260 likes | 505 Views
A Practical Approach to Bus Rapid Transit. (or is it Road Rapid Transit…?) Cliff Henke NABI USA Sales and Marketing. Vision Statements. BRT must be a logical solution between conventional bus service and rail rapid transit.
E N D
A Practical Approach to Bus Rapid Transit (or is it Road Rapid Transit…?) Cliff Henke NABI USA Sales and Marketing
Vision Statements • BRT must be a logical solution between conventional bus service and rail rapid transit. • BRT should not compete with existing modes in a zero-sum, either/or game. • BRT is not ‘low-ball’ LRT.
What Is BRT? • BRT is.… “Think rail, use buses.” —FTA website • Evolving definition: now “road rapid transit”?
What Is BRT? • BRT is this…
What Is BRT? • And also this…
What Is BRT? • And also this…
What Is BRT? • And also this… • …and this...
What Is BRT? • And also this… • …and maybe this. NABI 45C-LFW for LA NABI 65C-LFW concept
Vehicles need not be expensive or complicated to be attractive Most investment should be ‘offboard’: Signal priority Passenger information Attractive amenities Strong branding What is the practical approach?
Goal & Objectives of Practical Approach • Goal: Maximize cost-effectiveness and attractiveness of BRT mode • Objectives: • Use proven, low life cycle cost technology • Use an incremental approach • Encourage innovation on best value principles • Maximize public/private partnerships
Current BRT Situation • 30 to 40 cities looking at BRT • Scarce federal funds available despite record levels • New starts criteria encourages practical approach (rewards lower cost, higher local match)
How Did We Get Here? • Delegations saw cool stuff on trips • New starts criteria: • Long process • Lots of competition • Many cities are getting “sticker shock” • Waiver window closing
Cities’ Available BRT Options Alternatives: • High-end BRT • Traditional busways and bus lanes • Incremental approach
Narrow advantage of High-End BRT • Cost of new Portland streetcar: $18 million per mile
3rd Guided Bus City in UK 3.7 km length exclusive busway (2.3 guided) $17.6 million project cost $1.5 million by private operator, plus new buses Opened January 2002 Future: real-time passenger info (GPS) Bradford Guided Bus Project Photos courtesy FirstGroup
Practical Design Improvements • New UK Exteriors & Interiors
Recommendations from Vehicle Builder’s Viewpoint • Focus on building platforms, not high-tech systems • Focus on reliability, “making pull-out” • Be “change friendly” • Willing to partner, not lead
Example #1: BRT studies on existing vehicles • 60-LFW, doors on both sides
Attractive styling to lure “choice” riders Up to two extra rows of seats—still on two axles and lighter weight than 40-ft. metal bus Lighter weight body is better suited to new propulsion technologies Example #2: New road vehicles for BRT use
Summary • Practical approach is lower risk • Correctly shifts focus to non-vehicle improvements, where higher value is • Does not mean vehicle design is unimportant • Does mean that conventional buses should be better designed
Thank you For more information www.metro-magazine.com www.fta.dot.gov www.nabiusa.com www.optare.com NABI USA, Inc: Tel: (818) 610 0970Sales Department Fax: (818) 610 0335