Sustainable Transport Mass Transit Options PDF

Division 44
Environmental Management,
Water, Energy, Transport
Sector project: “Transport Policy Advice”
Sustainable Transport:
A Sourcebook for Policy-makers in Developing Cities
Module 3a:
Mass Transit Options
Deutsche Gesellschaft für

Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH
OVERVIEW OF THE SOURCEBOOK Modules and contributors
Sustainable Transport: A Sourcebook for Sourcebook Overview, and Cross-cutting Issues of
Policy-Makers in Developing Cities Urban Transport (GTZ)
What is the Sourcebook? Institutional and policy orientation
This Sourcebook on Sustainable Urban Transport 1a. The Role of Transport in Urban Development
addresses the key areas of a sustainable transport Policy (Enrique Peñalosa)
policy framework for a developing city. The 1b. Urban Transport Institutions (Richard Meakin)
Sourcebook consists of 20 modules. 1c. Private Sector Participation in Transport Infra-
structure Provision (Christopher Zegras, MIT)
Who is it for?
1d. Economic Instruments (Manfred Breithaupt,
The Sourcebook is intended for policy-makers
GTZ)
in developing cities, and their advisors. This
1e. Raising Public Awareness about Sustainable
target audience is reflected in the content, which
Urban Transport (Karl Fjellstrom, GTZ)
provides policy tools appropriate for application
in a range of developing cities. Land use planning and demand management
2a. Land Use Planning and Urban Transport
How is it supposed to be used?
(Rudolf Petersen, Wuppertal Institute)
The Sourcebook can be used in a number of
2b. Mobility Management (Todd Litman, VTPI)
ways. It should be kept in one location, and the
different modules provided to officials involved Transit, walking and cycling
in urban transport. The Sourcebook can be easily 3a. Mass Transit Options (Lloyd Wright, ITDP;
adapted to fit a formal short course training GTZ)
event, or can serve as a guide for developing a 3b. Bus Rapid Transit (Lloyd Wright, ITDP)
curriculum or other training program in the area 3c. Bus Regulation & Planning (Richard Meakin)
of urban transport; avenues GTZ is pursuing. 3d. Preserving and Expanding the Role of Non-
motorised Transport (Walter Hook, ITDP)
What are some of the key features?
The key features of the Sourcebook include: Vehicles and fuels
< A practical orientation, focusing on best
4a. Cleaner Fuels and Vehicle Technologies
practices in planning and regulation and, (Michael Walsh; Reinhard Kolke,
where possible, successful experience in Umweltbundesamt – UBA)
developing cities. 4b. Inspection & Maintenance and
< Contributors are leading experts in their fields.
Roadworthiness (Reinhard Kolke, UBA)
< An attractive and easy-to-read, colour layout.
4c. Two- and Three-Wheelers (Jitendra Shah,
< Non-technical language (to the extent
World Bank; N.V. Iyer, Bajaj Auto)
possible), with technical terms explained. 4d. Natural Gas Vehicles (MVV InnoTec)
< Updates via the Internet. Environmental and health impacts
How do I get a copy? 5a. Air Quality Management (Dietrich Schwela,
Please visit www.sutp-asia.org or www.gtz.de/ World Health Organisation)
transport for details on how to order a copy. The 5b. Urban Road Safety (Jacqueline Lacroix, DVR;
Sourcebook is not sold for profit. Any charges David Silcock, GRSP)
imposed are only to cover the cost of printing 5c. Noise and its Abatement (Civic Exchange
and distribution. Hong Kong; GTZ; UBA)
Comments or feedback? Resources
We would welcome any of your comments or 6. Resources for Policy-makers (GTZ)
suggestions, on any aspect of the Sourcebook, by Further modules and resources
email to sutp@sutp.org, or by surface mail to: Further modules are anticipated in the areas
Manfred Breithaupt of Driver Training; Financing Urban Transport;
GTZ, Division 44 Benchmarking; and Participatory Planning.
Postfach 5180 Additional resources are being developed, and
65726 Eschborn an Urban Transport Photo CD (GTZ 2002) is
Germany now available.
aa2 This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
Module 3a: About the contributors
Mass Transit Options The Institute for Transportation and Development

Policy (ITDP) was established in 1985 to promote
By Lloyd Wright transport options that are environmentally,
(Institute for Transportation and Development economically and socially sustainable. ITDP is
Policy) an international non-governmental organization
and Karl Fjellstrom that particularly focuses upon the promotion of
(Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische public transport, non-motorised transport, travel
Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH) demand management, and improved land-use
planning. ITDP works exclusively in developing
(With additional contributions from Armin Wagner countries and economies in transition, where the
and helpful review comments on the Bangkok consequences of inadequate basic mobility are
Skytrain system by Phil Sayeg of Policy Appraisal the most keenly felt, and where the adverse social
Services Pty Ltd.) and environmental effects of rapid motorisation are
causing the greatest economic and environmental
Editor: Karl Fjellstrom problems. To fulfil its mission, ITDP has three core
Manager: Manfred Breithaupt activities:
(i) Catalysing demonstration projects with
GTZ Transport and Mobility Group, 2003 progressive municipalities;
(ii) Communicating successful options and
Findings, interpretations and conclusions technical information; and
expressed in this document are based on (iii) Encouraging better policy making at the local,
information gathered by GTZ and its consultants, national, and multi-lateral levels.
partners, and contributors from reliable sources.
GTZ does not, however, guarantee the accuracy
or completeness of information in this document,
and cannot be held responsible for any errors,
omissions or losses which emerge from its use.
Cover photo: Bangkok’s Victory Monument, Dec.

2001. Photo by Karl Fjellstrom
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
i
1. Introduction 1 4. Comparison on key
parameters 16
1.1 Outline of the module 1
4.1 Cost 16
2. Mass Rapid Transit concepts 2
Capital costs for rail-based MRT 17
2.1 terminology 2 Capital costs for Bus Rapid Transit 18
2.2 Defining features of MRT 3 Operating costs 18
Use of space 3 Rolling stock 19
Speed and passenger capacity 3 Public finances 20
Integration 4
4.2 Planning & construction time 20
Level of service 4
Project development and planning 20
2.3 The strategic importance Construction 20
of MRT systems 4
4.3 Passenger capacity 22
3. Current applications in 4.4 Flexibility 23
developing cities 5
4.5 Speed 24
3.1 Bus Rapid Transit 5
4.6 Institutional capacity for
Latin American experience 6 successful implementation 24
Asian experience 8 The scope of the challenge 25
North American experience 9 Role of the private sector 25
European experience 9 Supportive policy setting 26
Australian and New Zealand programs 10 4.7 Long term influence on
3.2 Light Rail Transit 11 city development 26
Current applications 11 MRT and city form 26
LRT and Metro lines in Shanghai 11 MRT and development 26
3.3 Metros 12 4.8 Poverty alleviation 27

The Bangkok Skytrain (BTS) 13 4.9 Environmental impact 28
3.4 Commuter rail 15 5. Conclusion 29
Current applications 15
Positive experience with concessioning
Resource materials 30
of commuter rail services 16
ii This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
Module 3a: Mass Transit Options
1. Introduction leading consideration is cost (including cost

of construction, rolling stock, and operation);
Choices on public transit options are choices others include planning & construction time,
about a city’s future. Will there be congestion? flexibility in implementation, passenger capac-
Will there be high levels of air and noise pollu- ity, speed, and institutional issues. Longer term
tion? Will transport be affordable? Will services effects on poverty, city form, and the environ-
be available to all? The type of public transit ment are also assessed. In terms of maintaining
system will have a big impact on the answers to a transit-friendly city form and ensuring the
these questions (Figure 1). urban poor have access to employment, contacts
and services, a crucial factor when comparing
This module aims to provide policy-makers
systems is the potential for a Mass Rapid Transit
in developing cities – and those advising them
system to secure long term advances – or at least
– with guidance on choosing appropriate Mass
stabilisation – in the share of people travelling
Rapid Transit (MRT) systems. The module begins
by public rather than private transport.
by briefly describing some basic concepts and
defining features of MRT in developing cities.
Current applications of each of the main MRT
“Choices on transit options are
options are then described, focusing on applica- choices about a city’s future”
tions in developing cities. Since Metros and
Light Rail Transit are still relatively uncommon The module ends with a discussion of what the
in low income developing cities, most of this comparison of the different options reveals. It
discussion focuses on the recent development of is seen that although there is no single MRT
Bus Rapid Transit systems throughout the world. solution fitting all cities, for all but the major
corridors of relatively wealthy and dense devel-
The main section of the module then compares oping cities which are planning to develop an
each of these MRT options in the light of key MRT system, the best option will often be a
parameters for developing cities. Naturally, a form of Bus Rapid Transit.
Fig. 13
Which future? Choices
about Mass Rapid Transit
concern the kind of city
we want to live in.
Lloyd Wright, 2002
1
Sustainable Transport: A Sourcebook for Policy-makers in Developing Cities
2. Mass Rapid Transit concepts Metro

Metro is the most common international term
2.1 TERMINOLOGY for subway, heavy rail transit, though it is also
The distinction between many MRT concepts commonly applied to elevated heavy rail sys-
is fluid, and many different approaches are tems. In this module we use “metro” to refer to
commonly used to distinguish the different urban grade-separated heavy rail systems. They
modes and features of various MRT systems. are the most expensive form of MRT per square
Apart from basic defining features such as cost, kilometre, but have the highest theoretical capacity.
capacity, and technology, other features used to Commuter rail systems
delineate MRT systems might include distance
between stops, extent of right-of-way, opera- Commuter rail or suburban rail is the portion
tional regimes and guidance systems. For the of passenger railroad operations that carries
purposes of this module we have distinguished passengers within urban areas, or between urban
between four general forms of Mass Rapid areas and their suburbs, but differs from Metros
Transit: Bus Rapid Transit, Metros, Commuter and LRT in that the passenger cars generally are
Rail, and Light Rail Transit. heavier, the average trip lengths are usually longer,
and the operations are carried out over tracks
Mass rapid transit that are part of the railroad system in the area.
Mass rapid transit, also referred to as public tran- Bus Rapid Transit
sit, is a passenger transportation service, usually
local in scope, that is available to any person Many cities have developed variations on the
who pays a prescribed fare. It usually operates on theme of better bus services and the concept re-
specific fixed tracks or with separated and exclu- sides in a collection of best practices rather than
sive use of potential common track, according a strict definition. Bus Rapid Transit is a form of
to established schedules along designated routes customer-orientated transit combining stations,
or lines with specific stops, although Bus Rapid vehicles, planning, and intelligent transport
Transit and trams sometimes operate in mixed systems elements into an integrated system with
traffic. It is designed to move large numbers of a unique identity.
people at one time. Examples include Bus Rapid Bus Rapid Transit typically involves busway
Transit, heavy rail transit, and light rail transit. corridors on segregated lanes – either at-grade or
grade separated – and modernised bus technol-
Heavy rail transit
ogy. However, apart from segregated busways
A heavy rail transit system is “a transit system BRT systems also commonly include:
using trains of high-performance, electrically < Rapid boarding and alighting
powered rail cars operating in exclusive rights- < Efficient fare collection
of-way, usually without grade crossings, with < Comfortable shelters and stations
high platform stations” (TCRP, 1998). < Clean bus technologies
< Modal integration
Light Rail Transit
< Sophisticated marketing identity
A light rail transit (LRT) system is a metropoli-
< Excellence in customer service.
tan electric railway system characterised by its
ability to operate single cars or short trains along Bus Rapid Transit is more than simply operation
exclusive rights-of-way at ground level, aerial over exclusive bus lanes or busways. According
structures, in subways, or occasionally in streets, to a recent study of at-grade busways (Shen
and to board and discharge passengers at track et al., 1998), only half of the cities that have
or car floor level (TCRP, 1998). LRT systems busways have developed them as part of a sys-
include tramways, though a major difference is tematic and comprehensive package of measures
that trams often operate without an exclusive as part of the city mass transit network that we
right-of-way, in mixed traffic. would identify as a BRT system.
While Bus Rapid Transit systems always include
some form of exclusive right-of-way for buses,
2 This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
Fig. 25
the applications we consider in this module are 2.2 DEFINING FEATURES OF MRT The amount of space
mostly at-grade, street-level busways. Elevated required to transport
Use of space
busways or tunnels may be needed for traversing the same number of
some city centres, but in many developing cities Similar space-efficiency considerations (see passengers: car, bicycle,
funds will not be available for extensive grade Figure 2) apply to all the MRT modes, although and bus.
separation. in practice is arises as a policy issue only with Poster displayed at the City of Muenster
Planning Office, August 2001
regard to buses and some versions of LRT, since
Bus lane (or priority bus lane) rail systems are already fully segregated from
A bus lane is a highway or street reserved prima- other traffic. BRT and LRT often involve re-al-
rily for buses, either all day or during specified location of existing road space in favour of more
periods. It may be used by other traffic under efficient modes, whereas Metros are normally
certain circumstances, such as while making a fully grade separated and have no impact on
turn, or by taxis, bicycles, or high occupancy road capacity, unless they are elevated in which
vehicles. case there may be a small reduction in road
Bus lanes, widely used in Europe even in small capacity.
cities, are increasingly applied in developing cit-
Speed and passenger capacity
ies such as Bangkok, where counter-flow buses
can move rapidly through peak period congestion. All forms of MRT operate with relatively high
speeds and passenger capacities, and the basic
Busway
requirement of MRT in a developing city is that
A busway is a special roadway designed for it carry large amounts of passengers, rapidly.
exclusive use by buses. It may be constructed Where Metros are applied in developing cities
at, above, or below grade and may be located in they are often by far the fastest mode of MRT,
separate rights-of-way or within highway cor- while LRT and BRT systems typically operate at
ridors. Some form of busway system is a feature average speeds of between 20 and 30 km/hr.
of many Bus Rapid Transit systems.
3
Integration < Passenger information

< Climate control
All MRT systems require interchanges with
< Modal integration
other elements of the public transport system,
< Integration with major trip attractors.
and integration with other modes of transport
such as cars, walking and cycling. Shanghai, Rail-based systems have historically performed
for example, provides excellent Metro/bicycle better on ‘level of service’ indicators, although
and Metro/pedestrian interchanges, and good recent Bus Rapid Transit successes are challeng-
Metro/bus interchanges at some major stations. ing these traditional conceptions.
Mexico City’s Metro is physically integrated
with the international airport and major bus 2.3 THE STRATEGIC IMPORTANCE OF
stations. Curitiba’s BRT system includes excel- MRT SYSTEMS
lent integration with pedestrian streets and taxi
Developing cities are experiencing rapidly
stands. Sao Paulo’s BRT integrates well with the
worsening traffic and related environmental
Metro system. Poor integration is a feature of
conditions. As a first step, political commitment
some under-performing rail-based MRT systems,
to give priority to efficient modes of transport
such as in Kuala Lumpur and Manila.
(transit, walking, cycling) is needed.
Level of service Experience in developed cities shows that MRT
MRT systems usually offer a superior level systems tend to have little impact on land use
of service compared to unsegregated road- patterns. This leads many experts to recom-
based modes such as regular buses, taxis, and mend that ‘adaptive’ MRT systems be used, not
paratransit. to attempt to influence land use patterns, but
rather to adapt to the existing land use patterns
Superior service is evident for example with: (e.g. Cervero, 1998). In many developing cities,
< Terminals & interchanges however, the influence of MRT on land use
< Cleanliness patterns is likely to be much stronger, since such
< Sophisticated marketing image cities are often undergoing rapid spatial expan-
sion. Current trends – e.g. geared toward gated
communities and greenfields housing estates
in many Southeast Asian cities – often favour
car-dependent urban forms, but a quality MRT
system can help counteract such trends by main-
taining growth along main corridors and in city
centres (Figure 3).
While theoretically we are told that cities
should follow a ‘balanced’ approach, using
‘complementary’ MRT systems appropriate
to local circumstances, in practice – especially
in developing cities – once a particular MRT
system is developed, resources tend to be
devoted to that system, while other transit
modes are neglected. Developing cities often
lack the institutional capacity to simultaneously
develop multiple systems. This is apparent
in almost all developing cities which have
Fig. 35 recently pursued rail-based systems, including
Corridors in Bogotá where the TransMilenio system operates: Many for example Kuala Lumpur, Bangkok, Cairo,
developing cities, even though increasingly traffic-saturated, retain a Buenos Aires and Manila. In all these cities, bus
corridor orientation which is conducive to Mass Rapid Transit. transit has been neglected.
Enrique Penalosa, 2001
3. Current applications in Table 1 are discussed in more detail below, and

developing cities in Module 3b: Bus Rapid Transit.
We now survey world-wide applications of the 3.1 BUS RAPID TRANSIT

different MRT systems, focusing on developing
Various BRT systems operate in cities:
cities.
< In Asia: Istanbul, Kunming, Nagoya, Taipei.
Rail-based systems in developing country < In Europe: Bradford, Clermont-Ferrand,
Metros carry about 11 billion journeys each Eindhoven, Essen, Ipswich, Leeds, Nancy,
year, surface rail about 5 billion, and light rail Rouen.
about 2.5 billion. While the proportion of pub- < In Latin America: Belo Horizonte, Bogotá,
lic transport trips by rail exceeds 50% in Seoul Campinas, Curitiba, Goiania, Porto Alegre,
and Moscow, rail systems dominate only in a Quito, Recife, Sao Paulo.
very few cities (World Bank, 2001). < In North America: Ottawa, Pittsburgh,
Some typical MRT systems in developing cities Seattle, Los Angeles, Honolulu, Orlando,
are outlined in Table 1. Several of the systems in Miami, Vancouver.
< In Oceania: Brisbane, Adelaide.
Table 1: Performance and cost of various MRT systems.

World Bank, Cities on the Move, Urban Transport Strategy Review (Oct. 2001
Table 8.1. Performance and Cost of Some Typical MRT Systems

CARACAS BANGKOK MEXICO KUALA TUNIS RECIFE Q UITO BOGOTA PORTO ALEGRE
LUMPUR
EXAMPLE
(TRANSMILENIO,
(LINE 4) (BTS) (LINE B) (PUTRA ) (SMLT) (LINHA SUL) BUSWAY PHASE 1) BUSWAYS
Suburban rail
Category Rail metro Rail metro Rail metro Light rail Light rail Busway Busway Busway
conversion
Electric Electric, Electric, Electric Electric Electric, AC Electric Articulated diesel
Technology Diesel buses
Steel rail steel rail rubber tyre Driverless steel rail steel rail duo-trolleybus buses
11.2 (+ext
Length (km) 12.3 23.1 23.7 29 29.7 km 14.3 41 25
5.0)
20% elevated At grade,
Vertical 100% 100% 100% 95% at grade At grade, At grade
55% at grade At grade Partial signal
segregation tunnel Elevated elevated 5% elevated Mainly segregated No signal priority
25% tunnel priority
Stop spacing (kms) 1.5 1.0 1.1 1.3 0.9 1.2 0.4 0.7 0.4
Capital cost, ($m) 213
1,110 1,700 970 1,450 435 166 110.3 25
of which: (inf only)
Infrastructure/TA/
833 670 560 n.a 268 149 20.0 322 25
Equipment ($m)
Not included Not included
Vehicles ($m) 277 1,030 410 n.a. 167 18 80 (113 vehs)
(private operation) (private operation)
Capital cost/route
90.25 73.59 40.92 50.0 13.3 11.6 10.3 5.2 1.0
km. ($m)
Initial (ultimate) 40 (convoy
vehicles or trains / 20 (30) 20 (30) 13 (26) 30 n/a 8 operation 160 n.a.
hour /direction planned)
Initial maximum
21,600 25,000 19,500 10,000 12000 9,600 9,000 20,000
pass capacity
Maximum pass.
32,400 50,000 39,300 30,000 12000 36,000 15,000 35,000 20,000
carrying capacity
Ave operating 20+ (stopping)
50 45 45 50 13/20 39 20 20
speed (kph) 30+ (express)
Rev/operating cost 115% in
n.a. 100 20 >100 n.a 100 100 100
ratio 1998
Public (BOT Public Public
Private Private,
Ownership Public Public Public Public under infrastructure, infrastructure,
(BOT) (BOT)
consideration private vehicles private vehicles
1995 2000
Year completed 2004 1999 2000 1998 1998 2002 Mostly 1990s
(ext 2000) (1998 prices)
Sources: Janes Urban Transport System; BB&J Consult. 2000; J. Rebelo, and G Menckhoff.
5
Bogotá’s TransMilenio: BRT systems are under planning or construction stop only at special tube stations generally set at
initial results in the following cities: every 3 km. For the same flat fare, the passenger
Results of the first few years < In Asia: Bangalore, Delhi, Jakarta. can thus transfer from one bus to another at
of operation of TransMilenio < In Latin America: Barranquilla, Bogotá any of the terminals, extending public transport
have met the high (expansion), Cartagena, Cuenca, Guatemala access to 90% of the city (Meirelles, 2000).
expectations of the system’s City, Guayaquil, Lima, Mexico City, Panama
Curitiba has inspired improvements else-
developers: City, Pereira, Quito (expansion), San Juan,
• The system is moving
where. Even Los Angeles, perhaps the most
San Salvador.
700,000 passengers each car-dependent city in the world, is developing
< In North America: Albany, Alameda and
day (Sept. 2002) Bus Rapid Transit after a recent visit of a delega-
Contra Costa, Boston, Charlotte, Chicago,
• Most users of TransMilenio tion of leading city officials to Curitiba.
have gained more than 300
Cleveland, Dulles Corridor, Eugene,
hours per year to themselves
Hartford, Las Vegas, Louisville, Montomery Bogotá, Colombia
• 11 % of TransMilenio’s rid- County, San Francisco, Toronto. With over 6 million inhabitants, Bogotá has
ers are former private car < In Oceania: Auckland, Perth, Sydney. proven that Bus Rapid Transit is suitable
drivers even for the largest of cities. Bogotá’s new
• Average speed is higher Latin American experience
TransMilenio system went into operation in
than 25 km per hour Curitiba, Brazil January 2001. The existing two lines already by
• With the 72% of the total
It was in Curitiba in the early 1970s that the December 2001 served over 600,000 passenger
number of buses the sys-
tem moves about 60,000 Bus Rapid Transit idea first evolved. The city has trips per day, greatly exceeding initial projec-
passengers in peak hours implemented many other measures such as car- tions (see margin note). When the full system
• Noise and air pollution have free zones and large green spaces to become one is completed in 2015, TransMilenio will serve
been reduced by 30% of the world’s urban success stories. 5 million passengers each day with 388 km of
where TransMilenio runs busways.
Curitiba is one of the best examples of inte-
• 344 buses in operation
grated transport and urban planning. It has a Bogotá’s TransMilenio system was briefly
• Ticket fare of US$ 0.40
• 35.5 km in operation population of 1.5 million and about 655,000 described in Module 1a of this Sourcebook, and
• 56 stations in operation and motor vehicles. Public transport is managed by is discussed in more detail in Module 3b: Bus
6 under construction. a public company, URBS, and is operated by 10 Rapid Transit.
private companies under concession contracts.
Sao Paulo, Brazil
The public transport system runs 1,677 buses
– many of which are 270-passenger bi-articu- Sao Paulo operates probably the largest Bus
lated buses – which carry on average 976,000 Rapid Transit system in the world in terms of
passengers per day. The 65 km of busways along kilometres covered. Sao Paulo, the most impor-
five main routes are “fed” by 340 km of feeder tant financial and industrial centre in Brazil, has
routes that concentrate passenger demand on 9.9 million inhabitants and 4.8 million vehicles.
strategically placed interchange terminals. These Bus public transport is managed by a public
terminals are linked in turn by 185 km of circu- company, SPTRANS, and is operated by 53
lar interdistrict routes. Acting in support of this private companies. The public transport system
network are 250 km of “Speedy Bus” routes that runs 12,000 buses, which carry an average 4.8
million passengers per day. The city has 35 bus
transfer terminals, 28 km of median busways
and 137 km of bus lanes. New bus corridors
Fig. 44
are planned to integrate the inter-city bus lines,
In Curitiba, boarding suburban rail and Metro systems, and the local
tubes support 5-door bus routes (Meirelles 2000).
boardings on locally
manufactured buses. The system links outlying metropolitan areas
Doors open outwards, to Sao Paulo’s successful underground system.
and ramps drop down Thus, similar to Hong Kong and Singapore
to allow same-level where bus services are well integrated with
boarding. Metro systems, Sao Paulo is an example of bus
Manfred Breithaupt, 1999 and Metro systems being mutually beneficial.
Buses are the backbone

Even where extensive rail
systems have been built
Even cities with several
subway and surface rail
lines typically serve many
more passengers with bus
systems than with the rail
systems. Mexico City’s
Metro, for example, is more
than 150 km in length and
Fig. 65 has 11 lines, but serves less
The on-line median busway in Quito, Ecuador, than 15% of all motorised
covers operating costs at a fare of only US$0.2. trips. Likewise the Buenos
Lloyd Wright, 2001 Aires Metro has 5 lines but
serves only 6% of trips in the
metropolitan area. A similar
some units as old as 35 years. The electric trol-
situation applies in Singapore,
ley-bus also delivers additional environmental
Sao Paulo, Bangkok and
gains through the substitution of diesel-fuelled other developing cities with
buses with units powered by hydro-generated high cost rail-based mass
electricity. The overwhelming popularity of the transit systems. In all these
Quito trolley-bus has exceeded expectations cases buses continue to
Fig. 55 and in a sense created an unexpected problem. serve the large majority of
Sao Paulo has the world’s most extensive bus With over 200,000 commuters now using the public transport trips, with rail
system daily, its maximum capacity has been serving less than 15% of trips.
lane network, with 28 km of median busways
In nearly all developing
and 137 km of bus lanes. reached, and thus has prompted calls for further
cities the majority of pub-
US Federal Transit Administration, 2001 expansion. The municipality plans to deliver an
lic transport is bus based.
additional 73 kilometres of busways by 2006.
Exceptions include the
Quito, Ecuador For cost reasons, Quito’s new Eco-Via line ‘motorcycle cities’ such as
Quito’s trolley-bus system and recent Eco-Via utilises Euro II diesel buses rather than continue Ho Chi Minh and Denpasar,
addition are dramatic examples of BRT cost-ef- with electric trolley technology. Likewise, the where buses serve less than
5% of trips, as well as rail-
fectiveness and the applicability of BRT even planned expansion will be utilising clean diesel
dominated Moscow.
under stressed economic conditions. Ecuador technology for its buses.
Another notable partial ex-
has experienced several tumultuous years of po- ception is Hong Kong, though
Porto Alegre, Brazil
litical and economic misfortune. In 1998, rains even there buses still serve
from the El Niño climatic effect destroyed much Porto Alegre, Brazil has shown that BRT can be a majority of public transport
of the nation’s infrastructure. Then, in 1999, on delivered at a relatively low-cost. In this case, the passenger trips. Railways are
the heels of the emerging global market crisis, system was reportedly built for less than US$1 forecast to handle about 40%
Ecuador’s banking sector virtually collapsed. million per km. The city has 17 bus transfer ter- to 50% of the total public
Two governmental administrations during the minals, 27 km of median busways and 1 km of transport passenger board-
late 1990s only survived a short time in office. bus lanes, along 5 radial routes (Meirelles, 2000). ings in Hong Kong by 2016,
increasing from 33% in 1997
However, in the midst of this rather chaotic Porto Alegre employs a unique “Convoy” (Env. Protection Dept., Govt.
scene, Quito has developed and expanded an technique in organising its route structure. of Hong Kong SAR, 2002).
impressive transit system featuring 25 km of ex- Platoons of buses operate of main corridors and Shanghai, with its two
clusive busways. The system covers all operating stop simultaneously at station bays that provide new subway lines, elevated
costs with a fare of only US$0.20. space for three buses. At the end of the main Pearl LRT line, and suburban
Quito’s existing fleet of privately run buses corridors, the same buses continue onto separate rail line, combined with the
community routes. Thus, rather than switching poor and deteriorating traffic
has taken an environmental and health toll on
to feeder buses at transfer terminals, custom- conditions for buses, may be
the city. Until recently, the average bus age of following a similar trend, at
the private sector fleet has been 17 years, with ers can complete their entire journey without
least in the central city area.
transfers.
7
Initial results from Taipei

Initial results from Taipei,
China, have also been very
positive, including:
• Improved traffic orderliness
• Improved operating effi-
ciency of roadways
• Reduced traffic interference
by bus stops
• Savings in travel times Fig. 75
• Reduced frequency and se-
Porto Alegre, Brazil.
verity of accidents
Lloyd Wright, 2001
• Improved bus operation, in
terms of both efficiency and
Asian experience
reliability
• Increased ridership of public Kunming, China Fig. 95
transport (Jason Chang,
Through a partnership with the city of Zurich, Nagoya, Japan, marks the bus lanes with a
2002).
Switzerland, Kunming has become the first city coloured road surface.
Taipei (China), along with Courtesy of John Cracknell, TTC, and the US Transportation Research Board.
in China to adopt the BRT concept.
Bogotá and other leading
systems, is discussed in more Hong Kong, China
< A network of dedicated bus lanes
detail in the Module 3b: Bus < High quality transfer environments
Rapid Transit.
The Hong Kong bus system displays many fea- < Green buses
tures of BRT, including bus priority measures, < Intelligent Transport System (ITS)
advanced fare collection, comprehensive cover-
applications, including innovative passenger
age, clean buses, and passenger information.
information systems
The system is well integrated with Hong Kong’s < Transit-oriented development.
Metro, with an extensive bus feeder network
comprising more than 140 bus feeder shuttle Taipei has pursued a number of innovative solu-
routes connecting with railway stations includ- tions to finding lane spaces for buses.
ing the MTR, KCR and Airport Express.
Japan
Japan is currently hosting a 16-city Transport
Demand Management program in which eight
of the cities are developing bus improvement
initiatives.
Taipei, Taiwan (China)
Taipei has developed a bus lane network of 57
km since March 1998 (at an average cost of
US$500,000 per kilometre), in the context of a
wider policy framework emphasising:
Fig. 84
Nathan Road, Hong
Kong. Franchised bus
operators concentrate
along major traffic
corridors where major Fig. 105
commercial centres are Taipei commuters ponder the benefits of bus
located. travel.
Karl Fjellstrom, June 2001 Jason Chang, 2002
construction in the corridor leading to the

downtown. The near term benefit/cost ratios
were much higher for the relatively inexpensive
outer segments than for the costly CBD links.
Also, forecasts of future transit use indicated
that the building of a costly tunnel or any other
grade-separated facility in the downtown area
could be safely deferred for 20 to 25 years (Shen
et al., 1998).
USA
Fig. 115 Bus Rapid Transit is a succss story of technology
With an initial 17 city program, Bus Rapid transfer from the developing world to the devel-
Transit is rapidly expanding in the US. oped. Invented in Curitiba, Brazil, Bus Rapid
Courtesy of US Federal Transit Administration Transit is quickly being replicated in North
America, Europe, and Australia. In the United
North American experience States, the initial 17-city program is rapidly ex-
panding, and benefiting greatly from a national
Ottawa, Canada
information sharing program.
Ottawa has one of the most successful BRT
systems in North America with 26 kilometres of Honolulu’s successful CityExpress system has
exclusive busways, and a total system length of now been expanded to connect the system with
over 60 kilometres. Up to 200 articulated buses a unified intercity service called CountyExpress.
operate on the system per hour and handle peak Pittsburgh initiated its busway program back in
capacities of approximately 10,000 passengers 1977 and now has three lines on 26 kilometres
per hour per direction. The system is currently of exclusive busways.
handling 200,000 passengers each day for an Results from the US Bus Rapid Transit program
annual total of over 85 million passenger trips. are encouraging, as Table 2 shows. In virtually
The system is well integrated with other trans- every case, travel times have been reduced and
port infrastructure including train stations, Park ridership levels have seen dramatic gains, though
and Ride lots, and cycleways. The system also from a low base.
provides good examples of features such as traf-
fic signal prioritisation and queue jumping for Table 2: Positive initial results from the US
buses (Leech, C., personal communication, OC Bus Rapid Transit program.
Transpo, Ottawa, 2002). US Federal Transit Administration
Ottawa’s visionary system was developed at a Travel time Ridership

City
time when many other cities were looking to reduction increase
much more expensive rail-based mass transit Pittsburgh 50% 80–100%
solutions, and in combination with transit- Los Angeles 25% 27–41%
friendly land use development policies. Faced Miami N/A 70%
in the 1980s with anticipated increases in the Honolulu 25–45% N/A
metropolitan population, employment and tran-
Chicago 25% 70%
sit ridership, the transit operating agency OC
Transpo strove to increase the efficiency and use
of the existing bus system in the region. European experience
OC Transpo considered that the region would France
be best served by an “outside-in” rapid transit France also has an ambitious Bus Rapid Transit
development strategy. The downtown seg- agenda with such cities as Grenoble, Lyon,
ment was the most expensive to construct and Nancy, and Clermont Ferrand in Paris opting
was therefore deferred in favour of less costly for improved bus services.
9
The Brisbane Busway

Impressive initial results
Brisbane’s Southeast Busway, which opened in
April 2001, led in the first 6 months of operation
to an increase in ridership of 12% along the same
Fig. 124 routes, compared to the previous year.
The Busway rapidly gained further popularity.
The modern Civis bus
After a year of operation, the service was
on a busway in Rouen.
Courtesy of John Marino (Irisbus) and the
recording 27,000 extra passengers per week,
US Transportation Research Board with patronage on core bus services up by 45%.
A study in 2002 showed that property values
Great Britain along the Busway had risen substantially, though
property values have also risen elsewhere in the
Busways are becoming increasingly common in
city over the same period.
such English cities as Leeds, London, Reading,
A long term solution for a rapidly growing
and Ispwich.
metropolitan region
The Southeast Busway, to be followed by the
Inner Northern Busway (due for completion in late
2003), is aiming to fulfill the long-term mobility
Fig. 134
needs of the city. It is seen as a long-term
Ipswich, England. solution for the rapidly growing metropolitan area,
The unpaved centre rather than a transitional measure toward a rail-
strip reduces costs based system.
sonsiderably, and also As in Bogotá, implementation of the BRT
reduces noise. system is done in stages, with e.g. major
Courtesy of US Transportation Research
Board
extensions such as the Inner Northern Busway,
and regular ongoing improvements at particular
stations, interchange facilities, etc. For more
Australian and New Zealand programs information please see http://www.transport.
qld.gov.au/busways/.
Several cities in Australia and New Zealand
have launched Bus Rapid Transit programs.
Operating systems are in place in Adelaide
and Brisbane (see margin note on the Brisbane
Busway). Systems are also being planned in
Perth, Sydney, and Auckland.
Fig. 1435
The Brisbane Busway features excellent station
design, 50 new natural gas “green buses”,
good passenger support and information, and
excellent modal integration and marketing. It
has extensive grade-separation, elevated and
underground, in the city centre area.
Karl Fjellstrom, April 2001
3.2 LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT Rail system descriptions

Light Rail Transit (LRT) systems are a relatively and maps, world-wide
new and promising concept for application in For a comprehensive and
certain urban locations, though more relevant to reasonably up-to-date
listing of current rail systems
wealthy than to developing cities. Comparable
and projects world-wide,
to BRT systems in terms of capacity, LRT pro-
including for example rail
duces no local emissions. projects and expansion plans
As with BRT, LRT lines are usually segregated in Bangkok, Guangzhou,
from other means of traffic by barriers or slightly Shanghai, Taipei, Santiago,
Sao Paulo, Manila, Kuala
elevated tracks, or by full grade separation.
Lumpur, and Hong Kong
(several different projects) see
Current applications
http://www.railway-
LRT ranges from the conventional on-street Fig. 165 technology.com/projects/
tramways of Eastern Europe and Egypt to the el- The MRT system in Shanghai has had a index.html.
evated and segregated systems of Singapore and Maps of rail systems
positive impact on land use, with densification
Kuala Lumpur. With the exception of the ex- world-wide are available at
occurring along Metro routes.
http://www.reed.edu/~reyn/
tensive tram systems of Central Eastern Europe Karl Fjellstrom, Jan. 2002
transport.html.
and the former Soviet Union, LRT systems exist,
or have been planned, only in relatively wealthy city centre. A second line is being built to form a
developing cities such as Hong Kong, Shanghai, rough circle with the existing LRT line.
Tunis and Kuala Lumpur, or for high income The system provides excellent examples of
developments such as the Tren de la Costa of well-planned modal integration. The northern
Buenos Aires. point of the Red Metro line connects with the
Recent examples of LRT systems in developing long distance train station. Bicycle parking is
cities include the elevated Putra and recently provided near all MRT stations. The major
opened (July 2002) monorail systems in Kuala Shanghai Stadium interchange is located next to
Lumpur, and Shanghai’s Pearl line. a major bus terminal. Figure 16 (see also Figure
20) shows the positive influence the MRT can
LRT and Metro lines in Shanghai have on land use in the city, with a row of high
density developments focusing on the Shanghai
The elevated (for 80% of its length) “Pearl”
Stadium area; a major transit interchange.
LRT line (see Figure 15) in Shanghai serves high
density, high-rise apartments to the north of the On the downside, it is doubtful that the system
can be expanded at a pace to match the rapidly
expanding city. New developments in outer
areas combined with a frenetic road-building
program tend to promote car-dependency.
Traffic conditions and speeds in the city centre
are already poor for buses, and will worsen.
The decline of trams in developing cities
Trams, historically a feature of many developing
cities, retain a role in some cities, such as Hong
Kong, but are in decline. In Cairo the percent-
age of all motorised trips by tram has fallen from
15% in 1971 to 2% in 1998 (Metge, 2000).
Fig. 155
Historically many developing cities had tram
systems along major corridors, but these were
‘Shanghai City Plan’ shows the two Metro lines
dismantled to make way for increasing private
in Green and Red, and the LRT line in purple.
Shanghai Tourist Map, Tourism Administrative Commission, 2001
car traffic. Tram lines, now largely paved over,
11
are still visible in streets in many developing

cities in Asia and Latin America. Cairo (Figure
17) is one of the few developing cities with a
functioning tram system, though this has gradu-
ally dwindled to one line.
Renewed interest in wealthier cities
In many richer cities the trends of tram decline
are reversed (see Figure 18). A European best
practices report notes that the decline in tram
use in Munich, for example, has been reversed
and patronage has increased in the last 10 years
through a program of tram priority at intersec-
tions and integration with other rail services
(Atkins, 2001). Many other European cities
have introduced and expanded tramways, both
in the inner city (e.g. Amsterdam, Vienna,
Frankfurt), and serving outlying commercial and
leisure facilities (e.g. Oberhausen, Germany).
Fig. 175
Cairo’s dwindling, neglected tram system, In North America, many cities have successfully
though averaging only around 11 km/hr speeds, combined public transport projects with a policy
offers a pleasant community atmosphere and a of revival of its city centre. Well-designed and
fare from the upmarket Heliopolis to downtown planned LRT systems are attractive to passen-
Cairo of less than US$0.07. gers, even in car-dominated, low density North
Karl Fjellstrom, March 2002
American cities. In the last 20 years, 14 cities
in the US and Canada have introduced LRT
systems.
Building ‘transit malls’ with LRT access, trees
and pedestrian zones (see e.g. Figure 18) can en-
courage private investment in city centre office
blocks, shops and apartments.
3.3 METROS
Metros in developing cities carried about 11
billion journeys in 2000, more than twice the
ridership of commuter rail and more than four
times the ridership of LRT systems.
Both Metro and commuter rail systems require
exclusive right-of-way (ROW) and safety meas-
ures due to relatively high speeds. To provide
Fig. 184 exclusive ROW many heavy rail systems are
City-centre tram LRT built underground or elevated, causing very high
lines in Sapporo, Japan costs. Metro systems may cover their operational
(top) and Frankfurt, costs in urban areas with high population den-
Germany. In both cities sity, such as in Hong Kong or Sao Paulo, but
the trams act as feeders normally they require subsidies. A successful
to extensive Metro Metro also requires integration with existing
systems. transport modes and policies, and planned den-
Karl Fjellstrom, 2002 sification around Metro stations.
Metro systems are being developed or expanded

in several developing cities, such as Bangkok,
Santiago de Chile, Kuala Lumpur, Sao Paulo,
Buenos Aires, Mexico City (Figure 19), Cairo
(Figure 20), Manila, Shanghai, and Hong Kong
(see www.railway-technology.com/projects for a
list).
Older, generally successful systems include
Mexico City, Buenos Aires, and Sao Paulo,
though in all cases the Metro ridership is far
Fig. 195 below the ridership of the bus system. In this
Mexico City has an extensive Metro system, module we describe the cases of Bangkok and
with 11 lines. Fares are low at a flat 2 peso, Kuala Lumpur in more detail, as these cases
though the service is often overcrowded and illustrate the strengths and weaknesses of Metro
run-down. An entrance is shown here, to the applications in developing cities. While the
right of a bus lane. Bangkok Skytrain system is described following,
Karl Fjellstrom, Feb. 2002 the Kuala Lumpur heavy rail and LRT systems
are described in next section of the module,
comparing costs of the various MRT options.
The Bangkok Skytrain (BTS)

Three separate mass transit schemes were initi-
ated in Bangkok in the 1990s:
< The Bangkok Transit System (BTS or better
known as the Skytrain), initiated by the Fig. 216
Bangkok Metropolitan Administration Victory Monument,
< The failed Hopewell elevated rail project, Bangkok. BTS trains
initiated by the then Ministry of Transport run on dual tracks,
and Communications carried on a 9 metre
< The Blue Line, initiated by the Mass Rapid wide viaduct, supported
Transit Authority (a 20km underground rail on single box viaduct
line due to open in 2004 connecting to the girders, each 12 metres
suburban and BTS systems). above the road level.
Karl Fjellstrom, Jan. 2002
Fig. 205
Cairo’s 63km, two-line Metro carries 700
million passengers per year. Its stations,
marked by a distinctive “M”, have promoted
development along its route (top) and also serve
poor areas (above).
Karl Fjellstrom, Feb. 2002
13
The Skytrain,
which opened in
late 1999, is an
elevated heavy rail
system running
above some of
Bangkok’s busiest
commercial areas.
Bangkok Skytrain service It has a peak capacity of around 45,000 pas-
innovations
sengers per hour per direction. Trains run on 5
Recent Skytrain innovations
to 7 minute headways from 6 am to midnight,
include regular promotional
events. All are advertised,
though as demand increases and for special oc-
both in the mass media and casions such as New Year’s Eve, headways can Fig. 225
at the BTS stations. be shortened to 2 minutes (Sayeg, 2001) and
Each car is air-conditioned, and the BTS offers
In October 2001 a free running time extended. The BTS has two lines,
a comfortable and fast ride through the central
shuttle bus service for pass- with a total length of 23.1 km and 23 stations.
city area.
holding Skytrain passengers The lines intersect at the city centre station. Karl Fjellstrom, Dec. 2001
was implemented on 5 dif-
ferent routes. BTS cannot Tender documents for a turnkey BTS system
charge for these services. were issued in March 1993 to five consortia. stations), road traffic to the central area becomes
If they could, and BTS was The agreement was later amended to cover not even more difficult, integration with other
able to determine routing, this just the construction, but maintenance and op- modes is improved, and complementary mass
would put pressure on the eration of the completed network. (For further transit systems are completed.
BMTA to change. Hence, a discussion of private sector participation in the
multi-modal concession for Despite the initially disappointing ridership, an
BTS see Module 1c: Private Sector Participation
the BTS extensions (under International Finance Corporation (one of the
in urban Transport Infrastructure Provision.)
construction) may be a good system’s investors) funded study indicates that:
idea. Singapore’s northeast Fares, ridership and operating costs At present, BTS is covering operating and main-
corridor is an example of a
Fares range from 15 – 40 Baht, or around tenance costs through the fare box. ... As the
multi-modal concession, with marginal cost of carrying passengers on the BTS is
US$0.37 to $1.00. This is relatively expensive,
SBS – a bus operator – now well below the average cost, its cost recovery will
also running trains.
even compared to air-conditioned bus fares for increase markedly as patronage grows (IFC, 2001).
long trips, which are less than $0.50, or around
$0.11 for shorter trips. Economy bus fares are Modal integration
much cheaper, from around $0.05 for short trips Integration of BTS with other modes of
up to $0.20 for long trips. transport is poor; a contributing factor to the
First year ridership was only one-quarter of disappointing ridership. The Bangkok Mass
forecast ridership. Though it is improving, in- Transit Authority, Bangkok’s monopoly bus
creasing from around 160,000 to 200,000 trips services provider, has been slow to act. The BTS
per day in its first two years of operation (average meanwhile has taken steps to provide its own
280,000 weekday passengers in Oct. 2002), this feeder services (see margin note), but they are
is still only one-third of the forecast. Similar disap- severely constrained. Some clear opportunities
pointing ridership has been recorded for recent for modal integration were missed, with the
urban rail systems in Kuala Lumpur (discussed northern line terminating only around 2km
later in this module) and in Manila (Metrostar). from the newly constructed northern bus termi-
Diversion from car drivers to the BTS system ap- nal, and no feeder service or pedestrian walkway
pears to be relatively high, however, with around connecting the two.
10% of passengers being former car drivers. Facilities for bicycles are either not provided,
Interestingly, one-third of BTS trips are new trips. or are located in an unsupportive environment
Ridership should, however, continue to increase, for cyclists, and are therefore unused (such as
especially as densification around stations takes at Ekkamai station). Eight stations are directly
place (encouraged by rising land values near connected to adjacent shopping complexes.
Rolling stock
Twenty-seven three-car, 1,100 passenger capacity
trains, 65.1 metres long, are currently operated.
The quality, cleanliness and reliability of the sys-
tem are all outstanding. The three-car trains can
in future be doubled in length at peak times.
Future arrangements
From the start of commercial operations, all
operating revenue for the following 30 years was
to be handed to BTSC. However, the current
situation is that the BTS has been transferred
back to the BMA, although BTSC still carry
out the system maintenance.
The (inevitable) need for expansion
Almost all developing cities which are con-
sidering MRT applications or extentions
Fig. 235
are expanding at a rapid rate. It is therefore
An overloaded commuter train in Jakarta, Commuter rail in Bombay
inevitable that Metro systems, which are very
Indonesia. Commuter/suburban rail services
expensive and therefore often limited to one or
are in decline in many developing cities.
two short lines, soon come under pressure for Kompas, 17 -Jun-01
expansion to serve new areas of the city. This has
also happened in Bangkok. BTS system expan-
sion was approved in 1999, and construction
has commenced but is proceeding slowly due
to problems of cost and complexity. The three
approved extensions add up to an extra 19.2
km (see further http://www.bma.go.th/bmaeng/
Six million passengers
body_traffic_and_transport.html).
per day are carried
by suburban rail in
3.4 COMMUTER RAIL Bombay, India.
Current applications Manfred Breithaupt, Feb. 2002,
Churchgate Station, Bombay
Commuter or suburban rail services are mostly

provided by general railroad companies and
they share track with freight and long-distance Fig. 245
transport. While in theory the capacity would Radial commuter rail lines have influenced the
be limited to the number of available seats, in urban form in Buenos Aires.
practice these services are often run at crush pas- Nora Turco, 2001
senger loads in developing cities (Figure 23).

Suburban railways in developing cities are As shown in Bombay, where each day 6 million
usually radially oriented into the city centre. passengers are carried by suburban railways, this
mode may even serve as a backbone MRT for a Market differentiation
Although even in relatively well-served cities like
developing city. Like Metros, suburban railways in Bombay extends to
Bombay, Rio de Janeiro, Moscow, Buenos Aires
need an independent institutional body which women-only carriages,
and Johannesburg, they carry less then 10%
allocates funds and distributes earnings, as well similar to Cairo’s Metro.
of trips, they can be important in supporting Manfred Breithaupt, Feb. 2002
a transit-friendly city form and maintaining a as fare and timetable intregration with other
strong city centre (Figure 24). transport services.
15
Measures which can increase capacity and 4. Comparison on key parameters

safety include the elimination of at-grade road
crossings (or introduction of safety equip- Though ideally cities developing an MRT
ment), the purchase of double-deck-trains and system will draw from different combinations
improvement of boarding/alighting facilities, of road and rail-based MRT, experience shows
though in all cases the cost implications may be most developing cities will probably focus on
too large for many developing cities. As with one choice for an MRT system. Once one form
all other MRT systems, high ridership on com- of MRT is implemented, it is likely that other
muter lines requires feeder services (e.g. by bus) MRT options will be neglected. It is therefore
and good interchange facilities. important that this choice be well informed.
The rehabilitation and improvement of subur-
ban railways show good cost-benefit-ratios and 4.1 COST
can contribute to poverty alleviation, as poorer For any municipality, the infrastructure cost of a
people generally live further from the city centre. transit system is a pre-eminent decision-making
The most serious obstacles to rail developments factor. Bus Rapid Transit is relatively economical
are frequently institutional. When operated by to develop. Without costs of excavation and ex-
national rail organisations, suburban railways pensive rail cars, Bus Rapid Transit can be over
tend to be given low priority – in particular in 100 times less expensive than a Metro system.
comparison to the road lobby – and are poorly
coordinated with other urban public transport “New subway systems in the US
services. In many cases the weakness of publicly show that costs have been well
owned national rail undertakings leaves their
capacity severely underdeveloped (as in Manila, above, and ridership well below,
Jakarta, and Surabaya). forecasts made when the projects
were approved. This has also been
Positive experience with concessioning
of commuter rail services the experience of many rail transit
systems in developing countries.”
In Module 1c: Private Sector Participation in
Urban Transport Infrastructure Provision, it was Gregory Ingram, World Bank, Patterns of
seen that positive experience is possible where Metropolitan Development: What Have We Learned?,
Urban Studies, Vol. 35, No. 7, 1998
these weaknesses are addressed. A program of
concessioning to the private sector in Buenos
The cost difference extends to other infrastruc-
Aires revitalised the system, doubling patronage
ture items, such as stations. A busway station
over a five year period while at the same time
in Quito, Ecuador costs only about US$35,000
reducing the budget burden of the system by
while a rail station in Porto Alegre that serves a
nearly US$1 billion per year; although the sys-
similar number of persons costs US$150 million.
tem still requires an ongoing operational subsidy
and operating conditions have considerably
worsened in 2002.
In Brazil the transfer of responsibility for subur-
ban railways from the highly centralised CBTU
(Companhia Brasileira de Trens Urbanos) to
local (state) control, together with a government BRT station in Quito, Rail station in Porto Alegre:
funded rehabilitation program, has improved Ecuador: US$ 35,000 US$ 150 million
service in most of the major cities. Assisted by a
Thus, for the same amount of investment, a
program of concessioning, it is greatly reducing
Bus Rapid Transit system can serve as much as
the fiscal burden.
100 times the area of a rail-based system. A city
with enough funding for one kilometre of Metro
might be able to construct 100 km of BRT.
Capital costs for rail-based MRT Table 4: Factors influencing Metro capital Further information on
Capital costs usually cover planning and con- costs. comparisons, and transit
struction costs as well as technical equipment Adapted from Allport 2000 levels of service
and rolling stock. The capital costs of US LRT More information on transit
Influence Factor
level of service, relevant
systems are on average US$ 21.6 million per Dominant - Management/organisation quality
to comparisons between
kilometre. - New system, or progressive
modes – although from
expansion of existing system
The capital costs depend on the extent of a North American rather
Large - Ground conditions (underground than developing country
grade separation and right-of-way, as well as construction, and foundations for
on specific geological conditions and the prices perspective – can be obtained
elevated viaducts)
from the Transit Capacity and
of building materials and labour, but also - Urban constraints and topography
(utilities diversions, proximity Quality of Service Manual
extend to planning procedures and institutions.
to buildings, ability to divert (http://kittelson.transit.com),
Allport (2000) shows also that the effectiveness
traffic, environmental constraints, prepared for the Transit
of planning procedures contributes to a large earthquake protection) Cooperative Research
extent to capital costs. The study found that - Design and safety requirements Program (TCRP), 1999.
similar Metro systems in developing countries - Financing costs
were much more expensive, for example, than - Depth of water table (can make
cost prohibitive for underground)
a system implemented in Madrid (see Table
3). Table 4 provides a rough assessment of fac- Moderate - Land costs
- Competition in the equipment
tors influencing rail-based MRT capital costs. supply and construction market
Similar factors and influences can be assumed to
Small - Labour costs
apply to BRT systems. - Taxes and duties
- System features (long trains, AC,
Table 4 shows, perhaps counter-intuitively, that
special access, etc)
it is not the construction phase (with labour and
equipment costs) or details in system features,
but rather strategic decisions on management Table 5: Impacts of alignment on cost: rail-
and organisation that have the greatest influence based MRT.
on MRT capital costs. Additionally the integra- Allport 2000
tion in the urban fabric and the fundamental Vertical All-in cost (US$m) per Ratio
alignment route km
Table 3: Capital costs of various rail systems. At-grade 15 - 30 1
UTSR 2001; Allport 2000; GTZ 2001 Elevated 30 - 75 2 - 2.5
Cost/km Underground 60 - 180 4-6
Railway Type Notes
(US$)
West Rail Heavy 38% decision of vertical alignment will have a major
220m
Hong Kong Metro tunnel bearing on capital costs.
Kuala Lumpur Elevated,
LRT 50m Table 5 underlines the impacts of alignment
- Putra driverless
Kuala Lumpur Heavy Largely
decisions on capital costs for rail MRT systems.
50m
- Star Metro elevated
Manila - Line Light
50m Elevated
3 extension Metro
Bangkok
Metro 74m Elevated
Skytrain
Caracas -
Metro 90m BRT: US$ 1–10 million per Metros: US$ 55–207 million
Venezuela
kilometre per kilometre
Mexico City Metro 41m
Madrid Metro 23m
Tunis LRT 13m
Recife - Brazil Comm Rail 12m
17
Two systems at the same cost: Operating costs

(1) Rail
When comparing such operating cost values
between mass transit modes (e.g., BRT with
rail), one must be certain that a “like for like”
comparison of variables is being made. BRT
systems typically amortise vehicle purchase costs
within the operating cost calculation, while rail
systems sometimes list rolling stock as a capital
cost. Further, because of rail’s high cost structure,
certain maintenance and replacement part items
are sometimes capitalised. To make a correct
comparison, adjustments will need to be made
(2) Bus Rapid Transit to ensure capital and operating costs are appro-
priately categorised.
Rail systems do have an apparent operational
cost advantage from the standpoint of labour
costs, specifically with regard to the cost of a
driver. Bus coaches each require a driver while
several rail coaches connected together only
requires a single driver. However, in developing
nations, the lower wage differentials mean that
this advantage is largely overwhelmed by the
other components. Porto Alegre, Brazil offers a
Table 6: Infrastructure cost components of unique opportunity to compare urban rail and
Bogotá’s TransMilenio BRT system. BRT operating costs on an even basis. The city
Lloyd Wright, 2002 has both types of systems operating in similar
circumstances. The Trensurb rail system requires
Total cost Cost per km
Component a 69% operating subsidy for each passenger trip
(US$ million) (US$ million)
Trunk lines 94.7 2.5 (Thomson, 2001). By contrast, the city’s BRT
Stations 29.2 0.8 system has a comparable fare structure, but
Terminal 14.9 0.4 operates with no subsidies and in fact returns a
Pedestrian profit to the private sector firms operating the
16.1 0.4
overpasses buses.
Bus depots 15.2 0.4
Profitability of bus systems in
Control centre 4.3 0.1 developing cities
Other 25.7 0.7
Public transport by bus in developing countries
Total 198.8 5.3
is already characterised by a high level of cost
recovery, and usually such services operate at a
Capital costs for Bus Rapid Transit profit. The fact that such services can be profit-
Whereas rail-based MRT’s may cost from US$ able under inferior and deteriorating operationg
20 – 180 million per kilometre, Bus Rapid conditions (chiefly congestion), and a poor and
Transit systems are an order of magnitude unsupportive regulatory and planning frame-
cheaper: US$ 1 – 10 million per kilometre. work, indicates that where a range of operational
and regulatory improvements encouraging com-
We can view these cost differences graphically,
petition and service innovation are implemented
in terms of the length of MRT system achiev-
along with physical measures such as bus prior-
able for roughly the same cost.
ity, there is little doubt that BRT in developing
Table 6 summarises costs of Bogotá’s cities will be profitable.
TransMilenio BRT system, discussed in more
detail in Module 3c: Bus Rapid Transit.
In addition, the form of many developing cities Fare Box Ratio

Extra costs of new
is still suited to transit, as development is often The Fare Box Ratio gives an indication of eco- technologies
still channelled along major arterials rather nomic viability of an MRT system. It describes Providing refueling
than dispersed to all areas of the city. Even car- the ratio between fares collected and operational infrastructure can also be
saturated cities such as Bangkok can be more costs. Table 7 indicates that five railway opera- a consideration. According
accurately considered “car-saturated transit tions are able to cover operational costs and to to the International
cities” rather than “car-dependent cities”. These use the surplus for depreciation of infrastructure. Energy Agency, refueling
circumstances (unlike in car-dependent cities instrastructure and other
These are exceptional: Most railway operations
support system costs for fuel
where activities are highly dispersed), tend to are subsidised by an agency or surpluses in other
cell buses cost approximately
favour a high ridership. branches of the city budget. US$5 million.
Rail system operating costs A major additional cost for
Fare Box Ratios of BRT systems
new technologies such as fuel
Operating costs include salaries, fuel and main- The Fare Box Ratio of BRT systems in Porto cells, which is not included
tenance of both vehicles and infrastructure. The Alegre, Curitiba, Bogotá and Quito exceeds one, in Table 8, is the cost of re-
operational costs depend partly on the amount as do most bus systems throughout the develop- search and development for
of cars required to provide a service. The higher ing world. the transit agency concerned.
operating speeds the lower the circulation time
and in consequence the number of cars needed Furthermore, as shown in Module 3c: Bus
for a single line. Rapid Transit (see Figure 6) revenues from the
TransMilenio BRT in Bogotá do not only cover
operating costs for the trunk line operators, but
“The construction costs of Metros also cover a range of other costs, including the
in developing countries are so high costs of the feeder services, the system planning
that they crowd out many other and regulatory body (3% of fare revenues), the
investments. ... Most systems have fare collection company, the funds administra-
tor, and a contingency fund.
operating deficits that severely
constrain local budgets, as in Pusan Rolling stock
and Mexico City” Table 8 provides an approximation of the cost
Gregory Ingram (op cit) difference between buses with different propul-
sion systems, compared to a standard rail car.
A recent US survey (GAO, 2001) confirms The purchase cost does not include substantial
that operational costs of LRT systems are much and ongoing additional costs such as specialised
higher than for BRT. The report compares six maintenance, and research and development needs
US cities having both LRT and BRT systems. It that accompany the most advanced technologies.
refers to three categories of operating costs:
< Costs per vehicle hour Table 7: Fare Box Ratios, selected rail MRTs.
< Costs per vehicle revenue km TCRP 1999, Allport 2000, GTZ (edited)
< Costs per passenger trip.

Railway Fare Box Ratio
Operating costs per vehicle hour of 5 LRT Regional Metro Porto Alegre 0.25
systems are between 1.6 to 7.8 times higher than
Kuala Lumpur Putra LRT 0.50
those of BRT systems. LRT operating costs per
Buenos Aires Metro 0.77
vehicle hour ranged from $89 to $434. Similar
findings were made for operating costs per vehi- Kuala Lumpur Star Metro 0.90
cle revenue kilometre. Sao Paulo Metro 1.06
Singapore Metro 1.50
The World Bank (2001) provides some figures
for developing countries (see also Table 1). Santiago Metro 1.60
Operating costs per passenger range from Manila Light Metro 1.80
US$0.61 in Hong Kong to $0.19 in Santiago, Hong Kong Metro 2.20
while revenues per passenger range from $0.11 in
Calcutta to $0.96 in Hong Kong.
19
Construction time Table 8: Costs of various bus technologies, 4.2 PLANNING & CONSTRUCTION TIME
advantages of bus rapid compared to a standard rail car. Project development and planning
transit International Energy Agency, 2002.
Bangkok’s Skytrain system The project development and planning process

Cost per vehicle
took four-and-a-half years Propulsion technology is generally quicker for BRT than for rail-based
(US$)
to establish, from the time of MRT systems. The BRT planning process for a
New diesel, constructed in
signing of the construction
developing country
30,000 - 75,000 ‘world class’ BRT system, described in Module
contract to first operation. 3c: Bus Rapid Transit, takes about one year and
Bogotá’s TransMilenio BRT New diesel (Euro II) 100,000 - 300,000
costs around US$400,000 – US$2 million.
system – with 56 stations CNG, LPG bus 150,000 - 350,000
compared to the Skytrain’s Hybrid electric bus 200,000 - 400,000
Due to the relatively low costs, financing is also
25 stations and with a large generally easier and quicker for BRT than for
Fuel cell bus 1.0 - 1.5 million
range of associated improve- rail-based systems. Jakarta, Indonesia, for exam-
ments such as pedestrian Metro rail car 1.7 - 2.4 million ple, decided in late 2001 to implement a BRT
and cyclist facilities, public system, and the government was able to quickly
parks and so on – took less Public finances allocate funds from the routine city develop-
than 3 years from concept
In terms of public sector affordability, BRT is ment budget.
to full implementation. The
actual physical construction the most favourable form of MRT system. BRT
of the entire system, including systems require a relatively small initial outlay. “Mayors who are elected for only
the associated public space Bogotá, for example, was able to build the entire three or four years can oversee a
improvements, took only system of around 40 km without taking out loans.
around 8 months.
BRT project from start to finish”
Savings, meanwhile, can be used in other areas,
such as health and education, public space facili- Construction
ties, and conditions for pedestrians and cyclists.
The simpler physical infrastructure of Bus Rapid
Rail systems – both LRT and Metros – require Transit means that such systems can also be built
much greater initial outlays and ongoing in relatively short periods of time, often in less
subsidies. Though the advent of private sector than 18 months. Underground and elevated rail
concessionaires was expected by many to change systems can take considerably longer, often well
this situation, the evidence is that the various over three years.
new Build-Operate-Transfer projects are all in
financial trouble and are nowhere achieving This time difference has a political dimension.
profitability (see further Module 1c). Alone Mayors who are elected for only three or four
among rail MRT systems, the Hong Kong Metro years can oversee a BRT project from start to
funds all its costs (capital, asset replacement and finish. Successfully implemented BRT systems
operating) from its mainly farebox revenues, and have positively influenced the re-election and
can be considered profitable. All other rail MRT political careers of mayors in cities such as
systems require support from the public sector; Curitiba and Bogotá.
often very substantial (Allport, 2000).
The problems en-
Construction time
countered by new
rail MRT systems
in developing cities
are in many ways
illustrated by the
experience of the
Star and Putra rail
MRT systems in
Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia (see text BRT: < 18 months Metros: > 3 years
box). Lloyd Wright, 2001 (Bogotá) K. Fjellstrom, Feb-02 (Sao Paulo)
Airport Express line, opened in April 2002 but at Gov’t completes takeover
Rail-based MRT in Kuala Lumpur only 3,000 passengers per day (and a hefty fare of of two LRT operators
Malaysia has developed several new rail MRT US$10), ridership has been well below forecasts. 1:51pm, Fri: (AFP) - The
systems, often portrayed as paragons of
government today completed
technological progress and sophistication. But are
the takeover of two
they sustainable? The systems include STAR Light
debt-ridden light railway
Metro (operating from Dec. 1996) Putra LRT (from
companies in its largest ever
Dec. 1998), the KLIA Airport Express (from Apr.
restructuring exercise, dealers
2002), and the Monorail LRT (from July 2002). The
said.
various rail systems all intersect at the city centre.
The government issued
four tranches of bonds to-
talling RM5.467 billion with
maturities of five, seven, 10
Fig. 275
and 15 years in a debt con-
Kuala Lumpur’s city centre monorail has version scheme to settle the
experienced many delays in construction since two companies’ debts, bond
1997. Though it will serve thriving commercial dealers said.
areas and interlink with the other rail systems, The serial bonds will be
after the experience with STAR and Putra, the issued to creditors of Projek
government must be questioning the financial Usahasama Transit Ringan
Automatik (Putra) and Sistem
viability of its rail-oriented MRT strategy.
Fig. 265 Transit Aliran Ringan (Star) in
the debt replacement, they
Putra’s grand Dang Wangi station is often
added.
deserted. Pedestrian access is difficult, with no The deal, made through
crossing provided in front of the station. a special purpose vehicle
Syarikat Prasana Negara,
In its first three years of operation Putra’s
would see the government
ridership increased 10-fold, from 15,000 to
acquiring 80 percent of the
150,000 passengers per day. This increase in
assets of both operators, the
ridership, however, was only achieved after
New Straits Times said.
substantial fare reductions which probably had a
The railway networks are to
negative overall effect on revenue (Sayeg, 2001).
be leased back to the private
Despite this ridership gain, however, Putra has
firms to operate.
been a financial failure and along with STAR the
Putra, which is owned by
venture was nationalised in late 2001. After only 3
debt-ridden conglomerate
years of operation, Putra had accummulated debts
Renong, is the biggest debtor
of more than US$1.4 billion (see margin note).*
among the two, with total
The Monorail and KLIA airport services debts amounting to RM4.27
KL’s monorail, linking the LRT lines, was due to billion, the newspaper said.
open in mid 2002. However, a mishap during a trial
run in July (a wheel fell off, striking a journalist) has
Fig. 285
led to the opening being delayed until early 2003.
Major commercial areas and trip attractors – many This makeshift tent (above) serves as the
currently under construction – line its route. major bus stop at Kuala Lumpur’s largest
Two rail connections to the city’s International shopping mall (top left). Buses are infrequent
Airport, 70km from the city centre, are also being and overloaded, and passengers are forced to
built. One of these, the US$260 million, 57km KLIA scramble past taxis (above). The megamall is
* Note: On 1 Sept. 2002 Syarikat Prasarana Negara
actually only around 1.5 km from an LRT
Berhad (SPNB), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the station, though no feeder bus service to the mall
Minister of Finance, completed the sale and purchase is provided, and nobody walks from the LRT
of the assets and business operations of Sistem Transit station to the megamall, as the walkway is pot-
Aliran Ringan Sdn Bhd (STAR) and Projek Usahasama holed, very narrow, and unprotected from the
Transit Automatik Sdn Bhd (PUTRA) from the Renong sun and rain (top right).
Group. SPNB said it will continue operating STAR and Putra. Photos Karl Fjellstrom, Dec. 2001
21
Under-achieving new 4.3 PASSENGER CAPACITY

urban rail systems in the Misconceptions abound about the potential
Asia-Pacific region of BRT, especially in dense developing cities.
Star, Putra, and KLIA A common misconception is that, “Any city
Airport Express MRTs in
seriously wishing to move toward sustainability
Kuala Lumpur, Metrostar in
by changing the private car/public transport
Manila (17km, Dec. 1999),
the Sydney Airport rail link
equilibrium … must move in the direction of
(10km, June 2000 and electric-rail-based transit systems” (Newman
now in receivership), the & Kenworthy 1999, p90). Table 9 draws from
Hong Kong Airport Express Newman & Kenworthy’s book to present – and
Rail (34km, mid 1997), the then counter – several typical “myths” of BRT.
Bangkok Sky Train, and the
Brisbane Airtrain airport
Another misperception is that Bus Rapid Transit
Fig 295 cannot serve high passenger numbers. The
link: all of these new MRT
rail systems have shown People walking or taking a bus to the megamall results in Colombia and Brazil show that Bus
disappointing ridership, (see Fig. 28) must cross a busy road with Rapid Transit can handle passenger flows in
generally about about one- no help from signals or road markings. Not the range of 20,000 to 35,000 passengers per
quarter the projected levels. surprisingly, almost everyone gets to and from hour per direction. Table 10 shows passenger
From these systems the the mega-mall by car or taxi. Long queues form numbers actually recorded for different systems
longest in operation, Star, all day for taxis. in selected cities. Some of the biggest factors de-
has stabilised at around 20-
termining capacity is not the mode of transport
25% of projected ridership. Rail at the expense of bus services? but rather the techniques used for boarding and
Brisbane’s Airtrain opened Though Kuala Lumpur has made much recent
in May 2001 and operates
alighting.
progress, including many initiatives to improve
without government subsidy. conditions for pedestrians in the city centre, Table 9: Some ‘myths’ of Bus Rapid Transit.
However the Airtrain has and major new rail facilities, bus services remain
an uncertain future, with unreliable, unintegrated, unprofitable, and ‘Myth’ In fact...
ridership of just 6,000 neglected (The Star, 21 Dec. 2001). May be true in some
per week compared to a The lack of attention to buses is reflected in Only rail systems cases, though a recent
projected 52,000 per week. the poor conditions at Kuala Lumpur’s main bus are fast enough to study (GAO, 2001) shows
An important factor here is station. The bus station is a stark contrast to the compete with the that in 5 of 6 US cities
the fare: the Singapore and private car (p.90) with both BRT and LRT,
shiny new expressways and rail lines of modern
Hong Kong successful MRT BRT was faster
KL. Litter is scattered around and water forms
systems have fares com- standing pools. The litter and water, combined Buses are effective Success to date with
parable to air-conditioned in transit cost BRT has come from cities
with the confined exhaust smoke (there are no
bus services, and, relative to recovery only where other than developing
exhaust fans and little circulation), foul odour, there are large Asian cities, including
income, are about one-quar- slippery stairs, and poor lighting, contributes to numbers of captive Latin America and
ter as expensive as fares in a wholly unpleasant experience for passengers. users, as in newly Canada. Curitiba has the
Bangkok, Manila, and Kuala (This situation should be rectified by a major new developing Asian largest car-ownership in
Lumpur (Sayeg, 2001). bus terminal under construction in the city centre, cities (p.117) Brazil, after Brasilia
which integrates directly with the Star MRT line. Rail systems offer a
Many developing
Further improvements were achieved with the “more fundamental
cities have tragically
opening in 2002 of KL Central, the new central rail way to recover
wasted scarce
station, which links the Metro and LRT systems transit costs” (p.117)
development funds on
with the commuter rail lines.) and are “cheap in
expensive infrastructure
comparison to …
It is not just Kuala Lumpur which is preoccupied megaprojects. BRT is a
any highway option”
with large-scale projects to the detriment of cheaper option
(p.155)
bus systems and non-motorised transport. In
Buses cannot Passenger flows in many
developing cities ranging from Jakarta to Buenos
cope with a high BRT systems regularly
Aires, Bangkok to Guangzhou, Ho Chi Minh City to
passenger demand reach more than 25,000
Surabaya, policy-makers have consistently given (p.196) pax/hr/dir
more attention to large-scale, expensive projects
LRT is a natural BRT is implemented as
such as expressways, ring roads, LRT, and
progression ‘up’ a long term strategy in
Metros, rather than to lower cost approaches. after BRT (p.200) many cities
Table 10: Actual maximum ridership, selected lines and then feeding large passenger numbers Flexibility in operation
MRT systems. into a single corridor. Sometimes this situation Bus-based systems’ ability
(* Theoretical max., not actual ridership. Putra ridership is approx. 150,000 per occurs due to geographical constraints (Hong to operate both on and
day; BTS less than 300,000 passengers per day).
Lloyd Wright; GTZ; from various sources, 2001 Kong), but it is often due to a lack of funding off a busway or bus lane
for a city-wide Metro system. Thus, in a sense, provides Bus Rapid Transit
Ridership
Line Type
(pass/hr/dir)
the high capacity figures become inevitable. the flexibility to respond to
However, such situations can be avoided by of- operating problems. For
Hong Kong Metro 81,000 example, buses can pass
Sao Paulo East Line Metro 60,000
fering more distributed systems.
disabled vehicles, while Light
Santiago La Moneda Metro 36,000 Whether a city is utilising bus or rail transit Railtrains can be delayed
London Victoria Line Metro 25,000 systems, system designers may wish to keep behind a stalled train or other
Buenos Aires Line D Metro 20,000 capacity figures within manageable bounds. If vehicle on the tracks. Thus,
Buenos Aires Line E Metro 5,000 a system is operating at over 50,000 pphd and the impact of a breakdown of
Mexico Line B Metro 39,300 a technical or operational problem occurs, the a Bus Rapid Transit vehicle is
Bangkok BTS Metro 50,000* entire system can become overwhelmed with limited, while a disabled Light
Kuala Lumpur Putra LRT 30,000* Rail train may disrupt portions
passenger backlogs very quickly. Further, very
Bogotá TransMilenio BRT 33,000 of the system (GAO, 2001).
high capacity lines can be uncomfortable and
Recife Caxanga, Brazil BRT 29,800 unsafe for passengers if tight passenger “packing”
Belo Horizonte, Brazil BRT 21,100
becomes necessary.
Goiania, Brazil BRT 11,500
Sao Paulo 9 de Julho BRT 34,911
Porto Alegre Farrapos BRT 25,600 4.4 FLEXIBILITY
Porto Alegre Assis BRT 28,000 Unlike rail-based options which are by nature
Quito Trolleybus BRT 15,000 more fixed, BRT allows a great deal of flexibility
Curitiba Eixo Sul BRT 15,100 for future growth. Making new routings and
Ottawa Transitway BRT 10,000 other system changes to match demographic
changes or new planning decisions is fairly easily
Capacity and patronage are cardinal points when accomplished. Bogotá’s plans for a phased BRT
it comes to assessing the financial viability of an expansion (diagram following, and Figure 31)
MRT. Capacities up to 30,000 passengers per provides a good example of matching technology
hour per direction (pphpd) are currently han- to the dynamics of urban centres.
dled by bus while capacities exceeding 35,000 Growing and changing with the city:
pphpd can only be handled by Metros.
The maximum recorded ridership of most LRT
systems are limited to approximately 12,000
pphpd, although the Alexandria-Rami (Egypt)
line serves 18,000 pphpd.
Capacities up to 30,000 passengers per hour per
TransMilenio 2001 TransMilenio 2015
direction (pphpd) are currently handled by bus TransMilenio, SA, Bogotá, Colombia
while capacities exceeding 35,000 pphpd can
only currently be handled by Metros.
BRT systems provide greater flexibility than
The necessity for very high capacity flows in part LRT in implementation and operation.
depends upon the structuring of a system. Cities Improvements such as signal prioritization and
such as London and New York are fairly dense interchanges, which improve capacity and bus
and enjoy high usage of their Metro systems. speed, can be added incrementally.
However, peak capacities are only in the area of
Since buses approach and leave busways at inter-
20,000 – 30,000 pphpd. This occurs because
mediate points, many different routes can serve
these systems feature multiple lines distributing
a passenger catchment area, with fewer passen-
passenger flows about the city. In cities such as
ger transfers than would be required in a fixed
Hong Kong and Sao Paulo, the higher capacities
guided system. This is an important feature of
are achieved by offering a limited number of
23
4.5 SPEED
Grade separated Metros, LRTs and BRTs can
operate at high speeds. Street-running LRT
systems like Alexandria-Madina (Egypt) perform
less well due to interferences from street traffic
and maintenance problems.
A recent comparative study between BRT and
LRT systems in the same city found that bus
systems on segregated bus lanes can easily match
urban rail transit in terms of velocity (Figure
31). Thus, low-cost bus systems can match the
travel times of expensive rail systems.
��
��
��
Fig. 305
A medium term goal in Bogotá is to expand the ��
TransMilenio BRT system so that 85% of the ��

��
city’s 7 million inhabitants live within 500m ��
��
of a TransMilenio line. Such an expansion ��
��
program would be unrealistic for a rail-based ��
��
��
MRT system. ��
��
Enrique Penalosa, 2001 ��
�
��
Curitiba’s successful system, where express buses
��
combine some feeder features at the extremity ��
of the route, thereby minimising transfer needs ��

Fig. 315
of passengers. Bus Rapid Transit can also more ��
closely match capacity and service quality to In five of six cities with both BRT and LRT
��
��
changing passenger demands and special events, systems, BRT speeds were higher. The one
��
and buses are more able to segregate the market, exception was Los Angeles, where the BRT
��
��
providing a range of services (air-conditioned, system does not provide dedicated bus lanes.
��
��
GAO,2001 (from National Transit Database and six transit agencies)
express, etc). ��
��
��
��
“Expanding and adjusting a rail 4.6 INSTITUTIONAL CAPACITY FOR
system is much more costly and SUCCESSFUL IMPLEMENTATION
complex” Institutionally, rail-based systems are demanding:
Without high standards of operations, mainte-
In terms of flexibility to expand and adapt to ��nance and administration [Metros]��
will rapidly
a changing city, Bus Rapid Transit offers clear deteriorate [...]. The culture, managerial standards
advantages over a rail-based system (Figure 30). and attitudes often found in bus companies and
Expanding and adjusting a rail system is much railway corporations of developing countries are
unsuitable for a Metro. Accordingly it is usually
more costly and complex. Developing cities fol-
necessary to set up a new institution with new
lowing rail-based MRT approaches have quickly people and fresh ideas (Allport, 2000).
encountered a need to expand their initial
limited systems. Bangkok is a typical example; A BRT system also poses major institutional
similar situations apply in Cairo, Shanghai, challenges. The need for a ‘new institution’ cited
Buenos Aires, and virtually all developing cities above probably also applies to BRT in develop-
which have developed rail-based MRT systems. ing cities, as the experience of Bogotá suggests.
Bogota created a new institution to plan and
regulate TransMilenio.
The scope of the challenge TransMilenio & the private sector

Various basic prerequisites of successful rail- TransMilenio S.A., a publicly owned company,
based MRT projects include: provides PLANNING, MANAGEMENT, and
< Corridors with outstanding trip volume CONTROL.
(more than 700,000 trips per day) Infrastructure is developed and paid for by the
< More than 5 Million inhabitants or linear local government:
• Trunk lines
spatial development
• Stations
< At least US$1800 per capita annual income at
• Maintenance
the city level facilities
< A city management with positive experience
• Complementary
with traffic regulation infrastructure.
< Integration of other modes/fares Fare collection is
< Competitive fares managed by the private
< A strong institutional framework sector:
< Steady population growth combined with • Smart cards
economic prosperity • Financial
< City center growth (Allport, 2000).
management and
disbursements.
Even where such circumstances exist, institu- Bus operations are
tional capacity may be insufficient for Metro provided by through 4
implementation in developing cities. Even where concessioned private
corridor size, city income, growth prospects, city sector bus companies
centre growth, low cost alignment, fares policy, (plus an additional 7
city management, and Metro management companies providing
needs are met, Allport (2000) compare the op- feeder services):
• System operation
tions and conclude that:
• Bus procurement
Metros are a different order of challenge, cost and
• Employee management
risk … most likely to be applicable to serve the
• Maintenance.
largest corridors of the biggest and more affluent
developing cities.
rail MRT systems in 2001. Reasons for the fail-
Institutional challenges – and associated risks ure of the private sector involvement included:
and costs – are much higher for rail-based MRT < Overestimation of demand
compared to BRT. < Weak sectoral policies (no private car
restraint; poor integration with buses; no
Role of the private sector
integrated land use and transport policies;
Private sector involvement in MRT construction and a new tollway along a similar alignment)
and operation can be highly beneficial to all par- < Inadequate institutional arrangements,
ties, provided the government is able to establish with both fragmentation at the level of
an appropriate regulatory setting. The case of implementation and excessive centralisation
Bogotá provides an excellent illustration of how at the level of policy-making contributing
to successfully draw upon the private sector to to a lack of transparency and a poor policy
build and operate a BRT system (see text box). framework for making MRT investments.
Buenos Aires is often cited as a success story of Bus-based systems throughout the develop-
concessioning of suburban rail services to the ing world, on the contrary, are often operated
private sector, although in the case of rail-based without subsidy by the private sector, even in
systems the situation is more complicated in that a highly unconducive policy setting and poor
the government will almost always be required to and deteriorating operating conditions. Where
provide an ongoing subsidy. private sector involvement is well-regulated,
In the case of Kuala Lumpur, this ongoing sub- a quality MRT service can be provided at a
sidy resulted finally in the nationalisation of the relatively low fare, providing profit to the private
sector operators and operating without subsidy.
25
Long term benefits of Supportive policy setting It may, however, be unrealistic to expect major
mass rapid transit reductions in road congestion in developing
Successful MRT projects require additional
Perhaps the major long- cities. MRT infrastructure projects have only
measures in urban transport policy. Ideally
term benefit of a mass minor impacts on car ownership and use. Car
infrastructural and institutional improvement
rapid transit system, rail or ownership is generally more influenced by park-
will complement one another. The high capital
bus-based, is the effect it ing space supply and ownership costs rather
costs of rail based MRT – and also but to a
has in concentrating a city’s than by MRT supply. This applies particularly
development along transit-
lesser extent BRT – will not be justified if short-
in traffic-saturated developing cities like Bangkok.
accessible lines and nodes, comings in urban and transport planning offset
In Bangkok, 10% of all BTS passengers were previ-
and resisting urban sprawl. the benefits and harm operating conditions.
ously car drivers, although there seems to be such
Strong public transit sys- Supportive policy settings include transport de-
a pent-up, suppressed demand that reductions in
tems and transit-oriented mand management, suitable land use planning,
congestion are quickly absorbed by new trips.
development are an essential economic instruments, modal integration with
ingredient in any strategy to non-motorised transport, public awareness and The smart office buildings that line the corridors
reduce the level of “auto-de- support, viable financing, and so on (see Module of Curitiba’s bus system bear witness to the positive
pendency” of a city.
3c: Bus Rapid Transit). This integrated and developmental impacts of Bus Rapid Transit
Cairo’s MRT reduces
comprehensive approach to transport planning (Figure 32). Businesses locate near bus lines and
pressures for urban sprawl
is evident in the successful MRT cases such as stations because of the synergies with customer
This is evident for example
in Cairo, Egypt, where an
Bogotá, Curitiba, Singapore and Hong Kong. traffic. And likewise, the development helps
impressive 60km heavy rail provide a critical mass of customers to make the
Experience from several developing cities shows
metro network along major transit system economically viable.
that this supportive policy setting for MRT will
corridors now carries 20%
be easier to achieve where one institutional body
of all motorised passenger MRT and development
provides MRT planning and regulation.
trips in Greater Cairo. Without
Mass Rapid Transit stations help catalyse new
the metro network, north-
economic and employment opportunities by
south corridors and the city 4.7 LONG TERM INFLUENCE ON CITY
acting as nodes of development.
centre would have been DEVELOPMENT
overwhelmed by congestion, This has been the experience in Bogotá, with
and development would have
MRT and city form
rising land values in the vicinity of TransMilenio
been forced into peripheral Importantly for land use patterns and transit- stations and strong demand from land-owners
areas much earlier (Metge,
friendly development, nearly all MRT systems and businesses for the construction of stations
2000).
enable continuing city centre growth. A mass in their local areas. Bogotá implemented an
transit system is an indispensible aspect of a innovative value capture scheme in which the
sustainable transport system for a large city, and windfall benefits to landowners in the form of
in developing countries can play an important rising land values was partially diverted to help
role in shaping future development of the city, fund the construction of the stations.
leading to a transit-friendly city form.
Rail-based MRT systems can have similar ef-
fects, though in the case of bus and rail the
government plays a crucial role in promoting
development around stations and along routes.
However at the city-wide level the effects on
city structure will be weaker than hoped for
when unrestricted car use and weak building
laws encourage urban sprawl and lower urban
Fig. 324 densities. Hong Kong’s success, for example,
Curitiba’s 5 BRT lines results both from a well-designed and highly
are lined with high productive MRT-system and an enforced policy
density apartments, of high-density residential or commercial areas
offices and commercial around the stations. In Paris the concept of five
developments. edge cities was fostered by the implementation
Karl Fjellstrom, Feb. 2001 of a heavy rail system (RER) linking these edge
cities with the center of Paris. In the city centre MRTs: Poor service for the
the RER is integrated with the underground urban poor?
network. However even in Paris, where the city We shouldn’t assume low
centre is served by an excellent public transport fares are the most important
system, car use has been increasing and densi- factor for low income users of
ties falling, due to the lack of a policy of strong public transport in developing
restriction of car use. cities. Surveys in the
Indonesian cities of Denpasar
and Surabaya, for example,
4.8 POVERTY ALLEVIATION have revealed that factors
In the World Bank Urban Transport Strategy such as reliability, personal
safety, frequency, speed and
Review, Allport (2000) points to a ‘dilemma’ in
comfort (especially not being
MRT policy for developing cities:
cramped) are often rated as
At the centre of MRT policy for developing cities
Fig. 335 more important than low fares.
is the apparent conflict between tackling poverty
Secondly, it may be mis-
alleviation, for which affordable service is critical, A typical low income area of Cairo. Paratransit
taken to assume that a high
and attracting car users, for whom service quality provides a feeder service to the Metro terminus. quality MRT system would
is critical. Karl Fjellstrom, Mar. 2002
necessarily be priced beyond
Experience with BRT, and with quality bus the reach of poor users. High
the outskirts and along traffic arteries. They are
services in general, show this may be a false quality BRT systems in devel-
heavily affected by noise and pollution. oping cities can operate at a
dilemma. Cases such as Curitiba, Bogotá, Sao
Paulo and Quito show that BRT systems in Improved transit possibilities will provide faster low fare. One of the success-
access to work-places and enable more people es of Bogotá’s BRT is seen as
developing cities can provide an excellent service
its socially integrating effect,
popular with high and low income users, and to work. The MRTs in Cairo, Mexico, Bogotá
with rich and poor rubbing
be profitable at a low fare. In comparison, rail and elsewhere are used extensively by poor riders
shoulders in the bus. In many
systems provide a more limited geographical who profit from quick access to the city centre ways it is a social experiment,
coverage – especially for poorer people relying and hence additional employment possibilities. not just an MRT system.
on road-based transit (see Figure 33).
Mass Rapid Transit can play an important role
in alleviating – or exacerbating – poverty. It
is the poorest people who most depend upon
public transit for access to jobs and services. In
some cities the urban poor pay up to 30% of
their income on transport. The poor also typi-
cally live in lower rent areas on the outskirts of
the city (see Figure 34), and in some cases spend
two to four hours commuting each day. Most
importantly, public funds which are not poured
into road-building and rail can be spent on
improving health, education, public space and
quality of life of the urban poor.
Concentrating on the transport modes of poor
people calls for the provision of affordable forms
of public transport, although public transport Fig. 345
should not be viewed as only for the poor, as
Miami, Buenos Aires, Paris... The rail-based MRT systems of Sao Paulo
wealthy European and Asian cities show.
probably seem as inaccessible as the cities advertised on the billboards to the
Large cities in the developing world are centres urban poor living on the outskirts of Sao Paulo. Bus Rapid Transit, with
of economic growth and magnets for poor its potentially greater geographical reach, offers more hope to low income
people from the countryside, who often settle in communities on the outskirts of all developing cities.
Karl Fjellstrom, Feb. 2002
27
4.9 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Table 12: Trends in public transport use in an

Energy use by different transport modes, which international sample of cities, 1970 to the mid
is closely related to emissions, is presented in 1990s
Barter 1999; GTZ SUTP
Table 11. Rail is the most environmentally
friendly type of MRT in terms of energy use per Percent of all motorised trips by public transport
person-kilometre, though only where occupancy 1970 1980 1990 ‘93–’96
is very high. Emissions vary greatly depending Tokyo 65 51 48 ?
on the power source used to generate electric
Hong Kong ?
traction (for rail), and the bus and fuel technology
Seoul 81 74 63 ?
in a BRT system. In addition, not all developing
nation rail systems are electrified, and thus there Singapore 42 ? ? 51
are sometimes local emission impacts. Manila ? 70 67 70
Bangkok 53 ? 39 ?
From an environmental perspective, however,
the main point to note is that virtually all MRT Kuala Lumpur 37 33 32 24
systems offer environmental advantages to the Jakarta 61 58 52 53
extent that they replace trips by private motor Surabaya ? 36 35 33
vehicles. Perhaps most important in the long
term, in terms of reducing emissions, is the house gases, noise, and visual intrusion. Table
impact of an MRT system on the modal split, 12 describes the progressive decline of public
or percentage of people travelling by public transport in a selection of cities. There are some
and private transport modes. In this regard exceptions in cities which have experienced in-
experience shows that in developing cities it is creasing shares of passenger-kilometres by transit
the BRT systems such as Bogotá and Curitiba (e.g. Zurich, Vienna, Washington and New
that have enabled public transit to maintain or York: WBCSD, 2001) and increasing transit
even increase modal share compared to private modal shares (e.g. Singapore), but in general
transport. In other cities public transit has the trend is for declining transit modal shares of
tended to decline, with corresponding negative around 1 – 2% per year in large cities.
environmental impacts not just in terms of local
In the longer term, then, the MRT systems
pollutant emissions, but also in terms of green-
which can be expected to have the best envi-
ronmental impact are those which can halt
Table 11: Energy use per passenger kilometre, or reverse the declining modal share of public
various modes and operating conditions transport. In the case of lower income develop-
Armin Wagner, 2002, from various sources
ing cities such an impact on overall modal
Energy use per share in the city is probably possible only with
System passenger-km bus-based MRT, rather than rail. Due to the
[Watt-hours]
larger cost, new rail systems can be developed in
Bicycle (20 km/h) 22
only very limited areas of a developing city, and
Highly occupied Metro-systems
79 do not have the capacity of BRT to reach and
(Tokyo, Hong Kong)
cover larger areas, or the flexibility to adapt to a
Buses (Khartoum, Sudan) 99
changing and expanding city.
Buses (Occupancy 45%) 101
Paratransit (Mini-Bus, Khartoum) 184 In terms of air quality the crucial factor in
Less occupied Metro systems developing cities is not so much the emission
184 - 447 performance of the different MRT modes, but
such as Germany
Metro (occupancy 21%) 240 rather their potential in getting people out of
Paratransit (occupancy 67%/ cars and off motorcycles, and into transit. To the
317 extent that a BRT system can do this better than
Minibus/Aleppo (Syria))
Rail-based systems USA (22,5 a rail system (with much more limited coverage),
577
passengers per unit/USA) BRT has a greater positive environmental
Buses (8,9 passengers / USA) 875 impact.
5. Conclusion
After comparing MRT options, in general we

can conclude that there are few reasons for
developing cities to favour rail-based systems
where passenger capacities would be less than
25,000 passengers per hour per direction. Unless
specific circumstances apply – such as when
visual image of the system is quite important
and a city is sufficiently wealthy to handle the
higher capital and operational costs – this kind
of rail-based transit for developing cities com-
pares unfavourably with BRT systems on most
terms, and especially for key parameters such
as cost, flexibility, time frame, and institutional
demands.
There is however no single “right” transit solu-
tion. The best system for a city will depend on
local conditions and preferences and will involve
“Think rail, use bus.”
a combination of technologies. Bus Rapid
Transit may not be the solution in every situa-
tion. When passenger flows are extremely high
and space for busways is limited, other options
may be better, such as rail-based public transit;
although we have seen that BRT can accommo-
date passenger volumes to match demand even
in very large cities. In reality, it is not always just
a choice between bus and rail, as cities like Sao
Paulo, Brazil have shown that Metro and BRT
systems can work together to form an integrated
transport package.
It must however be recalled that city investments
in Mass Rapid Transit systems come at a high
opportunity cost. Funds used to build and sub-
sidise the operation of a limited Metro could be
used for schools, hospitals, and parks.
Bus Rapid Transit has shown that high quality
public transit that meets the needs of the wider
public is neither costly nor extremely difficult
to achieve. Many organisations are ready to help
municipalities in developing cities make efficient
public transport a reality. With political leader-
ship, everything is possible.
Karl Fjellstrom, Jan. 2002 (Shanghai’s Hengshan Rd. Station)
29
Resource materials Urban Transport Strategy Review

< Roger Allport, Urban Mass Transit in Reference on choice of MRT
Developing Countries, Halcrow Fox, with The World Bank’s Urban Transport Strategy
Traffic and Transport Consultants, 2000, http: Review includes a report which, like this module,
//wbln0018.worldbank.org/transport/utsr.nsf offers advice on approaching Mass Rapid Transit
< W.S. Atkins, Study of European Best Practice in options in developing cities. Urban Mass Transit
the Delivery of Integrated Transport, Summary in Developing Countries (Roger Allport, Halcrow
Report, Nov. 2001, www.cfit.gov.uk/research/ Fox, with Traffic and Transport Consultants,
2000), includes an excellent discussion of the
ebp/exec/index.htm
impacts, challenges and risks of rail-based
< Jason Chang, Taipei Bus Transit System and
projects, although in general it fails to draw
Dedicated Bus Lane, International Workshop out the experience of ‘world best’ Bus Rapid
on High Capacity Bus Systems, New Delhi, Transit applications such as Bogotá, since it
India, 20 Jan. 2002. was released only months after the TransMilenio
< Robert Cervero, The Transit Metropolis: A system began operation. Major sections of the
Global Enquiry, Island Press, 1998. report include:
< United States General Accounting Office • MRT options
(GAO), Bus Rapid Transit Shows Promise, • MRT role
Report to Congressional Requesters, • Research results
Sept. 2001, www.altfuels.com/PDFs/ • Scale of challenge
GAOBRTstudy.pdf. • Attitudes to MRT
< Gregory Ingram, World Bank, Patterns of
• Forecasting MRT impacts
• Planning for tomorrow
Metropolitan Development: What Have We
• The private sector approach
Learned?, Urban Studies, Vol. 35, No. 7, 1998 • Affordability and the private sector
< International Finance Corporation (IFC),
• Public transport integration
Bangkok Mass Transit (Skytrain) Externalities • Economic viability
Study, prepared by Policy Appraisal Services et • Poverty alleviation
al., July 2001 (unpublished) • Land use and city structure
< Alexandre Meirelles, A Review of Bus Priority • The environment
Systems in Brazil: from Bus Lanes to Busway • MRT planning
Transit, Smart Urban Transport Conference, • Implementation and operations
Brisbane, 17–20 Oct. 2000. This report can be obtained downloaded
< Hubert Metge, The Case of Cairo,
free of charge at the Urban Transport Strategy
Review web site, http://wbln0018.worldbank.org/
Egypt, World Bank Urban Transport
transport/utsr.nsf
Strategy Review, Nov. 2000, http://
Many more online resources on MRT topics
wbln0018.worldbank.org/transport/utsr.nsf
can be obtained through the Univ. of Nottingham’s
< Peter Newman & Jeff Kenworthy, Sustainable Urban Travel: Comprehensive
Sustainability and Cities: Overcoming bibliography lists of relevant contacts, addresses,
Automobile Dependence, Island Press, and worldwide Websites, www.nottingham.ac.uk/
Washington, 1999. sbe/planbiblios/bibs/sustrav/
< Philip Sayeg, Smart Urban Transport Magazine,
2001, www.smarturbantransport.com < Thomson, I., UN Economic Commission
< David Shen et al., At-Grade Busway Planning
for Latin America and the Caribbean
Guide, Florida International University, Dec. (UNECLAC), The Impact of Social, Economic
1998, www.cutr.eng.usf.edu/research/nuti/ and Environmental Factors on Public Transport
busway/Busway.htm in Latin American Cities, International
< Transit Cooperative Research Program Seminar on Urban Transport, Nov. 2001,
(TCRP), Transit Capacity and Quality of Bogotá, Colombia
Service Manual, Kittelson & Associates, < World Bank, Cities on the Move: An
1999, www.trb.org (many excellent reports Urban Transport Strategy Review, 2001,
available for download) www.worldbank.org/transport
Deutsche Gesellschaft für
Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH
Dag-Hammarskjold-Weg 1-5
Postfach 51 80
65726 Eschborn
Telefon (0 61 96) 79-1357
Telefax (0 61 96) 79-7194
Internet: www.gtz.de
Sourcebook enquiries:
manfred.breithaupt@gtz.de
karl.fjellstrom@sutp.org
www.sutp-asia.org
On behalf of:

Sustainable Transport Mass Transit Options PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Sustainable Transport Mass Transit Options PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sustainable Transport Mass Transit Options PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Division 44

Mass Transit Options

Deutsche Gesellschaft für

Mass Transit Options The Institute for Transportation and Development

Cover photo: Bangkok’s Victory Monument, Dec.

3.3 Metros 12 4.8 Poverty alleviation 27

1. Introduction leading consideration is cost (including cost

2. Mass Rapid Transit concepts Metro

Integration < Passenger information

3. Current applications in Table 1 are discussed in more detail below, and

We now survey world-wide applications of the 3.1 BUS RAPID TRANSIT

Table 1: Performance and cost of various MRT systems.

Table 8.1. Performance and Cost of Some Typical MRT Systems

Buses are the backbone

Initial results from Taipei

construction in the corridor leading to the

Ottawa’s visionary system was developed at a Travel time Ridership

The Brisbane Busway

3.2 LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT Rail system descriptions

are still visible in streets in many developing

Metro systems are being developed or expanded

The Bangkok Skytrain (BTS)

Commuter or suburban rail services are mostly

senger loads in developing cities (Figure 23).

Measures which can increase capacity and 4. Comparison on key parameters

Two systems at the same cost: Operating costs

In addition, the form of many developing cities Fare Box Ratio

< Costs per passenger trip.

Bangkok’s Skytrain system The project development and planning process

Under-achieving new 4.3 PASSENGER CAPACITY

TransMilenio BRT system so that 85% of the ��

Enrique Penalosa, 2001 ��

of the route, thereby minimising transfer needs �����������������������������������������������������������

The scope of the challenge TransMilenio & the private sector

4.9 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Table 12: Trends in public transport use in an

After comparing MRT options, in general we

Karl Fjellstrom, Jan. 2002 (Shanghai’s Hengshan Rd. Station)

Resource materials Urban Transport Strategy Review

You might also like

of the route, thereby minimising transfer needs ��