Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
Environmental Management,
Water, Energy, Transport
Sector project: Transport Policy Advice
Sustainable Transport:
A Sourcebook for Policy-makers in Developing Cities
Module 3a:
Deutsche Gesellschaft fr
Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH
aa2 This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
Module 3a:
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
1. Introduction
1.1 Outline of the module
ii
1
1
4. Comparison on key
parameters
16
4.1 Cost
16
17
2.1 terminology
18
Operating costs
18
Use of space
Rolling stock
19
Public finances
20
Integration
20
Level of service
20
Construction
20
3. Current applications in
developing cities
22
4.4 Flexibility
23
4.5 Speed
24
24
Asian experience
25
25
European experience
26
26
10
11
Current applications
11
26
11
26
3.3 Metros
12
27
13
28
15
Current applications
15
16
5. Conclusion
29
Resource materials
30
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
1. Introduction
Choices on public transit options are choices
about a citys future. Will there be congestion?
Will there be high levels of air and noise pollution? Will transport be affordable? Will services
be available to all? The type of public transit
system will have a big impact on the answers to
these questions (Figure 1).
This module aims to provide policy-makers
in developing cities and those advising them
with guidance on choosing appropriate Mass
Rapid Transit (MRT) systems. The module begins
by briefly describing some basic concepts and
defining features of MRT in developing cities.
Current applications of each of the main MRT
options are then described, focusing on applications in developing cities. Since Metros and
Light Rail Transit are still relatively uncommon
in low income developing cities, most of this
discussion focuses on the recent development of
Bus Rapid Transit systems throughout the world.
The main section of the module then compares
each of these MRT options in the light of key
parameters for developing cities. Naturally, a
Fig. 13
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
Mass rapid transit, also referred to as public transit, is a passenger transportation service, usually
local in scope, that is available to any person
who pays a prescribed fare. It usually operates on
specific fixed tracks or with separated and exclusive use of potential common track, according
to established schedules along designated routes
or lines with specific stops, although Bus Rapid
Transit and trams sometimes operate in mixed
traffic. It is designed to move large numbers of
people at one time. Examples include Bus Rapid
Transit, heavy rail transit, and light rail transit.
Heavy rail transit
A light rail transit (LRT) system is a metropolitan electric railway system characterised by its
ability to operate single cars or short trains along
exclusive rights-of-way at ground level, aerial
structures, in subways, or occasionally in streets,
and to board and discharge passengers at track
or car floor level (TCRP, 1998). LRT systems
include tramways, though a major difference is
that trams often operate without an exclusive
right-of-way, in mixed traffic.
Metro
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
Fig. 25
A bus lane is a highway or street reserved primarily for buses, either all day or during specified
periods. It may be used by other traffic under
certain circumstances, such as while making a
turn, or by taxis, bicycles, or high occupancy
vehicles.
Bus lanes, widely used in Europe even in small
cities, are increasingly applied in developing cities such as Bangkok, where counter-flow buses
can move rapidly through peak period congestion.
Busway
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
Integration
All MRT systems require interchanges with
other elements of the public transport system,
and integration with other modes of transport
such as cars, walking and cycling. Shanghai,
for example, provides excellent Metro/bicycle
and Metro/pedestrian interchanges, and good
Metro/bus interchanges at some major stations.
Mexico Citys Metro is physically integrated
with the international airport and major bus
stations. Curitibas BRT system includes excellent integration with pedestrian streets and taxi
stands. Sao Paulos BRT integrates well with the
Metro system. Poor integration is a feature of
some under-performing rail-based MRT systems,
such as in Kuala Lumpur and Manila.
Level of service
MRT systems usually offer a superior level
of service compared to unsegregated roadbased modes such as regular buses, taxis, and
paratransit.
Superior service is evident for example with:
< Terminals & interchanges
< Cleanliness
< Sophisticated marketing image
Fig. 35
Passenger information
Climate control
< Modal integration
< Integration with major trip attractors.
Rail-based systems have historically performed
better on level of service indicators, although
recent Bus Rapid Transit successes are challenging these traditional conceptions.
<
<
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
3. Current applications in
developing cities
We now survey world-wide applications of the
different MRT systems, focusing on developing
cities.
Rail-based systems in developing country
Metros carry about 11 billion journeys each
year, surface rail about 5 billion, and light rail
about 2.5 billion. While the proportion of public transport trips by rail exceeds 50% in Seoul
and Moscow, rail systems dominate only in a
very few cities (World Bank, 2001).
Some typical MRT systems in developing cities
are outlined in Table 1. Several of the systems in
BANGKOK
MEXICO
KUALA
TUNIS
RECIFE
Q UITO
BOGOTA
PORTO ALEGRE
(SMLT)
(LINHA SUL)
BUSWAY
(TRANSMILENIO,
PHASE 1)
BUSWAYS
LUMPUR
EXAMPLE
(LINE 4)
(BTS)
(LINE B)
(PUTRA )
Category
Rail metro
Rail metro
Rail metro
Light rail
Light rail
Technology
Electric
Steel rail
Electric,
steel rail
Electric,
rubber tyre
Electric
Driverless
Electric
steel rail
Suburban rail
conversion
Electric,
steel rail
Length (km)
12.3
23.1
23.7
29
29.7 km
14.3
Vertical
segregation
100%
tunnel
100%
Elevated
100%
elevated
At grade
95% at grade
5% elevated
1.5
1.0
20% elevated
55% at grade
25% tunnel
1.1
1.3
0.9
1,110
1,700
970
1,450
833
670
560
Vehicles ($m)
277
1,030
90.25
Busway
Busway
Busway
AC Electric
duo-trolleybus
11.2 (+ext
5.0)
At grade,
Partial signal
priority
Articulated diesel
buses
Diesel buses
41
25
At grade,
Mainly segregated
At grade
No signal priority
1.2
0.4
0.4
435
166
110.3
0.7
213
(inf only)
n.a
268
149
20.0
322
25
410
n.a.
167
18
80 (113 vehs)
Not included
(private operation)
Not included
(private operation)
73.59
40.92
50.0
13.3
11.6
10.3
5.2
1.0
20 (30)
20 (30)
13 (26)
30
n/a
40 (convoy
operation
planned)
160
n.a.
21,600
25,000
19,500
10,000
12000
9,600
9,000
32,400
50,000
39,300
30,000
12000
36,000
15,000
35,000
20,000
50
45
45
50
13/20
39
20
20+ (stopping)
30+ (express)
20
n.a.
100
20
>100
115% in
1998
n.a
100
100
100
Ownership
Public
Private
(BOT)
Public
Private,
(BOT)
Public
Public
2004
1999
2000
1998
1998
2002
Public
infrastructure,
private vehicles
2000
(1998 prices)
Public
infrastructure,
private vehicles
Year completed
Public (BOT
under
consideration
1995
(ext 2000)
Capital cost/route
km. ($m)
Initial (ultimate)
vehicles or trains /
hour /direction
Initial maximum
pass capacity
Maximum pass.
carrying capacity
Ave operating
speed (kph)
Rev/operating cost
ratio
20,000
Sources: Janes Urban Transport System; BB&J Consult. 2000; J. Rebelo, and G Menckhoff.
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
25
Mostly 1990s
Bogots TransMilenio:
initial results
Results of the first few years
of operation of TransMilenio
have met the high
expectations of the systems
developers:
The system is moving
700,000 passengers each
day (Sept. 2002)
Most users of TransMilenio
have gained more than 300
hours per year to themselves
11 % of TransMilenios riders are former private car
drivers
Average speed is higher
than 25 km per hour
With the 72% of the total
number of buses the system moves about 60,000
passengers in peak hours
Noise and air pollution have
been reduced by 30%
where TransMilenio runs
344 buses in operation
Ticket fare of US$ 0.40
35.5 km in operation
56 stations in operation and
6 under construction.
Fig. 44
In Curitiba, boarding
tubes support 5-door
boardings on locally
manufactured buses.
Doors open outwards,
and ramps drop down
to allow same-level
boarding.
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
Fig. 65
Fig. 55
Quito, Ecuador
some units as old as 35 years. The electric trolley-bus also delivers additional environmental
gains through the substitution of diesel-fuelled
buses with units powered by hydro-generated
electricity. The overwhelming popularity of the
Quito trolley-bus has exceeded expectations
and in a sense created an unexpected problem.
With over 200,000 commuters now using the
system daily, its maximum capacity has been
reached, and thus has prompted calls for further
expansion. The municipality plans to deliver an
additional 73 kilometres of busways by 2006.
For cost reasons, Quitos new Eco-Via line
utilises Euro II diesel buses rather than continue
with electric trolley technology. Likewise, the
planned expansion will be utilising clean diesel
technology for its buses.
Porto Alegre, Brazil
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
Fig. 75
Asian experience
Kunming, China
The Hong Kong bus system displays many features of BRT, including bus priority measures,
advanced fare collection, comprehensive coverage, clean buses, and passenger information.
The system is well integrated with Hong Kongs
Metro, with an extensive bus feeder network
comprising more than 140 bus feeder shuttle
routes connecting with railway stations including the MTR, KCR and Airport Express.
Fig. 95
Japan
Fig. 105
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
Travel time
reduction
Ridership
increase
Pittsburgh
50%
80100%
Los Angeles
25%
2741%
City
Miami
N/A
70%
Honolulu
2545%
N/A
Chicago
25%
70%
European experience
France
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
Fig. 124
Great Britain
Fig. 134
Ipswich, England.
The unpaved centre
strip reduces costs
sonsiderably, and also
reduces noise.
Courtesy of US Transportation Research
Board
Fig. 1435
10
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
Fig. 165
Fig. 155
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
11
Fig. 175
Fig. 184
12
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
Fig. 195
Fig. 216
Victory Monument,
Bangkok. BTS trains
run on dual tracks,
carried on a 9 metre
wide viaduct, supported
on single box viaduct
girders, each 12 metres
above the road level.
Karl Fjellstrom, Jan. 2002
Fig. 205
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
13
The Skytrain,
which opened in
late 1999, is an
elevated heavy rail
system running
above some of
Bangkoks busiest
commercial areas.
It has a peak capacity of around 45,000 passengers per hour per direction. Trains run on 5
to 7 minute headways from 6 am to midnight,
though as demand increases and for special occasions such as New Years Eve, headways can
be shortened to 2 minutes (Sayeg, 2001) and
running time extended. The BTS has two lines,
with a total length of 23.1 km and 23 stations.
The lines intersect at the city centre station.
Tender documents for a turnkey BTS system
were issued in March 1993 to five consortia.
The agreement was later amended to cover not
just the construction, but maintenance and operation of the completed network. (For further
discussion of private sector participation in the
BTS see Module 1c: Private Sector Participation
in urban Transport Infrastructure Provision.)
Fares, ridership and operating costs
14
Fig. 225
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
Rolling stock
Almost all developing cities which are considering MRT applications or extentions
are expanding at a rapid rate. It is therefore
inevitable that Metro systems, which are very
expensive and therefore often limited to one or
two short lines, soon come under pressure for
expansion to serve new areas of the city. This has
also happened in Bangkok. BTS system expansion was approved in 1999, and construction
has commenced but is proceeding slowly due
to problems of cost and complexity. The three
approved extensions add up to an extra 19.2
km (see further http://www.bma.go.th/bmaeng/
body_traffic_and_transport.html).
Fig. 235
Kompas, 17 -Jun-01
Fig. 245
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
Market differentiation
in Bombay extends to
women-only carriages,
similar to Cairos Metro.
15
16
The cost difference extends to other infrastructure items, such as stations. A busway station
in Quito, Ecuador costs only about US$35,000
while a rail station in Porto Alegre that serves a
similar number of persons costs US$150 million.
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
Influence
Factor
Dominant
- Management/organisation quality
- New system, or progressive
expansion of existing system
Large
Moderate
- Land costs
- Competition in the equipment
supply and construction market
Small
- Labour costs
- Taxes and duties
- System features (long trains, AC,
special access, etc)
Allport 2000
Ratio
At-grade
15 - 30
Elevated
30 - 75
2 - 2.5
Underground
60 - 180
4-6
Cost/km
(US$)
Notes
Heavy
Metro
220m
38%
tunnel
LRT
50m
Elevated,
driverless
50m
Largely
elevated
Manila - Line
3 extension
Light
Metro
50m
Elevated
Bangkok
Skytrain
Metro
74m
Elevated
Caracas Venezuela
Metro
90m
Mexico City
Metro
41m
Madrid
Metro
23m
Tunis
LRT
13m
Type
West Rail
Hong Kong
Kuala Lumpur
- Putra
Railway
Further information on
comparisons, and transit
levels of service
12m
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
17
Operating costs
Component
Trunk lines
Stations
Terminal
Pedestrian
overpasses
Bus depots
Control centre
Other
Total
Total cost
(US$ million)
94.7
29.2
14.9
Cost per km
(US$ million)
2.5
0.8
0.4
16.1
0.4
15.2
4.3
0.4
0.1
25.7
0.7
198.8
5.3
18
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
Operating costs include salaries, fuel and maintenance of both vehicles and infrastructure. The
operational costs depend partly on the amount
of cars required to provide a service. The higher
operating speeds the lower the circulation time
and in consequence the number of cars needed
for a single line.
The Fare Box Ratio gives an indication of economic viability of an MRT system. It describes
the ratio between fares collected and operational
costs. Table 7 indicates that five railway operations are able to cover operational costs and to
use the surplus for depreciation of infrastructure.
These are exceptional: Most railway operations
are subsidised by an agency or surpluses in other
branches of the city budget.
Railway
0.25
0.50
0.77
0.90
1.06
Singapore Metro
1.50
Santiago Metro
1.60
1.80
2.20
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
19
Construction time
advantages of bus rapid
transit
Propulsion technology
30,000 - 75,000
100,000 - 300,000
150,000 - 350,000
200,000 - 400,000
Public finances
In terms of public sector affordability, BRT is
the most favourable form of MRT system. BRT
systems require a relatively small initial outlay.
Bogot, for example, was able to build the entire
system of around 40 km without taking out loans.
Savings, meanwhile, can be used in other areas,
such as health and education, public space facilities, and conditions for pedestrians and cyclists.
Rail systems both LRT and Metros require
much greater initial outlays and ongoing
subsidies. Though the advent of private sector
concessionaires was expected by many to change
this situation, the evidence is that the various
new Build-Operate-Transfer projects are all in
financial trouble and are nowhere achieving
profitability (see further Module 1c). Alone
among rail MRT systems, the Hong Kong Metro
funds all its costs (capital, asset replacement and
operating) from its mainly farebox revenues, and
can be considered profitable. All other rail MRT
systems require support from the public sector;
often very substantial (Allport, 2000).
The problems encountered by new
rail MRT systems
in developing cities
are in many ways
illustrated by the
experience of the
Star and Putra rail
MRT systems in
Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia (see text
box).
20
Construction time
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
Fig. 275
Fig. 265
Fig. 285
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
21
Under-achieving new
urban rail systems in the
Asia-Pacific region
Star, Putra, and KLIA
Airport Express MRTs in
Kuala Lumpur, Metrostar in
Manila (17km, Dec. 1999),
the Sydney Airport rail link
(10km, June 2000 and
now in receivership), the
Hong Kong Airport Express
Rail (34km, mid 1997), the
Bangkok Sky Train, and the
Brisbane Airtrain airport
link: all of these new MRT
rail systems have shown
disappointing ridership,
generally about about onequarter the projected levels.
From these systems the
longest in operation, Star,
has stabilised at around 2025% of projected ridership.
Brisbanes Airtrain opened
in May 2001 and operates
without government subsidy.
However the Airtrain has
an uncertain future, with
ridership of just 6,000
per week compared to a
projected 52,000 per week.
An important factor here is
the fare: the Singapore and
Hong Kong successful MRT
systems have fares comparable to air-conditioned
bus services, and, relative to
income, are about one-quarter as expensive as fares in
Bangkok, Manila, and Kuala
Lumpur (Sayeg, 2001).
22
In fact...
Many developing
cities have tragically
wasted scarce
development funds on
expensive infrastructure
megaprojects. BRT is a
cheaper option
Buses cannot
cope with a high
passenger demand
(p.196)
LRT is a natural
progression up
after BRT (p.200)
BRT is implemented as
a long term strategy in
many cities
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
Type
Ridership
(pass/hr/dir)
Metro
Metro
Metro
Metro
Metro
Metro
Metro
Metro
LRT
BRT
BRT
BRT
BRT
BRT
BRT
BRT
BRT
81,000
60,000
36,000
25,000
20,000
5,000
39,300
50,000*
30,000*
33,000
29,800
21,100
11,500
34,911
25,600
28,000
15,000
BRT
15,100
Ottawa Transitway
BRT
10,000
Line
Hong Kong
Sao Paulo East Line
Santiago La Moneda
London Victoria Line
Buenos Aires Line D
Buenos Aires Line E
Mexico Line B
Bangkok BTS
Kuala Lumpur Putra
Bogot TransMilenio
Recife Caxanga, Brazil
Belo Horizonte, Brazil
Goiania, Brazil
Sao Paulo 9 de Julho
Porto Alegre Farrapos
Porto Alegre Assis
Quito Trolleybus
Flexibility in operation
4.4 FLEXIBILITY
Unlike rail-based options which are by nature
more fixed, BRT allows a great deal of flexibility
for future growth. Making new routings and
other system changes to match demographic
changes or new planning decisions is fairly easily
accomplished. Bogots plans for a phased BRT
expansion (diagram following, and Figure 31)
provides a good example of matching technology
to the dynamics of urban centres.
Growing and changing with the city:
TransMilenio 2001
TransMilenio 2015
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
23
4.5 SPEED
Grade separated Metros, LRTs and BRTs can
operate at high speeds. Street-running LRT
systems like Alexandria-Madina (Egypt) perform
less well due to interferences from street traffic
and maintenance problems.
A recent comparative study between BRT and
LRT systems in the same city found that bus
systems on segregated bus lanes can easily match
urban rail transit in terms of velocity (Figure
31). Thus, low-cost bus systems can match the
travel times of expensive rail systems.
Fig. 305
Fig. 315
24
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
rail MRT systems in 2001. Reasons for the failure of the private sector involvement included:
< Overestimation of demand
< Weak sectoral policies (no private car
restraint; poor integration with buses; no
integrated land use and transport policies;
and a new tollway along a similar alignment)
< Inadequate institutional arrangements,
with both fragmentation at the level of
implementation and excessive centralisation
at the level of policy-making contributing
to a lack of transparency and a poor policy
framework for making MRT investments.
Bus-based systems throughout the developing world, on the contrary, are often operated
without subsidy by the private sector, even in
a highly unconducive policy setting and poor
and deteriorating operating conditions. Where
private sector involvement is well-regulated,
a quality MRT service can be provided at a
relatively low fare, providing profit to the private
sector operators and operating without subsidy.
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
25
Fig. 324
26
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
Fig. 335
Fig. 345
Miami, Buenos Aires, Paris... The rail-based MRT systems of Sao Paulo
probably seem as inaccessible as the cities advertised on the billboards to the
urban poor living on the outskirts of Sao Paulo. Bus Rapid Transit, with
its potentially greater geographical reach, offers more hope to low income
communities on the outskirts of all developing cities.
Karl Fjellstrom, Feb. 2002
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
27
System
22
79
99
101
184
184 - 447
240
317
577
875
28
1970
1980
1990
9396
65
51
48
Hong Kong
Seoul
81
74
63
Singapore
42
51
Manila
70
67
70
Bangkok
53
39
Kuala Lumpur
37
33
32
24
Jakarta
61
58
52
53
Surabaya
36
35
33
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
5. Conclusion
After comparing MRT options, in general we
can conclude that there are few reasons for
developing cities to favour rail-based systems
where passenger capacities would be less than
25,000 passengers per hour per direction. Unless
specific circumstances apply such as when
visual image of the system is quite important
and a city is sufficiently wealthy to handle the
higher capital and operational costs this kind
of rail-based transit for developing cities compares unfavourably with BRT systems on most
terms, and especially for key parameters such
as cost, flexibility, time frame, and institutional
demands.
There is however no single right transit solution. The best system for a city will depend on
local conditions and preferences and will involve
a combination of technologies. Bus Rapid
Transit may not be the solution in every situation. When passenger flows are extremely high
and space for busways is limited, other options
may be better, such as rail-based public transit;
although we have seen that BRT can accommodate passenger volumes to match demand even
in very large cities. In reality, it is not always just
a choice between bus and rail, as cities like Sao
Paulo, Brazil have shown that Metro and BRT
systems can work together to form an integrated
transport package.
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
29
Resource materials
<
<
wbln0018.worldbank.org/transport/utsr.nsf
busway/Busway.htm
<
30
www.worldbank.org/transport
This is a non-printable version for demonstration purposes only. Print version available from GTZ from March 2003
Deutsche Gesellschaft fr
Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH
Dag-Hammarskjold-Weg 1-5
Postfach 51 80
65726 Eschborn
Telefon (0 61 96) 79-1357
Telefax (0 61 96) 79-7194
Internet: www.gtz.de
Sourcebook enquiries:
manfred.breithaupt@gtz.de
karl.fjellstrom@sutp.org
www.sutp-asia.org
On behalf of: