principles should guide BRT planning, design, and development: • BRT should be developed as a permanently integrated system of facilities, services, and amenities. • The BRT system should provide the key attributes of rail transit to the maximum extent possible. • BRT should be complemented by appropriate Transit First policies. Examples include transit-oriented development, complementary downtown parking policies, and adequate park-and-ride space at outlying stations. • BRT should be rapid. It should operate on separate rights-of-way wherever possible and on wide, continuous, free-flowing streets where separate rights-of-way are unavailable or removed from markets. Wide station spacing (except in downtown areas) is desirable. Transit preferential treatments such as exclusive bus lanes, transit signal priority (TSP), queue jumps/bypass lanes, and curb extensions are desirable. • BRT systems should be capable of staged development. Subsequent development could include extending a BRT line, upgrading the running way, or building new lines. • BRT systems should be reasonable in their costs to the community, urban travelers (especially transit riders), and the transit agency. Investments should be balanced with present and likely future ridership. Systems should be designed to increase transportation capacity in heavily traveled corridors, reduce travel times for riders, and minimize total person delay in the corridors served. A basic goal should be to maximize person flow with the minimum net total person delay over the long run. • Streets and corridors with existing long, heavily traveled bus routes are likely candidates for BRT. Often, BRT development will involve restructuring existing bus routes to provide sufficient service frequency along the BRT route. • System design and operations should enhance the presence, permanence, and identity of BRT facilities and services. BRT must be more than just express service along a bus lane or busway. • BRT should have a consistent, appealing image. BRT vehicles, stations, and marketing materials should convey the image of BRT as a rapid, easy- to-use service. The Guide provides ten guiding principles for BRT planning, design, and development.

Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide Summary Page S-4 Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide • Each urban area has its own specific needs, opportunities, and constraints that must be recognized. Thus, BRT systems must be carefully customized in order to apply the various components, obtain public support, and translate plans into operating systems. RIDERSHIP Realistic and reliable ridership forecasts are essential to size system design features, develop service plans, estimate capital and operating costs, perform alternatives analysis and cost-benefit comparisons, and make sound investment decisions. Ridership forecasts are needed for different time periods pending the complexity of the BRT project. Forecast horizons for FTA New Starts funding include the base year, the opening year, the year when ridership reaches maturity, and a design year usually 20 years into the future. Estimates should be provided for peak and off-peak conditions by line segment and by station boardings and alightings. Travel time, service frequency, and fare elasticities can be used for smaller- scale projects, especially where BRT would operate along existing bus routes. An on-bus survey can identify desired travel patterns and demographic and socio- economic information. Allowance should be made for “new” trips—trips diverted from automobiles, trips not made previously, and trips made with greater frequency. Population and employment growth should be taken into account. Ridership for larger BRT projects can be estimated by the traditional four-step process—trip generation, trip distribution, mode split, and trip assignment—where the BRT operates on a new right-of-way (such as a busway). Household travel surveys can provide the basic information needed for modeling and analysis. Elasticity methods can be used where the BRT line would operate along an existing bus route. It is essential to recognize BRT’s unique physical and operating features in the demand forecasting process. Salient research studies of customer response to new BRT systems (or upgraded express bus service) have identified two findings: • The attractiveness of BRT systems, not unlike that of new rail systems, has been greater than might be expected on the basis of reductions in travel time, service frequency, and cost. • All things being equal (e.g., newness, component quality, system configuration and completeness in terms of all the elements of rapid transit, origin-to-destination travel times, reliability, and costs), BRT systems are likely to attract levels of ridership similar to those of rail-based systems. Studies of ridership based upon applying elasticities to arterial street BRT lines in Boston, Los Angeles, and Vancouver (BC) found that actual ridership was up by about 20% more than that resulting from improved travel times and service frequencies. Accordingly, a 25% increase in base ridership above the gains obtained by elasticity computations is a suggested upper limit for full-featured BRT. Common practice applies up to a 12-minute in-vehicle travel time “bias constant” for rail rapid transit. That is, the travel times for mode-split modeling purposes would be 12 minutes shorter for rail in comparison to local bus service. Accordingly, a maximum 10-minute bias constant is suggested for full-featured BRT. The amount of the bias constant that is applied will depend upon the quality and the extent of various BRT service features. The guidelines give suggested allocations of bias effects to each major BRT component (running ways, stations, Elasticities can be used to estimate ridership for smaller- scale BRT projects. The four-step model can be used to estimate ridership for BRT on separate rights-of-way.

Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide Page S-5 Summary vehicles, service patterns, ITS applications, and branding). The six individual major components add up to 85% of the bias constant. The remaining 15% of the bias constant represents component synergy that should be added when the subtotal is 60% or greater. Where site-specific data from preference surveys suggest other percentages, the site-specific data should be used. Transit agencies are encouraged to collect local data and/or derive percentages from customer surveys and share their findings with other transit agencies. Within each component, values were estimated according to the presence of specific features. For example, a high-level BRT system using a grade-separated busway with uniquely designed vehicles would have a bias constant of 9.5 minutes of in-vehicle travel time, while a minimal system operating on city streets would have a bias constant of 4.3 minutes of in-vehicle travel time (or increases in base ridership of 24% and 11%, respectively, when elasticities are used). COMPONENT PROFILES Chapter 4 of this Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide presents the characteristics, costs, and impacts of 17 BRT components and gives guidelines for developing and assessing the individual components. Each profile contains the following information: • Scale of application • Selected typical examples • Estimated costs (capital, operating) • Likely impacts (ridership, operating cost savings, land development, etc.) Where applicable, the profiles also include the following information: • Conditions of application • Design and operating features • Implementability (institutional factors) • Analysis tools (analogy/synthesis, analytical modeling, simulation) Profiles have been developed for the following components: • Running way components > Busways on separate rights-of-way > Arterial bus lanes > Transit signal priority > Queue jumps/bypass lanes > Curb extensions • Stations • Vehicles > Size of vehicle > Modern vehicle styling > Low-floor boarding > Fuel/propulsion technologies > Automatic vehicle location Site-specific data are preferred for identifying the added impacts of BRT attributes. The components of full-featured BRT have synergy. The Guide contains profiles for running ways, stations, vehicles, service plans, systems, and branding.

Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide Summary Page S-6 Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide > Driver assist and automation • Service and systems > Service plan features > Fare collection > Passenger information > Enhanced safety and security systems • Branding INTEGRATION AND ASSESSMENT BRT components should be packaged into an integrated system of services, facilities, and amenities that reflects specific needs, opportunities, and resources. All BRT systems have running ways, stations, vehicles, and service patterns. The types of these features and the types of various ITS components and branding depend upon specific local conditions. General Guidelines Developing BRT calls for identifying appropriate corridors, analyzing options, selecting desired BRT components, assessing these components, and preparing a preferred investment and operations plan. Key steps in developing and analyzing BRT service alternatives include the following: 1. Establish the Need. Considerations include (a) slow and unattractive local bus service; (b) peak-period congestion on major roadways; (c) continued (or anticipated) growth in CBD employment, urban population, and transit ridership; and (d) community desire to improve transit. 2. Identify the Market. Current and future land use and demographic characteristics should be clearly identified. Market segments include riders diverted from local bus and automobiles as well as new trips. Similarly, current and future transit ridership profiles—including origin- to-destination patterns, expected BRT ridership, and maximum load section (point) volumes—should be determined. Candidate markets include corridors with sufficient ridership potential to allow frequent all- day service (preferably at headways not greater than 10 to 12 minutes). A strong CBD (e.g., with more than 50,000 jobs) and high-density corridors are supportive of BRT. 3. Select Type of Running Way. Selecting the type of BRT running way depends upon (a) availability of off-street right-of-way within the proposed BRT corridors; (b) width, continuity, and operational characteristics of arterial streets; and (c) the ability to integrate BRT operation with existing transit service. 4. Recognize Public Preferences. Community and agency preferences regarding BRT routes should be taken into account. The public’s preference for a special BRT vehicle should have the support of the transit agency responsible for operating the BRT service. Similarly, operational treatments such as bus lanes, TSP, and queue jump/bypass lanes should have the support of the street transportation agencies. 5. Integrate BRT with Existing Bus Services. Existing bus routes on streets in or serving a BRT corridor may need to be restructured. Local routes should The Guide provides guidelines for integrating and assessing BRT components.

Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide Page S-7 Summary feed rather than duplicate the BRT service. Where BRT operates on busways, terminals or outlying stations can serve as focal points for connecting bus services. 6. Consider Funding Availability. Available resources for capital, operating, and maintenance requirements are essential. The funding available for BRT may influence the type and extent of BRT features and the staging of BRT service implementation. Where funding is limited, BRT may have to operate on city streets rather than on off-street busways (at least initially). Similarly, existing vehicles might have to be used initially (although distinctively colored). 7. Explore Development Opportunities. Opportunities for land development near BRT stations should be explored. They can have bearing on (a) the extent of the BRT system, (b) the location and design of stations, (c) the type of running way selected, and (d) ridership. Experience suggests that, under the right market conditions, BRT can influence development at major outlying busway stations (e.g., Ottawa) or along rebuilt urban streets with improved landscaping and sidewalks (e.g., Boston). Costs and Effects The costs and effects of various BRT components were derived from the information contained in the project profiles. Exhibit S-1 gives representative unit costs for running ways, transit preferential treatments, stations, vehicles, fare collection, passenger information systems, branding , and ITS. Right-of-way costs were excluded because they depend upon running way options and local circumstances. Exhibit S-2 and Exhibit S-3 give cost and travel time savings for various running way options and preferential treatments, respectively. The various costs and effects can be applied to any projected BRT route and the local bus routes in the same corridor. The key analysis steps for each alternative are shown in Exhibit S-4. Example BRT Development Scenarios Chapter 5 uses example BRT development scenarios (case studies) for a 15- mile BRT route to show how the steps in Exhibit S-4 were actually applied. The following six scenarios were analyzed: • Grade-separated busway (14 miles) and CBD bus lanes (1 mile) • At-grade busway (14 miles) and CBD bus lanes (1 mile) • Median arterial busway (5 miles), at-grade busway (5 miles), mixed traffic (4 miles), and CBD bus lanes (1 mile) • Bus lanes with TSP (10 miles), mixed traffic (4 miles), and CBD bus lanes (1 mile) • Bus lanes without TSP (10 miles), mixed traffic (4 miles), and CBD bus lanes (1 mile) • TSP in mixed traffic (15 miles) The Guide evaluates six example BRT scenarios (case studies).

Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide Summary Page S-8 Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide Exhibit S-1 Representative BRT Component Development Costs Component Unit Cost/Unit Running Way Off-street busway At-grade Grade-separated Elevated Tunnel Per route-mile Per route-mile Per route-mile Per route-mile $5 million $13 million $50 million $200 million On-street Median arterial busway Bus lane - new construction Bus lane - striping lane Per route-mile Per route-mile Per route-mile $4 million $25 million $100,000 Transit Preferential Treatments Queue bypass Parking removal Use of right turn lane Added lane Per approach Per approach Per approach Negligible Negligible $300,000 Curb extension Per extension $60,000 TSP Per intersection $30,000 Special transit phase Per intersection $10,000 Stations Typical Basic Enhanced Per station Per station $21,000* $30,000* Major At-grade Grade-separated Per station Per station $150,000 $2.5 million Intermodal center Per station $12.5 million Passing lane Per lane-mile $2.7 million Vehicles Conventional standard Per vehicle $325,000 Stylized standard Per vehicle $350,000 Conventional articulated Per vehicle $570,000 Stylized articulated Per vehicle $780,000 Specialized BRT Per vehicle $1.3 million Fare Collection On-board Magnetic card media Smart media Per vehicle Per vehicle $15,000 $20,000 Off-board Magnetic card media Smart media Per machine Per machine $60,000 $65,000 Passenger Information At-station information Per sign $6,000 On-board information Per vehicle $4,000 Branding Branding Per system Negligible ITS Applications On-board security Per vehicle $10,000 On-board vehicle guidance Optical/magnetic sensors Hardware integration Per mile Per vehicle $20,000 $50,000 On-board precision docking Optical/magnetic sensors Hardware integration Per station Per vehicle $4,000 $50,000 On-board performance monitoring Per vehicle $2,000 AVL Per vehicle $8,000 * One direction NOTE: Values are in 2004 U.S. dollars. Costs include engineering and design. SOURCE: TCRP Report 90 (TRB, 2003), Characteristics of Bus Rapid Transit for Decision-Making (FTA, 2004), TCRP Project A-23A Interim Report, A Compendium of Vehicles and Hybrid Drive Systems for Bus Rapid Transit Service (WestStart-CALSTART, 2005), and TCRP Synthesis 48.

Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide Page S-9 Summary Exhibit S-2 Cost and Travel Time Savings of Various Running Way Options Running Way Option Cost per Mile (millions) Time Savings per Mile (minutes) Cost per Minute Saved (millions) Partially grade-separated busway $13.00 4.30 $3.00 At-grade busway $5.00 3.60 1.40 Median arterial busway $4.00 1.50 2.70 Bus lane (rebuilt) $2.50 1.10* 2.30 Bus lane (re-striped) $0.10 1.10* 0.09 Queue bypass (add lane) $0.30* 0.10 3.00 Curb extension $0.24 0.27 0.90 TSP $0.12 0.33 0.40 * May be 0.5 to 0.7 minutes/mile for higher bus operating speeds NOTE: The base condition is a running speed of 10 mph (6 minutes/mile and 6 stations/mile). SOURCE: Exhibit 5-4 and Exhibit 5-5 Exhibit S-3 Costs and Travel Time Savings of Preferential Treatments Treatment Approaches per Mile Cost/Unit (millions) Cost/Mile (millions) Time Savings/ Unit (seconds) Time Savings/ Mile (seconds) Queue bypass (with construction) 1 $0.30 $0.30 6 6 Curb extension 4 $0.06 $0.40 4 16 TSP 4 $0.03 $0.12 3 20 SOURCE: Exhibit 5-8 and project profiles Comparisons of anticipated BRT travel times, ridership, and development costs for the six scenarios analyzed are shown in Exhibit S-5. Similar information can be developed for BRT proposals in any given corridor. While the numbers and relationships are specific to the six scenarios analyzed, several patterns emerge: 1. As BRT development costs increase, there is a consistent reduction in travel times and a growth in BRT ridership. 2. Faster travel times reduce operating costs for any given bus volume. 3. The busway scenarios, because of their exclusive right-of-way and wider station spacing, have the greatest gains in speeds and ridership, but also the greatest investment costs. 4. The lower-cost scenarios (i.e., bus lanes and TSP) have the smallest time savings and ridership gains. 5. Travel time savings appears to be the greatest contributor to BRT ridership gains, followed by the provision of special BRT features. While BRT may run at short intervals, the splitting of corridor service between BRT and local bus operations may limit computed BRT ridership gains because of the combined bus frequencies. Any city-specific analysis should reflect local conditions in terms of land and construction costs, population and employment growth, and land development impacts. Current experience suggests that major investments such as busways and reconstructed arterial streets may encourage new investments.

Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide Summary Page S-10 Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide Exhibit S-4 Key Analysis Steps Step Items to Analyze 1. Estimate base conditions. A. Existing bus services B. Existing travel times C. Existing ridership 2. Define future conditions. A. Type of running way B. Station types and spacing C. Vehicle type and door configuration D. Method of fare collection E. Transit preferential treatments 3. Estimate travel time savings. A. BRT B. Other bus services 4. Allocate base corridor riders to BRT and local services. A. Rider survey to identify origin-to-destination patterns and preferences B. Relative travel times of various services 5. Estimate ridership gains from travel time savings (for BRT and other services). A. Effects of running way type B. Effects of station spacing and dwell times C. Effects of priority treatments 6. Estimate ridership gains from improved frequency. A. Greater frequency on BRT routes B. BRT riders who save time by taking first bus on combined BRT-local route 7. Subtotal ridership (from Steps 5 and 6). 8. Estimate additional ridership from BRT components (features). A. Features of BRT route 9. Estimate total base year riders (Step 7 + Step 8). 10. Estimate BRT fleet requirements A. Peak-hour peak direction riders in maximum load section B. Vehicle type, size, and passenger capacity C. Round-trip vehicle travel time (with recovery) D. Provision for spares 11. Estimate effects of growth A. Population and employment growth in corridor 12. Estimate development costs of BRT components (features). Exhibit S-5 Illustrative BRT Travel Times, Ridership, and Costs Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5 Scenario 6 Item Grade- Separated Busway At-Grade Busway At-Grade Busway & Median Arterial Busway Bus Lanes (Rebuilt) & TSP Bus Lanes Only TSP Only Existing (base) one-way travel time 94 min 94 min 94 min 94 min 94 min 94 min BRT in-vehicle travel time 29 min 43 min 48 min 50 min 57 min 58 min % reduction 69% 54% 49% 47% 39% 38% Assumed BRT base ridership 10,000 10,000 20,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 Anticipated BRT ridership 17,660 15,700 33,020 11,600 10,885 10,815 % increase 77% 57% 65% 45% 36% 35% Existing local bus ridership 20,000 20,000 20,000 16,000 16,000 16,000 Anticipated local bus ridership 10,000 10,000 - 8,490 8,490 8,000 Estimated development costs* $242.0 million $109.4 million $84.3 million $40.3 million $12.5 million $11.4 million * In 2004 dollars NOTE: Numbers have been rounded. SOURCE: Computed

Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide Page S-11 Summary LAND DEVELOPMENT There is growing documentation of the positive land development effects associated with BRT, especially where the systems have operated for several decades. Land development effects were quantified for busway systems in Adelaide (Australia), Brisbane (Australia), Ottawa, and Pittsburgh and along reconstructed arterial streets in Bogotá (Colombia) and Boston. The data showed the following: • For every 5 minutes of additional walking time to a BRT station in Bogotá, the rental price of a property decreased between 6.8% and 9.3% after controlling for structural characteristics and neighborhood attributes. • Boston’s Silver Line, operating on rebuilt Washington Street between downtown Boston and Dudley Square, has generated more than $700 million in new investment within a few blocks of the BRT route. • Brisbane’s South East Busway has reported a 20% gain in property values near the Busway. There has been a greater increase in home values along the Busway as compared with other suburban areas. • Ottawa’s Transitway system has generated more than $1 billion (Canadian) dollars in new investment since its opening in December 1983. The municipality’s land use policy requires major activities to locate near the Transitway and also limits parking at or near stations. The St. Laurent Center—connected to the Transitway by weather-protected, grade- separated walks—is one of Canada’s most productive shopping centers. About a third of the Center’s customers arrive via the Transitway. Concurrent with the opening of the St. Laurent Transitway Station in 1987, the Center completed a major expansion that included 80 additional stores. • Pittsburgh’s East Busway, which shares a corridor with a railroad, has generated more than $302 million in new development between 1983 and 2000. About 80% is clustered at stations. One-third of the new development represents an extension of the CBD. • In contrast, where bus service is improved without any major changes in physical facilities, little transit-oriented development (TOD) has been realized, as along San Pablo Avenue in Oakland. The following guidelines for helping communities, transit agencies, and developers plan and assess land development opportunities along BRT lines and at BRT stations emerged from a review of salient literature; an overview of TOD programs in Boston, Ottawa, and Pittsburgh; and developer surveys conducted in Boston and Ottawa: • BRT, like rail transit, can improve accessibility and increase passenger capacity in the corridors that it serves. It can help increase CBD intensity and encourage development at major nodes and in outlying areas. Each of these locations offers promise for transit-related development. BRT junctions with major intersecting bus routes also offer promising locations for TOD. • BRT systems should serve both existing and future markets. Where BRT serves existing markets in built-up areas, the customer base is well- established, but creating new TOD projects may be difficult. Where BRT serves underdeveloped areas, it has the opportunity to shape development around the route. The Guide provides guidelines for assessing land development opportunities along BRT lines and at BRT stations.

Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide Summary Page S-12 Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide • Successful TOD requires a strong, dynamic market, especially for retail development. Only where there is a latent demand for development near transit can significant increases in land value be achieved. Thus, not every BRT route or station can attract development. • Land should be available at reasonable cost for the intended uses. • The BRT route should provide a strong sense of permanence and a clear identity (in addition to faster service) to attract development. Improved (preferably separate) running ways and new urban design features can create a positive climate for investment; a good example of this is the positive development effects of Boston’s Washington Street Silver Line. • The location and design of BRT routes should consider land development opportunities. Vision is important. Urban redevelopment, for example, has been a major consideration underlying Cleveland’s Euclid Avenue Transitway. • Convenient transit passenger access should be provided for developments adjacent to, or integrated with, BRT stations. Attractively designed BRT stations with conflict-free, weather-protected pedestrianways connecting transit stations to adjacent activity centers can have a positive effect on land development. The St. Laurent station along Ottawa’s Transitway is an example of such a treatment. • Site designs should encourage density, diversity, and walkability. Transit- supportive uses (retail, office, and residential) should be encouraged. Mixed-use developments can add interest and variety; however, the various uses do not have to be mixed in the same location. • Transit-supportive policies should be established. They can specify where various developments can locate (i.e., zoning), site design and access features, and parking requirements. Ottawa’s Official Plan, for example, requires all major retail centers to be located along its Transitway or LRT system. • Parking policies should support TOD. It is desirable to avoid both too much and too little parking. Parking should be limited, especially adjacent to BRT stations, and structured parking, while costly, may be desirable where land costs are high and space is at a premium. Ottawa’s policies, for example, specify a maximum parking requirement of one parking space per 455 square feet of development within 1,300 feet of a BRT station and a maximum of two spaces per 1,000 square feet of office space elsewhere. • Public-private partnerships should be encouraged. The public sector has the power to resolve land assembly problems, ensure that the site is ready for development, contribute land, and fund infrastructure improvements. Private developers can finance, build, and operate the developments. Working together, they can expedite TOD. • Service planning should recognize that BRT, in contrast to rail transit, can potentially minimize transfers by providing both transfer-free neighborhood feeder bus service and trunk service.

Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide Page S-13 Summary GUIDE CONTENTS The six chapters in the Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide contain detailed guidelines for planning BRT; estimating BRT ridership; describing component features, designs, costs, and impacts; packaging, integrating, and assessing systems; and achieving land development benefits.

Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide Summary Page S-14 Bus Rapid Transit Practitioner’s Guide This page is intentionally blank.