Tracking the Evolution of the Bogot Model Findings from three South American BRT Systems

1
Tracking the Evolution of the Bogotá Model -
Findings from threeSouth American BRT Systems

• March 20, 2007
• National Bus Rapid Transit Institute,
  ww.nbrti.org
• Center for Urban Transp. Research,
  www.cutr.usf.edu
• University of South Florida

2
Todays Agenda

• 200 PM Welcome and Introductions FTA-TRI
  Representatives
• 205-250 Overview of Visits and Initial
  Findings
• George Darido and Alasdair Cain, NBRTI
• Purpose of Visits and Delegation
• Findings from Bogotás TransMilenio
• Colombias National BRT Program
• Findings from Pereiras Megabús
• Findings from Guayaquils Metrovía
• Lessons for the US Transit Industry and Next
  Steps
• 250-310 Remarks by Paul Bignardi, San
  Francisco MTA (MUNI)
• 310-320 Remarks (via telephone) by Lurae
  Stuart, APTA
• 320-330 Remarks by Bill Vincent,
  Breakthrough Technologies
• 330-400 Questions and Answers

3
There are at least 7 elements to BRT planning and
a spectrum of discrete options within each
RUNNING WAYS
Integration of Elements
STATIONS
AND LAND USE
VEHICLES
SERVICE AND OPERATIONS PLAN
FARE COLLECTION
ITS
MARKETING ANDBRANDING
4
The visits focused on strategies to maximize
capital and operating efficiencies with BRT

• Guayaquil, Ecuador - Metrovia
• 2.5 million inhabitants
• First of 3 corridors (10 miles) opened in August
  2006
• gt90,000 pax/day
• Pereira, Colombia - Megabús
• 600,000 inhabitants
• 3 routes since October 2006 (10-mile corridor,
  exclusive)
• 100,000 pax/day
• Bogotá, Colombia - Transmilenio
• Capital city of 8 million inhab.
• gt50 miles of exclusive busways since Dec. 2000
• 1.3 million pax/day

COLOMBIA
5
The program included meetings with leading
officials, project representatives and operators

• February 11-12, 2007 Guayaquil, Ecuador
• Technical tour of Metrovia BRT system, control
  center, and terminals
• President of Metrovia, Federico von Buchwald, and
  other staff
• Mayor of Guayaquil, Jaime Nebot
• February 13, 2007 Pereira, Colombia
• Technical tour of Megabús BRT system, control
  center, and depot
• General Manager of Megabús, Monica Vanegas
• Megabus managers and operating companies
• February 14-16, 2007 Bogotá, Colombia
• Technical tour of Transmilenio BRT system and its
  largest depot
• Former Mayor of Bogotá, Enrique Peñalosa
• General Manager of Transmilenio, Angelica Castro
• CEO the largest Transmilenio bus operator, Victor
  Raul Martinez
• Fare Collection and Control System Operators for
  Transmilenio
• UITP (International Union of Public
  Transportation) 5th Bus Conference on Bus
  Systems without Limits

6
The 12 delegates were planners and engineers
representing diverse organizations and locations

• 5 from Public Agencies
• David Tomzik, Pace Suburban Bus, Chicago, IL
• John Cullen, TARC, Louisville, KY
• Nancy Schneider, South Florida Regional Plan.
  Council, FL
• Paul Bignardi, San Francisco MTA, CA
• Ron Garrison, StarMetro, Tallahassee, FL
• 2 Industry Consultants
• Pilar Rodriguez, TranSystems Corp., Puerto Rico
• John Mason, HDR Inc., Atlanta, GA
• 5 Researchers and Other Industry Representatives
• Alasdair Cain, NBRTI, Univ. of South Florida
• Georges Darido, NBRTI, Univ. of South Florida
• Lurae Stuart, APTA, Washington DC
• Scott Rutherford, Univ. of Washington
• William Vincent, Breakthrough Technologies, Wash.
  DC

7
Bogotá, Colombia
Photo Credits Transmilenio S.A.
8
The Traditional Bus System

• Relatively unregulated traditional system led
  to
• penny war competition for passengers
• High accident rates
• Poor service quality
• Long travel times
• High pollution levels
• low bus occupancies

9
TransMilenio Infrastructure
Bicycle way
Sidewalk
5m
7m
10.5m
1-3m
3 - 8m
7m
10.5m
1-3m
3 - 8m
Busway
Busway
Sidewalk
Lateral Sep.
Lateral Sep.
3 general purpose lanes
3 general purpose lanes
Central Separator on-TM Stations
10
TransMilenio Phases I and II
11
Bogotá 2005 Applicability to the U.S

• Major Findings
• Capacity
• Capital Cost
• Business Model
• Politics
• Urban Renewal
• Integrated Package Approach

12
TransMilenio Phases I and II
13
TransMilenio Phase I, II and III
14
The TransMilenio Masterplan
15
The Colombian National BRT Program
16
Observations from Bogotá 2007

• Performance issues
• Contractual issues
• Political issues
• Near term and long term solutions / System
  integration

17
Performance Issues - Capacity
18
Performance Issues User Information
19
Contractual Issues
20
Political Issues
21
System Performance Potential Near Term
Solutions
22
System Integration The Long Term Solution
23
Pereira, Colombia
Photo Credits Megabus S.A.
24
Pereira Characteristics

• Running Way 16 route- miles (exclusive) trunk
  with feeder network
• Stations 35 (high platforms, enclosed with
  sliding doors), 2 larger terminals, fiber optic
  network
• Service/Oper. Plan 3 routes through downtown,
  3-5 min. (pk/off pk) headway

Photo Credits Megabus S.A. G. Darido W.
Vincent
25
Pereira Characteristics
Images Megabus S.A.
26
Pereira Characteristics

• Vehicles 51 artic., 81 feeders
• Fare Collection only with proximity smartcards
  (a first!)
• ITS next vehicle signs, infrared location
  sensors at stations
• Branding green trunk line, yellow feeders

Photo Credits Megabus S.A. G. Darido W.
Vincent
27
Pereira Characteristics
Photo Credits W. VincentG. Darido
28
Pereira Characteristics

• Short implementation time
• 2001 Preliminary design
• 2003 Financial plans finalizedMegabus S.A.
  createdContracts drafted for bids
• 2004 Construction groundbreaking
• August 2006 Start of operations
• Simple fare structure/system
• US0.45 with no operating subsidies
• Flat fare for all entry-only validation
• Cash accepted only in first month of operations
• 200,000 smartcards free with purchase of 4 trips
• 50,000 more smartcards sold (US2.00) at
  terminals
• Registered cards one trip negative balance
  allowed

Photo Credit W. Vincent
29
Pereira Characteristics

• 100,000 pax/day currently 140,000 expected when
  all infrastructure in place
• Travel and dwell times
• 50 of citywide transit trips on Megabus
• 2 mode shift from private cars to transit
  (citywide)
• 10 of Megabus users have accessto a car
• Spontaneous land developmentaround stations
  observed but not measured
• Seeking CDM approval for carbontrading
  (Transmilenio methodology already approved)

Photo Credits W. VincentG. Darido
30
Pereiras Megabús was modeled after Transmilenio
but with significant differences

• Trunk-feeder with innovative network design
• Routes 1 city, 1 city circulator, 1 express
• Narrow downtown streets
• One lane in each direction
• One way and bus-only streets
• Some parking and traffic lanes removed
• Some sidewalks widened
• Some cars allowed on the running way to access
  parking
• Feeders are not free
• On-board smartcard reader and turnstile
• Requires passengers to board the feeders through
  front door at stations and back door at terminals
• Smaller feeder buses (30)
• Serving neighborhoods and activity centers from
  terminals
• Operating in mixed traffic

Photo Credit W. Vincent
31
Pereiras Megabús demonstrates a successful BRT
model in a smaller city

• Public-private partnerships are key
• Two private bus operators each running their own
  trunk and feeders services to balance revenue
  sharing problem
• Smartcards recharged at stations or external POS
  network of 60 locations managed by contractor
  (e.g. lottery machines, pharmacies)
• Megabus administration 22 employees overseeing
  940 contract employees
• Required political will and national level
  support
• Transforming downtown areas into more transit and
  pedestrian-friendly environments road space
  reallocation
• Infrastructure cost US60 Million (in 2006) 70
  national government, 30 local

32
Guayaquil, Ecuador
Photo Credits Metrovia.Foundation
33
Guayaquil Characteristics

• Running Way Phase I 10 miles (exclusive) trunk
  with feeder network
• Service/Oper. Plan
• one route splits through narrow streets of
  downtown and provides better coverage
• 4-6 min. (pk/off pk) headways
• reorganization of previous routes and feeders
  created problems initially

Images Metrovia.Foundation
34
Guayaquil Characteristics

• Stations 34 (high platforms, enclosed with
  sliding doors), 2 terminals, fiber optic network,
  short stop spacing in downtown
• Vehicles 40 artics., 40 feeders (replacing 250
  colectivos)
• Fare US0.25 general discounted fares no
  operating subsidies
• Cash and proximity smartcards
• Only about 5 of passengers use smartcards

Photo Credits Metrovia.Foundation
35
Guayaquil Characteristics

• Phase I 100,000 pax/day
• 7 routes planned for 600,000 pax/day
• Routes 2 and 3 by 2008
• 2 lanes per direction in critical areas
• City funding the first 3 routes (infrastructure,
  stations, terminals)
• Estimated at US100 million
• 70 financed by Andean Development Corporation
• About US25 Million for the first route (Phase I)

36
As in Bogotá, Metrovia is the centerpiece of an
urban redevelopment program

• Mayor Jaime Nebot came into office in 2000 and
  prioritized transit
• Redevelopment of the riverfront into vibrant
  public spaces and pedestrian promenade
• Implementation timeline
• Planning began in 2001 with support from foreign
  consultants
• System opened in August 2006
• 2007 Sustainable Transport Award by ITDP during
  TRB

Photo Credits Metrovia.Foundation
37
Aesthetically pleasing stations and terminals
were key investments

• Terminals are large and reminiscent of train
  station architecture
• Free transfers between trunk and feeder buses

Photo Credits G. DaridoW. VincentMetrovia.Fo
undation
38
A very lean institutional model with advantages
and additional risks

• Metrovia Foundation established by the city with
  12 staff
• Regulating agency to control system operations
  and quality
• Administers contracts and hundreds of contractors
• Responsible for system planning and future phases
• Funded from space rents and advertisement (no
  fare revenue)
• Outsourcing for all services (12-year contracts)
• Bus operations
• Fare collection andtechnology integrator
• Trust
• Control/Supervision
• Security
• Cleaning
• Only one concessionaire forbus operations
  employingformer colectivo drivers

39
Business model depends on the future expansion of
the system

• All fare revenues are deposited in a trust fund
  and distributed based on real income (not per km
  or per service hour)
• Fare contractor takes 9.3 of revenues
• Remainder goes to the bus operator and other
  contractors
• With the planned routes and additional operators,
  fare revenue will be distributed based upon km of
  service provided
• Trust provided essentially at no cost by a third
  party
• Bank earns interest until contractors are
  remunerated
• Provides Metrovia some independence from
  political pressures and other influences
• Control and fare collection system designed for
  full implementation contract is more profitable
  with additional routes in operation

40
In conclusion, local conditions are driving the
evolution of the TransMilenio model

• Feeder and fare collection systems
• Network design and service planning for narrow
  rights-of-way and lower-volume systems
• Adapting business and institutional models
• Insulating agencies from political and other
  influences
• Level of private sector involvement
• Managing contracts and operational risks
• Friction between regulators and operators

41
Business and Institutional Models
42
Urban Renewal / Mobility Program
Before
After
43
Evolution of the TransMilenio Model - Lessons
Learned for the United States

• Business and Institutional Model
• Using public /private sector partnerships to
  achieve optimal operating efficiency
• Private sector involvement in
  infrastructure provision
• Balanced contracting to reduce friction between
  regulators and operators
• Service Model
• BRT as the centerpiece of package approach to
  urban renewal and mobility management
• Evolving from BRT corridors to BRT networks
  through careful service integration
• Achieving city-wide mobility, congestion
  reduction, and urban development goals

Experience in Pereira and Guayaquil proves that
the model can be applied in smaller developing
world cities
44
Next Steps

• Trip report and presentation at APTA Bus
  Conference in May 2007
• CBRT update by end of 2007
• Elements
• Performance and Benefits
• Capacity
• Implementation time
• Capital cost effectiveness
• Operating cost efficiency
• Land development
• Environmental quality
• Possible research projects
• Adapting international BRT business and
  institutional models to the US context

45
Thank you for your attention

• Alasdair Cain
• Senior Research Associate
• cain_at_cutr.usf.edu
• Tel [phone]
• Georges Darido, P.E.
• Senior Research Associate
• darido_at_cutr.usf.edu
• Tel [phone]
• National Bus Rapid Transit Institute
• www.nbrti.org
• Center for Urban Transportation Research
• www.cutr.usf.edu
• University of South Florida
• Tampa, Florida, USA