BRT-lite

By Joyce Roy

How to improve reliability and speed on trunk routes without removing traffic lanes or parking.

Prologue

With the challenge of global warming, we must find a way the make public transit an attractive alternative to the auto. I have found the examples of BRT in Curitiba and Bogotá inspiring.

But do these examples represent appropriate technology for the East Bay? Curitiba's BRT is on a central spine lined with apartment towers and Bogotá's arterial resembles an I-80 parking lot. Even USA cities much larger and denser then ours like Los Angeles have not taken a lane away for BRT. It seems removing a lane and parking for BRT in the East Bay is overkill and unnecessary to significantly improve public transit.

To quote from the Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) funded by the FTA: In the United States and Canada, BRT is typically most successful when the urban population exceeds 750,000 and employment in the central business district (CBD) is, at a minimum, between 50,000 and 75,000. Land uses should be organized in dense patterns that facilitate transit use.

There is no example in North America of a BRT that has taken away a lane for bus-only in each direction on a low-density city street that has only two lanes and parking in each direction. And no North American bus system uses POP (Proof of Payment).

I have called my alternative BRT-LITE (I have seen this term in the literature) to distinguish it from Rapid Bus Plus, because it does not propose anything that would provide faster and more reliable service. For instance, having cleaner, fuel efficient true low-floor buses is simply something every line should have and instituting POP is something no line should have if AC Transit is adverse to losing money.

BRT-LITE with the bulb-outs does increase efficiency and reliability. I don't know if this has been done system-wide elsewhere. It seems like a middle way for small cities and we can be the first. It is cost effective, doable within a reasonable time period, will have the community behind it and attract new riders because it will make bus riding a pleasure. People will be tempted to leave the comfort of their cars if they have reliable service, safe attractive places to wait for the bus and a comfortable bus to ride on.

BRT-LITE [An Alternative]

1) Split up the 1R route. It is asymmetrical. The East Oakland portion of the route has heavy ridership and probably requires 60-ft buses but only 40-ft buses are needed on Telegraph between downtown Oakland and downtown Berkeley. So the route from East Oakland should follow the old 82 line and end at the West Oakland BART station and the one from downtown Berkeley would have the Oakland Amtrak station in Jack London as its terminus.

2) Try to locate Rapid stops where there is some existing activity, stores, etc., so people feel safe and can do something while waiting for the bus.

3) Provide bulb-outs at all Rapid stops with an attractive, comfortable shelter with posted schedules, a working real-time information display, and create place-making with trees and special paving. The bulb-outs should accommodate a pedestrian cross walk plus a 40-ft bus on the downtown Berkeley to the Oakland Amtrak station in Jack London route. And they should accommodate 60-ft buses on the old 82 line. The bulb-outs mean a bus can save time because it does not need to maneuver to a curb and then get back into the flow of traffic. It means, ipso facto, a bus priority lane is created and no parking is lost. Parked cars along a busy street act as a safety barrier for pedestrians. To help prevent double parking, every block with some commercial development on it should have a limited time loading zone.

4) Level boarding created at the Rapid bus bulb-outs.

5) Continue with local service for those who have difficulty walking. The local only stops will remain at the curb so the Rapid can easily pass.

6) VERY IMPORTANT: Select buses that decrease dwell time and make the riding experience a pleasure. That means not the low-aisle Van Hools but true low floor American buses that one can enter and sit with ease and has a ride smooth enough for reading. The only reason buses are slower than cars is they have to pick up passengers so decreasing the dwell time is very important.

7) Select buses that are energy efficient, and will cut down on air pollution and greenhouse gases such as diesel/electric hybrid buses. *

8) As with all BRT, provide signal priority and stops that are on the far side of a cross street.

9) Proof-of-payment (POP)** is not advisable. It is used successfully on some rail lines because they have fewer stops. But cheating is too easy on buses so it is used on very few, if any, BRTs in the USA. But uses of flash passes and Translink should be encouraged through financial incentives. One city has encouraged the use of Smart Cards by offering free transfers. Within a few weeks most riders were using them.

• See GHG for an even better idea!