HOME | WHAT IS BRT? | ABOUT THE BRT STANDARD | THE SCORECARD | BRT RANKINGS | DOWNLOAD
This scorecard shows the criteria and point values that make up the BRT Standard, including a description of each category.
THE BRT BASICS (38 points)
A dedicated right-of-way is vital to ensuring that buses can move quickly and unimpeded by congestion. Physical design is critical to the self-enforcement of the right-of-way. Dedicated lanes matter the most in heavily congested areas where it is harder to take a lane away from mixed traffic to dedicate it as a busway. Rainbow BRT: Sangamwadi-Vishrantwadi The Rainbow BRT Sangamwadi-Vishrantwadi corridor uses fences to create dedicated physically separated bus lanes. Scoring In-Depth:
Best Practice
Pune/Pimpri-Chinchwad, India
Ranking: Basic BRT
Corridor length: 7.2 km
Riders per day: 26,000
TYPE POINTS WEIGHTED BY
Physically separated, dedicated lanes
(e.g. fences, curbs, bus stations)8
% of corridor with type of dedicated right of way
Color-differentiated, dedicated lanes with no physical separation 6
Dedicated lanes separated by a painted line 4
No dedicated lanes 0
The busway is best located where conflicts with other traffic can be minimized, especially from turning movements from mixed-traffic lanes. In most cases, a busway in the central verge of a roadway encounters fewer conflicts with turning vehicles than those closer to the curb due to alleys, parking lots, etc. Additionally, while delivery vehicles and taxis generally require access to the curb, the central verge of the road usually remains free of such obstructions. All of the design configuration recommendations detailed below are related to minimizing the risk of delays caused by turning conflicts and curbside access. Best Practice Lahore, Pakistan: Metrobus Green Line Ranking: Basic BRT Corridor length: 8.3 km Riders per day: 180,000 Notable strengths: The Metrobus Green Line in Lahore includes a two-way median aligned busway in the center verge of a two-way road. Scoring In-Depth*:
*To see the rest of the configurations scoring, download The BRT Standard.
CORRIDOR CONFIGURATIONS POINTS WEIGHTED BY
TIER 1 CONFIGURATONS
% of corridor with type of dedicated right-of-way
Two-way median aligned busway in the central verge of a two-way road 8
Bus-only corridor where there is a fully exclusive right-of-way and no parallel mixed traffic or a converted corridor 8
Busway that runs adjacent to an edge condition like a waterfront or park where there are few intersections to cause conflicts 8
Off-board fare collection is one the most important factors in reducing travel time and improving the customer experience. Presently, the two most effective approaches to off-board fare collection are “barrier-controlled” (passengers pass through a gate, turnstile, or checkpoint upon entering the station where fare is verified or deducted), and “proof-of-payment” (passengers pay at a kiosk and collect a paper ticket that is then checked on board the vehicle by an inspector). Both approaches can significantly reduce delay, however barrier-controlled is slightly preferable. Jakarta, Indonesia: TransJakarta: Koridor 1 The TransJakarta Koridor 1 features off-board ticketing with turnstile controlled access to stations Scoring In-Depth:
Best Practice
Ranking: Silver
Corridor length: 12.9 km
Riders per day: 41,600*
OFF-BOARD FARE COLLECTION (DURING ALL OPERATING HOURS) POINTS WEIGHTED BY
Barrier-controlled 8 % stations on corridor
Proof-of-payment 7 % routes using corridor bus infrastructure
Onboard fare validation- all doors 4 % routes using corridor bus infrastructure
There are several ways to increase bus speeds at intersections, all of which are aimed at increasing the green-signal time for the bus lane. Forbidding turns across the bus lane and minimizing the number of traffic-signal phases where possible are the most important. Traffic-signal priority, when activated by an approaching BRT vehicle, is useful in lower-frequency systems but less effective than turn prohibitions. Best Practice São Paulo, Brazil: Corredor Metropolitano ABD: ABD Extensão Morumbi Ranking: Basic BRT The system prioritizes pedestrians and bans left-turns at intersections. It was also rated the most satisfying transportation mode in the Metropolitan Region of São Paulo, with a 79% approval rate, according to the National Association for Public Transport’s (Associação Nacional de Transportes Públicos) 2011 survey. Scoring In-Depth:
Corridor length: 10.8 km
Riders per day: 325,000
INTERSECTION TREATMENTS POINTS WEIGHTED BY
Turns prohibited across the busway 7 % of turns across busway prohibited
Signal priority at intersections 2 % of intersections on corridor
Having the bus-station platform level with the bus floor is one of the most important ways of reducing boarding and alighting times per passenger. Passengers climbing even relatively minor steps can mean significant delay and an increase in safety hazards, particularly for the elderly, disabled, or people with suitcases or strollers. “Vertical gap” refers to the difference in height between bus floors and station platforms. Station platforms should be designed and buses selected so that the vertical distance between the platform and the bus floor is less than 1.5 centimeters (5/8 inches), although larger gaps are acceptable in The BRT Standard. “Horizontal gap” refers to the distance between the bus and the platform. There are a range of ways to achieve horizontal gaps of less than 10 centimeters (4 inches) including Kassel curbs and boarding bridges. The scoring does not take into account which technique is chosen. Ahmedabad, India: Janmarg With well-designed infrastructure and driver training, such as in Ahmedabad, India, a BRT systems can reduce the boarding gap to under 10 centimeters. Scoring In-Depth:
Best Practice
Ranking: Bronze
Corridor length: 82 km
Riders per day: 130,000
PLATFORM-LEVEL BOARDING POINTS WEIGHTED BY
Buses are platform level, having 4 centimeters (1 1/2 inches) or less of vertical gap 7 % of buses operating on corridor
Stations in corridor have measures for reducing the horizontal gap 6 % of stations on corridor
SERVICE PLANNING (19 points)
Having multiple routes operate on a single corridor is a good proxy for reduced door-to-door travel times by reducing transfer penalties. This can include: Mexico City, Mexico: Metrobus: Línea 2, Eje 4 Sur Mexico City’s Metrobus added an additional 20,000 daily passengers by incorporating a direct route connecting Corridor I (Insurgentes) with Corridor II (Eje 4), thereby eliminating the transfer between the two. Scoring In-Depth:
Best Practice
Ranking: Silver
Corridor length: 20 km
Riders per day: 180,000
MULTIPLE ROUTES POINTS
Two or more routes exist on the corridor, servicing at least two stations 4
No multiple routes 0
One of the most important ways that BRT corridors increase operating speeds and reduce passenger travel times is by providing limited and express services. While local services stop at every station, limited services skip lower-demand stations and stop only at major stations that have higher passenger demand. Express services often collect passengers at stops at one end of the corridor, travel along much of the corridor without stopping, and drop passengers off at the other end. Infrastructure necessary for the inclusion of express, limited, and local BRT services is captured in other scoring metrics. Bogota, Columbia: Transmilenio: NQS Central Stations feature two passing lanes to allow for additional service options including local, limited and express options to accommodate a variety of trip patterns. Scoring In-Depth:
Best Practice
Ranking: Gold
Corridor length: 12.4 km (BRTdata.org)*
Riders per day: 192,405
SERVICE TYPES POINTS
Local services and multiple types of limited-stop and/or express services 3
At least one local and one limited-stop or express service option 2
No limited-stop or express services 0
Control centers for BRT systems are increasingly prevalent for a host of service improvements, such as avoiding bus bunching, monitoring bus operations, identifying problems, and rapidly responding to them. A full-service control center monitors the locations of all buses with GPS or similar technology and can: A full-service center should be integrated with a public transport system’s existing control center as well as the traffic signal system. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: TransOeste TransOeste has a full-service control center that oversees automated dispatching of buses, active bus controls, and automatic vehicle location information. Scoring in Depth:
Best Practice
Ranking: Silver
Corridor length: 58 km
Riders per day: 240,000
CONTROL CENTER POINTS
Full-service control center with all three services 3
Control center with two of the three services 2
Control cente rwith one of the three services 1
No control center or center with limited functionality 0
If the BRT corridor is located along one of the top ten corridors, in terms of aggregate bus ridership, this will help ensure that a significant proportion of passengers benefit from the improvements. Points are awarded to systems that have made a good choice for the BRT corridor, regardless of the level of total demand. Guadalajara, Mexico: Macrobus: Linea 1 Macrobus Linea 1 was the first BRT line in Guadalajara and the first in Mexico to include passing lanes at stations, it also offers both limited and express stop services to meet the high demand of riders along this corridor. Scoring In-Depth:
Best Practice
Ranking: Gold
Corridor length: 16
Riders per day: 127,000
CORRIDOR LOCATION POINTS
Corridor is one of top ten demand corridors 2
Corridor is not one of top ten demand corridors 0
Building a dedicated BRT infrastructure in the highest-demand segments of a road ensures that the greatest number of passengers benefit from the improvements. This is most significant when the decision is made whether or not to build a corridor through a downtown; however, it can also be an issue outside of a downtown on a road segment that has a varied and high demand profile. Best Practice Lima, Peru: El Metropolitano: COSAC 1 The COSAC 1 corridor of El Metropolitano BRT in Lima includes the highest demand segments which have Tier 1 trunk corridor design treatments to serve the high volumes of passengers. Scoring In-Depth:
Ranking: Gold
Corridor length: 26.6 (26 km on BRTdata.org)*
Riders per day: 350,000
DEMAND PROFILE POINTS
Corridor includes highest demand segment, which has a Tier 1 Trunk Corridor configuration 3
Corridor includes highest demand segment, which has a Tier 2 Trunk Corridor configuration 2
Corridor includes highest demand segment, which has a Tier 3 Trunk Corridor configuration 1
Corridor does not include highest demand segment 0
A viable transit service must be available to passengers for as many hours throughout the day and week as possible. Otherwise, passengers could end up stranded or may simply seek another mode of transport. Late night service refers to service until midnight and weekend service refers to both weekend days. Guatemala City, Guatemala: Transmetro: Ramal Sur The Transmetro Eje Sur BRT offers early morning, evening and weekend service to accommodate riders. For example, Linea 12 begin service at 4:30 and ends at 22:00 during the week, and 4:30 to 22:00 on the weekends. Scoring In-Depth:
Best Practice
Ranking: Gold
Corridor length: 13 km
Riders per day: 180,000
OPERATING HOURS POINTS
Both late-night and weekend service 2
Late-night service, no weekends or weekend service, no late-nights 1
No late-night or weekend service 0
Ideally, BRT should include multiple corridors that intersect and form a network, as this expands travel options for passengers and makes the system more viable as a whole. When designing a new system, some anticipation of future corridors is useful to ensure the designs will be compatible with later developments. For this reason, a long-term plan is recognized, with an emphasis on near-term connectivity through either BRT services or infrastructure. Curitiba, Brazil: Rede Integrada de Transporte (RIT): Linha Verde One of the first BRT systems built in the 1970s, the RIT features 21 iconic futuristic glass tube stations throughout the multi-corridor network of 6 lines. Scoring In-Depth:
Ranking: Gold
Corridor Length: 7 km
Riders per day: 31,000
MULTI-CORRIDOR NETWORK POINTS
BRT corridor connects to an existing BRT corridor or to the next one planned in the network 2
BRT corridor connects to a future planned corridor in the BRT network 1
No connected BRT network planned or built 0
INFRASTRUCTURE (13 points)
Passing lanes at station stops are critical to allow both express and local services. They also allow stations to accommodate a high volume of buses without getting congested with buses backed up waiting to enter. While more difficult to justify in low-demand systems, passing lanes are a good investment, yielding considerable passenger travel-time savings and allowing for flexibility as the system grows. On high-demand corridors requiring frequent service, passing lanes at stations are particularly helpful for providing sufficient corridor capacity to maintain higher speeds. Best Practice Guangzhou, China: Guangzhou BRT: Zhongshan Avenue Scoring In-Depth:
Ranking: Gold
Corridor length: 22.5 km
Riders per day: 850,000
Zhongshan Avenue was the first BRT line put in operation in China in 2010, contains the world’s longest BRT station (260 m including bridges).
PASSING LANES POINTS
Dedicated passing lanes 3
Buses overtake in oncoming dedicated bus lanes given safe conditions 2
Passing in mixed traffic given safe conditions 1
No passing lanes 0
Over the past two decades, the European Union and the United States have adopted a series of progressively tighter emissions standards that are being used for this scoring system. Buses must be in compliance with Euro VI and U.S. 2010 emissions standards to receive 3 points. These standards result in extremely low emissions of both PM and NOx . For diesel vehicles, these standards require the use of PM traps, ultra-low-sulfur diesel fuel, and selective catalytic reduction. To receive 2 points, buses need to be certified to Euro IV or V with PM traps (note: 50 ppm sulfur diesel fuel or lower is required for PM traps to function effectively). Vehicles certified to the Euro IV and V standards that do not require traps emit twice as much PM as vehicles meeting more recent standards. Therefore, these vehicles are awarded 1 point. IV and V have been tested at levels substantially higher than certified levels. Because that is hard to verify, it is included as a recommendation, but not as a requirement, for receiving the 1 point. Zero points are awarded for U.S. 2004 and Euro III standards and less stringent standards, because these standards allow ten times as much PM emissions as the U.S. 2010 and Euro VI standards. Ranking: GoldBest Practice: TransOeste, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Corridor length: 52 km (58 km on BRTdata.org)*
Riders per day: 240,000
TransOeste utilizes buses with low emissions as outlined in the standards of Euro VI or US 2010 to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Stations should be located at minimum 26 meters (85 feet), but ideally 40 meters (130 feet), from intersections to avoid delays. When stations are located just beyond an intersection, delays can occur when passengers take a long time to board or alight and the docked bus blocks others from pulling through the intersection. If stations are located just before an intersection, the traffic signal can keep buses from leaving the station and thus not allow other buses to pull in. The risk of conflict remains acute, particularly as frequency increases. Separating stations from intersections is a key way to mitigate these problems. Bogota, Colombia: Transmilenio: Suba Notable strengths: Portal de Suba serves several main shopping centers and parks, stations are designed to be open but shelter from the sun and weather, platform level boarding and passing lanes are also positive aspects of the design.Best Practice
Ranking: Silver
Corridor length: 13 km
Riders per day: 121,438
Having a single station serving both directions of the BRT corridor makes transfers between the two directions easier and more convenient—something that becomes more important as a BRT network expands. It also tends to reduce construction costs and minimize the necessary right-of-way. In some cases, stations may be centrally aligned but split into two—called split stations, with each station housing a particular direction of the BRT corridor. If a physical connection between the two directions is not provided, fewer points are awarded. Bogotá, Colombia: Transmilenio: Calle 80 Notable strengths: Articulate buses add capacity for greater volumes of riders and dedicated bus-only lanes with physical separation from other vehicular traffic allows for increased on-time performance without traffic delays.Best Practice
Ranking: Gold
Corridor length: 7.5 km
Riders per day: 158.806
Good-quality pavement ensures better service and operations for a longer period by minimizing the need for maintenance on the busway. Roadways with poor-quality pavement will need to be shut down more frequently for repairs. Buses will also have to slow down to drive carefully over damaged pavement. A smooth ride is critical for creating a high-quality service that can attract and retain customers. Bogota, Colombia: Transmilenio BRT: Calle 26Best Practice
Ranking: Gold
Corridor length: 12.2 km
Riders per day: 104,180
Calle 26 BRT line features a pavement structure that is designed for a 30 year life over the entire corridor.
STATIONS (10 points)
In a consistently built-up area, the distance between station stops optimizes at around 450 meters (1,476 ft.). Beyond this, more time is imposed on customers walking to stations than is saved by higher bus speeds. Below this distance, bus speeds will be reduced by more than the time saved with shorter walking distances. Thus, in keeping reasonably consistent with optimal station spacing, average distance between stations should not be below 0.3 km (0.2 mi.) or exceed 0.8 km (0.5 mi.). Belo Horizonte, Brazil: MOVE: Cristiano-Machado Scoring In-Depth:
Best Practice
Ranking: Gold
Corridor length: 7.1 km
Riders per day: 185,000
Stations are spaced on average between 0.3 km (0.2 miles) and 0.8 km (0.5 miles) apart throughout the length of the corridor.
DISTANCE BETWEEN STATIONS POINTS
Stations are spaced, on average, between 0.3 km and 0.8 km apart 2
One of the main distinguishing features of a BRT system as opposed to standard bus service is a safe and comfortable station environment. Four main elements contribute to that: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: BRT Rio: TransCarioca Scoring In-Depth:
Best Practice
Ranking: Gold
Corridor length: 39 km
Riders per day: 216,000
TransCarioca was the second BRT line to open in Rio; establishing new connections to the airport. Stations are wide, weather protected, safe, and attractive.
STATIONS POINTS WEIGHTED BY
Stations have four elements 3
% of stations
Stations have three elements 2
Stations have two elements 1
Stations have one element 0
The speed of boarding and alighting is partially a function of the number of bus doors. Much like a subway in which a car has multiple wide doors, buses need the same to let higher volumes of people on and off the buses. One door or narrow doorways become bottlenecks that delay the bus. Nantes, France: Ligne 4 Scoring In-Depth:
Best Practice
Ranking: Bronze
Corridor length: 6.9 km
Riders per day: 25,000
Buses have at least three doors (for articulated buses) or two wide doors (for non-articulated buses) on the station side. System allows boarding at all doors.
STATIONS POINTS WEIGHTED BY
Buses have at least three doors (for articulated buses*) or two wide doors (for non-articulated buses) on the station side. System allows boarding at all doors. 3 % of buses using corridor infrastructure meeting criteria
Multiple docking bays and sub-stops not only increase the capacity of a station, they help stations provide multiple services at the station as well. A station is composed of sub-stops that can connect to one another but should be separated by a walkway long enough to allow buses to pass one sub-stop to dock at another. This reduces the risk of congestion by allowing a bus to pass a full sub-stop where buses can let passengers on and off. They are usually adjacent to each other and allow a second bus to pull up behind another bus already at the station. A station may be composed of only one sub-stop. Curitiba, Brazil: Rede Integrada de Transporte (RIT): Leste The Leste corridor features at least two substops or docking bays at the highest demand stations to increase capacity and provide multiple service types. Scoring In-Depth:
Best Practice
Ranking: Silver
Corridor length: 12.39 km
Riders per day: 90,500
DOCKING BAYS AND SUBSTOPS POINTS
At least two substops or docking bays at the highest demand stations 1
Less than two substops or docking bays at the highest demand stations 0
Sliding station doors where passengers get on and off the buses improve the quality of the station environment, reduce the risk of accidents, protect passengers from the weather, and prevent pedestrians from entering the station in unauthorized locations. Johannesburg, South Africa: Rea Vaya: 1A Ranking: Silver Corridor length: 25.5 km Riders per day: 42,000 Notable strengths: All stations have sliding doors which improve the quality of the station environment, reduce the risk of accidents, protect passengers from the weather, and prevent pedestrians from entering the stations in unauthorized locations. Scoring In-Depth:
Best Practice
SLIDING DOORS POINTS
All stations have sliding doors 1
Otherwise 0
COMMUNICATIONS (5 points)
BRT promises a high quality of service, which is reinforced by having a unique brand and identity. Cleveland, Ohio, USA: Healthline All buses, routes, and stations in corridor follow single unified brand of entire system which communicates uniformity and consistency to riders. The name also suggests connections to the Cleveland Clinic and University Hospitals of Cleveland. Scoring In-Depth:
Best Practice
Ranking: Silver
Corridor length: 11.4 km
Riders per day: 15,000
BRANDING POINTS
All buses, routes, and stations in corridor follow single unifying brand of entire BRT system 3
All buses, routes, and stations in corridor follow single unifying brand, but differ from rest of system 2
Some buses, routes, and stations in corridor follow single unifying brand, regardless of rest of system 1
No corridor brand 0
Numerous studies have shown that passenger satisfaction is linked to knowing when the next bus will arrive. Giving passengers information is critical to a positive overall experience. Real-time passenger information includes electronic panels, digital audio messaging (“Next bus” at stations, “Next stop” on buses), and/or dynamic information on handheld devices. Static passenger information refers to station and vehicle signage, including network maps, route maps, local area maps, emergency indications, and other user information. Hartford, Connecticut, USA: CTFastrak CTFastrak stations feature functioning real-time and up to date passenger information corridor wide. Scoring In-Depth:
Best Practice
Ranking: Silver
Corridor length: 15.1 km
Riders per day: 9,674
PASSENGER INFORMATION (AT STATION AND ON VEHICLES) POINTS
Functioning real-time and up-to-date static passenger information corridor-wide 2
Up-to-date static passenger information 1
ACCESS AND INTEGRATION (15 points)
A BRT system should be accessible to all special-needs customers, including those who are physically, visually, and/or hearing-impaired, as well as those with temporary disabilities, the elderly, children, parents with strollers, and other load-carrying passengers. Rouen, France: TEOR (Transport Est-Ouest Rouennais) Scoring In-Depth:
Best Practice
Ranking: Silver
Corridor length: 9.9 km
Notable strengths: Accessibility includes both physical design characteristics that allow for people using wheelchairs and otherwise to move through stations unimpeded, as well as audiovisual information communicated via Braille and tactile ground surface indicators.
UNIVERSAL ACCESSIBILITY POINTS
Full accessibility provided 3
Physical accessibility provided 2
Audiovisual accessibility provided 1
When a BRT system is built in a city, a functioning public transport network often already exists, be it rail, bus, or minibus. The BRT corridor should integrate into the rest of the public transport network, saving time and providing a seamless, high-quality experience. There are two components to BRT integration: Caracas, Venezuela: BusCaracas: Linea 7 Linea 7 has several transfer points to other public transit lines throughout the city of Caracas, with minimal walking distances & fare payment integration. Scoring In-Depth:
Best Practice
Ranking: Silver
Corridor length: 5.2 km
Riders per day: 77,948
INTEGRATION WITH OTHER PUBLIC TRANSPORT POINTS
Integration of both physical design and fare payment 3
Integration of both physical design or fare payment only 2
No integration 0
A BRT system could be extremely well-designed and functioning but if passengers cannot access it safely, it cannot achieve its goals. Good pedestrian access is imperative in BRT corridor design. Additionally, as a new BRT corridor is a good opportunity to improve the pedestrian environment on the streets, public spaces along the corridor, and on side streets leading to stations. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Metrobus: 9 de Julio Notable strengths: 9 de Julio includes at-grade pedestrian crossings with signals, markings and bollards to protect pedestrians from vehicular traffic when accessing the BRT stations. Scoring In-Depth:
Best Practice
Ranking: Silver
Corridor length: 3 km
Riders per day: 255,000
PEDESTRIAN ACCESS POINTS
Good, safe pedestrian access at every station and many improvements along corridor 4
Good, safe pedestrian access at every station and modest improvements along corridor 3
Good, safe pedestrian access at every station and no other improvements along corridor 2
Good, safe pedestrian access at most stations and no other improvements along corridor 1
Stations lack good, safe pedestrian access 0
Bicycle parking at stations allows customers to use bicycles as feeders to the BRT corridor, increasing system coverage. More options for accessing the BRT corridor can save users time and create a higher quality experience. Formal bicycle parking facilities that are secure (either monitored by an attendant or observed by security cameras) and weather-protected are more likely to be used by customers. Xiamen, China: Xiamen BRTL Line 2 Scoring In-Depth:
Best Practice
Ranking: Silver
Corridor length: 10 km
Riders per day: 113,300
Xiamen has installed bicycle parking racks near BRT stations, some are double-decker to conserve space more efficiently.
BICYCLE PARKING POINTS
Secure bicycle parking at least in higher-demand stations and standard bicycle racks elsewhere 2
Standard bicycle racks in most stations 1
Little or no bicycle parking 0
Bicycle-lane networks integrated with the BRT corridor improve customer access, provide a full set of sustainable travel options, and enhance road safety. Bicycle lanes should ideally connect major residential areas, commercial centers, schools, and business centers to nearby BRT stations within 2 kilometers (1.2 miles) to provide the widest access. Moreover, in most cities, the best BRT corridors are also the most desirable bicycle routes, as they are often the routes with the greatest travel demand. Yet there is a shortage of safe cycling infrastructure on those same corridors. If some accommodation for cyclists is not made, it is possible that cyclists may use the busway. If the busway has not been designed for dual bike and bus use, it is a safety risk for cyclists. Bicycle lanes should be built either within the same corridor or on a nearby parallel street and should be at least 2 meters, for each direction, of unimpeded width. Los Angeles, California, USA: Orange Line Scoring In-Depth:
Best Practice
Ranking: Bronze
Corridor length: 20 km
Riders per day: 26,179
The LA Orange Line BRT includes a protected separated bicycle paths that runs along the length of the corridor right of way. Buses also includes loading racks for bikes.
BICYCLE LANES POINTS
Bicycle lanes on or parallel to entire corridor 2
Bicycle lanes do not span entire corridor 1
Poorly-designed or no bicycle infrastructure 0
Having the option to make short trips from the BRT corridor by a shared bicycle is important to providing connectivity to some destinations. Operating costs of providing bus service to the last mile (i.e., feeder buses) are often the highest cost of maintaining a BRT network; thus, providing a low-cost bicycle-sharing alternative to feeders is generally seen as best practice. Mexico City, Mexico: Metrobús: Línea 1, Av. de los Insurgentes Metrobús Linea 1 integrates Ecobici bike share stations along the corridor, particularly in the Downtown city center areas where there is greater density and more protected bicycle lanes. Scoring In-Depth:
Best Practice
Ranking: Silver
Corridor length: 30 km
Riders per day: 480,000
BICYCLE-SHARING INTEGRATION POINTS
Bicycle-sharing at minimum of 50% of stations on corridor 1
Bicycle-sharing at <50% of stations on corridor 0
| POINT DEDUCTIONS* |
-63 (Total) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Commercial Speeds Most of the design features included in the scoring system will always result in higher speeds. However, there is an exception: higher-demand systems in which too many buses carrying too many passengers have been concentrated into a single lane. In this case, bus speeds could be lower than in mixed-traffic conditions. This penalty was imposed to mitigate the risk of rewarding such a system with a quality standard. Deduction In-Depth:
|
-10 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Minimum Peak Passengers per Hour per Direction Below 1,000 BRT systems with ridership levels below 1,000 passengers per hour per direction (pphpd) during the peak hour are carrying fewer passengers than a normal mixed-traffic lane. Very low ridership can be an indication that other bus services continue to operate in the corridor alongside and in competition with the BRT services. Alternatively, it indicates that a corridor was poorly selected. Almost all cities have corridors carrying at least 1,000 pphpd during the peak hour. Many cities, however, have corridors where transit demand is very low, even below this level. While many Gold- Standard BRT features would still bring benefits in these conditions, it is unlikely that such levels would justify the cost and dedicated right-of-way intrinsic to BRT. This penalty has been created to penalize systems that have done a poor job of service planning or corridor selection, while not overly penalizing smaller, car-oriented cities with low transit demand. If PPHPD is below 1000, a deduction of -5 should be made. |
-5 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lack of Enforcement of Right-of-Way A BRT corridor may have a good alignment and physical separation, but if the right-of-way is not enforced, bus speeds will decline. This penalty addresses systems that do not adequately enforce the busway to prevent encroachment from other vehicles. There are multiple and somewhat context-specific means of enforcing the exclusive right-of-way. The committee generally recommends on-board camera enforcement and regular policing at points of frequent encroachment, coupled with high fines for violators, to minimize invasions of the lanes by non-authorized vehicles. Solely relying on camera enforcement deployed at high-risk locations is somewhat less effective. Deductions In-Depth:
|
-5 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Significant Gap Between Bus Floor and Station Platform Even corridors that have been designed to accommodate platform-level boarding could have gaps if the buses do not dock properly. A significant gap between the platform and the bus floor undermines the time-savings benefits of platform-level boarding and introduces a significant safety risk for passengers. Such gaps could occur for a variety of reasons, from poor basic design to poor driver training and technical opinion varies on the best way to minimize the gap. Note: If a system does not have platform-level boarding by design, no penalty points should be given. Deduction In-Depth*:
*For more information on the definitions for minor and major horizontal gaps, see The BRT Standard. |
-5 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Overcrowding This was included because many corridors that are generally well-designed are so overcrowded that they become alienating to passengers. While average “passenger standing density” is a reasonable indicator, getting this information is not easy, so a more subjective measure is allowed in cases of obvious overcrowding. If this metric is not easily calculated, then clearly visible signs of overcrowding on buses or in stations should be used, such as doors on the buses regularly being unable to close, stations overcrowded with passengers because they are unable to board full buses, and so forth. Deduction In-Depth:
|
-5 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Poorly Maintained Infrastructure Even a BRT system that is well built and attractive can fall into disrepair. It is important that the busway, buses, stations, and technology systems be regularly maintained. A corridor can be penalized for a lack of maintenance of the busway, buses, stations, or technology systems for a total of -14 points. Deductions In-Depth:
|
-14 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Low Peak Frequency How often the bus comes during peak travel times such as rush hour is a good proxy for quality of service. For BRT to be truly competitive with alternative modes, like the private automobile, passengers need to be confident that their wait times will be short and the next bus will arrive soon. Deductions In-Depth:
|
-3 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Low Off-Peak Frequency As with peak frequency, how often the bus comes during off-peak travel times is a good proxy for quality of service. Deductions In-Depth:
|
-2 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Permitting Unsafe Bicycle Use Bicycle use in busways is generally not encouraged, and is particularly dangerous in bus lanes with speed limits greater than 25 kilometers per hour (15 miles per hour) and/or bus lanes with widths less than 3.8 meters (12 feet). If cycling is observed in these conditions, a deduction of 2 points should be made. |
-2 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Lack of Traffic Safety Data Traffic safety data is vital to ensuring that transportation systems operate safely and to evaluating efforts to improve safety. All cities should collect traffic safety data and make this information public so that progress can be tracked. If traffic safety data is not collected, a deduction of 2 points should be made. |
-2 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Buses Running Parallel to BRT Corridor Bus corridors should be designed to capture as much of the public transportation demand on a corridor to maximize the utility of dedicated transit infrastructure. A significant number of full-sized public buses operating outside the busway results in difficult transfers, undermines the financial sustainability of the BRT corridor, and leads to less frequent service on the corridor. Deductions In-Depth:
|
-6 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bus Bunching Bus reliability is critical to improving BRT performance. Bus bunching- when the distance between buses becomes highly uneven-reduces reliability, increases wait times, and contributes to crowding conditions, deteriorating the quality and speed of service. Deductions In-Depth:
|
-4 |
*Point deductions are only relevant to systems already in operation. They have been introduced as a way of mitigating the risk of recognizing a system as high quality that has made significant design errors or has significant management and performance weaknesses not readily observable during the design phase.
You must be logged in to post a comment.