Año: 2010

New corridor opens on Arequipa's Bolivar and Sucre streets

Pedestrian-only paths mark progress for planned BRT system.
 

Source: EMBARQ

Photo: Henry Zuñiga
 

The city of Arequipa, Peru transformed its downtown Bolivar and Sucre Streets into pedestrian-only areas, as part of the ongoing construction work to prepare for the new System of Integrated Transport (SIT).

Mayor Simón Balbuena Marroquín unveiled the newly renovated streets in an opening ceremony on December 6. The city is still waiting to complete the remaining road infrastructure and select bus operators for the new bus rapid transit (BRT) system that will pass through the historic city center.

More than 147 homes along Bolivar and Sucre Streets received a new facade. The roads were re-constructed with new asphalt and concrete, complementary to the distinct character of the historic «White City» of Arequipa, which is listed as a UNESCO World Heritage site.

Improvements were also made to the water and sewage services and underground wiring. The corridor also includes new decorative street furniture, such as benches, metal trash cans, and trees.

Balbuena emphasized that, in spite of the project being stalled for three months because of political reasons, the new construction brings the SIT-AQP BRT project one step closer to reality, especially for residents living along the corridor.

Arequipa Mayor-Elect Alfredo Zegarra Tejada has promised to support the project, which includes maintaining the bidding process for operations and management, contracting finances from the Andean Development Corp. (CAF), and constructing additional infrastructure, when he assumes his new position on January 1.

 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!

Tweet

Opinion Pieces: Frequency and connectivity – key drivers of reform in urban public transport provision

Opinion Pieces: since 2007, Prof. David Hensher has written an opinion column in the Australasian Bus and Coach magazine, where he monthly discusses a lot of different transport-related hot topics. In this section we are revisiting these columns.

March 2008

Public transport investment is being touted as a key springboard for a sustainable future, especially in large metropolitan areas with growing populations. Whether such investment will turn the tide away from automobility is a big question; however regardless of the likely outcome, any commitment to improved public transport has a growing number of options to pursue. Although variations in rail systems typically loom dominant in many strategic statements on urban reform, ranging from heavy rail through to metro rail and light rail, there is a growing interest worldwide in ways of making better use of the bus as a primary means of public transport, and not limited as a service that feeds a rail network.

In establishing a role for public transport, it should be enshrined in the motto of delivering ‘frequency, connectivity and visibility’ that is value for money as defined in terms of net social benefit per dollar outlaid. Connectivity refers to the provision of services that offer door-to-door services with minimum delay and almost seamless interchanges. Visibility is predominantly ‘knowing where the mode is going from and going to, and when’.

There are many ways in which bus transport can be developed as part of an integrated network-based public transport system, typified by the best practice bus rapid transit (BRT) systems in South America such as Curitiba in Brazil and TransMilenio in Bogota, Colombia. Bus Rapid Transit is “…a high-quality bus based transit system that delivers fast, comfortable, and cost-effective urban mobility through the provision of segregated right-of-way infrastructure, rapid and frequent operations, and excellence in marketing and customer service. BRT essentially emulates the performance and amenity characteristics of a modern rail-based transit system but at a fraction of the cost. A BRT system will typically cost four to 20 times less than a light rail transit (LRT) system and 10 to100 times less than a metro system.”

Recent research shows the appeal of BRT in Los Angeles when comparing the Orange line BRT with the Pasadena, California Gold Line light rail (LRT), both of which connect to the Red Line subway and have similar service patterns and length. The BRT is performing considerably better than the LRT. The latter costs considerably more and carries fewer riders. Capital costs per average weekday boarding for the BRT line is $US16,722 in contrast to $US45,762 for the LRT line; cost per revenue service hours for BRT and LRT are respectively $US243.18 and $US552.54; and cost per passenger mile are respectively $US0.54 and $US1.08. These are impressive evidence of the value for 45 money from BRT compared, in this instance, to an LRT system. Metro rail and heavy rail would be even more unattractive within the service capacity range studied.

What lessons can be learnt from the most successful BRT system in Bogota, Columbia, the TransMilenio, and what is its applicability to Australia. The most important findings relate to connectivity and network integrity, reinforcing the view that it is all about networks and not corridors per se. They suggest that BRT is capable of playing a role in the achievement of a wide set of objectives such as sustainable accessibility and urban renewal when implemented as part of a holistic package of integrated strategies. Importantly it is the commitment to a network of BRT routes (and not a corridor view of planning per se), which gives a metropolitan area the opportunity to enhance the accessibility and urban renewal benefits from corridor level to metropolitan wide level. The relatively low capital costs have made this possible in many countries within a relatively short time frame (up to 5 years often). Whether this is a transition strategy to other forms of public transport or an end in itself should be determined by how the market responds. It is not uncommon to see BRT promoted as a transition to light rail, metro and even heavy rail (e.g. in Brisbane and Pittsburgh), partly to get something started within constrained budgets, but to also appease anti-bus groups who see public transport as singularly rail. What is encouraging is that the success of many of the BRT systems has resulted in its expansion without the need to go to a rail ‘solution’. Carrying capacities of BRT (see Figure 1) are increasing all the time and moving the case solely for rail off of many agendas.

Food for thought

Figure 1: The changing capacity capability of the modes

¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!

Tweet

“The oportunities and challenges to implement BRT systems in Brazil” – Roundtable during ANPET

During the 24th Annual ANPET Conference (Associação Nacional de Pesquisa e Ensino em Transportes – do Brasil), celebrated in Salvador, Bahia between 30 November and 2 December, Toni Lindau coordinated a roundtable to adress the subject «The oportunities and challenges to implement BRT systems in Brazil». The other participants were Gustavo Nogueira, BRT division of Mercedez Benz in Brazil, Wagner Martins, from LogitConsultoria, and Francisco Ulisses from the Secretaria de Transportes e Infraestrutura of Salvador.

The speakers addressed the concept of BRT systems and the elements that characterize a good project and the main requirements for the implementation of a BRT in a city. The discussion was focused in the challenges that Salvador faces to implement a BRT system with more than 40 km to structure, in a sustainable way, the urban transport of the city facing the World Cup 2014.

Photo: Gustavo Nogueira, Francisco Ulisses, Luis Antonio Lindau and Wagner Martins

¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!

Tweet

TransMilenio: Ten Years Down the Line

Source: The City Fix

“Road space is the most valuable space a city has; it’s more important than diamonds,” according to former Mayor of Bogotá Enrique Penalosa, who oversaw the first phase of the Colombian capital’s bus rapid transit (BRT) system, known as TransMilenio, which celebrates its 10th anniversary this month.

Ten years ago, Bogotá’s streets were invaded by a disorganized and outdated network of individually owned vehicles. The city of 7.5 million people was highly polluted and congested, and “businesses around transit corridors were declining and closing or were replaced by low-key pawn shops, auto part shops, and even smutty nightclubs and hourly motels,” says Dario Hidalgo, director of research and practice at EMBARQ. “Public space was encroached by hawkers and cars parked on top of sidewalks.”

Today, merely a decade after the implementation of TransMilenio, the city is a shining example of how integrated transit policies and transportation networks can transform the urban environment.

“After the system was launched, the city regained hope,” Hidalgo adds. “People started believing that good things can be done.”

TransMilenio brought a revival to the transit corridors of the city. The high-capacity bus system now boasts 84 kilometers of busways, 104 stations, 10 integration points, integrated feeder services and advanced centralized control. It includes more than 1,000 buses that move 1.6 million passengers per day. And TransMilenio’s Avenida Caracas is known as the best performing single BRT corridor in Latin America, in terms of peak usage, transporting 43,000 passengers per hour in each direction, according to the report, “Modernizing Public Transportation”.

Bogotá has become so easy to navigate by public transportation that its citizens approved a referendum endorsing an annual car-free day. (Despite citizen interest, there were not enough votes to approve a referendum to make the city car-free by 2015). TransMilenio’s implementation has occurred alongside the installment of one of the world’s most extensive network of bike paths, CicloRuta, as well as hundreds of new parks and plazas. Businesses are thriving. New homes have been constructed. And the ultimate benchmarker of success: nearly a million people, or 10 percent of the population, have left their cars at home for a more convenient and cost-effective public transportation system.

However, the system is not without need for improvement. Bureaucratic contracts with service providers make tweaking small components of the system difficult. And as Hidalgo says, “The TransMilenio system still needs attention and improvements, especially in two aspects: buses and selected stations are overcrowded and road surface needs permanent and timely maintenance.”

Given TransMilenio’s central role in improving transit and quality of life in Bogotá, and its importance for elevating the concept of BRT globally, we’ll be celebrating TransMilenio’s first decade over the next few weeks. Stay tuned for photo essays from The City Fix and the release of a new EMBARQ case study on Bogotá’s bus system improvement.

¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!

Tweet

Opinion Pieces: Why are bus operators not taking advantage of alliances to share costs and grow business?

Opinion Pieces: since 2007, Prof. David Hensher has written an opinion column in the Australasian Bus and Coach magazine, where he monthly discusses a lot of different transport-related hot topics. In this section we are revisiting these columns.

February 2008

If one studies the airline industry, one is struck by the amount of alliance activity amongst two or more operators. These alliances come and go, and are restructured regularly and re-focussed as required. In aviation, such alliances range from very light alliances such as purchasing fuel together to get a bulk or super bulk discount, to maintenance cost sharing, and heavy alliances in code sharing of flights amongst
passengers booked onto different airlines.

For many years of lecturing in the NSW Certificate of Transport Management (CTM), I have suggested that there are many opportunities for bus and coach operators to work cooperatively together in getter better deals on cost inputs, even if the operators may compete for patronage business (this is known as cooperative competition). It is good for all, since it ensures greater efficiency in consumption of resources, as well as opening up opportunities under contract or otherwise for the scarce government dollar to go further, giving even more value for money. Yet bus and coach operators, with rare exception, do not do this, and as far as I can tell, my advice through the CTM is rarely acted on.

It has taken me some years to try and work out why this opportunity is not grabbed. Bus and coach operators in the main (there always are exceptions), regardless of size and ownership, are very conservative (certainly when compared to the airline sector), and are heavily focused on operating a business in a very day-to-day manner rather than thinking about strategic opportunities that can actually assist in operating a business more efficiently and effectively. Years of dependence on government and declining patronage (often for very easily explained reasons), have made the industry somewhat inward looking. It is true that bus and coach associations play an important role in facilitating a wide range of financial deals for members, but this is not the same as individual operators working with other operators to gain even better cost and service outcomes.

Maybe some more lateral thinking on this matter could be used to give an operator a strategic advantage as we move into benchmarking of operators. Those who form an alliance for specific cost input savings relative to what they pay out by going it alone must be advantaged. This is not a matter of ‘getting into bed with the direct or indirect competitor’ since contacted operators who will be increasingly subjected to benchmarking to earn the right to re-negotiate their contracts (in contrast to being subject to competitive tendering), should all be trying to assist government who pay most of their bills, to reduce the cost of providing bus transport. Future benchmarking programs would include recognition of this cooperative alliance process through higher rankings of such operators.

There are so many innovative way of creating input cost alliances, that the smarter strategically thinking operators(s) will always increase their chances of entering renegotiation and moving themselves further away from the risk of being subject to competitive tendering.

Food for thought

¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!

Tweet

Our experience at the VREF CoE Workshop in Nairobi

During 14 – 16 December 2010 some of our members were part of the VREF CoE Workshop held in Nairobi, Kenia. We were represented by Juan Carlos Muñoz (PUC), Rosário Macário (IST-Lisbon), Daniela Facchini (EMBARQ), Onesimo Flores (PhD student MIT) and Sebastian Raveau (PhD student PUC). The first day of the meeting was completely devoted to understand more about Nairobi from some Kenya researchers, politicians and practitioners as well as from researchers from the University of Columbia that have been working there. In the second day two talks were arranged for each CoE. We presented the Observatory efforts and the research developed by Onesimo within the LS3 project: «From vision to promise to delivery». On the third day, PhD students from the eight Centres had a meeting were they shared the research they were doing. In parallel, senior researchers had a meeting where VREF gave them several interesting news.
 
 
Some of the participants shared with us their thoughts after this meeting:

Daniela Facchini: “The VREF 2010 Center of Excellence workshop in Nairobi helped to better understand Nairobi´s challenges on planning public transportation and allowed experience exchange and knowledge sharing among members of the 8 CoE. Events like this are very important to settle personal contacts and strengthen collaboration within the network.”

Onésimo Flores: “Attending the VREF Workshop in Nairobi was a good opportunity to present and get valuable feedback on some of our initial work with LS3. It was also a chance to learn more about what VREF actually is, and to hear how other phd students across the world have profited from their affiliation with a CoE. I returned home with good suggestions to improve our work, and with important contacts from people conducting somewhat similar research. One point to note is how relevant is BRT for all the VREF Centers, a sheer demonstration of how this topic is indeed one that cuts across latitudes and cultures.

It was also useful to meet other members of our CoE, such as Daniela Facchini from Embarq, Rosário Macário from IST and my student colleague Sebastian Raveau from U. Católica. My sense is that all phd students affiliated with our CoE would profit much from such an «immersion», even if it happened in a less formal (and expensive) setting. The experience of the Omega Center (London) in dealing with multi-university, multi-location student collaboration may provide a useful «template». The possibilities for synergies and future collaborations are evident. ”

Sebastian Raveau: “As a PhD student, attending the VREF CoE Workshop in Nairobi was a great opportunity to get to know the members of the different Centers of Excellence worldwide, to find out more about their researches and to make contacts with other PhD students. It’s always great to get valuable feedback for our work, especially from such a broad and diverse audience, and generate instances for mutual collaboration. Also, as we are a recently established Center of Excellence formed by five different institutions across the world, the VREF CoE Workshop was an opportunity to get together with our fellow researchers. These opportunities are few, especially for the PhD students, so we have to seize these occasions to work and share experiences.”
 
 
We brought a couple of pictures from our trip. The first one was taken at the main dinner at the National Museum of Nairobi where participants to the meeting attend. The second one was taken at breakfast, you can see (left to right) Onesimo, Rosario, Daniela, Juan Carlos and Sebastian:

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Finally, you can check the two presentations made by Juan Carlos Muñoz and Onésimo Flores during the workshop.
 
 
BRT Observatory – For more info or comments on this presentation, contact Juan Carlos Muñoz (jcm@ing.puc.cl).
 

 

 
 
 
Implementing BRT-From Vision to Reality – For more info or comments on this presentation, contact Onésimo Flores (onesimo@mit.edu).
 

 

 
 
¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!

 
Tweet

In the U.S., Poor Communication and Poor Choices Plague Bus Rapid Transit

Source: The City Fix

Bus rapid transit (BRT) is still a relatively novel mode of public transit, particularly in the United States. And because the definition of BRT is flexible, this form of public transit often suffers from miscommunication that continues the cycle of misinformation that spurs poor transit investment choices and disappointment among public transit riders and personal vehicle owners.

Earlier this week, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution covered the opening of the new BRT lines in Atlanta, Ga. While this new public transit service is certainly a step forward for Atlanta (one of the most congested and car-dependent cities in the U.S.), the system is not terribly remarkable in the world of BRT. Instead, the media coverage in the Journal is interesting for several reasons.

As the AJC explains, the routes Q Express and Q Limited run along a main corridor on the east side of the metropolitan area and connect at their west terminus with Atlanta’s MARTA rail system. The lines feature queue-jumping lanes at two major intersections and signal priority, allowing buses to get ahead of traffic at red lights and holding green lights until they pass through an intersection. The lines have significantly fewer stops, placed at least three-quarters of a mile apart, a feature which even some light rail systems have not managed.

The article continues:

[The Q Lines are] not like the gold standard of BRT, routes like those in Ottawa and Cleveland, which have their own dedicated lanes. That’s because the gold standard costs its weight in gold to build, considering the land that has to be bought and the construction required to create an extra lane.

In that short paragraph lie both confusion in BRT communication as well as progress in how American media portray this form of transit.

First, the good: the author acknowledges that the moniker BRT includes varying level of investment. All too often, “American BRT” has failed because cities have over-hyped and under-delivered the benefits that can come from the key features of BRT. Many cities tout BRT as being rail-like yet at lower costs, but then they don’t actually invest the money necessary for the rail-like elements of BRT. Then, when the service begins, riders are often left thinking: “It’s still just a bus!”

The Journal-Constitution article acknowledges up front that the Q lines in Atlanta are not the highest level of BRT. This tempering of expectations helps prevent the disappointment that has soured transit advocates to BRT in many cities where benefits were oversold. Small investments in BRT infrastructure certainly won’t deliver all of the benefits of full-fledged BRT likened to rail, but they cost significantly less.

An even more important point that the AJC did not directly emphasize, though, is that BRT investment is scalable: Initial investments can be built upon incrementally as funding, political will or ridership necessitates to produce better service.

The benefit of most BRT infrastructure is underscored by the fact that it can combine and streamline projects, reducing costs. Atlanta added queue-jumping lanes to the intersection because there was already a streetscape project underway at these junctions. Other cities would do well to learn from this.

Moving the BRT vs. Rail Debate to Focus on Scaling up Investment

The growing American focus on BRT has become mired in a heated “rail vs. bus” debate that often pits transit advocates against each other, allowing bus rapid transit to be hijacked by budget hawks who care very little about delivering good quality transit service.

This debate has come to focus almost solely on judgments around whether buses can be as comfortable as rail, whether they spur development equivalent to rail and whether buses carry some stigma that rail does not. These questions cannot be answered definitively given the variables involved.

Instead, we should be focusing on the objective differences between bus and rail infrastructure. Possibly the most important of these is the scalability of bus systems. With buses, cities can do as Atlanta has with a small initial investment on technological improvements and minimal road space reallocations. Once these improvements attract additional ridership, you can begin to build support for further investment, perhaps rush-hour restricted bus lanes that allow mixed traffic during other times. Some time thereafter, an agency may be able to budget money to add nicer stops, or even stations, with arrival time displays, ticket vending machines, and so on. Eventually, support and ridership is such that you can justify large investments in high-capacity buses and curb-separated lanes, creating truly high-level bus rapid transit. Going a step further, Brisbane, Australia has even designed its busways to be easily convertible to light rail in the future.

With a rail system, this incremental investment is much more difficult, if not impossible. You can’t put rails in the street without also installing the overhead catenary infrastructure. Unless a city already has surplus rail cars, those must be purchased simultaneously. Installing rails usually requires full-depth reconstruction of right-of-way. Long story short, there are a lot of major investments, most of which must be made simultaneously. Of course, in many cities where there is large pent-up demand for transit service, these large investments are likely worthwhile. In far more cases, though, cities have only marginal additional demand that don’t merit huge one-time investments.

Reclaiming Road Space Through BRT

Far too many American cities still miss the point about road space priorities. In that one paragraph she wrote in the Journal-Constitution article, Ms. Hart says that the high-level BRT systems are costly because “land has to be bought” and cities must “create another lane.” High-level BRT can be an inexpensive alternative to rail precisely because it doesn’t require a new lane. And there-in lies the problem: Because most U.S. cities lack the political will power to reallocate road space from cars, they are left finding new space for transit, and suddenly costs skyrocket. After all, “gold standard” BRT isn’t expensive because of new right-of-way. (Cleveland’s Health Line, which the article cites as high-level BRT, used existing road space.) It’s expensive because cities are willing to invest in a lot of infrastructure at once which results in truly high quality transit.

Taking a lane away from private vehicles and allocating it to transit vehicles is politically challenging and not just in the US. In Britain, the government recently removed the dedicated bus lane on London’s M4 highway, opening it back up to all traffic. The government capitulated to motorists who complained that they sat in traffic while buses zoomed by in a mostly empty lane. Human Transit’s Jarret Walker laments:

Yes, from behind the wheel of your stopped single-occupant car, a well-functioning bus lane looks empty most of the time. But at high-demand times, bus lanes easily move far more people than traffic lanes. The question is: do all the users of the road matter equally? If so, it should be a no-brainer to provide faster travel times to people who use limited capacity more efficiently.

One traffic lane can accommodate approximately 60 buses or 1,800 automobiles per hour. Assuming a capacity of 60 passengers per bus, and an average occupancy of automobiles of 1.59 passengers, bus lanes can carry 3,600 passengers per hour, while a mixed traffic lane will only achieve about 2,900. If you add articulated buses, which have a capacity of 110 passengers, the capacity of a bus lane is even higher.

If these efficiencies aren’t fully communicated, it will be next to impossible to justify to policy makers taking a lane of road away from private vehicles, and even harder to justify such changes to the drivers. New right-of-way is indeed expensive, leaving many cities to implement their BRT systems in mixed traffic, to the ultimate disappointment of customers who are often promised “rail-like” priority.

Rapid bus service still suffers from communication problems. It’s been around since the 1970s and its time we start accurrately depicting the costs and benefits of these systems. These problems range from the misunderstanding that BRT requires new right-of-way, to the little trumpeted benefit of accommodating smaller, incremental investments, and the misconception that anything labeled BRT will automatically run like a “train on tires.” More in-depth reporting will help alleviate this problem. Even the Atlanta Journal-Constitution article, despite slightly misrepresenting the issue, will result in better communication by cities and transit agencies.

¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!

Tweet

David Hensher radio interview on Road Pricing, BRT and Public Private Partnerships

Professor David Hensher was interviewed by radio New Zealand National’ journalist Kathryn Ryan, regarding the urban traffic issues of New Zealand.

Listen to the full interview here.

This is a summary of the interview, by Mathew Dearnaley:

Auckland should add more busways as far cheaper mass-transit options than rail extensions, says a visiting Australian transport expert.

«We’ve got to get serious now about a lot more dedicated roads for buses into the suburbs.»

¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!

Tweet

Opinion Pieces: It is all about dollars – there is a will but a difficult way

Opinion Pieces: since 2007, Prof. David Hensher has written an opinion column in the Australasian Bus and Coach magazine, where he monthly discusses a lot of different transport-related hot topics. In this section we are revisiting these columns.

January 2008

Many years ago I said that ‘One will never make public transport more attractive without making the car less attractive, if buses and trains want to make a serious dent in the mainstream travel market, in contrast to the number of niches which keep public transport, buses in particular, afloat’. The situation appears to have hardly changed with one exception – the real curse of the road system, namely traffic congestion, may the savior of public transport, but only if governments are able and willing to invest literally billions of dollars into public transport infrastructure in metropolitan areas. Sadly in Australia, the lack of political will at all levels of government, in supporting congestion charging and some amount of hypothecation, means that revenue sources will be hard to come by.
Despite the long list of offered ‘solutions’ by ‘experts’ and the democratic community of the partially informed ‘lay experts’, the simple facts are that until we can offer a substantially improved public transport system, there is very little chance that any major policy effort to attract significant car users into public transport will be anything than a short term nightmare, with a consequential return back to the car. With a modal share in Sydney of 10 percent of passenger trips by public transport, and with rail struggling to cope now that any spare capacity has been taken up, imagine getting even two percent of 48 car trips into the rail system or the buses. This would increase public transport trips by 20 percent and the current system simply would not be able to cope. A similar situation would exist in Melbourne. What this suggests, time and time again, is that a focus of substantially higher frequency of bus services combined with efforts to establish
dedicated rights-of-way for buses, is not only a sensible value for money strategy, it is also the way of delivering accessibility and connectivity to the entire metropolitan area. A mix of good coverage and good frequency is essential. Focussing on specific corridors with high cost investments such a heavy rail, while appealing to some and also sensible to some degree, comes at a very high opportunity cost of being unable to invest in the rest of the public transport network, which is essential to ensure a mainstream move back to
public transport.
The good news is that politicians and government advisers agree with all of this; the bad news is that they have limited resources to do a great deal about it. It is just a matter of time before we have to involve the private sector and introduce more efficient variable user charging for car use. If it is done properly, most car users will be better off. As an example of taking the hard decisions, the Dutch government, in 2011, plans to scrap road tax as well as purchase tax on new cars. This will provide a fairer system which taxes vehicle use, rather than ownership. Indeed, the minister says that more than half of Dutch road users will actually pay less under the road user charging scheme. According to calculations by motoring organisations, only motorists who drive more than 18,000kms a year are likely to be worse off under the new scheme. In Australia, the average kms per annum of urban residents using their privet car is 12,500kms.

Food for thought.

¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!

Tweet

Cities in Focus | Curitiba

Source: EMBARQ

Photo: EMBARQ

Curitiba, Brazil, is the birthplace of bus rapid transit, the high-capacity urban public transportation system developed under the leadership of former city mayor Jaime Lerner. The ensuing transit-oriented development (TOD) underscored the importance of organizing urban areas around transport corridors and led Curitiba to be hallmarked as the most successful example of TOD.

Check this interesting video developed by EMBARQ about Curitiba’s transport system:

¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!

Tweet

TransMilenio Celebrates 10 Years of Operation

Source: ITDP

Photo: Transmilenio

TransMilenio, Bogota’s world-class BRT system, celebrated ten years of successful operations on October 28th. ITDP President and former Mayor of Bogota, Enrique Penalosa, described TransMilenio as “the best bus system in the word’ in his key-note address at the anniversary celebrations. Penalosa commissioned its creation during his tenure as Mayor. He reminded people that TransMilenio was a crucial part of his more comprehensive mobility policy that included car restrictions, the implementation of hundreds of kilometers of pedestrian promenades and separated bicycle paths, and the construction of public libraries, schools and nurseries.

TransMilenio started operations in late 2000 and functions as an above-ground system with high-capacity, quality buses. It was inspired by the BRT of Curitiba in Brazil, which was constructed in the 1970’s during Jaime Lerner’s time as Mayor. Penalosa was keen to pay homage: “I want to offer my gratitude to the Former Mayor of Curitiba, Jaime Lerner. But, I have to say that one of the main differences between the BRT systems of Bogota and Curitiba is that we gave a name to our BRT system; a meaningful name that implies major changes in the people’s behavior and a huge transformation in the City’s landscape. Today nobody says they are going to take a bus when they talk about TransMilenio,” Peñalosa argued.

Over the past 10 years, TransMilenio has transported more than 3,000,000,000 passengers and currently serves 1.7 million users per day. It has helped reduce carbon emissions, being characterized by the United Nations as a Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). Water and oil savings are up 40%, while the rate of accidents on the road has decreased by 80%. The system is also integrated with the bicycle network, offering bicycle parking for more than 1,600 bicycles at various stations.

Furthermore, TransMilenio has emerged as an international symbol for urban transportation success, with over 200 delegations from every part of the globe traveling to Bogota to learn first-hand about technical, operational and maintenance issues. Bogota’s BRT system has also spurred further exchange of knowledge between countries as those involved in the development of TransMilenio have gone on to help with other BRT systems in China, Indonesia, Africa, and around Latin America. Edgar Enrique Sandoval, who was the First General Manager of the system and has worked with ITDP, was awarded and recognized at the 10-year celebration as one of the crucial founders of TransMilenio.

The main challenge facing TransMilenio as it enters its second decade is popularity. According to Peñalosa, the system should expand service and capacity as its ridership continues to grow daily. Such additions would include more stations, increased accessibility to the City’s suburbs, more services, more operational returns, and underground tunnels along the system’s backbone Avenida Caracas.

¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!

Tweet

Opinion Pieces: Buses are boring and trains are sexy – time to do something about it?

Opinion Pieces: since 2007, Prof. David Hensher has written an opinion column in the Australasian Bus and Coach magazine, where he monthly discusses a lot of different transport-related hot topics. In this section we are revisiting these columns.

December 2007

The image of the simple bus is not good. It has essentially remained as a rectangular box (with the occasional mild curve) since we moved away from showing off the bonnet in the 1950’s. I have formed a very strong view that public transport in general and bus services in particular should be enshrined in the motto of delivering ‘frequency, connectivity and visibility’. Connectivity refers to the provision of services that offer door-to-door services with minimum delay and almost seamless interchanges. While the idea of visibility is predominantly ‘knowing where the bus is going from and going to, and when’, good looks would not go amiss. It has the same implications as a car driver who prefers to travel in a smart looking sports car or modern Mercedes or BMW. When I discussed this with one of our very reputable bus body builders, the response was that we do need to make our buses look more interesting, but that government regulation requires specific angles for lights etc.

What I find very odd about this is that in many counties, notably in Europe, we have some really attractive buses that appear to preserve this feature without having to stay rectangular. A set of pictures that I often show people are given below. The first reaction is ‘what a nice looking light rail’? Wrong – they are actually buses. Indeed such better looking buses when manufactured in large volumes are very cost competitive with the rectangular box, and with some thought, can carry the same number of people. Combined with low floors, Euro 4 or better engines and style, they must surely be given more serious consideration than we see today in the Australian way of designing buses.

We eagerly await the first Australian-based bus body builder’s new offerings.

Food for thought.

¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!

Tweet

Assessing net effect on emissions of implementation of Bus Rapid Transit system in São Paulo, Brazil: case study and some hypothetical scenarios

The paper investigates the relative influence of factors affecting vehicular emissions in high-flow BRT – Bus Rapid Transit corridors. Emissions were estimated using the IVE – International Vehicle Emission model, which bases estimates on the vehicle driving cycle, and the results of emissions measurements conducted by IPT – Institute of Technological Research of the State of São Paulo for different bus technologies and driving cycles. The developers of IVE have collected data about the technological characteristics of the fleet and driving cycles for different types of vehicles in São Paulo, Brazil. Data about operations in bus corridors in São Paulo was obtained from local transport agencies. Two types of analyses were conducted. First, a before and after analysis of a selected BRT corridor in São Paulo looked at the impacts on overall emissions. The results show that the comparison should not be restricted to the bus system only or to traffic in the specific road affected. When the contribution of autos taking alternative routes after the implementation of the BRT system is included in the estimates of total emissions, important changes in results can occur. A second analysis considered a number of hypothetical scenarios, simulating the impact of different variables related to system planning, design and operation, choice of technology and other general policies. The results indicate that vehicular emissions are influenced by a number of factors that, when combined, can bring favorable results, but that policies aimed at the automobile and consequences of BRT implementation on car users and car traffic are paramount.

Delhi government clears 15 new BRT corridors

Source: Industantimes

Even as the fate of Delhi’s first Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) corridor—a 14.5km stretch from Ambedkar Nagar to Delhi Gate— hangs fire, the Delhi government on Monday gave the go-ahead for an ambitious plan to construct 15 new BRT corridors spanning 359.9 kilometres. To prevent people driving their private vehicles to the Capital’s central vistas, the government has also asked the High Court-appointed special task force to prepare a concrete plan to levy congestion tax and install automatic parking meters in the Capital.

The government also cleared nine new metro lines covering 148.2 km and a 40.3 km stretch of light rail transit (LRT) system for the Capital. The new BRT corridors, metro lines and the LRT line will be constructed by 2021.

Senior Delhi government officials said keeping pace with growing traffic and transport demands, RITES, a central government consultancy firm on transport and infrastructure projects, had suggested these corridors in a recent report ‘Transport Demand Forecast and Development of Public Transport System for Delhi’.

“A 12-member special task force constituted by the Delhi High Court to look for solutions to the increasing traffic problem in the city had approved the report in May this year. By putting its stamp on the report, the Delhi Cabinet has paved the way to take these projects to the drawing board,” said a senior Delhi government officer.

Though new metro lines and BRT corridors have been approved to strengthen the public transport system in the Capital, senior officials said they are yet to explore how these projects will be funded.

A strong BRT and metro network is vital for Delhi considering the rate at which private vehicles are increasing in the Capital. Delhi’s vehicle count has already crossed 65 lakh and 900-1,000 new vehicles are registered everyday.

Senior Delhi government officials said the Cabinet has asked the special task force to come up with a concrete plan on how and in which areas it plans to introduce congestion charges on the lines of cities like Singapore and London. To strengthen the parking system, the Cabinet has also agreed to install automatic parking meters most commercial hubs in the city. According to a task force member, Central Market of Lajpat Nagar has been identified as a commercial centre to launch the parking meters pilot project.

“The parking meters will help do away with problems like parking more vehicles than authorised limit, unreliable and rude parking staff and overcharging,” the member said.

“On congestion tax, we have been asked to carry out a study on roads that require congestion taxing and alternate routes for motorists that do not want to pay the tax,” he added.

The Cabinet has also agreed to start a pilot project in Anand Vihar to map the entire residential area on Delhi’s geo-spatial map to estimate how much parking space the area has and then interact with resident welfare associations to find ways to tackle the city’s fast growing vehicle numbers, given the space constraints.

The Cabinet also agreed to send a reminder to the Centre to approve a bill to create Delhi Urban Mass Transit Authority — a central body to look into roads and transportation needs for the Capital.

¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!

Tweet

Latin American Green City Index: Curitiba is Latin America's greenest metropolis

Source: Siemens

Photo: Siemens press picture

The Latin American Green City Index measures sustainability of 17 major cities in eight countries. In terms of environmental sustainability, Curitiba is Latin America’s greenest metropolis, with other Brazilian cities, too, scoring above average. This is one of the results of a unique comparative study of 17 major Latin American cities carried out by the Economist Intelligence Unit on behalf of Siemens. Siemens presented the study findings at the World Mayors Summit on Climate in Mexico City.

The Latin American Green City Index analyzes the ambitions and the actual performance of Latin American cities in respect of environmental and climate protection across eight different categories: energy and CO2, land use and buildings, transport, waste, water, sanitation, air quality, and environmental governance. «The study shows that cities that take a holistic approach score particularly well,» explains Leo Abruzzese, Global Forecasting Director at the Economist Intelligence Unit. Curitiba, for instance, a city of 1.7 million inhabitants, has been pursuing a long-term strategy since the 1960s to control urban sprawl, and to plan and manage its transportation systems. By contrast, cities that respond in an ad hoc manner to the urgent problems facing them generally score lower. In such cities, the infrastructure growth tends to be less coordinated, which has a negative impact on overall efficiency.

According to the United Nations Population Division, around 81 percent of the population of Latin America lives in cities, making these countries some of the most heavily urbanized emerging economies. Worldwide, more than 50 percent of people live in cities, and urbanization is the trigger of many problems being experienced in traffic management, and in power and water supply. Cities are also at the forefront in the battle to combat climate change. «The battle against climate change will be won in cities, as they are responsible for around 80 percent of all man-made CO2 emissions,» as Peter Löscher points out.

The Latin American Green City Index is the second such comparative study of sustainable urban infrastructure that Siemens has commissioned. It is based on a similar one of European cities carried out by the Economist Intelligence Unit, which was published at the occasion of the United Nations Climate Change Conference COP 15 held in December 2009. In that study, Copenhagen was Europe’s «greenest city.» The methodology used in the study was developed by the Economist Intelligence Unit in consultation with urban experts from, for example, the OECD and the World Bank. Similar surveys are planned for other world regions. In many Latin American countries, the topic of sustainability has not yet taken hold as it has in Europe. This is why the Latin American Green City Index may be regarded as a pioneering effort in helping to disseminate knowledge of sustainable urban infrastructure in Latin America.

For more information, check the Executive Summary and the Report.

¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!

Tweet

New BRT projects in Mexico (in Spanish)

Source: Reforma newspaper

Ciudad de México (15 noviembre 2010).- Mientras que en el DF se tiene previsto que la tercera línea del Metrobús entre en operación este diciembre y ya se cuenta con un proyecto y recursos para la cuarta, en 2011 los sistemas BRT, tipo Metrobús, se abren camino en nueve ciudades más de México.

Por medio del Fondo Nacional de Infraestructura (Fonadin), recursos del Programa Nacional de Infraestructura, el Gobierno Federal analiza apoyar una decena de esquemas de transporte BRT en Monterrey, Chihuahua, Mexicali, Estado de México, Guadalajara, Tijuana, Cancún, Culiacán y Acapulco.

Al Macrobús de Guadalajara, por ejemplo, transporte que ya recibió un apoyo previo por 3 mil 400 millones de pesos, el Fonadin le otorgaría 1 mil 505 millones de pesos más para su tercera fase.

En Cancún, Quintana Roo, también se prevé introducir el transporte «metronizado», llamado Corredor Bicentenario, con camiones de cama baja, tecnología superior al Euro III como mínimo, paradas fijas y sistema de prepago, para lo cual se analiza otorgarle un apoyo de 1 mil 290 millones de pesos.

En total, el monto del apoyo para los nueve proyectos es de 12 mil 683 millones de pesos, y es poco probable que alguno de ellos, al final, se quede fuera de la repartición.

«Ya hay un análisis muy a fondo de los proyectos, con Fonadin, con la Secretaría de Comunicaciones y Transportes, lo que puede pasar es que les hagan algunas observaciones, creo que todos son buenos proyectos», consideró Adriana Lobo, directora del Centro de Transporte Sustentable en México, organismo asesor del Fonadin.

«Qué bueno que hay financiamiento federal, eso hace una diferencia extraordinaria, antes no se producían los proyectos porque no había expectativa de inversión en el tema, Fonadin ya está creando una dinámica diferente, importante», agregó Lobo.

El Gobierno del Distrito Federal no pidió recursos al Fonadin para ninguna de las dos líneas ya existentes de Metrobús. Y la Línea 3, ya en construcción, tuvo un costo de obra de 1 mil 400 millones de pesos, aunque se pagarán 2 mil 800 millones en total por medio de un Pago por Prestación de Servicios que incluye el mantenimiento durante 10 años.

La Línea 4, cuya construcción comenzará en enero de 2011, la financiarán las empresas concesionarias de los segundos pisos de Periférico, y costará 700 millones de pesos.

El Fonadin se constituyó con los recursos provenientes del Fideicomiso de Apoyo al Rescate de Autopistas Concesionadas (FARAC) y del Fondo de Inversión en Infraestructura (FINFRA).

En total, los recursos del Fonadin sumaron en un principio 40 mil millones de pesos, y se espera que con la realización de los activos con que cuenta, en los próximos 5 años puedan canalizar recursos hasta por 270 mil millones de pesos.

Mientras tanto, en Latinoamérica, la cuna del sistema BTR, la red suma 550 a 600 kilómetros; pero sólo en Brasil, donde en 2014 se realizará la Copa del Mundo de Futbol, se construirá la misma cantidad de kilómetros.

«Rumbo a la Copa del Mundo, el Gobierno ha dado la pauta para que se implementen 500 kilómetros, solamente en Brasil, en 12 ciudades donde se va a llevar a cabo la Copa del Mundo, y se van a gastar 6 mil 600 millones de dólares», detalló Luis Gutiérrez, director para América Latina de la Red EMBARQ, Centro de Transporte Sustentable del Instituto de Recursos Mundiales, con sede en Estados Unidos.

¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!

Tweet

Opinion Pieces: Things could be better but relative to other countries it is…

Opinion Pieces: since 2007, Prof. David Hensher has written an opinion column in the Australasian Bus and Coach magazine, where he monthly discusses a lot of different transport-related hot topics. In this section we are revisiting these columns.

November 2007

I have just returned from Singapore where I am a member of the International Expert Panel to advise the Minister of Transport and the Land Transport Authority (LTA) on its transport policies and strategies, and help keep LTA abreast of the latest global trends and developments in land transport. You may well ask – what can we offer Singapore?; whom I am sure many ABC readers would hold up as a ‘jewel in the crown’ in the provision of public transport and how it deals with the car by electronic road pricing. True that the return on investment is something Australian operators only dream of (lets leave it at 20 percent plus and no operating subsidy), but it may come as a surprise to know that the bus system is not any more cost efficient and service effective than many urban operators in Australia (after exchange rate conversion). This means that if one wants to dip one’s toes offshore, that there are serious entrepreneurial openings when and if competitive reforms take place (keep a vigilant watch on this). Never deny the fact that many Australian based operators have been through tough times and the survivors are healthier for it. Take this experience and use it to stand up and be counted amongst the set of globally mobile operators who are in the business of dividing up the world into 25 main players (yes – you did hear it right – that is the view of many in the know).

Some of the challenges in Singapore are not dissimilar to those in Australia. For example, the debate on fare structures under fully integrated and seamless multimodal public transport ticketting is alive and well in many countries. We are not alone and unoriginal. The big issue is the flag fall component on each mode and the impost of having to pay it each time one changes mode. The solution is amazingly easy apart from the modal politics – namely do away with flag fall, have a distance or time-based fare structure (just like the direction that tolling of roads in heading) and set up a clearinghouse (again like fuller interoperable toll roads) to receive revenue and disperse it appropriately. In some countries they are using the move to smartcard fully integrated ticketing to review and revise many outdated fare structures and introducing simpler fare structures that reflect both efficient and equitable fares and most important are sensible ways of attracting people back to public transport. Food for thought!

¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!

Tweet

Transantiago – The best bus system in Latin American in 4 or 5 years (in Spanish)

Source: Plataforma Urbana

Photo: José Genao

Hace un tiempo atrás, sostuve una distendida conversación con Enrique Peñalosa, ex-Alcalde de Bogotá y uno de los principales gestores del sistema de buses rápidos TransMilenio. Peñalosa es un tipo carismático, de una gran labia y una vasta trayectoria en el ámbito de las políticas urbanas. Enrique Peñalosa ha trabajado en distintas ciudades del mundo, es un conocedor de las experiencias en transporte en América Latina, y cuando se le pregunta por Chile no deja de dar su opinión informada. Para todos los que piensan que Transantiago representa lo peor del Chile reciente, esta entrevista más que hundir el dedo en la llaga, busca abrir el debate sobre temas de fondo, ésto es, inversiones en transporte público v/s transporte privado, subsidios al sistema de buses, nacionalización del transporte y otros más. Con Peñalosa hablamos también de visión de ciudad y de cómo hacer urbes a gusto de las personas.

Enrique Peñalosa fue Alcalde de la ciudad de Bogotá en el periodo 1998-2000. Bajo su administración se impulsaron importantes reformas urbanas, entre ellas, el sistema de buses rápidos TransMilenio basado en el sistema de Curitiba, Brasil. Desde su gestión, el sistema de Bogotá ha sido tomado como ejemplo en muchas ciudades del mundo. Actualmente Enrique Peñalosa es miembro del partido verde de Colombia y es invitado frecuentemente a exponer a lo largo del mundo sobre políticas progresistas en temas de transporte público entre otros.

Para Peñalosa, un asiduo expositor en ponencias internacionales, mientras más ciudades y lugares recorres, más te vas dando cuenta que los problemas y las personas en los distintos países son más parecidas de lo que usualmente se piensa. La siguiente es una entrevista realizada en el contexto de las conferencias Urban Age. Dicho eso, parte de la entrevista hace referencia al impacto que tienen éstas en las políticas públicas de las ciudades que las acogen. El resto de la entrevista se enfoca en temas de transporte y políticas urbanas en Chile. En palabras de Peñalosa, “obviamente, mientras más ricos –son los países – los problemas se van diferenciando, por ejemplo Chile. En Chile ocurrió algo muy curioso, y es que el Estado de Chile promovió la expansión de Santiago, la expansión y la sub urbanización, cuando eso ya era claro que era un gran error.”

Javier Vergara Petrescu (JVP): Considerando que has tenido la oportunidad de asistir a todas y cada una de las conferencias Urban Age realizadas a lo largo del mundo. ¿Cuál es, desde tu punto de vista, el alcance que tienen éstas en la manera de hacer políticas públicas en la ciudad sede?

Enrique Peñalosa (EP): Aunque hay ciertos acuerdos fundamentales, el tema del urbanismo no es una ciencia. No hay forma de probar matemáticamente, que es mejor tener ciclo rutas a que no tener, que la densidad de una ciudad de 120 hab/há es mejor que otra, etc. En general hay ciertos argumentos con los que uno puede probar ciertas cosas, pero entonces es interesante que se reúnan expertos en el mundo, y se discutan ciertos estándares, que algunos expertos desde afuera feliciten o critiquen ciertas cosas. Esto da pie a una discusión. Me parece que eso tiene de alguna manera cierta influencia, y termina generando un apoyo intelectual significativo a ciertos proyectos, y una crítica a otros.

JVP: ¿Han habido impactos inmediatos en las políticas urbanas?

EP: No. Ojalá que las decisiones políticas tuvieran respaldo popular, lo que tienen que tener necesariamente es respaldo de los grupos dominantes, esto es es el 30%. No estamos hablando de los multimillonarios a los cuales se refería Marx, es decir, los dueños capitalistas de la sociedad, pero sí estamos hablando de las clases medias altas. Ellos son los que deciden.

Curiosamente, las ciudades se hacen para los grupos de clase media alta, y casi que para los adultos, “hombres” de clase media alta. Y como es un tema complejo, los mismos ciudadanos pobres no son conscientes de qué es lo que les conviene.

Ellos mismos no son conscientes que tiene derecho a tener aceras, a tener ciclovías protegidas. Los que tienen todos los derechos son los señores poderosos, los que tiene carros.

JVP: Al parecer, en muchas ciudades el problema descansa en la idiosincrasia local donde aún existe una visión muy paternalista de las autoridades.

EP: Si los problemas en las ciudades no se están solucionando es porque éstos están mal diagnosticados. Si tienes una enfermedad y te dan el remedio para otra, así no te vas a mejorar. Muchas de las cosas que pasan en las ciudades son contra intuitivas. A uno “le parece” que hacer vías más grandes resuelve el temas del embotellamiento. Por ejemplo, en Santiago quedaron muy felices con sus autopistas con peaje inteligente, y creen que esa es la gran solución, y yo pienso que esa no es la solución, que se van a embotellar, y los problemas de la ciudad en baja densidad son muy graves, y obviamente en ninguna parte del mundo se han solucionado los temas de embotellamientos construyendo mas vías. En ninguna parte.

Obviamente, durante los primeros años de construidas las vías se alivia el tráfico, pero 10 años después, es otra la historia. Entonces son muchas cosas contra intuitivas. El problema de los sistemas urbanos es que parecen ser muy obvios y no lo son. A uno “le parece” que es el sol es el que da vuelta alrededor de la tierra, y claramente no es así. Este tipo de seminarios ayudan a crear una consciencia y a mirar ciudades más exitosas. Por ejemplo Londres, Copenhague, o Zúrich, que son ciudades mejores que las de América latina en términos de espacios peatonales, mejores espacios públicos, parques, etc.

Lo que hace falta también es hacer cosas completamente distintas, redes de vías peatonales, o redes de vías sólo para bus, especialmente en ciudades como, no digamos Santiago que ya está casi terminada, pero qué tal en África, donde las ciudades serán mucho más grandes de lo que son hoy. Gran parte de la ciudad de Nairobi del año 2070 se está por hacer, y podría hacerse completamente distinta, con parques que vayan de lado a lado, de vías solo para buses, una manera distinta de vivir.

JVP: Para que eso ocurriera, habría que tomar las riendas políticas.

EP: Finalmente son los políticos los que toman las decisiones de las ciudades. A uno pueden o no gustarle los políticos, pero la realidad es que los políticos toman las decisiones. Sin embargo, lo que nos falta es cuestionar la visión de ciudad.

La gente tiene muy clara cuál es la vivienda ideal que quisiera, pero no tiene claro la ciudad que quiere. De eso no se habla, no se tiene claro ni el barrio, ni siquiera la cuadra. Si tú le preguntas a la gente en Santiago…cómo es su cuadra ideal, de qué altura quiere sus edificios, ¿tenemos mezclado lo residencial con el comercio, o no? ¿de qué ancho deben ser las aceras? ¿tenemos ciclorutas, o no?, en fin…

Posiblemente uno lo podría llegar a tener claro, pero eso toma tiempo. Creo que no dedicamos suficiente tiempo a construir nuestra visión de ciudad. Creo que hace falta poner más en práctica ese ejercicio.

JVP: ¿Crees que las visiones prestadas de otros lados, ayudan a crear o a generar una visión propia?

EP: Claro, lo que yo creo es que la gente en el mundo se parece más de lo que uno cree. Por ejemplo en América Latina, el sistema de buses colombiano, TransMilenio, lo aprendimos de Curitiba. Son pocas las cosas que se replican en un lado y no funcionan en otra…

JVP:…en Santiago, por ejemplo, donde replicamos el TransMilenio en el Transantiago…

EP: No, yo creo que Transantiago va a ser el mejor sistema de buses en America Latina muy pronto. Lo que pasa es que hubo una serie de errores políticos, una serie de errores en la implementación, pero tiene cosas muy buenas, como por ejemplo, tienen el sistema de tarjeta electrónica más sofisticado de América Latina, y sustituyeron todos los buses tradicionales de manera simultánea yo creo que Transantiago tuvo muchos problemas de implementación, además de problemas políticos entre la derecha y la izquierda, pero obviamente yo estoy convencido que el Transantiago va a ser el mejor sistema de buses en América Latina en unos 4 o 5 años.

JVP: En cuanto a sistema de transporte de Bogotá, ¿qué porcentaje de Transmilenio es subsidiado por el Estado?

EP: Cero. TransMilenio no tiene ningún tipo de subsidio del Estado. El Estado construye la Infraestructura, pero los buses pagan todos los impuestos. A diferencia de los metros, que generalmente no pagan los impuestos de importación o tienen tarifas subsidiadas, el TransMilenio paga aranceles a la importación de los buses, paga impuesto a la venta de los buses, paga impuesto de renta, paga impuesto de rodamiento – como los carros que pagan por usar las vías. El costo de construcción de vía lo paga -finalmente TransMilenio- a través de impuestos, como cualquier vehículo. No solamente se autofinancia, sino que paga muchos impuestos. Yo no me siento orgulloso que no sea subsidiado. Me parece bueno que el transporte público sea subsidiado.

Por otro lado, hay una cosa equivocada, TransMilenio tiene un problema grandísimo. En Bogotá están todos los buses tradicionales que hacían la guerra del centavo y competían como locos. Cada bus de TransMilenio que entra al sistema, tiene que comprar nueve (9) de los tradicionales y además pagar por la chatarrización de los buses viejos. Es una cosa completamente loca. Toda la ciudad quiere que entren los buses nuevos, pero le estamos cobrando todo el costo de sacar los buses viejos de circulación a los usuarios del TransMilenio. A quienes se le debería de cobrar esos impuestos, es a los usuarios de los carros. Esto duplica el costo de los buses. Como sube el costo, los buses van muy llenos. Lo que te quiero enfatizar es que TransMilenio, además de autofinanciarse, paga una cantidad de impuestos inusitados. En Bogotá el Transmilenio representa aún solamente el 25 o 30% de la totalidad de los buses de la ciudad. Todavía falta sacar el 70%.

JVP: En Chile se ha puesto el tema en la mesa sobre Nacionalizar el sistema de Transporte Público. ¿Qué opinión tienes al respecto?

EP: ¡NO! Eso sería una locura. Yo creo que los buses nunca deben ser del Gobierno. Por lo menos en Colombia, un bus del Gobierno que sale del norte llega al sur con otro motor, bueno, eso es en el peor de los casos, pero en el mejor de los casos es una operación ineficiente. Yo creo que el Estado debe tener una pequeña operación, y subcontratar, pero los buses que sean de privados y que se les pague por kilómetros, no por pasajeros, para que sea un sistema moderno.En Chile me parecería muy extraño, ya que nos han enseñado en América Latina a ocupar el sistema privado para todo. Un bus del gobierno es un desastre. Me parece que sería un error inmenso. pURB

Puedes conocer más de Enrique Peñalosa en:

www.enriquepenalosa.com / @EnriquePenalosa

Entrevista por @vergarapetrescu

¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!

Tweet

Peninsula Car-Poolers Secure Transit Lane Win!

Source: Mike Baird

The RTA’s proposal to scrap the transit lane on the Burnt Bridge Creek Deviation has been shelved after Northern Beaches car-poolers argued it would worsen traffic congestion, Manly MP Mike Baird and Pittwater MP Rob Stokes said today.

“The prospect of punishing car-poolers to address congestion was nonsense at every level,” Mr Baird said.

“Scrapping the T3 southbound on the Burnt Bridge Creek would have removed the incentive to car-pool and punish those who were trying to do something to reduce the gridlock.

“It is a relief that the uproar from the community has been heard and I thank the Minister for Roads for pulling the RTA into line.

“The important point, which I discussed with the Minister, is the need to stop tinkering around the edges and implement a long-term public transport solution for the Spit corridor.

“We have been advocating for some time a Bus Rapid Transit for the Northern Beaches and we will seek expressions of interest as a priority if elected next March.”

Mr Baird said a huge number of residents expressed their objection to the RTA’s proposal, some who feared they would have to change their children’s school if they no longer had access to the transit lane.

“The Minister acknowledged the community response was persuasive and I thank those that took the time to make submissions, as there’s no doubt it worked.

“While I still question whether the northbound bus lane needs to be 24 hours, I’m delighted the southbound proposal has been scrapped,” Mr Baird said.

Pittwater MP Rob Stokes said he hoped the Government’s back flip on the transit lane would spur more people into car-pooling.

“This decision sends the message that people using cars during peak hour need to do so efficiently by car-pooling.

“The Labor Government needs to take this as a positive lesson in community consultation,” Mr Stokes said.

¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!

Tweet

Evaluation of pedestrian safety at midblock crossings, Porto Alegre, Brazil

This paper proposes a method to evaluate the potential risk of pedestrian crashes at midblock crossings, which can be applied in developing countries. The method is quantitative because it uses modeling techniques to represent the relationship of risk factors with the occurrence of pedestrian crashes. Application of the method described here comprised the analysis of reported pedestrian crashes in the city of Porto Alegre, in southern Brazil, between 1998 and 2006, and the identification of midblock crossings with the highest number of pedestrian crashes. Twenty-one midblock crosswalks were selected for evaluation. A Poisson regression model was developed to relate pedestrian crashes to the prevailing operational and physical characteristics of midblock crossings. The results indicate that pedestrian crash risk is influenced by a combination of interactive risk factors, such as the presence of busways and bus stops, the road width, the number of traffic lanes, and the volume of pedestrians and vehicles.

Opinion: Transmilenio is an Insufficient Solution (in Spanish)

Source: El Espectador Editorial

Transmilenio ha sido una experiencia con éxitos indiscutibles. El sistema de buses articulados le dio efectivamente un respiro a la capital y mostró las bondades de un transporte organizado. Sus próceres, sin embargo, se han dedicado a la más ridícula lucha de desprestigio de las restantes alternativas de movilidad. A pesar de dicha oposición, debería ser para todos claro que Bogotá, sexta ciudad más densa del mundo, necesita valerse de todas las opciones disponibles para evitar el colapso de sus vías. La más urgente: concretar el Sistema Integrado de Transporte (SITP). No obstante, por más que los buses y colectivos se organicen y Transmilenio siga adelante con sus fases, muchas rutas de la ciudad están ya excedidas en su capacidad. El promedio de la velocidad de los articulados rojos de la Caracas, por ejemplo, que comenzó con 30 km por hora, va ya en 19, y seguirá disminuyendo a medida que sean más los buses que se incorporen para satisfacer la demanda.

Además de la congestión del actual Transmilenio, por la forma como se configuró la ciudad, los espacios simplemente no dan para expandir por todos los callejones un sistema de corredores de 30 metros de ancho. Este es, en especial, el caso del costado oriental de la ciudad, centro de la actividad económica de la capital, y al que viajan o donde se movilizan 3 millones 300 mil personas cada día. Esta cantidad de ciudadanos se desplaza por la carrera Séptima, a 18 km/h; por la carrera 11, a 10,5 km/h; por la carrera 19, a 14 km/h, y por la 17, a 15 km/h. Esto hoy, cuando la ciudad tiene cerca de siete millones de habitantes. ¿Cómo será cuando en 2018 lleguemos a unos 11? No sobra recordar el ancho promedio de estas vías. La 17 tiene 8,5 metros de ancho, la 19 tiene 14, la 11 tiene 9,7 y la Séptima, aunque su promedio es de 30 metros, en realidad sólo se cumple el límite desde la 100 hacia el norte.

Así las cosas, la realidad urbana del centro económico de la capital sencillamente hace imposible los 30 metros de vías que exige Transmilenio. De aquí que lo que se discute no sea una mera alternativa para la ciudad, la cual empezará con el tiempo a pedir también el metro hacia el costado occidental. Pero los opositores abundan. Por un lado, están aquellos que, si bien lo ven necesario, piensan que todavía hay buen margen de espera, como si la construcción de este proyecto no tardara cuando menos cinco años y no fuera mejor intervenir una ciudad de siete millones de habitantes que una de 11. Por el otro lado están los defensores a ultranza de Transmilenio, que bien por intereses económicos o de ideología, prefieren que la ciudad pague por los predios que requieren las ampliaciones de Transmilenio en el sector más valorizado, a que se haga un metro más urbano y más ecológico que buses articulados por callejuelas.

Con todo, de manera paradójica, el principal enemigo del metro es el mismo Alcalde, que ganó las elecciones llevándolo como promesa de campaña. Los escándalos de corrupción que han envuelto la administración Moreno y el mal manejo de las obras que ya están en ejecución, han hecho que tanto la ciudadanía como el Gobierno Nacional desconfíen de su firma y prefieran, mejor, retrasar la licitación. Desconfianza que, si bien es razonable, no por ello puede dejar empantanar un proyecto que sólo traería beneficios a la ciudad. No se deben detener la segunda y tercera etapas de la ingeniería básica —estudios de amueblamiento, dotación de la infraestructura y material rodante—, para que la siguiente administración pueda llegar y adjudicar de inmediato la obra. Contrario a lo que muchos han sugerido, incluida la Universidad de los Andes, fiel consultora de Transmilenio, y Planeación Nacional, el trazado de los estudios es bueno y el gasto es financiable. No tiene sentido darle más espera.

¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!

Tweet

Opinion Pieces: The Data Trail – Keep it Simple but make it Meaningful

Opinion Pieces: since 2007, Prof. David Hensher has written an opinion column in the Australasian Bus and Coach magazine, where he monthly discusses a lot of different transport-related hot topics. In this section we are revisiting these columns.

October 2007

My recent participation in a number of inquiries into ways to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of public transport has highlighted the inadequate focus on really knowing what does make a difference to actual and potential users of public transport. There appear to be a large number of customer satisfaction surveys which seem on balance to focus mainly on looking at how satisfied (happy?) existing users are with a range of existing service attributes. There is something missing – someone may be eternally satisfied with a specific feature of a service (e.g., the attitude of the bus driver or the inspector on the train or the attendant at the Ferry wharf), but is that really so important as to influence whether someone would choose to use or not use a bus or train or ferry? An obvious and simple improvement would be to identify how important specific service features are in one’s choice of means of transport and how well is the operator performing in providing the service in terms of that feature. As an example, we might think about asking how does the stakeholders’ perception of how successful the operator has been in addressing each of the issues compare with their perception of how important each of the issues are? To determine this, a simple “difference score” might be used, defined as the difference between the importance and success ratings given by each respondent to each issue as shown in the Table below.

A positive score indicates that the success in addressing an issue is lagging behind its importance in choosing a means of transport. Its magnitude is indicative of how much success is lagging behind importance. For example, the score “3” is obtained when the stakeholder considers an issue to be very important but the same issue has been unsuccessfully addressed by the Operator. A negative score indicates that the Operator has over addressed an issue given its importance to actual and potential passengers. For example, the score “-3” indicates that a stakeholder considers an issue to be unimportant even though it has been very successfully addressed by the Operator. A zero score indicates that the Operator has addressed the issue in line with its importance.

Given the growing importance of measuring the passenger’s (existing and potential) assessment of the effectiveness of public transport services, it is timely that we at least ask the question: Do we Really Know our Passengers? Are we measuring incorrectly if we want to grow patronage? Information is only relevant if it is useful.

Tweet

¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!

BRT in Ahmedabad: Lessons From a State-of-the-Art Bus System

EMBARQ’s The City Fix had the chance to spoke with Professor Shivanand Swamy, the Associate Director of CEPT, about Ahmedabad’s Janmarg bus rapid transit (BRT) system one year after its creation. The new BRT system, considered a best practice for BRT in South Asia, provides services of about 90,000 bus trips per day on 45 buses.

Read full article at The City Fix.

Photo: CEPT University

Tweet

¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!

Check our Transantiago videos in YouTube

These videos are a description of the motivation, design, implementation and first year evolution of Transantiago System, in Santiago, Chile. They were developed during the International Workshop on BRT held in Santiago on 26-29 August, 2008. Don’t forget to activate the English captions by clicking «CC» at the bottom of the video.

Transantiago video – part 1

Transantiago video – part 2

Transantiago video – part 3

Photo: Transantiago

Tweet

¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!

Interview to Professor Juan de Dios Ortuzar during his stay in The University of Western Australia

During July 2010, Professor Ortuzar lived in Perth, where he was the Westnet Infrastructure Group Visiting Professor at The University of Western Australia Business School. He was interviewed about his research and his work in Perth.

Read full interview in The University of Western Australia’s website.

Tweet

¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!

Guadalajara decides to cancel their BRT project: controversy in Mexico

Mayors just rejected federal funding for line 2 of Guadalajara’s BRT. Their decision is allegedly based on technical studies showing that LRT is a better option – full press conference article (in Spanish).

In response, the Governor of Jalisco slams them for «sending the jobs and federal money to Monterrey» – full press release (in Spanish).

Bunch of links on the polemic (in Spanish): informador.com.mx

Tweet

¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!

The ALC-BRT CoE has been awarded a five-year grant from the Volvo Research and Education Foundation (VREF)

Read full article in VREF’s website.

Tweet

¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!

Special Issue of Research in Transportation Economics edited by Rosário Macário

Research in Transportation Economics is a journal devoted to the dissemination of high quality economics research in the field of transportation. The content covers a wide variety of topics relating to the economics aspects of transportation, government regulatory policies regarding transportation, and issues of concern to transportation industry planners. The unifying theme throughout the papers is the application of economic theory and/or applied economic methodologies to transportation questions.

In this special edition Volume 30, Issue 1, Pages 1-154 (2010) ECONOMICS OF CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIPS IN THE PROVISION OF TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE, edited by Rosário Macário, you can find the following articles from members of our Centre of Excellence:

Galilea, P. and Medda, F. (2010) Does the political and economic context influence the success of a transport project? An analysis of transport public-private partnerships. Research in Transportation Economics 30, 102-109.

Macário, R. (2010) Critical issues in the design of contractual relations for transport infrastructure development. Research in Transportation Economics 30, 1-5.

Macário, R. (2010) Future challenges for transport infrastructure pricing in PPP arrangements. Research in Transportation Economics 30, 145-154.

Viegas, J.M. (2010) Questioning the need for full amortization in PPP contracts for transport infrastructure. Research in Transportation Economics 30, 139-144.

Photo: Metro de Santiago

¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!

Tweet

BRT special edition of Built Environment

«Bus Rapid Transit: A Public Transport Renaissance» is a special issue of Built Environment (Volume 36, number 3, edited by Professor Sir Peter Hall and Professor David Banister, guest editor: Lloyd Wright, Viva) that traces both the history of and the current trends in BRT across the globe, providing a regional perspective on progress and challenges.

The following papers from members of our CoE are included in this publication:

Curitiba, the Cradle of Bus Rapid Transit
Authors: Luis Antonio Lindau, Dario Hidalgo and Daniela Facchini
Page start: 274

BRT in Latin America – High Capacity and Performance, Rapid Implementation and Low Cost
Authors: Dario Hidalgo and Aileen Carrigan
Page start: 283

More info: Promotional flyer and oficial website

Tweet

¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!

Our first appearences on the World Wide Web

During April, 2010, our Centre of Excellence was all over the World Wide Web!

Please check the following articles regarding our CoE’s establishment:

ALC-BRT CoE in PUC’s website (in Spanish)
ALC-BRT CoE in World Resources Institute’s website
ALC-BRT CoE in EMBARQ’s website
ALC-BRT CoE in MIT Portugal website
ALC-BRT CoE in MIT News website

Tweet

¿Comments? ¿Opinions? ¿Similar News? Send them to us!