Yedavall Sarathy Aswanth

UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI
03/05/2008
Date:___________________
Sarathy Aswanth Yedavalli

I, _________________________________________________________,
hereby submit this work as part of the requirements for the degree of:
Master of Community Planning
in:
the College of Design, Architecture, Art & Planning
It is entitled:
Decision Support System for Bus Rapid Transit
This work and its defense approved by:
Chair: _______________________________
Dr. Xinhao Wang, Professor in Planning, SOP
_______________________________
Dr. Lin Liu, Professor in Geography
_______________________________
David Shuey, GIS Manager, OKI Regional
_______________________________
Council of Governments.
_______________________________
Decision Support System for Bus Rapid Transit
A thesis submitted
Division of Research and Advanced Studies

of the University of Cincinnati
in partial fulfillment of the

requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF COMMUNITY PLANNING
in
School of Planning
College of Design, Art, Architecture & Planning
2008
Written by:
Sarathy Aswanth Yedavalli

B.Plan. Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, 2004
Hyderabad, India
COMMITTEE
Chair: Dr. Xinhao Wang
Professor, School of Planning
Faculty Member: Dr. Lin Liu

Professor, Department of Geography
Reader: Mr. David Shuey

GIS Manager, OKI Regional Council of Governments
ABSTRACT
Different communities have adopted many public transportation initiatives ranging from
light rail to regular bus transit across the world to address a variety of issues ranging from
environmental consciousness to the desire for alternatives to clogged highways and urban
sprawl. These concerns have led to a re-examination of existing transit technologies and the
embrace of new, creative ways of providing transit services. Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) can be an
extremely cost-effective way of providing high-quality, high-performance transit (TCRP 2003, a.)
One of the important reasons for BRT to be so successful is the lower capital costs
combined with significant travel time savings and good brand identity. These are important
elements of decision-making element. This project tries to develop a decision support system
that would enable communities and implementing agencies to evaluate the capital costs and
performance of the BRT systems.
i
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I extend my deep gratitude to my family back in India, for their constant support and
encouragement in every step that I took.
I extend my special thanks to my committee, Dr. Xinhao Wang, Prof. Lin Liu and Mr. David Shuey
for their kind support and guidance. I would like to thank Dr. Edelman and Ms. Connie Dean, for being
there whenever needed. I would have to thank Thomas Wuerzer for his critical comments that got me
started.
I am greatly indebted to my friends who have helped me in carrying out my thesis without much
difficulty, especially Bharathi for her moral support.
Last but not the least; I would like to thank my wife Anu, for her patience, support and excellent
suggestions at every stage of my life and this paper. Without her I could never have achieved whatever
little I have, in my career.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 2

1.2. Need for innovative Public Transportation....................................................................................... 3
1.3. What is Bus rapid tranist (BRT)? ....................................................................................................... 3
1.4. Why Choose BRT? ............................................................................................................................. 4
1.5. Decision Making Elements of BRT..................................................................................................... 7
1.6. Integration of BRT Elements ............................................................................................................. 8
2.1. BRT in Transportation Planning Process ......................................................................................... 11
2.2. Problem Statement ......................................................................................................................... 12
2.2.1. Need for Decision Support system ......................................................................................... 12
2.3. Goal of the Study ............................................................................................................................ 13
2.4. Objectives........................................................................................................................................ 14
2.5. Methodology................................................................................................................................... 14
2.5.1. Literature Study ...................................................................................................................... 14
2.5.2. Data Collection ........................................................................................................................ 15
2.5.3. Implementation ...................................................................................................................... 16
2.6. Scope and Limitations ..................................................................................................................... 16
3.1. BRT Elements .................................................................................................................................. 19
3.2. Running Ways ................................................................................................................................. 19
3.2.1. Role of the Running Way in BRT ............................................................................................. 19
3.2.2. Characteristics of Running Way .............................................................................................. 19
3.2.3. Running Way Options ............................................................................................................. 20
3.3. Stations ........................................................................................................................................... 23
3.3.1. Role of Stations In BRT ............................................................................................................ 23
3.3.2. Characteristics of Stations....................................................................................................... 24
3.3.3. Station Options ....................................................................................................................... 25
3.4. Vehicles ........................................................................................................................................... 29
3.4.1. Role of Vehicles in BRT ............................................................................................................ 29
3.4.2. Characteristics of Vehicles ...................................................................................................... 29
iv
3.4.3. Vehicle Options ....................................................................................................................... 30
3.5. Fare Collection ................................................................................................................................ 34
3.5.1. Role of Fare Collection in BRT ................................................................................................. 34
3.5.2. Characteristics of Fare Collection ........................................................................................... 34
3.5.3. Fare Collection ........................................................................................................................ 35
3.6. Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) ......................................................................................... 37
3.6.1. Role of Intelligent Transportation Systems in BRT ................................................................. 37
3.6.2. Characteristics of ITS ............................................................................................................... 38
3.6.3. Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) ................................................................................. 39
3.7. System Performance of BRT Elements:........................................................................................... 43
3.8. Travel Time...................................................................................................................................... 45
3.8.1. Running Time .......................................................................................................................... 46
3.8.2. Station Dwell Time .................................................................................................................. 48
3.9. Identity and Image .......................................................................................................................... 51
3.9.1. Brand Identity ......................................................................................................................... 51
3.10. Safety and Security ..................................................................................................................... 54
3.10.1. Safety ...................................................................................................................................... 54
3.10.2. Security ................................................................................................................................... 56
3.11. Why CommunityViz..................................................................................................................... 57
3.12. What is CommunityViz ................................................................................................................ 59
3.12.1. Scenario 360............................................................................................................................ 59
3.12.2. Why Scenario 360? ................................................................................................................. 59
3.12.3. Components of Scenario 360 .................................................................................................. 61
3.13. Summary ..................................................................................................................................... 63
4.1. Capital Cost Data ............................................................................................................................. 65
4.2. System design ................................................................................................................................. 68
4.2.1. Conceptual model work flow .................................................................................................. 68
4.3. Capital Cost calculation ................................................................................................................... 69
4.4. Evaluating System performance ..................................................................................................... 70
4.4.1. Travel time savings.................................................................................................................. 70
4.4.2. Calculating Identity Rank ........................................................................................................ 73
4.4.3. Calculating safety and security Rank....................................................................................... 74
v
5.1. The Decision Support Model........................................................................................................... 79
5.2. Study Area ....................................................................................................................................... 82
5.3. Data required .................................................................................................................................. 82
5.4. Assumptions .................................................................................................................................... 83
5.4.1. Cost Assumptions .................................................................................................................... 83
5.4.2. Running ways .......................................................................................................................... 83
5.4.3. Stations ................................................................................................................................... 85
5.4.4. Vehicles ................................................................................................................................... 86
5.4.5. Fare Collection ........................................................................................................................ 87
5.4.6. ITS ............................................................................................................................................ 88
5.4.7. Other system assumptions ..................................................................................................... 90
5.5. User Inputs - Spatial Design ............................................................................................................ 91
5.5.1. Route Design ........................................................................................................................... 91
5.5.2. Station Design ......................................................................................................................... 96
5.6. Dynamic Attributes ....................................................................................................................... 100
5.7. Indicators ...................................................................................................................................... 100
5.7.1. Capital Costs .......................................................................................................................... 100
5.7.2. System Performance: ............................................................................................................ 102
6.1. Results ........................................................................................................................................... 104
6.2. System benefits ............................................................................................................................. 107
6.3. Short comings ............................................................................................................................... 107
6.4. Conculsions & Future Work .......................................................................................................... 108
References ................................................................................................................................................ 110
Appendix A: BRT Element Descriptions and Costs tables ......................................................................... 112
Appendix B: Dynamic formulas ................................................................................................................. 130
Appedix C: Indicator formulas .................................................................................................................. 164
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Charlotte Area Bus Rapid Transit System ...................................................................................... 4
Figure 2: Transit Investment Planning and Project Development Process..…………………………………………….12
Figure 3: Decision support System for BRT - Methodology ........................................................................ 17
Figure 4: BRT Elements and Performance Measures included in the Decision Support System................ 15
Figure 5: Scenario Comparison ................................................................................................................... 61
Figure 6: Alerts ............................................................................................................................................ 63
Figure 7: Dynamic Formulas........................................................................................................................ 62
Figure 8: Intuitive Controls ......................................................................................................................... 63
Figure 9: General Model Work Flow ........................................................................................................... 69
Figure 10: BRT Decision Support System Model Flow ................................................................................ 81
Figure 11: Running Way Cost Assumptions ............................................................................................... 84
Figure 12: Station Cost Assumptions .......................................................................................................... 85
Figure 13: Vehicle Cost Assumptions .......................................................................................................... 86
Figure 14: Fare Collection Process Cost Assumptions ................................................................................ 87
Figure 15: ITS Cost Assumptions ................................................................................................................. 88
Figure 16: ITS Cost Assumptions 2 .............................................................................................................. 89
Figure 17: General Assumptions, Design Speeds, Station Dwell Times, Budget Assumptions................... 90
Figure 18: Scenario 360 and Editor Toolbars .............................................................................................. 91
Figure 19: Using the GIS interface to design new BRT route ...................................................................... 92
Figure 20: Using the GIS interface to design new BRT Station ................................................................... 96
Figure 21: Individual Capital Costs Chart of the BRT System .................................................................... 101
Figure 22: Total Capital Costs Chart of the BRT System ........................................................................... 101
Figure 23: System Performance Indicators Chart of BRT System ............................................................. 102
vii
Figure 24: Travel Time Saving Chart of the BRT System ........................................................................... 102
Figure 25: Individual Cost Elements Comparison By Scenarios ................................................................ 106
Figure 26: Performance By Scenario ......................................................................................................... 106
Figure 27: Total Capital Costs comparison by scenario ............................................................................ 106
Figure 28: Travel Time Savings Comparison By Scenario.......................................................................... 106
viii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Running Ways Options .................................................................................................................. 21
Table 2: Running Way Marking Options ..................................................................................................... 22
Table 3: Guidance Options .......................................................................................................................... 23
Table 4: Station Options.............................................................................................................................. 25
Table 5: Platform Height Options ............................................................................................................... 26
Table 6: Platform layout Options ................................................................................................................ 27
Table 7: Passing Capability Options ............................................................................................................ 28
Table 8: Station Access................................................................................................................................ 28
Table 9: Vehicle Options ............................................................................................................................. 31
Table 10: Aesthetic Enhancement Options................................................................................................. 32
Table 11: Passenger Circulation Enhancement Options ............................................................................. 32
Table 12: Propulsion System Options ......................................................................................................... 33
Table 13: Fare Collection Options ............................................................................................................... 35
Table 14: Fare Transaction Media Options ................................................................................................. 36
Table 15: Fare Structure Options ................................................................................................................ 37
Table 16: Vehicle Prioritization Options ..................................................................................................... 39
Table 17: Driver Assist and Automation Technology Options .................................................................... 40
Table 18: Operations Management Technology Options .......................................................................... 41
Table 19: Passenger Information Options .................................................................................................. 42
Table 20: Safety and Security Options ........................................................................................................ 42
Table 21: Effects of BRT Elements on Running Time .................................................................................. 47
Table 22: Effects of BRT Elements on Station Dwell Time .......................................................................... 49
Table 23: Effects of BRT Elements on Brand Identity ................................................................................. 52
Table 24: Effects of BRT Elements on Safety .............................................................................................. 55
Table 25: Effects of BRT Elements on Security ........................................................................................... 56
Table 26: BRT Individual Elements Cost table............................................................................................. 65
Table 27: Estimated Average Bus Speeds on Busways or Exclusive Freeway HOV Lanes: ......................... 71
Table 28: Estimated Average Bus Speeds on Dedicated Arterial Street Bus Lanes, in miles per hour ....... 71
Table 29: Estimated Average Bus Speeds in General Purpose Traffic Lanes, in miles per hour ................. 71
Table 30: Station Dwell Times ..................................................................................................................... 73
ix
Table 31: Identity & Image and Safety & Security Ranking ........................................................................ 75
Table 32: Data Required ............................................................................................................................. 82
Table 33: BRT Route Design Options .......................................................................................................... 93
Table 34: BRT Station Design Options......................................................................................................... 97
Table 35: Choices Made by user in Scenario-I and Scenario -2 ................................................................ 104
x
BACKGROUND
1
Introduction
1.1. INTRODUCTION
Different communities have adopted many public transportation initiatives ranging from light
rail to regular bus transit across the world to address a variety of issues ranging from environmental
consciousness to the desire for alternatives to clogged highways and urban sprawl. These concerns have
led to a re-examination of existing transit technologies and the embrace of new, creative ways of
providing transit service and performance. Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) can be an extremely cost-effective
way of providing high-quality, high-performance transit (TCRP 2003, a.)
Recently Bus rapid Transit (BRT) has been successfully adopted by many major cities across the
world including United States of America, grabbing the attention of numerous communities towards this
system of public transit which combines flexible service with advanced technologies. BRT is a rapid
mode of transportation that can combine the quality of rail transit and the flexibility of buses. These
systems use new electronic technologies, vehicle design, transit operation principles, and marketing
techniques.
One of the important reasons for BRT to be so successful is the lower capital costs combined
with significant travel time savings and good brand identity. This is an important element of decision-
making element. Therefore, there is a need for decision support system that evaluates the costs and
benefits of the BRT system in a particular community and gives the communities a head start on the BRT
projects.
This project tries to develop a decision support system that would enable communities and
implementing agencies and public to evaluate the capital costs and performance of the BRT systems.
Decision Support System for Bus Rapid Transit | Yash Yedavalli 2

Need for innovative Public Transportation
1.2. NEED FOR INNOVATIVE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION

Continued growth of urban areas, including many CBDs and suburban and regional centers,
requires more transport service and improved access. Given the costs and community impacts
associated with major road construction, improved and expanded public transport emerges as an
important way to provide the needed capacity. However, existing bus systems are difficult to use;
service is slow, infrequent, and unreliable; route structures are complex and hard to understand;
vehicles and operations are not well matched to markets; and there is little, if any, passenger
information and few amenities at stops. Rail transit can be difficult, time consuming, and expensive to
implement; costly to operate; and poorly suited to many contemporary U.S. travel markets.
Such conditions forced Transportation and community-planning officials all over the world to
examine public transportation solutions to improve urban mobility and contain urban sprawl. Bus Rapid
Transit (BRT) is seen as a cost-effective means of achieving these objectives.
1.3. WHAT IS BUS RAPID TRANIST (BRT)?

BRT Implementation Guidelines defined BRT as:
“A flexible, high performance rapid transit mode that combines, a variety of physical, operating
and system elements into a permanently integrated system with a quality image and unique identity.”
(TCRP 2003, a)
BRT applications are designed to be appropriate to the market they serve and their physical
surroundings, and they can be incrementally implemented in a variety of environments. In brief, BRT is
an integrated system of facilities, services, and amenities that collectively improves the speed, reliability,
and identity of bus transit. BRT, in many respects, is rubber-tired light-rail transit (LRT), but with greater
operating flexibility and potentially lower capital and operating costs. Often, a relatively small

Why Choose BRT?
investment in dedicated guide ways (or “running ways”) can provide regional rapid transit. (TCRP 2003,
a). An illustration of BRT in charlotte area is shown in Figure 1.
1.4. WHY CHOOSE BRT?

According to the TCRP Report, Transportation and community-planning officials all over the
world are examining public transportation solutions to improve urban mobility and contain urban
sprawl. These concerns have led to the reexamination of existing transit technologies and the
development of new, creative ways to improve transit service and performance. BRT is seen as a cost-
effective means of achieving these objectives. BRT can be built in stages, requires shorter planning and
construction time frames, and has lower costs and greater flexibility than LRT. In addition, it can be built
in any environment where LRT runs. For most intermediate capacity rapid-transit applications now being
considered in North America, bus-based rapid transit has the potential to offer capacities and a level of
service that are comparable to rail systems in many respects, superior in some respects, and
characterized by both operating and capital costs that (depending on passenger volumes) will generally
be considerably lower. Specific reasons for implementing BRT are the following:

Why Choose BRT?
1. Continued growth of urban areas, including many CBDs and suburban and regional centers,
requires more transport service and improved access. Given the costs and community impacts
associated with major road construction, improved and expanded public transport emerges as
an important way to provide the needed capacity. However, existing bus systems are difficult to
use; service is slow, infrequent, and unreliable; route structures are complex and hard to
understand; vehicles and operations are not well matched to markets; and there is little, if any,
passenger information and few amenities at stops. Rail transit can be difficult, time consuming,
and expensive to implement; costly to operate; and poorly suited to many contemporary U.S.
travel markets.
2. BRT can often be implemented quickly and incrementally, without precluding future rail
investment if and when it is warranted.
3. For a given distance of dedicated running way, BRT is generally less costly to build and equip
than rail transit. Moreover, there are relatively low facility costs where buses operate in existing
bus-only lanes or HOV lanes.
4. BRT can be cost-effective in serving a broad variety of contemporary U.S. urban and suburban
environments. BRT vehicles, whether driver-steered or guided mechanically or electronically,
can operate on streets and in freeway medians, railroad rights-of-way, and arterial structures, as
well as underground. BRT can easily provide a broad array of direct express, limited-stop, and
local all-stop services on a single facility. Rail systems, with their large basic service units, must
often force multiple transfers to serve the same markets.
5. BRT can provide quality performance with sufficient transport capacity for corridor applications
in most U.S. and Canadian cities. (The Ottawa Transit way system’s West Line, for example,
carries more people in the peak-hour peak direction than most LRT segments in North America).

Why Choose BRT?
Many BRT lines in South American cities carry peak-hour passenger flows that equal or exceed
those on many U.S. and Canadian fully grade separated rapid-transit lines.
6. At the ridership levels typically found in most urban corridors, BRT’s relatively low marginal fixed
and maintenance costs can offset variable driver costs to provide low net-unit operating and
maintenance costs.
7. BRT is well suited to extend the reach of existing rail transit lines. BRT can also provide feeder
services to/from areas where densities are currently too low to support rail transit.
8. BRT, like other forms of rapid transit, can be integrated into urban and suburban environments.
9. The application of several ITS and other modern technologies makes BRT even more attractive
and practical than earlier bus-based rapid-transit systems. These technologies Include – “Clean”
vehicles (e.g., those powered by electronically controlled “clean,” quiet diesel engines with
catalytic converters, compressed natural gas [CNG], hybrid-“clean” diesel electric, or dual
power, such as trolley/diesel);
10. Low-floor vehicles that allow quick, level boarding; and
11. Mechanical, electronic, and optical guidance systems.
The main reasons cited in the case studies (presented in Volume 1 of TCRP Report 90) for
implementing BRT were lower development costs and greater operating flexibility as compared with rail
transit. Other reasons included BRT as a practical alternative to major highway reconstruction, an
integral part of the city’s structure, and a catalyst for redevelopment. A 1998 study in Eugene, Oregon,
for example, found that a bus-based system could be built for about 4% of the cost of rail transit.
However, in Boston, BRT was selected because of its operational and service benefits rather than its cost
advantages.

Decision Making Elements of BRT
1.5. DECISION MAKING ELEMENTS OF BRT

There are seven major components to a BRT system. Communities may choose among these
component groups to assemble systems that best meet their needs. (The Bus Rapid Transit Policy
Center,2006)
1. Running Ways: Vehicles operate on their own roadways or lanes, or in HOV lanes, thus
maximizing speed and service. Vehicles also can run on city streets, providing flexibility to serve
changing community needs. Communities can use signal prioritization, queue jumping, and
other technologies to increase speed and enhance service when vehicles are operating in
general traffic.
2. Stations: Like rail systems, stations are the link between the community and the system. They
are designed to integrate into the community, promote economic development, enhance travel
time, and encourage intermodal connectivity. They also minimize boarding and "dwell" times,
thus helping people reach their destination more quickly.
3. Vehicles: Vehicles are clean, quiet, comfortable, modern, and efficient. Although they can
operate on a range of fuels, priority should be given to vehicles that reduce pollution. Priority
also should be given to vehicles that minimize boarding times and that provide easier access for
the disabled and others with special needs. This will make the system more efficient for
everyone.
4. Service: Service is frequent enough that passengers do not need a schedule. Moreover, service
is integrated with other regional transportation systems, enhancing mobility and promoting
intermodal connectivity.
5. Route Structure: Routes are logically laid out and depicted in an easy-to-read map, like a
subway map. "Feeder" lines can be used to link into "express" service, combining the
convenience of close-to-home stops with the speed of express service.

Integration of BRT Elements
6. Fare Collection: Smart card and other advanced technologies allow fares to be collected quickly
and efficiently, often before the boarding process. This speeds the trip for everyone.
7. Intelligent Transportation Systems: Technology keeps track of vehicles, provides passengers
with updated travel information, and improves safety.
1.6. INTEGRATION OF BRT ELEMENTS

BRT may provide significant benefits as a result of its flexibility and the integration of its disparate
elements into a package that will yield more total benefits than the sum of the benefits of the individual
parts. These elements must be integrated into a system that optimally serves the particular market
within the specific physical constraints of each corridor. There are several primary advantages of BRT’s
flexibility according to the “Characteristics of BRT for Decision Making” report by FTA, they are:
1. BRT elements can be packaged to suit almost any physical and market environment. It is
possible to implement just the elements and the corresponding options that make most sense in
a particular community or corridor. This can result in better, more individualized solutions. For
instance, investments in ITS traffic signal priority for BRT vehicles may be deemed much more
cost efficient than constructing or designating exclusive bus lanes in congested urban areas.
2. BRT systems can be developed incrementally. Being that each element of BRT can be
independently developed, it is also possible to make incremental investments to upgrade the
system as ridership grows, public support strengthens, and more resources become available.
Additional elements could be added or existing system elements could be upgraded to more
advanced technologies.
3. Some elements may be shared with other modes. BRT can be considered an intermediate mode
in the sense that some options may be compatible or even borrowed from other modes. This

allows for significant opportunities for joint development and reduced procurement costs with
rail and bus projects.

GOALS & OBJECTIVES

2

BRT in Transportation Planning Process
2.1. BRT IN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING PROCESS

Understanding BRT’s capabilities is important for assessing its performance and potential benefits
during an Alternatives Analysis. The Federal Transit Act requires that all requests for capital assistance
for New Start funds be preceded by an alternatives analysis where a full range of feasible, potentially
cost-effective alternatives for addressing specific transportation needs are objectively and transparently
evaluated (Federal Transit Administration 2004). Despite the fact that BRT is a bona fide rapid transit
concept, local planning efforts often do not have complete information regarding BRT’s:
1. Physical and operating characteristics
2. Ridership attraction
3. Capital, operating and maintenance costs
4. Performance in terms of speed, reliability and other measures
5. Air, noise, and other environmental impacts
6. Ability to induce sustainable, transit oriented land uses
Unfamiliarity with these characteristics of BRT affects the ability of planning to support completely
informed decision making about investments. Keeping communities needs in view a document was
developed for Federal Transit Administration by a consortium of organizations led by Booz Allen
Hamilton Inc., including DMJM + Harris; Mitretek Systems; the National Bus Rapid Transit Institute
(NBRTI) at the Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR), University of South Florida; and
Weststart – CALSTART, detailing the characteristics of BRT for decision makings to provide a useful
reference for transit and transportation planning officials involved in sketch planning and detailed
Alternatives Analyses.

Problem Statement
2.2. PROBLEM STATEMENT

2.2.1. NEED FOR DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM
In addition to the better information about BRT for use in Alternatives Analyses, there is also a
need for a decision support tool that would enable less complex, “first cut” sketch planning exercises,
where an initial list of viable, potentially desirable alternatives can be developed.
Figure 2 illustrates the relationship of the number of alternatives considered during Systems / sketch
planning, Alternatives Analysis, Preliminary Engineering and other planning and project development
steps to the level of design detail utilized. Early in the planning process, there are many alternatives
available to solve a specific transportation need. Because of resource constraints, all alternatives cannot

Goal Of The Study
be exhaustively analyzed in detail at all planning stages (Federal Transit Administration 2004). Hence
there is a need for a decision support tool that would enable users, typically transportation planning
authorities, to evaluate different alternatives scenarios and their performances to help them understand
the implications of their decisions. Once the universe of potentially feasible options has been narrowed
down to a small number through the sketch planning process, a more detailed analysis can be
undertaken.
2.3. GOAL OF THE STUDY

To create a decision support system that enables communities wanting to incorporate Bus Rapid
Transit,
1. To Design their own BRT system with custom BRT elements and
2. To visualize capital costs incurred as a result of different combinations of BRT elements and
evaluate the performance of their BRT system,
Enabling them to quickly evaluate their alternatives.
The two primary decision making characteristics in evaluating scenarios are costs associated and
performance of the system. This decision support system would enable the user to evaluate these two
components of the BRT system, by interactively changing the various elements on a ‘CommunityViz’
enabled ‘ArcGIS’ Map and choices that he makes while building the BRT system.
1. Capital Costs: Capital costs for each individual BRT element will be captured in a database and
an aggregate capital cost will be generated dynamically depending on the choice of elements
that the user makes.
2. System Performance: An index for system performance will be generated dynamically, that
would reflect the choice of BRT elements and their individual effect on system performance.

OBJECTIVES
2.4. OBJECTIVES
1. Develop a model for calculating capital costs incorporating different elements like BRT like
Runways, Stations, Vehicles, Intelligent Transportation systems.
2. Develop an indicator of performance matrix that would evaluate the performance of BRT, as a
result of different combinations of BRT.
2.5. METHODOLOGY
This section of the report lays out the detailed methodological approach, as well spells out model
design for the ‘Decision Support System for Bus Rapid Transit’. The detailed working design is given
below.
2.5.1. LITERATURE STUDY
a. The project is begun by identifying the need for innovative transportation system for public
transit problems and BRT being a potential solution.
b. Elements of BRT: Through literature reviews, the elements that affect the performance of
BRT are identified and the elements that are to be included in the decision support system
are finalized. Of the six elements that are being defined by the Federal Transit
Administration (Federal Transit Administration 2004), only 5 elements are included those
are:
I. Running Ways
II. Stations
III. Vehicles
IV. Fare Collection
V. Intelligent Transportation Systems

Methodology
The Service and Operating Plan Element are not covered because of time and technical
constraints.
c. Performance Measures: The decision support tool evaluates capital costs and the system
performance based on the choice of BRT elements and there are various measures of
evaluation that are clearly laid out by the Federal Transit Administration in the
“Characteristics of BRT for Decision Making” report, those are:
I. Travel Time Savings
II. Identity and Image
III. Safety and Security
2.5.2. DATA COLLECTION
d. Cost data collection. The cost data required for the calculation of BRT system costs would be
collected under this phase. The data includes the cost for each individual element and sub-
element at a unit level that can be used to calculate the overall system costs. The capital
cost associated with each element is detailed in Chapter 3.
e. Study Area: A study area where the BRT system will be tested is selected and data is
processed for performing analysis. For the purpose of this project Cincinnati is chosen as the

Scope and Limitations
Study Area and various sets of data including streets and parcel data are processed. The
various processes in this phase are explained in Chapter 4.
2.5.3. IMPLEMENTATION
f. The Decision Support System: the decision support system which would interactively
calculate the capital costs and generate the performance index for the user desired BRT
system is developed. The detailed explanation of the model working is laid out in Chapter 5.
2.6. SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS

1. Only the overall qualitative benefits of the BRT are evaluated, the quantitative benefits are
beyond the scope of this study.
2. The elements of BRT, as defined by the CBRT report, like service and operation plans are not
incorporated in the system.
3. This decision support system is only limited to a particular route, and cannot be used to evaluate
the costs and benefits at a larger scale like a community of a city.

Figure 3: Decision support System for BRT – Methodology
Source: Author, 2007

LITERATURE REVIEW
3

BRT Elements
3.1. BRT ELEMENTS

This chapter briefly presents the various BRT elements, types of options available for these
elements, and performance measures that will be used in the building the Decision Support System for
Bus Rapid Transit. The description of all the elements is extracted from “Characteristics of BRT for
Decision Making” a comprehensive report on BRT elements by FTA. Apart from the BRT elements this
chapter also reviews the features and advantages of CommunityViz.
3.2. RUNNING WAYS

3.2.1. ROLE OF THE RUNNING WAY IN BRT
Just as rail transit vehicles travel down tracks, bus rapid transit vehicles travel on guideways or
running ways. In fact, how running ways are incorporated into a BRT system is the major defining factor
of a BRT system. Running ways are the most critical element in determining the speed and reliability of
BRT services. Running ways are also often the most significant cost item in the entire BRT system.
Finally, as the BRT element visible to the largest number of potential and existing customers, running
ways can have a significant impact on the image and identity of the system (Federal Transit
Administration 2004).
3.2.2. CHARACTERISTICS OF RUNNING WAY
There are three primary BRT running way characteristics according to the “Characteristics of BRT for
Decision Making” report by FTA:
1. Degree of Segregation – The level of separation from other traffic is the primary running way
planning parameter. An existing mixed flow lane on an arterial represents the most basic form
of running way. BRT vehicles can operate with no separation from other vehicle traffic on
virtually any arterial street or highway. Increasing levels of segregation through exclusive arterial

Running Ways
lanes, grade separated lanes or exclusive transit ways on separate rights-of-way add increasing
levels of travel time savings and reliability improvement for the operation of BRT services. Fully
grade-separated, segregated BRT transit ways have the highest cost and highest level of speed,
safety and reliability of any BRT running way type.
2. Running Way Marking – Just as a track indicates where a train travels for rail transit passengers
and the community, treatments or markings to differentiate a running way can effectively
convey where a BRT service operates. Differentiation in the appearance of the running way can
be accommodated through a number of techniques including pavement markings, lane
delineators, alternate pavement texture, alternate pavement color, and separate rights-of-way.
3. Guidance (Lateral) – BRT running ways can incorporate a feature known as lateral guidance. This
feature controls the side-to-side movement of vehicles along the running way similar to how a
track defines where a train operates. Like most bus operations, many BRT systems operate with
no lateral guidance, relying on the skills of the vehicle operator to steer the vehicle. Some BRT
systems incorporate a form of vehicle guidance to meet one or more of a variety of objectives,
including to reduce right of way requirements, to provide a smoother ride and to facilitate
“precision docking” at stations, allowing no-step boarding and alighting. Depending upon the
type of technology used, the guidance can be mechanical, electro-magnetic, or optical.
3.2.3. RUNNING WAY OPTIONS
3.2.3.1. Running Way Segregation Types
There are four major options for running ways that represent increasing levels of segregation.

Running Ways
Table 1: Running Ways Options
Mixed Flow Lanes

Unimproved Mixed Flow Lanes
Mixed flow lanes are the most basic form of BRT running way. In
fact, most rubber tired urban transit service operates on mixed
flow lanes. BRT vehicles face delays due to conflicts with other
vehicles, which also operate within the street.
Mixed Flow Lanes with Queue Jumpers

Mixed flow lanes can be augmented through the use of queue
jumpers. A queue jumper thus allows BRT vehicles to “jump the
queue” or bypass congestion or delays at intersections.
Designated (Reserved) Arterial Lanes

In corridors where the alignment of the BRT route follows an
existing arterial roadway, designated lanes can provide BRT
vehicles with a fast, reliable alternative to mixed flow traffic lanes.
With a designated arterial lane, a traffic lane within an arterial
roadway is set aside for the operation of BRT vehicles. Other
vehicles are restricted from using the lane.
At-Grade Transit ways

Standard Lane – Some urban corridors have new or existing
rights-of-way available for the construction of infrastructure for
exclusive use of transit vehicles. Exclusive facilities offer
significant potential for speed, reliability and safety
improvements since they physically separate BRT vehicles from
the general stream of traffic, eliminating the potential for general
traffic to encroach on the BRT lanes.
Fully Grade-Separated Exclusive Transit ways

The running way type with the greatest level of separation is the
grade-separated exclusive transit way. These facilities can either
be stand-alone or be on a major highway.
Source: Federal Transit Administration 2004

Running Ways
3.2.3.2. RUNNING WAY MARKING
Differentiation of running ways can be accomplished through a number of means. The three
major techniques are described below.
Table 2: Running Way Marking Options
Signage and Striping

Signage is the most basic form of marking a lane as reserved for BRT
service. It often includes the use of “diamond” lane symbols to restrict
automobile service from the lanes. Where transit ways and/or bus lanes
are built on arterials, signs are provided in each direction at each
intersection
Raised Lane Delineators

Delineators such as raised pavement marking such as colored line, raised
curbs, bollards, or bumps in pavement can highlight the distinction
between general purpose lanes and BRT running way lanes.
Alternate Pavement Color / Texture

Implementing alternate pavement color through colored asphalt or
concrete can reinforce the notion that a particular lane is reserved for
another use, thereby reducing conflicts with other vehicles.
3.2.3.3. Guidance (Lateral)
There are three major types of guidance systems – each requiring investment in vehicles and
running ways. Guidance systems can be implemented flexibly either all throughout the running way or
at specified locations such as narrow sections of right-of-way, tight curves, or approaching and leaving
stations (Federal Transit Administration 2004).

Stations
Table 3: Guidance Options
Optical Guidance
Optical guidance systems involve special optical sensors on the
vehicles that read a marker placed on the pavement to delineate
path of the vehicle
Electromagnetic Guidance
Electromagnetic guidance involves the placement of electric or
magnetic markers in the pavement such as an electro-magnetic
induction wire or permanent magnets in the pavement.
Mechanical Guidance
Vehicles are guided by a physical connection from the running way
to the vehicle steering mechanism, such as a steel wheel on the
vehicle following a center rail, a rubber guide wheel following a
raised curb, or the normal vehicle front wheels following a
specifically profiled gutter next to station platforms.
3.3. STATIONS
3.3.1. ROLE OF STATIONS IN BRT
Stations form the critical link between the BRT system, its customers, and other public transit
services offered in the region. They also are locations where the brand identity that distinguishes the
BRT system from other public transit services, portraying a premium-type service, while integrating with
and enhancing the local environment. Because BRT systems serve high demand corridors and have only
a limited number of stops, the number of customers using each BRT station will be significantly higher
than would be the case for a typical local bus line. Accordingly, BRT stations are much more significant
than a sign on a pole as is typically the case for conventional local transit bus services. They range from
simple stops with well-lit basic shelters to complex intermodal terminals with amenities such as real
Stations
time passenger information, newspaper kiosks, coffee bars, parking, pass/ticket sales and level boarding
(Federal Transit Administration 2004).
3.3.2. CHARACTERISTICS OF STATIONS
Stations have five primary characteristics according to the “Characteristics of BRT for Decision
Making” report by FTA, they are:
1. Basic Station Type – There are several major BRT station types, in increasing size and
complexity: simple stop, enhanced stop, designated station, and intermodal transit center. BRT
stations can be designed to convey a brand identity that distinguishes the BRT system from
other public transit services, portraying a premium-type service, while integrating with the local
environment.
2. Platform Height – Platform height affects the ability of disabled or mobility-impaired passengers
to board the vehicle. Passengers traditionally board vehicles by stepping from a low curb up to
the first step on the vehicle, then climbing additional steps. Given the trend toward widespread
adoption of low-floor vehicles, boarding has become easier for all passengers. Platforms at the
same height as vehicle floors can enhance customer experience and reduce dwell times if some
approach to providing no-gap, no-step boarding and alighting is adopted through provision of
drop ramps or precision vehicle docking.
3. Platform Layout – Platform layout, which describes the length and extent of berthing
assignment, also is a major element of station design. It affects how many vehicles can
simultaneously serve a station and how passengers must position themselves along a platform
to board a given service.
4. Passing Capability – When service on a running way is so dense that vehicles operate in quick
succession, the ability of vehicles to pass each other can maximize speed and reduce delay,

Stations
especially at stations. Passing capability can be accommodated through a number of means
including multiple lanes, passing lanes at stations or intersections, or ability to use adjacent
lanes with mixed flow traffic.
5. Station Access – Station access describes how the BRT system is linked to surrounding
communities. Station access can be entirely focused on pedestrian access to adjacent land uses
or can emphasize regional access through the provision of large parking garages and lots. The
type of parking facility and the number of spaces should be tied to the nature of the market that
the station serves and the adjacent physical environment. The provision of parking at the
appropriate BRT stations can save overall travel time for customers arriving by automobile from
outside the station area and can expand the reach of the system.
3.3.3. STATION OPTIONS
3.3.3.1. Station Types
There are four basic BRT station types “Characteristics of BRT for Decision Making” report by FTA, they
are:
Table 4: Station Options
Simple Stop
This is the simplest form of the four BRT station types listed within this
section. It consists of a “basic” transit stop with a simple shelter (often
purchased “off the shelf”) to protect waiting passengers from the
weather. In general, this type of station has the lowest capital cost and
provides the lowest level of passenger amenities.
Enhanced Stop
Enhanced BRT stations include enhanced shelters, which are often
specially designed for BRT to differentiate it from other transit stations
and to provide additional features such as more weather protection and
lighting.

Stations
Designated Station
The designated BRT station may include level passenger boarding and
alighting, a grade separated connection from one platform to another and
a full range of passenger amenities including retail service and a complete
array of passenger information.
Intermodal Terminal or Transit Center

The intermodal terminal or transit center is the most complex and costly
of the BRT stations listed in this section. This type of BRT facility will often
have level boarding, provides a host of amenities, and accommodates the
transfers from BRT service to local bus, other public transit modes, e.g.,
rail transit, and even intercity bus and rail.
3.3.3.2. Platform Height
There are three basic platform height options according “Characteristics of BRT for Decision Making”
report by FTA, they are:
Table 5: Platform Height Options
Standard Curb
The standard curb causes a vertical gap between the height of the station
platform or the curb and the vehicle entry step or floor. This causes customers to
step up to enter the BRT vehicle and step down to exit the BRT vehicle.
Raised Curb
A raised curb reduces the vertical gap between the platform and the vehicle
floor. The raised curb platform height should be no more than 10 inches above
the height of the BRT running way or Arterial Street on which the BRT system
operates.
Level Platform
To create the safest, easiest, and efficient manner of customer boarding and
alighting, platforms level with BRT vehicle floors (approximately 14 inches above
the pavement for low floor vehicles) are the preferred station platform
treatment.

Stations
3.3.3.3. Platform Layout
Platform layouts range from single vehicle length with a single berth (boarding position), usually
from 60 feet where only conventional 40 foot buses are used, to as long as 300 or more feet where
multiple articulated buses must be accommodated. There are three types of platform heights according
to “Characteristics of BRT for Decision Making” report by FTA, they are:
Table 6: Platform layout Options
Single Vehicle Length Platform

This is the shortest platform length necessary for the entry and exit of one
BRT vehicle at a time at a station.
Extended Platform with Un-Assigned Berths

Extended platforms usually accommodate no less than two vehicles and
allow multiple vehicles to simultaneously to load and unload passengers.
Since this platform can accommodate more than one vehicle at a time,
overlay services can more easily utilize the BRT stations and running way.
Extended Platform with Assigned Berths

Extended platforms with assigned berths have all of the features of
extended platforms but also assign vehicles serving specific routes to
specific positions on the platform. This is the longest of the two platform
length options.
3.3.3.4. Passing Capability
The ability for BRT vehicles in service to pass one another at stations is important in two primary cases:
1. In mixed flow operation, where frequency is high and travel times are highly variable
2. In cases where multiple types of routes (local and express) operate along the same running way
and serve uneven levels of demand

Stations
In both of these cases, BRT vehicles can delay other BRT vehicles operating on the same running way if
there is no ability to pass one another at stations.
Table 7: Passing Capability Options
Bus Pull-outs
For both arterial BRT operation and exclusive lanes, bus pull-outs at
stations allow buses serving a station to pull out of the BRT running way
and, thus out of the way of BRT vehicles that need to pass vehicles stopped
at the stations.
Passing Lanes at Stations

Passing lanes at stations allow a vehicle in express services to pass through
a station at full speed or a vehicle to overtake stopped.
3.3.3.5. Station Access
Transit systems require linkages to adjacent communities in order to draw passengers from their
market area – either through pedestrian linkages to adjacent sites or connections through the roadway
network to adjacent neighborhoods by automobile or non-motorized modes (Federal Transit
Table 8: Station Access
Pedestrian Linkages
Pedestrian linkages, such as sidewalks, overpasses and pedestrian paths
are important to establish physical connections from BRT stations to
adjacent sites, buildings, and activity centers.

Vehicles
Park-and-Ride Facility
Park-and-ride lots allow stations, especially those without significant
development, to attract passengers from a wide area around BRT stations.
Because services can be routed off the primary running way, regional park-
and-ride facilities can also be located off the running way.
3.4. VEHICLES
3.4.1. ROLE OF VEHICLES IN BRT
Vehicles have a direct impact on speed, capacity, environmental friendliness and comfort. BRT
vehicles are also the element of BRT that most passengers and non-customers associate with the BRT
system’s identity. As the BRT element in which customers spend the most time, passengers derive much
of their impression of the BRT system from their experience with vehicles. For non-passengers, vehicles
are the system elements that are most visible (Federal Transit Administration 2004).
3.4.2. CHARACTERISTICS OF VEHICLES
Four primary attributes defined by “Characteristics of BRT for Decision Making” report by FTA for BRT
vehicles are:
1. Vehicle Configuration – The basic physical configuration of BRT vehicles is a function of the
combination of size, floor height, and body type. Transit vehicles in the United States have
traditionally been high-floor vehicles with steps. In response to the Americans with Disabilities
Act (ADA), low-floor vehicles have become the norm in conventional transit operations. Vehicles
in U.S. BRT applications range from low-floor two-axle 40- or 45-foot units to three-axle 60-foot
articulated buses.
2. Aesthetic Enhancement – Aesthetic treatments, including paint schemes and styling options
affecting the appearance and configuration of the vehicle body contribute to BRT system

Vehicles
identity, positioning it as a quality option and providing information to potential customers as to
where to access BRT services. Interior amenities such as high quality interior materials, better
lighting and climate control also contribute to the customer perception of comfort and service
quality.
3. Passenger Circulation Enhancement – Several enhancements can be added to vehicles to
facilitate circulation onto and off the vehicle and within the vehicle. These include the provision
of additional or wider door channels or the provision of doors on the opposite (left) side of the
vehicle. Internal circulation enhancements include the provision of alternative seat layouts and
alternative wheelchair securement positions.
4. Propulsion – Propulsion systems determine the acceleration, maximum speed, and fuel
consumption and emissions characteristics of BRT vehicles. They also affect the noise and
smoothness of operation, service reliability and have a large impact on over-all BRT system
operating and maintenance costs.
3.4.3. VEHICLE OPTIONS
3.4.3.1. Vehicle Configuration
The vehicle configuration is the primary vehicle planning/design parameter for BRT systems. The
configuration captures the combination of the length (capacity), body type, and floor height of the
vehicle. In practice, BRT systems can use a variety of different vehicle configurations on a single running
way. Each configuration can be tailored to a specific service profile and market (Federal Transit

Vehicles
Table 9: Vehicle Options
Conventional Standard
Conventional standard vehicles are 40-45 feet in length and have a
conventional (“boxy”) body. The partial low-floor variety (now the
norm among urban transit applications) contains internal floors that
are significantly lower (14 inches above pavement) than high floor
buses.
Stylized Standard
Stylized Standard vehicles have all of the features of a conventional
step low-floor vehicle. The major difference is that they incorporate
slight body modifications or additions to make the body appear
more modern, aerodynamic and attractive.
Conventional Articulated
The longer, articulated vehicles have a higher passenger carrying
capacity (50% more) than standard vehicles. Typical floors are partial
low floors with steps with two or three doors.
Stylized Articulated
Stylized articulated vehicles are emerging in the US to respond to
BRT communities’ desire for more modern, sleeker and more
comfortable vehicles. Step-low floors, at least three doors, with 2
double stream and quick deploy ramps all facilitate boarding and
alighting to shorten stop dwell times.
Specialized BRT Vehicles

Specialized vehicles employ a modern, aerodynamic body that has a
look similar to that of rail vehicles. They also employ advanced
propulsion systems and often come with advanced ITS and guidance
systems.
3.4.3.2. Aesthetic Enhancement
Above and beyond the basic vehicle type, several aesthetic enhancements can be added to
vehicles to enhance the attractiveness of vehicles to passengers. Selection of these features can have
important impact on community and rider acceptance (Federal Transit Administration 2004).

Vehicles
Table 10: Aesthetic Enhancement Options
Specialized Logos and Livery

Specialized logos and vehicle livery are often used to create a specialized
identity by establishing a brand and a theme that patrons recognize and
associate with the positive attributes for the BRT system.
Larger Windows and Enhanced Lighting

The incorporation of larger windows (especially on low floor vehicles) and
interior light fixtures that allow for abundant, flattering light, day or night
to provide an “open feeling” can improve the perception and reality of
passenger security.
Enhanced Interior Amenity

Enhanced interior amenities such as more comfortable seating, higher
quality materials and finishes, better lighting, and climate control can
improve the perception of cleanliness, quality construction, and safety.
3.4.3.3. Passenger Circulation Enhancement
Several features govern accessibility to BRT vehicles and circulation within vehicles. These
features can have important impacts on dwell time, capacity, passenger comfort, and community and
rider acceptance (Federal Transit Administration 2004).
Table 11: Passenger Circulation Enhancement Options
Alternative Seat Layout

Alternative seat layout with seating placed against the sides of the vehicle
can increase the aisle width within the vehicle increasing the standing
capacity of the vehicle as well as providing additional space for passenger
circulation.

Vehicles
Additional Door Channels

Curb side – Additional door channels and wider doors facilitate the
boarding process by allowing multiple queues of passengers to enter the
BRT vehicle at one time.
Enhanced Wheelchair Securement

Conventional wheelchair securement involves the use of tie-downs, wheel
locks and belts, involving a process that takes between 60 and 200 seconds
including boarding time.
3.4.3.4. Propulsion System
Spurred on by the evolution of regulations supporting clean air, the number of choices in vehicle
propulsion systems is increasing. Technology is evolving to provide new propulsion systems that use
cleaner, alternative fuels and new controls on emissions, resulting in reduced pollution and lower noise
emissions. Because many new technologies are being introduced and market conditions, such as
demand and cost of production, are evolving (Federal Transit Administration 2004).
Table 12: Propulsion System Options
Internal Combustion Engines

The internal combustion engine fueled by ultra low-sulfur diesel (ULSD) or compressed natural gas
(CNG) with spark-ignition coupled with an automatic transmission is the most common propulsion
system today.
Trolley, Dual Mode and Thermal-Electric Drives

Electric trolley bus drives powered by overhead catenary-delivered power are still produced today and
are planned in limited quantities for operation in tunnel BRT applications. Dual mode systems with an
on-board thermal engine (usually diesel) can provide a capability to operate as a trolley and as an ICE
vehicle off the catenary for specialized operations.
Hybrid-Electric Drives
Hybrid-electric drive systems offer improved performance and fuel economy with reduced emissions
(e.g., of nitrogen oxides (NOx) and particulates (PM). They differ from dual-mode systems in that they
incorporate some type of on-board energy storage device (e.g., batteries or ultra capacitors).

Fare Collection
Fuel Cells
A number of operational tests of fuel cell buses are underway this year and next in Europe and the US.
Although the price is prohibitive currently, there is great interest in future development to provide zero
emissions using domestically produced hydrogen.
3.5. FARE COLLECTION

3.5.1. ROLE OF FARE COLLECTION IN BRT
Fare collection systems for BRT can be electronic, mechanical, or manual, but the key BRT
planning objective is to support efficient, e.g., multiple stream boarding, for what are extremely busy
services. Factors include fare policies (e.g., flat fare versus zone or distance), fare collection practices,
and payment media. Rather than exhaustively reviewing the large body of literature on fare collection2,
this section focuses on the specific BRT fare collection processes, structures, and technologies. It
describes the various fare collection options for BRT systems and provides cost estimates for various
electronic fare collection (EFC) approaches (Federal Transit Administration 2004).
3.5.2. CHARACTERISTICS OF FARE COLLECTION
The three primary design attributes of a BRT fare collection system are the fare collection process,
fare transaction media, and fare structures.
• Fare Collection Process - The fare collection process is how the fare is physically paid, processed,
and verified. It can influence a number of system characteristics including service times (dwell
time and reliability), fare evasion and enforcement procedures, operating costs (labor and
maintenance), and capital costs (equipment and media options).
• Fare Media - The fare media helps to process transactions associated with a given fare
collection process. The choice of fare transaction media includes the instruments associated
with the selected equipment, technologies, and fare collection processes. The choice and design

Fare Collection
of fare media can also influence the service times, auxiliary uses, as well as the capital and
operating costs of the fare collection system.
• Fare Structure – BRT fare structures greatly influence the choice of fare processes and
technologies. As noted, it is influenced by the existing or legacy systems of an organization or
region. Transit agencies may consider a number of design factors including their size, network,
organization, customer base, as well as financial, political, and management-related variables.
The two basic types of fare structures flat fares and differentiated fares.
3.5.3. FARE COLLECTION
3.5.3.1. Fare Collection Process
The basic fare payment systems and verification options are listed below with their associated
advantages or disadvantages (Federal Transit Administration 2004):
Table 13: Fare Collection Options
Pay on-board system (i.e., inside or upon entering the vehicle)

Typically involves a fare box or a processing unit for tickets or cards
adjacent to the operator. The considerable advantage of this system is that
it does not require significant fare collection infrastructure outside the
vehicle.
Conductor-validated system
Requires the rider to either pre-pay or buy a ticket on-board from a
conductor. However, this system is generally not applicable to BRT systems
in the United States because of the high labor costs involved in visually
validating all tickets.
Barrier Enforced Fare Payment system (i.e., pay-on-entering and/or

exiting a station or loading area)
Involves turnstiles, fare gates, and ticket agents or some combination of all
three in an enclosed station area or bus platform. It may involve entry
control only or entry and exit control.

Fare Collection
Barrier-Free (self-service) or Proof-of-Payment (POP) system

Requires the rider to carry a valid (usually by time and day) ticket or pass
when on the vehicle and is subject to random inspection by roving
personnel. It typically requires ticket vending and/or validating machines.
3.5.3.2. Fare Transaction Media
Fare collection policies and processes influence the selection of fare payment media and
equipment technology. The fare equipment must be capable of handling the selected fare payment
media. Likewise, the selected fare payment media may require certain equipment or technology. In
turn, fare collection equipment and media utilized by transit agencies depends on the fare payment
options given to passengers. The three primary fare media options include (Federal Transit
Administration 2004):
Table 14: Fare Transaction Media Options
Cash (Coins, Bills, and Tokens) and Paper Media (Tickets, Transfers, and Flash Passes)
This is simplest but slowest fare media option because of the necessary transaction time, particularly if
exact fare is required.
Magnetic Stripe Media

These cards are made of heavy paper or plastic and have an imprinted magnetic stripe that stores
information about its value or use.
Smart Cards
Smart Cards generally support faster and more flexible fare collection systems. Contactless or Proximity
Smart Cards permit faster processing times than magnetic stripe cards or contact smart cards.
3.5.3.3. Fare Structure
Transit agencies generally decide on fare collection policies and associated fare system based on
a number of factors including their size, network, organization, customer base, as well as financial,

Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS)
political, and management-related goals. There are two basic types of fare structures (Federal Transit
Administration 2004):
Table 15: Fare Structure Options
Flat Fares
Flat fares impose the same fare regardless of distance or quality of service. This policy simplifies the
responsibilities of the bus operators by reducing potential confusion and disputes and thus can speed up
boarding.
Differentiated fares
Differentiated fares are charged depending on length of trip, time of day, type of customer, speed or
quality of service. There are various types of differentiated fare strategies.
1. Distance-based or zonal fare is charged as a direct or indirect function of the distance traveled.
Bus operators may collect the fare when passengers board or, more rarely, as they exit the
vehicle.
2. Time-based fares are charged depending on the time of day or length of the trip.
3. Service-based fares depend on the type or quality of transit service, which may share stations or
infrastructure with other services. Express bus or BRT services may be an example. Generally,
this approach is used for multi-modal transit systems and may include transfers.
4. Other differentiated fare structures include market-based or consumer-based fares, discounted
fares, and free-fare zones.
3.6. INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS (ITS)

3.6.1. ROLE OF INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS IN BRT
Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) have helped transit agencies increase safety,
operational efficiency and quality of service and may have their highest and best use in BRT systems. ITS
includes a variety of advanced technologies to collect, process and disseminate real-time data from
vehicle and roadway sensors. The data are transmitted via a dedicated communications network and
computing intelligence is used to transform these data into useful information for the operating agency,
driver and ultimately the customer (Federal Transit Administration 2004).

Different combinations of technologies combine to form different types of ITS systems. For
example, automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) in combination with Automated Scheduling and Dispatch
(ASD) and Transit Signal Priority (TSP) can improve schedule adherence and hence reliability as well as
revenue speed. ITS technologies provide many performance improvements and benefits. The remote
monitoring of transit vehicle location and status and passenger activity also improves passenger and
facility safety and security.
ITS also can be used to assist operators in maintaining vehicle fleets and alert mechanics to
impending mechanical problems as well as routine maintenance needs. ITS applications are
fundamental to generating many of BRT’s benefits. However, integration of individual ITS applications
into the overall BRT system are essential. Combinations of ITS applications must ultimately work
together synergistically to provide the high quality service which defines BRT.
3.6.2. CHARACTERISTICS OF ITS
There are many technologies and operational features that can be utilized for BRT systems. Some
have been applied by conventional bus systems. In this section, individual ITS technologies that should
be considered for integration in BRT systems are discussed, many of which have already provided
significant benefits as part of integrated BRT systems. The various ITS applications that can be integrated
into BRT systems are discussed below. They have been categorized into seven groups according to the
“Characteristics of BRT for Decision Making” report by FTA:
1. Vehicle Prioritization
2. Assist and Automation Technology
3. Electronic Fare Collection (Discussed Section 2.4—Fare Collection)
4. Operations Management
5. Passenger Information
6. Safety & Security

7. Support Technologies
3.6.3. INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS (ITS)
3.6.3.1. Vehicle Prioritization
This technology group includes methods to provide preference or priority to BRT services. The
intent is not only to reduce the overall traffic signal delays (thus greater operating speed and shortened
travel time) of in-service transit vehicles, but also to achieve greater schedule/headway adherence and
consistency (thus enhanced reliability and shorter waiting times). Signal Timing / Phasing and Signal
Priority help BRT vehicles minimize delay caused by having to stop for traffic at intersections. Access
Control provides the BRT vehicles with unencumbered entrance to and exit from dedicated running
ways and/or stations (Federal Transit Administration 2004).
Table 16: Vehicle Prioritization Options
Signal Timing / Phasing

Optimization of traffic signals along a corridor to make better use of
available green time capacity by favoring peak, e.g., BRT flows.
Station and Lane Access Control

Allow access to dedicated BRT running ways and stations with variable
message signs and gate control systems requires the installation of barrier
control systems that identify a driver and vehicle and/or similar
surveillance and monitoring systems.
Transit Signal Priority

Traffic Signal Priority (TSP) technologies can be used to extend or advance
green times or allow left turn swaps to allow buses that are behind
schedule to get back on schedule, improving schedule adherence,
reliability, and speed.

3.6.3.2. Driver Assist and Automation Technology
This technology group includes technologies that provide automated controls (lateral, i.e.,
steering and longitudinal, i.e., starting, speed control, stopping) for BRT vehicles. Use of the Collision
Warning function assists a driver to operate a BRT vehicle safely. Use of Collision Avoidance, Lane Assist,
and Precision Docking functions provides for direct control of the BRT vehicle for collision avoidance,
running way guidance, or station docking maneuvers. All assist and automation technologies help to
reduce frequency and severity of crashes and collisions and reduced running and station dwell times
Table 17: Driver Assist and Automation Technology Options
Collision Avoidance
Provision to control the BRT vehicle so that it avoids striking obstacles in or along its path. This includes
forward, rear or side impacts or integrated 360 degree system. Requires installation of sensors (infrared,
video, or other), driver notification devices, and automated controls within the vehicle.
Collision Warning
Provision of warning for BRT vehicle driver about the presence of obstacles or the impending impact
with the pedestrian or obstacle. This includes forward, rear or side impact collision avoidance or
integrated 360 degree system.
Precision Docking
System that assists BRT vehicle drivers to correctly place a vehicle at a stop or station location both
latitude and longitude. There are two primary ITS-based methods to implement Precision Docking:
magnetic and optical. This requires the installation of markings on the pavement (paint, magnets),
vehicle-based sensors to read the markings, and linkages with the vehicle steering system.
Vehicle Guidance
Guides BRT vehicles on running ways while maintaining speed, using a variety of technologies. These
technologies, also known as “lane assist technologies”, allow BRT vehicles to safely operate at higher
speeds. There are three primary Vehicle Guidance technologies: magnetic, optical, and GPS-based. They
either require the installation of markings on or in the running way pavement (paint, magnets) or
development of a GPS-based route map).

3.6.3.3. Operations Management Technology
This technology group includes automation methods that enhance management of BRT fleets.
Currently, many transit agencies and BRT sites are modifying their existing communication system in
order to handle the most basic data needs of AVL systems and Mobile Data Terminals (MDT). Use of
Automated Scheduling Dispatch System and a Vehicle Tracking method assists BRT management to best
utilize the BRT vehicles. Use of Vehicle Mechanical Monitoring and Maintenance assists in minimizing
downtime of the BRT vehicles. All Operations Management functions improve operating efficiencies,
supporting a reliable service and reduced travel times. Solutions that improve BRT performance are
described in this section (Federal Transit Administration 2004).
Table 18: Operations Management Technology Options
Automated Scheduling Dispatch System

Utilization of real-time vehicle data (location, schedule adherence, passenger counters) to manage all
BRT vehicles in the system and insure proper level of service for passengers. Requires a communication
system and vehicle tracking components integrated with an ASDS software package.
Vehicle Mechanical Monitoring and Maintenance

Automatically monitor the condition of transit vehicle engine components via engine sensors and
provide warnings of impending (out of tolerance indicators) and actual failures occur. Requires a
communication system and on-board mechanical monitoring system that is capable of collecting and
transmitting necessary vehicle data.
Vehicle Tracking
Provide transit operations personnel with the current location of BRT vehicles on the network. Transit
location information will be used for improved traveler advisory services, schedule adherence and
archived to support future planning efforts. Requires a communication system integrated with vehicle
tracking components. The most typical installation is based upon the global positioning system (GPS) to
identify vehicle location. There are other options which are quickly being replaced.
3.6.3.4. Passenger Information
Passenger Information technologies can improve passenger satisfaction, help to reduced wait times, and
thus increase ridership. Passenger Information systems can also be a source of revenue through the sale

of advertising time and space on information screens. These services rely on a communication system
that is able to track individual vehicles, transmit vehicle location data to a central processing center and
disseminating processed vehicle data to the transit customer (Federal Transit Administration 2004).
Table 19: Passenger Information Options
Traveler Information at Stations

Provision of information about vehicle schedule, next bus information or delays within the system via
dynamic message sign at the station. Requires techniques to predict the vehicle arrival time and the
ability to display this information at the station/stop.
Traveler Information on Vehicle

Provision of information about next stop, vehicle schedule, transfer/other bus information or delays
within the system via dynamic message sign on the vehicle. Requires techniques to predict the vehicle
arrival time at the station/stop, receive data on other vehicles along the route and the ability to display
this information to transit customers riding on the vehicle.
Traveler Information on Person

Provision of information about vehicle schedule, next bus information or delays within the system via
PDA, cell phone or similar device used by the traveler. Requires software to provide personal traveler
information, and provision of information through the internet or mobile communications (either
directly, or through a service provider).
Trip Itinerary Planning

Provision for a traveler to request trip information by specifying a trip origin and destination, time and
date. Also provision for a traveler to specify their special equipment or handling requirements.
3.6.3.5. Safety and Security Technology
Use of Silent Alarms and on-board and in-station Monitoring systems can increase the security of the
BRT operation (Federal Transit Administration 2004). Specific types of technologies are:
Table 20: Safety and Security Options
Silent Alarms
Alarms installed on the BRT vehicle that are activated by the BRT vehicle driver. A message such has
“Call 911” can be displayed on the exterior sign board for others to see or messages can be sent back to
the operations center to indicate an emergency or problem.

System Performance of BRT Elements:
Voice and Video Monitoring

Surveillance of the vehicle, by use of microphone or CCTV camera. Data is sent to an operations center
to monitor.
3.7. SYSTEM PERFORMANCE OF BRT ELEMENTS:
The “Characteristics of BRT for Decision Making” by FTA, identifies five key BRT system performance
attributes, including:
1. Travel Time,
2. Reliability,
3. Image and Identity,
4. Passenger Safety and Security, and
5. System Capacity.
Travel Times: The impact of BRT systems on travel time saving is dependent on how each BRT element is
implemented in the specific application and how they relate to each other and the rest of the BRT
system. There are several different travel time components that BRT systems impact, including:
1. Running Time - The time BRT vehicles and passengers actually spend moving. Running times are
dependent on traffic congestion, delays at intersections, and the need to decelerate into and
accelerate from stations.
2. Station Dwell Time – This measures the time vehicles and passengers spend at stations while
the vehicle is stopped to board and alight passengers. Typical influences on dwell times include
platform size and layout, vehicle characteristics (e.g., floor height, number of doors and their
width), fare collection processes and media, and \ the use of technologies to expedite the

System Performance of BRT Elements:
boarding process for disabled customers and other mobility-impaired group (e.g., precision
docking or facilitated wheelchair securement).
3. Waiting and Transfer Times - These are highly dependent on service frequency and route
structure and the design of stations at transit terminals.
Reliability, is defined as the variability of travel times, and is affected by many BRT features. The three
main aspects of reliability include:
1. Running Time Reliability - The ability to maintain consistent travel times
2. Station Dwell Time Reliability – The ability for patrons to board and alight within a set
timeframe. (Elements that contribute to Station Dwell time include: station platform height,
vehicle types, fare collection process and fare media type)
3. Service Reliability – The availability of consistent service (availability of service to patrons, the
ability to recover from disruptions, availability of resources to consistently provide the
scheduled level of service).
Identity and Image reflects the effectiveness of a BRT system’s design in positioning it in the
transportation market place and in fitting within the context of the urban environment. It is important
both as a promotional and marketing tool for transit patrons and for providing information to non-
frequent users as to the location of BRT system access points (i.e., stops and stations) and routing. Two
major elements of BRT system Image and Identity capture its identity as a product and as an element of
the urban form:
1. Brand Identity – A BRT system brand identity reflects how it is positioned relative to the rest of
the transit system and other travel options. Effective design and integration of BRT elements

Travel Time
reinforce a positive and attractive brand identity that motivates potential customers and makes
it easier for them to use the system.
2. Contextual Design - This measures how effectively the design of the BRT system is integrated
with the surrounding urban environment.
Safety and Security for transit customers and the general public can be improved with the
implementation of BRT systems, where safety and security are defined as:
• Safety – Freedom from hazards as demonstrated by reduced accident rates, injuries, and
improved public perception of safety.
• Security –Actual and perceived freedom from criminal activities and potential threats against
customers and property.
Also accompanying the discussion of each performance element is a summary of BRT elements and
performance statistics by system. This summary allows for a comparison of different approaches
undertaken by transit agencies to achieve performance and of different performance results across
systems.
3.8. TRAVEL TIME

Travel time may be the single attribute of a transit system that customers care the most about,
particularly for non-discretionary, recurring trips such as those made for work purposes. Relatively high
BRT running speeds and reduced station dwell times make BRT services more attractive for all types of
customers, especially riders with other transportation choices. Waiting and transferring times have a
particularly important effect, and BRT service plans generally feature frequent, all–day, direct service to
minimize them.

Travel Time
The Operational Analysis of Bus Lanes on Arterials14 indicates that for suburban bus operations,
the majority of overall bus travel time (about 70 percent) takes place while the bus is in motion. For city
bus operations, particularly within Central Business Districts (CBDs), a lower percentage of overall bus
travel time (about 40 to 60 percent) takes place while the bus is in motion. This is due to heavier
passenger boarding and alighting volumes per stop, higher stop density, more frequent signalized
intersections, more pedestrian interference and worse traffic conditions.
For the purposes of this report, we consider four travel time components:
1. Running Time – time spent in the vehicle traveling from station to station
2. Dwell Time – time spent in the vehicle stopped at a station
Each of these types of travel time is described in further detail with a discussion of how BRT
elements contribute to reductions in travel time.
3.8.1. RUNNING TIME
3.8.1.1. Description of Running Time
Running time is the element of travel time that represents the time spent by BRT passengers
and vehicles actually moving from station to station. In most cases, the maximum speed of the vehicle
itself is not usually a determining factor for running travel times. Vehicles in service in such dense
corridors rarely accelerate to the maximum speed of the vehicle before they must decelerate to serve
the next station. The major determining factors are the delays that the vehicle encounters along the way
including congestion due to other vehicle traffic, delays at intersections for turns, traffic signals and
pedestrians, the number of stations a vehicle is required to serve, and the design of the BRT route
structure (Federal Transit Administration 2004).

Travel Time
3.8.1.2. Effects of BRT Elements on Running Time
The primary BRT elements that improve travel times relative to conventional bus service are described
below.
Table 21: Effects of BRT Elements on Running Time
Running Way – Running Way Segregation is one of the key BRT elements that affect travel times.
Running Way Mixed Flow Lanes with Queue Jumpers – Queue Jumpers allow vehicles to
bypass traffic queues (i.e., traffic backups) at signalized locations or bottlenecks.
Segregation
Dedicated (Reserved) Arterial Lanes reduce delays associated with congestion in
city streets. Dedicated lanes are often used in conjunction with Traffic Signal
Priority to minimize unpredictable delays at intersections.
At-Grade Exclusive Transit ways eliminate the hazards due to merging or turning
traffic or pedestrians and bicyclists crossing into the middle of the running way,
allowing BRT vehicles to travel safely at higher speeds.
Grade-Separated Exclusive Transit ways eliminates all potential delay, including
delays at intersections. BRT vehicles are free to travel safely at relatively high
speeds from station to station.
Stations – Passing Stations that allow for passing minimize delays at stations, especially if the
service plan includes high frequency operation or multiple routes. Passing
Capability
capability also allows for the service plan to incorporate route options such as
skip-stop or express routes, which offer even lower travel times than routes that
serve all stations.
ITS – Transit Vehicle Transit Vehicle Prioritization, specifically TSP will enable the BRT vehicle to
travel faster along the roadway through increased green time. TSP is especially
Prioritization
useful if implemented at key intersections that cause the highest delay. To a
lesser extent
Signal Timing/Phasing could provide similar benefits. Retiming or coordinating
signals along a corridor is generally directed at improving all traffic flow, not just
transit. Station and Lane Access Control can reduce the amount of time a BRT
vehicle sits in a queue waiting to enter a dedicated BRT or HOV lane or station.
ITS—Driver Assist For those BRT systems operating on narrow roadway ROW (e.g. shoulders), Lane
and Automation Assist can allow the BRT vehicle operator to travel at higher speeds than
otherwise would be possible due to the physical constraints of the ROW.
Precision Docking will enable a BRT vehicle to quickly dock at a BRT station and
reduce both Running Travel Time and the Station Dwell Time. Docking
technology removes the burden on the BRT vehicle operator of steering the
vehicle to within a certain lateral distance from the station

Travel Time
Service and Reducing the number of stations reduces delay associated with decelerating into
and accelerating out of the station and with loading at the station. Cumulatively,
Operations Plan –
the travel time savings associated with widening the station spacing can be
Station Spacing significant. BRT systems in North America vary considerably with respect to stop
spacing, ranging from about 1,200 feet for the planned system in Cleveland’s
core to about 7,000 feet for the Transitway system in Ottawa, which has
significant coverage in suburban areas.
3.8.2. STATION DWELL TIME
3.8.2.1. Description of Station Dwell Time
Station dwell time is the amount of time spent by passengers while a vehicle is stopped at a station.
The dwell time represents the time required for the vehicle to load and unload passengers at the transit
station. The report on Operational Analysis of Bus Lanes on Arterials states that station dwell time can
comprise as much as 30% (a significant share) of total travel times for transit. It also states that dwell
time can also make up to as much as 40% of total delay time depending on the level of congestion.
According to the “Characteristics of BRT for Decision Making” report by FTA, Dwell time depends on:
• The number of passengers boarding or alighting per door channel – multi-door boarding
disperses passengers
• The fare collection system – pre-processing fares and/or reducing transaction times on vehicles
can reduce loading times
• Vehicle occupancy – congestion inside the vehicle requires extra time to load and unload
passengers.
The dwell time at a particular stop can be estimated by multiplying the number of people boarding
and/or alighting through the highest volume door by the average service time per passenger. Typical
dwell times for standard local bus operations are:

Travel Time
• About 60 seconds at a downtown stop, transit center, major transfer point, or major park-and-
ride stop
• About 30 seconds at a major outlying stop
• About 15 seconds at a typical outlying stop
Several bus rapid transit elements can reduce station dwell times significantly.
3.8.2.2. Effects of BRT Elements on Station Dwell Time
The BRT elements that impact station dwell time most strongly are discussed below.
Table 22: Effects of BRT Elements on Station Dwell Time
Stations – Platform Level Platforms minimize the “gap” between the BRT vehicle floor and station
platform edge, greatly speeding the boarding and alighting process. For example,
Height
the MAX system in Las Vegas and the TEOR system in Rouen, France utilize and
optical guidance precision docking system. This system and vehicle floor-height
station platforms provide level, no-gap boarding and alighting, thus greatly
reducing station dwell times. No-gap, level vehicle floor -to-platform boarding
and alighting has the added benefit of permitting wheelchair users to board and
alight BRT vehicles without a lift, ramp, or assistance from a vehicle operator
Raised Curbs achieve some of the benefits of level platforms without the need
for precision docking but
Stations – Platform Platform layouts that do not constrain the number of vehicles that can load and
Layout unload passengers decrease the amount of time vehicles spend at stations
waiting in vehicle queues.
Vehicles – Vehicle Vehicle configurations with low floors facilitate boarding and alighting, especially
of mobility impaired groups – the disabled, elderly, children, and persons with
Configuration
packages. For low floor vehicles passenger service times could be reduced 20%
for boarding times, 15% for front alighting times and 15% for rear alighting
times.
Specialized BRT Vehicles with one hundred percent low floor vehicles have the
great advantage of shorter boarding and alighting times and the ability to place
an additional door behind the rear axle.
Vehicles – All types of passenger circulation facilitate lower dwell times.

Passenger
Additional Door Channels (with wider and more numerous doors) can
dramatically reduce the time for passengers to board and alight. BRT systems

Travel Time
Circulation that incorporate some form of secure, non-driver involved fare collection can
take advantage of multiple-door boarding. 23
Enhancement
Vehicles that include Alternative Seat Layout with wider aisles in the interior
also promote reduced dwell times, especially when there are significant standing
loads. Although a small percentage of passenger’s board in wheelchairs, the
dwell times for these customers can be significant. The typical wheelchair lift
cycle-times range from 60 to 200 seconds per boarding for high floor buses
(including time to secure the wheelchair). With a low floor bus the typical
wheelchair ramp cycle time ranges from 30 to 60 seconds per boarding which
includes time to secure the wheelchair.
Enhanced Wheelchair Securement devices are being developed and can reduce
dwell times further. The extent of the impact is still being measured.
Fare Collection – Fare Collection Processes that allow multiple door boarding – Proof-of-Payment
and Barrier-Enforced Pre-Payment – can provide significant reductions in
Fare Collection
boarding times. According to the Transit Quality of Service Manual (2nd Edition),
Process proof-of payment systems can provide up to a 38% reduction in boarding times,
and therefore commensurate reductions in dwell times as well. Multiple door
channels for boarding and alighting can reduce passenger service times even
further, to a fraction of other fare collection approaches. For example, two,
three, four, and six door channels can reduce the 2.5 seconds per total passenger
required to board under complete prepaid fare system to 1.5, 1.1, 0.9, and 0.6
seconds per total passenger boarding at a particular stop, respectively.
Fare Collection – For options where fare transactions take place on the vehicle, the fare
Fare transaction media has additional impacts on station dwell time. Compared to
fare collection by a driver using exact change, flash pass systems or electronic
Transaction Media
systems using tickets or passes can reduce passenger boarding time by 13% from
an average of 3.5 to 4 seconds per passenger.25 Smart Card technologies are
most effective in this respect; Magnetic Stripe Card technologies are less
effective. In addition, electronic systems can offer a great amount of valuable
passenger level data for better scheduling and planning. This can further reduce
passenger travel times.
ITS—Driver Assist Precision Docking has the potential to reduce station dwell times for two
reasons.
and Automation
First, it allows all passengers, especially the mobility impaired, to board and
alight without climbing up and/or down stairs. Second, some BRT systems (e.g.,
Bogotá Transmilenio) use systems that ensure that vehicles stop in the same
location, thus insuring orderly queuing for boarding.
.

Identity and Image
3.9. IDENTITY AND IMAGE

An important objective for BRT is to establish an image and identity separate from local bus
operations, to maximize the potential for attracting additional riders who might not be able to or want
to use the current system. Identity here refers to “branding” and image relates to the style, aesthetics
and compatibility of BRT’s physical elements (Federal Transit Administration 2004).
The three most visible BRT elements are the vehicles, stations, and running ways. A distinct BRT
color scheme (livery) and logo used with unique, modern vehicles are growing more common in BRT
systems. Most BRT systems also have stations with highly visible, distinct design cues to differentiate the
BRT routes that serve them from regular local bus stops. Some combine architecture and design with
high visibility to both “advertise” the system and indicate where to gain access to the BRT system
3.9.1. BRAND IDENTITY
3.9.1.1. Description of Brand Identity
Brand identity represents how BRT system is viewed among the set of other transit and
transportation options available. A BRT system may have a separate, brand identity from other parts of
the transit system (e.g., local bus network) to maximize its potential to attract new riders. An identity
separate from other transit services can be a successful strategy because of market differentiation as a
premium service, and thus increased appeal to choice riders. In effect, BRT can establish itself as a new
and distinct transit mode and enhance its competitiveness in a particular travel market with highly
visible, unique design features. BRT brand identity is strengthened when the design of all BRT elements
reinforce the core marketing message directed at passengers (Federal Transit Administration 2004).

Identity and Image
3.9.1.2. Effects of BRT Elements on Brand Identity
Table 23: Effects of BRT Elements on Brand Identity
Running Ways – Just as the physical rail tracks on a rail transit line reinforce to passengers the
idea that high quality rail transit service is present, running ways that have
Running Way
distinct identities also reinforce the idea that high quality BRT service is present.
Segregation This reinforces the identity of the BRT system. The ability to impart and reinforce
this system identity increases with increasing segregation.
Running Way – Similar to running way segregation, Running Way Markings can also supplement
brand identity. Examples of differentiation techniques include pavement marking
Differentiation
(e.g., frequent “bus only” markings on the pavement) and signs, particularly
active signage (e.g., “BRT-Only”) and paving running ways a unique color (e.g.,
maroon in Europe, Green in New Zealand, Yellow in Nagoya, Japan and Sao
Paulo, Brazil). Running Way Markings “advertise” the BRT system by providing it
with a distinct image and make enforcement easier when there isn’t an
impenetrable barrier separating the BRT-only running ways from general traffic.
Stations – Station Perhaps no better opportunity exists to create a unique identity and theme
throughout a BRT system than with station design that integrates into the local
Type
or corridor the BRT system serves. The unique identity of BRT stations creates a
system wide unified theme that is easily recognizable to customers and
emphasizes BRT’s unique attributes of speed and reliability. This can be
accomplished with distinct architectural design that differentiates the BRT other
“local” bus services.
Use of Enhanced Stops, larger Designated Stations, and Intermodal Terminals can
enhance the identity of BRT systems. Their presence advertises the presence of
BRT service to potential passengers as well as providing a safe, secure, attractive
and comfortable location for waiting for BRT service.
Vehicles – Vehicle Vehicle Configurations that provide enhanced body designs – Stylized Standard
and Articulated vehicles and Specialized BRT Vehicles support positive
Configuration
impressions of BRT systems that incorporate them. A survey of twenty-two
communities planning BRT projects revealed that the high-capacity articulated
vehicles were often characterized in appearance as “sleek, modern, futuristic,
raillike, speedy and new.” Research shows that the "image of bus service can be
significantly enhanced if the vehicles are “modern and clean." This shows that
aesthetics and proper maintenance do affect passengers' perception38.
Worldwide, the interest in modern looking, specialized BRT vehicles has led to
development of several models including Irisbus’ Civis in France, the Bombardier
“GLT” in Belgium and France and the Berkhoff-Jonkhere Phileas in the
Netherlands. Manufacturers in North America are also developing new models
that incorporate aesthetics in their design.

Identity and Image
Vehicles – Aesthetic Use of Larger Windows can reinforce brand messages of being “open” and
“safe”. Low-floor buses, with their high ceilings, generally have larger windows.
Enhancements
The large windows and high ceilings provide the customer with a feeling of
spaciousness, which contributes to the comfort of passengers.
Vehicles – Propulsion systems and fuels have clear positive effects on community
integration as well as image and branding of the service. Concern for air pollution
Propulsion
and community health effects of conventional diesel buses are important as is
their noise.
Fare Collection – Fare pre-payment allows BRT to resemble rail systems. Complete pre-payment
either through Barrier-Enforced Proof-of-Payment or Barrier-Free Proof-of-
Fare Collection
Payment allows for the optimization of bus operations, thus, improving the
Process system’s image and brand identity. Fare inspectors associated with Barrier Free
Proof-of- Payment Systems also provide another customer service interface.
Because inspectors represent the system, there is an important balance between
enforcement vigilance and an understanding customer service approach.
Fare Collection – Alternative fare media associate BRT systems with high technology and user
friendliness.
Fare Transaction
Smart Cards – Smart cards provide quick transactions enhance the image of BRT
Media
service as a high technology and high efficiency system. Although involving
significant investments, they provide tangible benefits including the possibility of
auxiliary services and uses (e.g. vending machines, parking, tolls, etc.) and in
creating seamless regional transit services with an integrated fare collection.
Magnetic-Stripe Cards – Magnetic strip cards have many of the same benefits as
smart cards although with slightly longer transactions.
ITS –Vehicle Including ITS elements can reinforce the association that passengers have of the
Priority, particular technology with the BRT brand. Transit Signal Priority can be marketed
as just one improvement that distinguishes a BRT service from regular bus
Driver Assist and
service. Precision Docking is another example where the transit agency can
Automation, brand the BRT service as having the ability to precisely stop at the same location
Passenger each and every time. Real-Time Traveler Information options suggest that the
system is technologically advanced enough to provide useful and timely
Information information to customers.
Identity

Safety and Security
3.10. SAFETY AND SECURITY

Safety and security are two major attributes of transit systems. Safety is defined as the level of
freedom from hazards experienced by passengers and employees of the transit system. According to
“Characteristics of BRT for Decision Making” report by FTA, Security is defined as the freedom from
criminal or intentional danger experienced by passengers and employees. BRT systems, when properly
planned, implemented, and operated can:
• Reduce accident rates
• Improve public perception of safety and security leading to increased ridership
• Improve risk management leading to reduced insurance claims, legal fees and investigations
• Reduce maintenance costs associated with damage and vandalism
• The provision of a safe and secure environment for BRT customers is essential since many
• BRT stations and stops are likely to be unattended and open during extended hours of
operation.
3.10.1. SAFETY
3.10.1.1. Description of Safety
Safety is defined as the level of freedom from danger experienced by passengers and employees of
the transit system. In general, two performance measures make up how well safety is managed by a
transit agency:
• Accident rates
• Public perception of safety
Passenger safety can be measured in terms of actual safety accident rates per unit hour or mile of
operation. These rates can be established in terms of preventable and non-preventable accidents. The

Safety and Security
public perception of safety is often measured using passenger surveys or information gathered from
customer feedback.
3.10.1.2. Effects of BRT Elements on Safety
Table 24: Effects of BRT Elements on Safety
Running Way – Running way options that involve the segregation of BRT vehicles from other
traffic and from pedestrians increase the level of safety and decrease the
Running Way
probability and severity of collisions by BRT vehicles.
Segregation
Running Way – Guidance technologies incorporated into the running way/vehicle interface allow
vehicles to follow a specified path along the running way and in approaches to
Guidance
stations thereby avoiding collisions while maintaining close tolerances.
Stations – Platform Raised Curbs or Level Platforms reduce the possibility of tripping and facilitating
wheelchair and disabled person access.
Height
Vehicles – Vehicle The use of vehicle configurations with partial or complete low floors may
potentially reduce tripping hazards for boarding BRT vehicles. Studies performed
Configuration
so far, however, cannot yet point to statistically valid comparison of passenger
safety for low-floor buses versus high-floor buses. In implementing low floor
buses, hand holds may be necessary between the entrance and the first row of
seats since, in many cases, the wheel well takes up the space immediately
beyond the entrance40.
ITS -- Driver Assist Lane Assist and Precision Docking, contribute to the safety of a BRT system
and Automation through smoother operation as it is operating at high speeds, in mixed traffic or
entering/exit the traffic flow.
Technology
Source: Federal Transit Administration 2004BRT Elements and Safety

Safety and Security
3.10.2. SECURITY
3.10.2.1. Description of Security
The objective of passenger security is to minimize both the frequency and severity of criminal
activities on impacting BRT systems. Reducing potential or perceived threats to passengers improves the
image of BRT systems. Security performance measures are generally measured in terms of crime rates
experienced on the transit system per unit of output (service hours or service miles). These statistics can
then be compared to crime rates experienced in the system’s surrounding areas or in the rest of the
transit system. These objectives of providing a secure system should be applied at all points where
passengers come into contact with the BRT systems, and specifically in stations and vehicles. Fare
collection systems and ITS technologies can also be central to achieving passenger security (Federal
Transit Administration 2004).
3.10.2.2. Effects of BRT Elements on Security
Table 25: Effects of BRT Elements on Security
Stations – Station Since passengers can potentially spend time at stations in an exposed
environment, designing stations to minimize exposure to crime or security
Design
threats is important. Such considerations include the provision of clear or
transparent materials to preserve sightlines through the facility, incorporation of
security monitoring or emergency telephones, and barriers or fare-enforcement
areas to deter non-patrons from entering the station area.
Vehicles – Aesthetic Aesthetic Enhancements that support a secure environment emphasize visibility,
brightness, transparency, and openness. Some vehicle characteristics that
Enhancement
support these principles include Larger Windows and Enhanced Lighting, to
promote sight lines through the vehicle. Large windows in the front and rear of
the vehicle ensure there are no dim zones within the vehicle.41
Fare Collection – Proof-of-Payment –The same equipment, personnel, and procedures that are
applied to collecting and enforcing fares may also be use to ensure passenger
Fare Collection
security on a system. Monitoring and surveillance measures could be applied to

Why CommunityViz
Process achieve both fare enforcement and security objectives. The presence of fare
inspectors can both transmit a message of order and security and ensure a
source of trained staff to assist customers in cases of emergency.
Barrier-enforced Fare Payment – Barrier-enforced fare payment may discourage

criminals from entering the system and targeting passengers with cash, provide a
more secure or controlled environment for waiting passengers.
Fare Collection – Pre-paid instruments and passes per se may not enhance passenger security, but
may be easier to control if lost or stolen and may discourage crime on the system
Fare Media
because of the reduced number of transactions using cash. Fare media options
such as contactless smart cards that allow for stored value and that do not
require passengers to reveal the instrument while paying the fare may also
enhance security.
ITS – Operations BRT security can be addressed with Operations Management technology such as
Automated Scheduling and Dispatch and Vehicle Tracking. In addition, Silent
Management,
Alarms and Voice and Video Monitoring are important to the security of the BRT
Safety and Security
vehicle and passengers. When criminal activity does occur, an integrated system
Technologies that includes a silent alarm, video cameras and vehicle tracking can alert
dispatchers instantaneously to the status of the BRT vehicle, where it is located,
and what is occurring on the BRT vehicle.
3.11. WHY COMMUNITYVIZ

CommunityViz is a GIS-based decision-support tool for land-use planning and resource
management. It works as an extension to ArcGIS. Since most of decisions are spatial and would require
the GIS technological assistance of GIS, a decision support tool like this would help in creating a
template for multiple analyses, by creating a decision support database which stores the values that are
required to perform analysis that assists in decision making process. And following are the various
advantages of incorporating CommunityViz in this model:

Why CommunityViz
Easy to Understand
CommunityViz is made to help people understand the sometimes complex considerations that
affect geographic decisions. Scenario 360 is carefully designed to be as easy on the outside as it is
powerful on the inside, For example, analysis functions are displayed separately from set-up functions,
making it easier for non-technical audiences to focus on decision-making concepts without getting lost
in details.
Web-Ready Reports and Presentations
Scenario 360 reporting capabilities include a Reports Wizard that helps you create clear,
comprehensive reports that provide data, images, and explanations about your analysis. Reports are in
html format that is ready to be posted to a project website or simply viewed on your own computer.
CommunityViz WebShots let you post partly interactive web presentations that let your viewers explore
your analysis or view it as a slide show you create.
Analysis Publisher
The Analysis Publisher creates freely sharable, read-only versions of your Scenario 360 analysis.
You can share your work with clients, members of the public, or anyone else you like, whether or not
they have CommunityViz or ArcGIS. To create sharable analyses, the ArcGIS Publisher extension
(standard with ArcInfo) is required. To view analyses, ESRIs free ArcReader is required. Published
Analyses are the ideal companion to Sharable 3D Scenes and they provide more robust map navigation
and data than WebShots.
Analysis Diagrams
Scenario 360's interactive analysis diagrams provide a visual map of the logic of your analysis.
Showing all of the analysis components and their relationships with color-coded lines and icons are a

What is CommunityViz
great way to display, explain or track down the interdependencies that are so common in
comprehensive geographic decision-making.
3.12. WHAT IS COMMUNITYVIZ

According the CommunityViz Quick Reference Guide, Version 3x includes two components, Scenario 360
and SiteBuilder 3D.
3.12.1. SCENARIO 360
Scenario 360, which is employed for the purpose of this project, is a decision-support
technology is designed to help people visualize, analyze and communicate about geographic decisions.
Its purpose is to help people make informed, collaborative decisions about the future of their
community, their land, and their world. Scenario 360 can be used to calculate potential positive and
negative impacts of all kinds – economic, social, and environmental – and compare results after
assumptions or details have been changed. In short, you can try out your choices in the computer before
actually implementing them in the real world.
3.12.2. WHY SCENARIO 360?
The objective of this project is to create an interactive tool that would enable communities and
decision makers to analyze and visualize the impacts of various choices they make while incorporating
Bus rapid transit in their communities, Scenario 360 is a perfect tool that would make the process of
making decisions about communities more participative, can involve the people whom it affects, and
can be more effective.

3.12.2.1. Strengths of Scenario 360 software
According to the CommunityViz software documentation provided on http://www.placeways.com
the following are the various components of Scenario 360.
1. Scenario 360 helps users to view, project, analyze, and understand potential alternatives and
impacts via visual exploration and scenario analysis. It allows users to experiment with
hypothetical scenarios, challenge assumptions on the fly, and view impacts of changes.
2. A powerful decision-making framework, Scenario 360 assists people and groups in bringing
diverse information to a central location. Proposals, assumptions and impacts can be viewed
side by side to illustrate the choices that need to be made. Economic, social, environmental and
visual considerations can all be measured and compared, leading to holistic, informed decisions.
3. Scenario 360 provides users with the ability to make data dynamic. This very powerful feature
means that data about features on a map can be driven by formulas so that changes made to
one aspect of an analysis drive recalculations and responsive changes throughout the entire
analysis. Dynamic data allows you to experiment with alternatives and view the impacts of
changes immediately.
4. Use of Scenario 360 software encourages participation and collaboration by engaging colleagues
and public audiences via visualization and interactive media. A higher level of participation in
decisions often leads to a higher level of consensus. Scenario 360 includes many presentation
features that assist you in presenting information to the public. People can ask “what if”
questions and play out “if/then” scenarios quickly and effectively. The result is an informed
dialogue that leads to stronger consensus, better decisions, and far greater support for land-use
plans.

3.12.3. COMPONENTS OF SCENARIO 360
According to the CommunityViz software documentation provided on http://www.placeways.com the
following are the various components of Scenario 360.
3.12.3.1. Visualize
Dynamic Charts: Scenario 360 includes special charts that provide dynamically updated visual
displays of information you want to know. You can set up the charts to display a single variable, multiple
variables, multiple scenarios, and previous values.
3.12.3.2. Analyze.
Scenarios: Scenario 360 allows you to create,
analyze, and display multiple geographic alternatives - such
as land-use plans, growth patterns, or project sites - and
compare them all side-by-side. One of many ways is with our
Scenario Sketch tools. Compare how they look on a map;
compare their quantitative effects; compare how each
responds to changes in assumptions or external influences.
And with the Scenario Comparison feature, you can display
maps, charts, and images in a tiled display that makes it easy
to compare, present, and review alternatives and their
impacts.
3.12.3.3. Dynamic Formulas
Scenario 360 handles spatial data somewhat like a Microsoft Excel®-spreadsheet handles
numbers. Spatial information, tabular information, and user-changeable assumptions for variables like

unit costs or growth rates can all be used to write formulas. The formulas' results will give you
information you need to make geographic decisions, such as how much an alternative will cost or which
parcel of land is most suitable for a given application. Because the formulas are dynamic, the results
update automatically as you make changes to assumptions, edit the map, or experiment with other
choices.
3.12.3.4. Intuitive Controls
The intuitive, highly visual controls on Scenario 360 are designed to be easy to understand.
Slider bars, for example, encourage viewers to vary assumptions and change weighting factors to see
the results. Large, colorful icons are associated with common functions. Toolbars, windows, charts and
other screen elements can be moved around, reorganized, and resized to suit individual preferences.
And built-in, context-sensitive help is always available in case it's needed.

Summary
3.12.3.5. Automated Alerts
Scenario 360 lets you create your own alerts to
notify you when certain thresholds are crossed as you
experiment with changes to your analysis. For example,
set an alert that marks when a school runs out of capacity,
or one that highlights all the parcels that meet your
criteria for a particular use.
3.13. SUMMARY
The elements and their effect on performance measures are explored in this chapter along with the uses
of CommunityViz and its components. Using this literature the model will be developed which can be
used to evaluate design and evaluate the performance of the system.

Summary
SYSTEM DESIGN
4

Capital Cost Data
4.1. CAPITAL COST DATA

One of the main inputs that the Bus Rapid Transit Decision support system is the cost of individual
elements that comprise of a BRT system. The individual elements and their costs are detailed out in
table 26, more details about individual BRT elements and their costs can be found in Appendix A. Cost of
elements are subject to fluctuations in the economy and inflation, hence the system provides flexibility
to update the cost of individual items, whenever found necessary.
The list of elements and their costs used for evaluating the study area are detailed out the in the
following table.
Table 26: BRT Individual Elements Cost table
BRT ELEMENT ASSOCIATED COST UNIT
RUNNING WAYS
Running Way Options
Unimproved Mixed Flow Lanes $0 Per lane mile
Mixed Flow Lanes with Queue Jumpers $0.1 - $0.29 million Per queue jump lane section per
intersection
Designated (Reserved) Arterial Lanes $2.5 - $2.9 million Per lane mile
At-Grade Transitways $6.5 – 10.2 million Per lane mile
Fully Grade-Separated Exclusive Transitways
Aerial Transitway – $12 - 30 million Per lane mile
Below-grade Transitway -- $60 – 105 million Per lane mile
Additional Lanes: (within existing $2.5 – 3 million Per additional lane mile
roadway Profile)
Additional Lanes: (New roadway Profile) $6.5 – 10.12 Per additional lane mile
Running Way Marking
Signage and Striping NA
Raised Lane Delineators NA
Alternate Pavement Color / Texture NA
Guidance (Lateral)
Optical Guidance $11,500 – 134,000 Per vehicle
Electromagnetic Guidance
Magnetic Sensors $20,000 Per mile
Hardware and Integration per $50,000 - $95,000 Per vehicle
Mechanical Guidance NA
STATIONS

Capital Cost Data
Station Options
Simple Stop $15,000 to $20,000 Per shelter.
Enhanced Stop $25,000 to $35,000 Per shelter.
Designated Station $150,000 to $2.5 Million per station
Intermodal Terminal or Transit Center $5 million to $20 million. Per facility or higher
Platform Height
Standard Curb NA
Raised Curb NA
Level Platform NA
Platform Layout
Single Vehicle Length Platform NA
Extended Platform with Un-Assigned Berths NA
Extended Platform with Assigned Berths
Passing Capability
Bus Pull-outs $0.05 - 0.06 million Per pull-out (per station platform)
Passing Lanes at Stations $2.5 - $2.9 million Per lane mile
Station Access
Pedestrian Linkages
Park-and-Ride Facility
$3,500 - $5,000 For a surface space
$10,000 to $25,000 Per space for structured space
VEHICLES
Vehicle Types
Conventional Standard $300,000 to $350,000 Per vehicle
Stylized Standard $300,000 to $370,000 Per vehicle
Conventional Articulated $500,000 to $645,000 Per vehicle
Stylized Articulated $630,000 to $950,000 Per vehicle
Specialized BRT Vehicles $950,000 to $1,600,000 Per vehicle
Aesthetic Enhancement
Specialized Logos and Livery NA
Larger Windows and Enhanced Lighting NA
Enhanced Interior Amenity NA
Passenger Circulation Enhancement
Alternative Seat Layout NA
Additional Door Channels NA
Enhanced Wheelchair Securement NA
Propulsion System
Internal Combustion Engines
CNG price increment over ULSD is ~ $40,000.00 Per vehicle
Infrastructure capital ~ $700,000-$1,000,000 One time
Trolley, Dual Mode and Thermal-Electric
Drives
Cost increment over diesel ICE is $200,000 to $400,000. One time
Hybrid-Electric Drives

Capital Cost Data
Price increment over diesel ICE is $100,000 to $250,000. One time

Fuel Cells NA
FARE COLLECTION
Fare Collection Process
Pay on-board system NA
Conductor-validated system NA
Barrier Enforced Fare Payment system
$30,000 to $60,000 Per ticket vending machine (tvm);
$20,000 to $35,000. Per fare gate
Barrier-Free (self-service) or Proof-of- $30,000 to $60,000 Per ticket vending machine (tvm);
Payment (POP) system
Fare Transaction Media
Cash (Coins, Bills, and Tokens) and Paper
Media (Tickets, Transfers, and Flash Passes)
low cost mechanical farebox $2,000 Per box
complex electronic registering farebox $5,000 Per box
Magnetic Stripe Media
per validating farebox with magnetic card $10,000 to $12,000 Per vehicle
processing unit
Per garage for hardware/software. $10,000 to $20,000 Per garage
Smart Cards $12,000 to $14,000 Per vehicle
Per garage for hardware/software. $10,000 to $20,000 Per garage
INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS

Vehicle Prioritization
Signal Timing / Phasing $3,500 Per intersection
Station and Lane Access Control
Controller Software for Entire System $25,000 to $50,000 One time
Gate Hardware per Entrance $100,000 to $150,000 Per station
Transit Signal Priority
Signal Priority Software - $300 to $600 Per signal
Signal Controller Hardware $4,000 to $10,000
Vehicle Hardware $500 to $2,000 Per vehicle
Driver Assist and Automation Technology
Collision Avoidance
Collision Warning $3,500 Per vehicle
Precision Docking
Magnetic - $4,000 Sensors per station
Optical Markings - $4,000 Per station
Hardware and Integration - $50,000 Per vehicle
Vehicle Guidance
Magnetic Sensors $20,000 Per vehicle
Optical per Mile - $20,000 Per vehicle
GPS - $125,000 One time
Hardware and Integration per Vehicle - $50,000 - $95,000 Per vehicle
Operations Management Technology

System design
Automated Scheduling Dispatch System

Hardware and Software Acquisition - $20,000 - $40,000 One time
System Integration - $225k - $500k One time
Sensors and Fleet Integration - $1,100k - $2,200k One time
Vehicle Mechanical Monitoring and
Maintenance
Sensors and Fleet Integration - $1,100k - $2,200k One time
Vehicle Tracking
Operations Center Hardware - $15,000 - $30,000 One time
Software Integration & Development - $815k - $1,720k One time
Vehicle Hardware - $600 - $1,000 Per vehicle
Passenger Information
Traveler Information at Stations $4,000 - $8,000 Per station
Traveler Information on Vehicle NA
Traveler Information on Person NA
Trip Itinerary Planning NA
Safety and Security Technology
Silent Alarms $420k - $700k One time
Voice and Video Monitoring $420k - $700k One time
4.2. SYSTEM DESIGN

This section of the report lays out the basis on which the Decision support system for Bus rapid
transit is developed. The framework of the model and the concepts behind the calculations are laid out
in the following sections of the chapter.
4.2.1. CONCEPTUAL MODEL WORK FLOW
The BRT decision support system works in three simple steps,
1. User input of the BRT element (spatial/non-spatial): First step involves the user
selecting/inputting desired BRT element through simple drawing or inputting and selecting
various parameters involving BRT elements costs and performance.
2. Calculation of Capital Costs: the cost of the user inputted element will be calculated from a
predefined data base that consists of individual BRT elements and their costs and the spatial
measures extracted from the GIS based Decision support system.

capital Cost calculation
3. Evaluation of performance: The performance of the user inputted BRT element is calculated
from a predefined set of formulas involving spatial measures from GIS and a predefined
database of raking measures developed though expensive literature studies.
Repetition of the steps 1-3 for all the BRT elements would produce the final capital costs and
system performance indicators.
4.3. CAPITAL COST CALCULATION

Capital costs are calculated by multiplying per unit cost of individual BRT element, available
from cost table above, with the no of units, extracted from GIS system’s spatial component. For instance
the cost of a simple stop is $15,000 and the user designs a system with 4 simple stops then the total
capital cost of simple station is $60,000 (15000 * 4).

Evaluating System performance
A grand total of capital cost is arrived at by summing up individual capital costs of all the elements of
Running Ways, Stations, Vehicles, Fare Collection, and Intelligent transportation system.
4.4. EVALUATING SYSTEM PERFORMANCE

4.4.1. TRAVEL TIME SAVINGS
Travel time savings are the combined savings from Running Way Savings and Station Dwell time savings.
The evaluation of running time savings and station dwell time savings are explained in the following
sections (Federal Transit Administration 2004).
4.4.1.1. BRT Vehicle Speeds
Research in transit operations suggests how running times can be reduced through many elements that
are incorporated into BRT. The “Characteristics of BRT for Decision Making” report by FTA provides
estimated average speeds of buses, as a function of three variables:
• Type of Running Way (e.g., Freeway HOV Lane, Arterial Street Bus Lane, or Mixed Traffic)
• Average Stop Spacing
• Average Dwell Time per stop
Table 27 makes clear that the use of exclusive right-of-way (i.e., no traffic signals) is the most
effective way to increase bus travel speeds. All things (e.g., station spacing, fare collection approach,
etc.) being equal, BRT revenue speeds on exclusive running ways will compare favorably with most
heavy rail and exclusive right-of-way light rail systems.
As shown in Table 28, having dedicated bus lanes on arterial streets provides for speeds that are
similar to that of street-running light rail systems. Table 29 indicates that in typical mixed traffic
conditions, bus speeds are significantly lower than those for BRT, light and heavy rail systems operating

on exclusive running ways. This is due to the traffic itself, as well as the time required for the bus to exit
/ re-enter the traffic stream at each stop. Tables 27 to 29 also indicate that stop spacing is the next most
significant variable in influencing average bus travel speeds, followed by average dwell time per stop.
Table 27: Estimated Average Bus Speeds on Busways or Exclusive Freeway HOV Lanes:
Average Stop Average Dwell Time Per Stop in Seconds

Spacing In Miles 0 15 30 45 60
0.5 36 mph 26 mph 21 mph 18 mph 16 mph
Table 28: Estimated Average Bus Speeds on Dedicated Arterial Street Bus Lanes, in miles per hour

Spacing In Miles 10 20 30 40 50 60
0.10 9 mph 7 mph 6 mph 5 mph 4 mph 4 mph
Table 29: Estimated Average Bus Speeds in General Purpose Traffic Lanes, in miles per hour

Spacing In Miles 10 20 30 40 50 60
Using these 3 matrices, the speed of the BRT vehicles is calculated basing on the type of traffic
conditions, distance between stops. Using these speeds the travel time is calculated. And then using the
design speed of the road the original time of travel is calculated and ten compared against the BRT
travel time to evaluate the performance of BRT system.

4.4.1.2. Evaluation of running time
Running time savings can be evaluated using several measures like:
• Peak Hour End-to-End Travel Time
• Unconstrained End-to-End Travel Time
• Minutes per mile
• Maximum Time on Local Line (peak hour)
• Travel Time Reduction
4.4.1.3. Travel Time Reduction
Of all the measures mentioned above the most appealing would be the travel time reduction
measure. this measure is derived by calculating the percentage difference in travel time between a BRT
line and a local line that operate along the same alignment and have the same end points (for BRT lines
that have no local alternative, the travel time is compared to the system wide average) (Federal Transit
4.4.1.4. Station Dwell Time
The dwell time at a particular stop can be estimated by multiplying the number of people boarding
and/or alighting through the highest volume door by the average service time per passenger. Typical
dwell times for standard local bus operations are:
• About 60 seconds at a downtown stop, transit center, major transfer point, or major park-and-
ride stop
• About 30 seconds at a major outlying stop
• About 15 seconds at a typical outlying stop

For the purpose of this project the station dwell times are assumed, basing on literature study, to be
as follows:
Table 30: Station Dwell Times
Station Type Dwell Time
Simple Stop 15sec – 25sec
Enhanced Stop 20sec – 35sec
Designated Station 30sec – 45sec
Intermodal Terminal or Transit Center 45sec –75+sec

4.4.1.5. Calculating Performance of Station Dwell time
There are no established measures of evaluating the station dwell time, but for the purpose of
this study Ratio of Improved BRT to Maximum Station Dwell time is used to calculate performance of
BRT elements on station dwell time.
Ratio of Improved to Maximum Station Dwell time: – this measures the station dwell time
differential between improved BRT systems and standard transit station dwell times. The higher the
ratio, the greater the impact of improved BRT elements on station dwell time.
4.4.2. CALCULATING IDENTITY RANK
The most common technique to articulate a separate brand identity is through the use of a
different look for vehicles. Transit signal priority to improve speeds and the use of real-time passenger
information at stations are two common techniques to impart an impression of high technology for bus
rapid transit systems.
Identity and image is a perception of quality and since there are no quantitative ways of rating
the BRT system for its Identity and Image, a qualitative approach is adopted for rating the BRT systems.
The system performance will be rated on a scale of 1 to 4 depending on the performance of the built-in
BRT Elements.
The Table 31 below shows the various BRT elements and their effect on the Identity and Image
rating. The Identity and Image rating of the system is calculated by dividing the final score divided by 63
and then multiplied by 100 will produce index between 0 and 100.
4.4.3. CALCULATING SAFETY AND SECURITY RANK
Safety and security like Identity and Image, is a perception of quality so a qualitative approach is
adopted for rating the BRT systems. The system performance will be rated on a scale of 1 to 4, 4 being
the highest and best, depending on the performance of the built-in BRT Elements.
The Table 31 below shows the various BRT elements and their effect on the safety and security
rating. The Identity and Image rating of the system is calculated by dividing the final score divided by 48
and then multiplied by 100 will produce index between 0 and 100.

Table 31: Identity & Image and Safety & Security Ranking
Identity and Safety and

Image Security
Running ways
Running way segregation types •
· Mixed flow lanes with queue jumpers 2 1
· Designated (reversed) arterial lanes 2 2
· At-grade exclusive lane (Transitway) 4 4
· Grade-separated exclusive lane (Transitway) 4 4
Running way marking •
· Signage 2
· Lane delineators 2
· Alternate pavement color structure 2
Running way guidance type •
· Optical guidance 3 4
· Electromagnetic guidance 3 4
· Mechanical guidance 3 4
Stations
Station types •
· Basic shelter 1 1
· Enhanced shelter 2 2
· Designated station 3 3
· Intermodal transit center 4 4
Platform height •
· Standard curb 1 1
· Raised curb 2 3
· Level platform 3 4
Platform layout
· Single vehicle length platform
· Extended platform with un-assigned berths
· Extended platform with assigned berths
Passing capability
· Bus pull-outs
· Passing lanes at stations
Station access
· Pedestrian linkages 3
· Park-and-ride facility 3
Vehicles
Vehicle configurations •

· Conventional standard 1 2
· Stylized standard 2 3
· Conventional articulated 3 3
· Stylized articulated 3 3
· Specialized BRT vehicles 4 4
Aesthetic enhancement •
· Specialized logos and livery 2 2
· Larger windows and enhanced security treatments 2 3
· Enhanced interior amenity 2 3
Passenger circulation enhancement •
· Alternative seat layout 2 2
· Additional door channels 2 2
· Left side doors 2 3
· Enhanced wheel-chair securement 3 3
· Interior bicycle securement 3 3
Propulsion systems •
· Internal combustion engines 2
· Trolley, dual-mode and thermal electric drives 4
· Hybrid electric drives 4
· Fuel cells 4
Fare collection
Fare collection process •
· Pay on board 1
· Barrier 2
· Proof of payment 3
Fare transaction media •
· Cash and paper only 1 1
· Magnetic stripe 3 3
· Smart cards 4 3
Fare structure •
· Flat 2
· Differentiated 3
Intelligent transportation system
Vehicle prioritization •
· Signal timing/phasing 2
· Station and lane access control 3
· Transit signal priority 4
Driver assist and automation technology •
· Collision avoidance 1 3

· Collision warning 2 3
· Precision docking 3 3
· Vehicle guidance 4 4
Operations management
· Automated scheduling dispatch system 3
· Vehicle mechanical monitoring and maintenance 3
· Vehicle tracking 4
Passenger information •
· At station 2 1
· On person 2 2
· On vehicle 2 2
· Trip itinerary planning 3 2
Safety and security technology
· Silent alarms 4
· Voice and video monitoring 4
SUMMARY
Hence the methods for evaluating costs and performance of BRT system are established and covered in
this chapter, including the cost data that is used in system development. Using these methods for
calculating the various indices of performance and capital costs of the BRT system, the system itself is
developed using CommunityViz. The details of the system development are covered in chapter 5 and the
results in the following ones.

SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT
5

The Decision Support Model
5.1. THE DECISION SUPPORT MODEL

The decision support system for BRT, evaluates the potential capital costs involved in building a new BRT
route(s) in a community and evaluating the performance of the BRT System in terms of Identity, Safety
and travel Time Savings. The general model working flow is described below and shown in the figure 10:
1. Data required: The BRT Decision support system primarily needs two sets of data, one look-up
tables that contain the information on BRT elements, individual safety and identity ranks and
the second set being the street network data of the community.
2. Assumptions: Assumptions give flexibility to the system where the user can either update the
existing cost and system assumptions or
a. Select your Cost Assumptions: The assumptions primarily about the current costs of
each element of BRT that are used in evaluating the Capital Costs can be changed to
meet the current market rates; else the user could use the default rates for each
element. This element provides flexibility that is required for keeping the system up to
date.
b. Select your System Assumptions: Primarily these are related to travel time, one of them
being station dwell times and the other design speeds.
3. User Inputs: At this stage the user actually designs the BRT system in his community, there are
essentially two steps in which he can design the system, through which all the five elements of
the BRT system are addressed, they are:
c. Design your route: Draw your route along the street network and a series of questions
will be asked about the kind of BRT elements that you want to be incorporated in the
system.

d. Design your stations: The second user input is the selection of station locations and
selecting the BRT elements associated with it through answering a series of questions
that follow each individual station input.
4. Dynamic Attributes: the assumptions, user inputted values and data from look-up tables are
then processed using formulas to calculate the outputs, that are stored in the New BRT route
and New BRT station layers, which are later used to calculate capital costs and system
performance indices.
5. Outputs: The outputs are primarily in the form of charts, total capital costs chart, identity index
chart, safety index chart, travel time saving index chart.
e. Capital Cost: The selection set of BRT elements from user inputted stations and routes
are then calculated for capital costs, using the costs database that can be updated by
changing the cost assumptions.
f. Evaluate performance: The performance of the system is evaluated using three main
indicators. Running time savings, Identity Rank and Safety Rank.

Figure 10: BRT Decision Support System Model Flow

Study Area
5.2. STUDY AREA

Hamilton County is selected as the study area, for the purpose of demonstrating the capabilities of this
Decision Support System, because of the availability of data and access to information. This chapter
offers a specific description of the development of this decision support model in CV. Data used for this
model was obtained from the Cincinnati Area GIS database, including the street centerline and network
dataset.
5.3. DATA REQUIRED

Since the users of the system are not confined to a particular region and the availability of
standardized GIS datasets is difficult, the model is built on widely available street datasets, enabling
instant usage of this model by different communities and regions.
Because of the global nature of the model, several elements cannot be evaluated that are highly
localized. For instance the cost of acquisition, that can be a substantial amount of the capital costs,
cannot be evaluated because of the constraints in data availability.
The data required for this model are of two types spatial and non-spatial, the spatial data sets
include Street network data that has information on street types and number of lanes. And the non-
spatial data is the information on individual BRT elements. The detailed description of each data set
required is given in the following table.
Table 32: Data Required
Data Element Source Key Attributes
Street Centerline Data CAGIS, 2006 Location Information
Running Ways Look-Up Author, 2007 Safety Rank, Identity rank
Stations Look-Up Author, 2007 Safety Rank, Identity rank

Assumptions
Vehicles Look-Up Author, 2007 Safety Rank, Identity rank
Fare Collection Look-Up Author, 2007 Safety Rank, Identity rank
ITS Look-Up Author, 2007 Safety Rank, Identity rank
Apart from the regular data information on current costs of construction of BRT will be useful in
calculating the capital costs accurately.
5.4. ASSUMPTIONS
There are several model assumptions that the user can interactively change to produce more
accurate and up-to date results. The assumptions in this decision support system generally are confined
to the cost of individual BRT elements. There are about 76 assumptions in the model. Each of these
individual elements is explained in the following section:
5.4.1. COST ASSUMPTIONS
The following assumptions reflect the current cost of construction of individual BRT elements.
The ability to choose and change these assumptions reflects the flexibility of the model. The current
values represent the cost table shown in Table 26. Basing on these assumptions are the capital costs and
indicators of performance are calculated.
5.4.2. RUNNING WAYS
In the running way assumptions the user is asked to update or choose the current cost of
construction of each type of running, the units of cost being per lane of construction and the cost of
construction of Guidance system for BRT system. There are no significant costs associated with the
running way markings hence they are not presented in this section. The running way assumptions are
shown in the Figure 11.

Assumptions
Figure 11: Running Way Cost Assumptions

Assumptions
5.4.3. STATIONS
In this section of assumption the user is asked to update or confirm the cost of construction of
each type of station. The cost of construction of intermodal terminal is approximated but the user is
asked to update this considering local aspects like size, cost of construction per square feet. He is also
asked to select the cost of construction of station access elements and passing capability of stations. The
platform height and layout does not add significant costs hence they are not presented in this section.
The station cost assumptions are shown in the Figure 12.
Figure 12: Station Cost Assumptions

Assumptions
5.4.4. VEHICLES
These set of vehicle assumptions reflect the cost of different types of vehicles and the type of
propulsion systems that run the vehicles. The user is asked to update or confirm the cost of each type of
vehicle and installation of propulsion systems. These assumptions are shown in the Figure 13 below:
Figure 13: Vehicle Cost Assumptions

Assumptions
5.4.5. FARE COLLECTION
Fare collection costs are usually the smaller portion of the total costs of the BRT system, but still
significant. The user can update or confirm the cost of each individual element of fare collection process
and fare collection media which will be incorporated in the system. Figure 14 shows the fare collection
cost assumptions.
Figure 14: Fare Collection Process Cost Assumptions

Assumptions
5.4.6. ITS
Intelligent transportation system costs are one of the most significant costs components of BRT
system. The following assumptions in the Figure 15 allow the user to update or change the cost of each
individual ITS element under Vehicle Prioritization, Driver Assist and Automated Technologies,
Passenger Information, and Safety & Security in the system.
Figure 15: ITS Cost Assumptions

Assumptions
Figure 16: ITS Cost Assumptions 2

Assumptions
5.4.7. OTHER SYSTEM ASSUMPTIONS
Apart from the cost elements that affect the BRT system capital costs there are other
assumptions that the user can control which can affect the performance of the BRT system. The other
assumptions are Design Speed assumptions, Station Dwell time assumptions and Available budget
assumption. As shown in the figure 17
Figure 17: General Assumptions, Design Speeds, Station Dwell Times, Budget Assumptions

User Inputs - Spatial Design
5.5. USER INPUTS - SPATIAL DESIGN

The second task of the user is to select his origin and destination and draw his routes and select sites
for his stations and stops and draw them on map using the CommunityViz and editor toolbars shown
below in figures 18. After designing the route/station a series of user inputs are requested by the
system, by selecting which the indicators will be evaluated using dynamic formulas.
Figure 18: Scenario 360 and Editor Toolbars
5.5.1. ROUTE DESIGN
Step 1: Select your origin and destination points and click the Start Scenario Editing button on the
CommunityViz tool bar and select the pen tool on the editor tool bar and draw lines joining origins and
destinations along the street network as shown in the Figure 19.

Figure 19: Using the GIS interface to design new BRT route
Step 2: After drawing the route, double click to stop drawing, and then a series of questions will be
asked by the system the questions asked are shown in the Table 33 below.

Table 33: BRT Route Design Options
1. Select the type of Running ways that your 2. Select the type of running way marking to be
route would use to run you BRT on. used on the running way
3. Select the type of vehicle guidance that would 4. Select the type of vehicles that you want to
be guide your vehicles. run on this route
5. Select the type of propulsion system for the 6. Enter the no of buses that would run along
vehicles this BRT route

7. Enter the No of proposed lanes 8. Enter the no of signals existing on the route or
proposed on the route.
9. Select the type of precsion docking for BRT 10. Select the type of vehicle prioritization for
vehicles your Intelligent transportation system
11. Do you want specilaized Logos and Livery for 12. Do you want larger windows and enhanced
your BRT system? lighting for your vehicles?

13. Do you want enhanced interior amenities on 14. Do you want alternative seat layout on your
your vehicles? vehicles?
15. Do you wan additional door channels on your 16. Do you want wheel chair securement on your
BRT vehicles? vehicles?
17. Do you want collison warning for your BRT 18. Do you want Driver assistance and
system? automation technology for your BRT system?
Step 3: After designing the route, stop editing by clicking the Stop Scenario Editing (same button as Start
Scenario Editing) and save edits when asked for.

User
ser Inputs - Spatial Design
5.5.2. STATION DESIGN
Step 1: Select your site location and click the Start Scenario Editing button on the CommunityViz tool bar
and select the pen tool on the editor tool bar and draw polygon in the selected site for the station as
shown in the Figure 20.
Figure 20: Using the GIS interface to design new BRT Station

Step 2: After drawing the station polygon, double click to stop drawing, and then a series of questions
will be asked by the system the questions asked are shown in the table 34 below.
Table 34: BRT Station Design Options
1. Select the type of station that you propose at 2. Select the passing capability at this station
the particular site
3. Slect the type of station acess you want to 4. Select the type of payment system you want
provide at this station for this station
5. Select the type of fare transaction media you 6. Select the type of fare structure system for

wan to provide on BRT vehicles the BRt system
7. Select the type of platform at this station 8. Select the height of platform for this station
9. Enter the no of vending machines that would 10. Do you want automatic scheduling dispatch
be installed at this station system at this station?
11. Do you want mechanical monitoring and 12. Do you want vehicle tracking for you BRT
mainatinance for this station? System?

13. Do you want to provide traveller information at 14. Do you want to provide traveler information
this station? on the vehicle?
15. Do you want to provide traveler information on 16. Do you want to provide trip planning ability
person on your system?
17. Do you want to proide silent alarms at this BRt 18. Do you want to provide Voice and video
station? monitoring at this station?
Step 3: After designing the station, stop editing by clicking the Stop Scenario Editing (same button as
Start Scenario Editing) and save edits when asked for.

Dynamic Attributes
5.6. DYNAMIC ATTRIBUTES

The dynamic attributes are calculated basing on the user inputs and formulas based on user
assumptions. The work flow has been explained in the system design section. There are 93 dynamic
attributes that calculated and form he platform for evaluating the capital costs and system performance.
In this Appendix 2 section the formulas that are used to calculate these dynamic attributes are
explained.
5.7. INDICATORS
Indicators are the results that reflect the cost of the BRT system that the user designed and the
performance of the system that was put in place. These results are presented through charts. Here the
user has to understand that these capital costs and system performance indicators only provide a
general framework for evaluating results of incorporating BRT system in their community. These
indicators are explained in this section.
5.7.1. CAPITAL COSTS
Capital costs of the BRT system is the grand total of all the individual pieces of cost resulting
from BRT elements. These are directly affected by the choices made by the user while designing the BRT
route or BRT station also affected by the assumption values that the user chooses. Figure 21 shows the
individual capital costs BRT elements.
Indicators
Figure 21: Individual Capital Costs Chart of the BRT System
Figure 22 shows the total BRT system costs and the threshold line representing the available budget.
Figure 22: Total Capital Costs Chart of the BRT System
Indicators
5.7.2. SYSTEM PERFORMANCE:
The system performance is evaluated using three indicators identity rank, safety rank, and travel
time savings. The former two are rated on a scale of 100 and the travel time savings is a percentage of
travel time savings. These indicators are presented as charts that would be easily readable and
understood. Figures 23 show the identity and safety rank for the BRT system designed by the user. And
Figure 24 show the running time savings achieved through the BRT system.
Indicators
RESULTS & CONCLUSIONS

6
Results
6.1. RESULTS
The prime objective of the model is to generate of the model can be used to compare alternatives and
arrive at a better BRT System that is within the available budget or achieves certain degree of
performance. For demonstrating those capabilities the two scenarios were selected with different
options and results resulting in different capital costs and varying levels of performance.
The options selected in these two different scenarios are explained below in Table 34.
Table 35: Choices Made by user in Scenario-I and Scenario -2
Element Scenario - 1 Scenario - 2
Length of Route 10475 Feet 5677 Feet
Type of Running Ways Exclusive Arterial Transitways Mixed Flow lanes with Queue
Jumpers
Type of Markings Alternative Pavement /Color Raised Lane Delineators
Vehicle Guidance Electronic Guidance Electronic Guidance
Vehicle Type Specialized BRT Vehicle Specialized BRT Vehicle
Type of Propulsion System Hybrid-Electric Drives Internal Combustion Engines
No of Buses 3 2
No of Proposed Lanes 1 1
No of Signals 2 2
Precision Docking Magnetic Magnetic
Vehicle Prioritization Station and Lane Access Control Transit Signal Prioritization
Specialized Logos and Livery Yes Yes
Larger Windows Yes Yes
Enhanced Interiors Yes Yes
Results
Alternative Seat Layout Yes Yes
Additional Door Channels Yes Yes
Collision Warning Yes Yes
Driver Assist Technology Yes Yes
Type of Station Enhanced Stop, Intermodal Simple Stop, Enhanced Stop
Passing Capability Bus-Pullouts Bus-Pullouts
Station Access Structured Parking Surface Parking
Fare Collection Process Barrier Free of Payment Barrier Enforced
Fare Collection Media Smart Card Electronic Stripe Media
Type of Platform Single Vehicle length platform Single Vehicle length platform
Ticket Vending Machines 2 2
Scheduling and Dispatch System Yes Yes
Mechanical Monitoring Yes Yes
Traveler information at Stations Yes Yes
Traveler information on Vehicles Yes Yes
Traveler information in Person Yes Yes
Trip Planning Yes Yes
Silent Alarm Yes No
Video Monitoring Yes No
Basing on these choices made by user in scenario -1 and scenario -2 the following results were achieved.
Results
Using these results the user can decide on the type of scenario that the want to choose for a BRT System
in his community. Thus the purpose of the model is satisfied as it provides useful insight in to the
alternative scenarious chosen by the user.
System benefits
6.2. SYSTEM BENEFITS

The results or indicators that are calculated using the BRT provide several key pieces of information that
would enable planners and communities to better plan and prepare for incorporating BRT system in
their communities. Some of them are explained below.
1. Potential Users: The model can be potentially used by several users ranging from transportation
planners, local development authorities. This model can be employed by transportation and
local planning authorities and political organizations to budget their proposals, review
alternatives.
a. This tool can also be used in public meetings, in future after further functionality is added,
to demonstrate the benefits of BRT and stimulate interactive discussions.
2. Comprehensive Database: A part from being a useful decision making tool the system is a great
compilation of cost data and performance evaluation data; it saves lot of time for communities
in data collection for evaluation of their proposed BRT system alternatives.
3. Alternatives: Several alternative BRT systems can be generated using the system incorporating
different options resulting in different performance results and varying capital costs. This gives
the user to choose between the various options and narrow down the alternatives to fewer
affirmative options on which further detailed analysis can be performed.
4. Capital costs: The capital costs figures can be used to cut down costs on BRT elements or
allocate budgets that can achieve the targeted performance.
6.3. SHORT COMINGS

This BRT Decision Support System provides a general framework for designing and evaluating BRT
system in a quick fashion, but it does have its short comings some of the main short comings are:
Conculsions & Future Work
1. Excluded support for cost of land acquisition: One of the major short coming of the model
being the cost of land acquisition. The reason for excluding this component is the need for the
model to be globally usable. Which disables the calculation of “land acquisition costs” as data
for such functionality is not globally available.
2. Lack of Total Functionality: The current decision support system does not support all the system
performance evaluation measures like Reliability and Capacity. Also the system benefits like
Ridership, Transit – Supportive Land Development are not evaluated using this system. Hence
further work is recommended using in these areas.
3. Variable Rakings and Individual choice: The present system has the individual rankings hard
coded into the model, making it hard to change the ranking of individual elements. Hence
further work is proposed to enable the user to change the rankings using assumptions.
4. Technical Shortcomings: One of the major technical shortcoming of the model is that the order
of choices available for users to choose. Some times in the current model this order is altered
and can lead to confusion. CommunityViz has no current capability of fixing this issue.
a. User Friendliness: Though the current system is relatively simple to use and implement,
the user is required to have minimum GIS knowledge to work his way though around
this system Apart from GIS knowledge there are several choices the user has to make
before analyzing the system and once the choice is made the user has to go though the
tedious process of editing the attribute tables for changing the choices he chose to
change.
6.4. CONCULSIONS & FUTURE WORK

The model is a good start to what can potentially turn into a great tool for planning BRT systems
by different user groups and evaluate associated benefits and costs with the BRT system. With further
Conculsions & Future Work
work the model can be complete by incorporating all the measure of performance and overcoming all
the technical shortcomings. Some of the key features or improvements that can be made in future to
this model are as follows:
1. Travel Time Savings: More complex modeling incorporating transportation planning concepts of
congestion is advised to evaluate the BRT systems travel time savings in the future.
2. Key Functionality: Some of key functionalities that are advised in the future models are as
follows:
a. Ridership Benefits: Evaluating Ridership benefits would add tremendous value to the
system as it enables transit authorities to plan for daily operations and management.
b. Environmental Benefits: Evaluating environmental benefits of the BRT system can improve
the image of BRT in public.
c. Other additions: Other major additions that can add value to the system are Capacity
Evaluation and
3. Flexibility: Model can be modified to ease the process of changing the identity and safety ranks
though user assumptions interface.
4. Runtime: The model runtime is the time taken for the analysis to be performed; currently this is
recorded to be between 15 minutes to 20 minutes. Which can be significantly reduced by, using
customized VB scripts, instead of using the inbuilt dynamic formulas available through
CommunityViz.
5. User Friendliness: Further work is advised in creating a integrated graphical user interface that
would centralize the choices user has to make and provide a better experience of using the
system. Also providing a help system that would go with the model is advised.
REFERENCES
REFERENCES
Brail, Richard K., and Richard E. Klosterman, ed., 2001. “Planning Support System”. Redlands: ESRI Press.
Bus Rapid Transit Central. 2005. [Database on-line]; available from http://www.busrapidtransit.net/.
Accessed on June 15, 2007.
Community Viz . GIS Software and Documentation. Internet; available from

http://www.placeways.com/communityviz/?p=siteb. Accessed on August 15, 2007.
ESRI. “ArcGIS Desktop Help.” [Database on-line]; available from

http://webhelp.esri.com/arcgisdesktop/9.1/index.cfm?TopicName=welcome. Accessed on August
15, 2007.
Federal Transit Administration.2004. “Characteristics of Bus Rapid Transit for Decision Making.” [Report
on-line]; available from
http://www.nbrti.org/media/documents/Characteristics%20of%20Bus%20Rapid%20Transit%20fo
r%20Decision-Making.pdf. United States Department of Transportation. Accessed on November
17, 2007.
Federal Transit Administration(FTA). “Research, technical assistance and training”. [Database on-line];
available from http://www.fta.dot.gov/assistance/technology/research_4234.html. Accessed on
November 17, 2007.
Federal Transit Administration (FTA). 2003. Issues in Bus Rapid Transit. [Report online]; available from
http://www.fta.dot.gov/documents/issues.pdf. Accessed on November 17, 2006.
Grava, Sigurd. “Urban transportation systems: Choices for communities.” McGraw-Hill Professional.
2003.
Huang, Hexiang. “Application of visualization in urban planning decision-making process.” M.C.P

diss.,University of Cincinnati, 2004.
Henke, Cliff. 2002. “A Practical Approach to Bus Rapid Transit.” Metro Magazine. [Journal on-line];
available from http://www.metro-magazine.com/brt_pdf/approach.pdf. Accessed on August 15,
2007.
Metro magazine. Bus rapid transit. Internet; available from http://www.metro-

magazine.com/t_brt_home.cfm.
Scheuernstuhl, George Jacob. An Analysis of Freeway Utilization Possibilities for Bus-Rapid Transit.
REFERENCES
Schwenk, Judith C. 2002. “Evaluation guidelines for bus rapid transit demonstration projects.” Federal
Transit Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C . DOT-VNTSC-FTA-
02-02, DOT-MA-26-7033-02.
The Bus Rapid Transit Policy Center. “ Bus Rapid Transit.” [Database on-line]; available from
http://gobrt.org/.
The National BRT Institute. “Bus Rapid Transit.” [Database on-line]; available from
http://www.nbrti.org/
Transit Cooperate Research Program (TCRP). 2003 a. “Bus Rapid Transit Volume 1: Case
Studied in Bus Rapid Transit.” Washington D.C.: Transportation Research Board.
Transit Cooperate Research Program (TCRP). 2003 b. Bus Rapid Transit Volume 2:
Implementation Guidelines. Washington D.C.: Transportation Research Board.
Federal Transit Administration. 2001. “BRT Bus Rapid Transit—Why More Communities Are Choosing
Bus Rapid Transit.” Transportation Research Board, National Research Council. Washington, D.C.
WestStart-CALSTART. “Advanced Transportation Technologies.” [Database on-line]; available from

http://www.calstart.org/programs/brt/new/.
Yildirim, Saadet. “Evaluating two potential bus rapid transit station areas for transit oriented
development opportunities.” M.C.P diss, University of Cincinnati, 2004.
U.S. Senate. Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, “ Bus rapid transit offers communities a
flexible mass transit option.” Federal Transit Administration, June 24, 2003. Testimony GAO-02-
729T.
U.S. Congress. “Bus rapid transit shows promise.” United States General Accounting Office, September
17, 2001. GAO-01-984.
Appendix A: BRT Element Descriptions and Costs
tables
APPENDIX A: BRT ELEMENT DESCRIPTIONS AND COSTS TABLES

Running Way Segregation Types
Mixed Flow Lanes

Unimproved Mixed Flow Lanes
Mixed flow lanes are the most basic form of BRT running way. In fact, most Use of existing lanes has
rubber tired urban transit service operates on mixed flow lanes. BRT minimal costs since there
vehicles face delays due to conflicts with other vehicles, which also operate are no modifications to be
within the street. made.
Mixed Flow Lanes with Queue Jumpers

Mixed flow lanes can be augmented through the use of queue jumpers. A $0.1 - $0.29 million per
queue jumper is typically a short section of roadway on an approach to a queue jump lane section
bottleneck, (e.g., an intersection), designated for exclusive use of a BRT per intersection (excluding
vehicle or for BRT vehicles and turning vehicles only. A queue jumper thus ROW acquisition). Costs
allows BRT vehicles to “jump the queue” or bypass congestion or delays at can be less if existing
intersections. In most applications, queue jumper lanes are used in roadway space can be
conjunction with signal priority to allow vehicles to enter an intersection rededicated for the
with a special signal ahead of other vehicles. purposes of queue jump
lanes
Designated (Reserved) Arterial Lanes Cost: $2.5 - $2.9 million

per lane mile (excluding
In corridors where the alignment of the BRT route follows an existing
ROW acquisition)
arterial roadway, designated lanes can provide BRT vehicles with a fast,
reliable alternative to mixed flow traffic lanes. With a designated arterial
lane, a traffic lane within an arterial roadway is set aside for the operation
of BRT vehicles. Other vehicles are restricted from using the lane. This is
enforced through a physical barrier or through police enforcement. BRT
vehicles thus face minimal congestion delay between intersections. With
designated lanes, BRT vehicles are not delayed in the approach to a station
by a queue of other vehicles. Designated lanes thus reduce travel times
and improve reliability.
In some cases, specified classes of vehicles are allowed to share the

designated lane such as turning vehicles or high-occupancy vehicles. In
these cases, slight performance reductions are experienced as a result of
delays caused by the movements of automobiles into and out of the
running way.
tables
At-Grade Transit ways Cost (not including ROW):

$6.5 – 10.2 million per
Standard Lane – Some urban corridors have new or existing rights-of-way
lane mile
available for the construction of infrastructure for exclusive use of transit
vehicles. Exclusive facilities offer significant potential for speed, reliability
and safety improvements since they physically separate BRT vehicles from
the general stream of traffic, eliminating the potential for general traffic to
encroach on the BRT lanes. Because other traffic cannot interfere with BRT
vehicles, service can be operated safely at much higher speeds between
BRT stations. At-grade exclusive lanes do, however, interact with other
traffic at cross streets.
Bi-Directional Lane – In certain cases, right-of-way for exclusive lanes may

only be wide enough to accommodate one single bi-directional lane. At
low frequencies of service, single bi-directional exclusive lanes can provide
many of the same benefits as two exclusive lanes. At higher frequencies,
sophisticated signal systems and coordinated schedules may be required
to ensure safe and unimpeded operation of BRT vehicles.
Fully Grade-Separated Exclusive Transit ways Cost (not including ROW):

The running way type with the greatest level of separation is the grade-
separated exclusive transit way. These facilities can either be stand-alone
Aerial Transit way – $12-
(as in the use of former railroad rights-of-way) or be on a major highway
30 million per lane mile
(either running along the side or in the median of a freeway or in a
separate elevated or underground viaduct). Grade-separated exclusive
transit ways allow BRT vehicles to operate unimpeded at maximum safe Below-grade Transit way --
speeds between BRT stations. Separated from congestion in local streets at $60 – 105 million per lane
intersections and adjacent highways, grade-separated exclusive lanes mile
provide the highest travel time savings, the most reliable travel times and
highest degree of safety. For this reason, these types of exclusive lanes
typically offer the greatest benefits but at the greatest cost. Additional Lanes: $2.5 – 3
million per lane mile
(within existing roadway
Where volumes of buses is high and where there is a mix of standard and
express services, multiple lanes may be necessary to add capacity and to profile); $6.5 – 10.12 per
allow passing. additional lane mile
RUNNING WAY MARKING
Signage and Striping NA

Signage is the most basic form of marking a lane as reserved for BRT
service. It often includes the use of “diamond” lane symbols to restrict
tables
automobile service from the lanes. Where transit ways and/or bus lanes
are built on arterials, signs are provided in each direction at each
intersection
Raised Lane Delineators NA

Delineators such as raised pavement marking such as colored line, raised
curbs, bollards, or bumps in pavement can highlight the distinction
between general purpose lanes and BRT running way lanes.
Alternate Pavement Color / Texture NA

Implementing alternate pavement color through colored asphalt or
concrete can reinforce the notion that a particular lane is reserved for
another use, thereby reducing conflicts with other vehicles.
Guidance (Lateral)
Optical Guidance Cost: $11,500 – 134,000

per vehicle
Optical guidance systems involve special optical sensors on the vehicles
that read a marker placed on the pavement to delineate path of the
vehicle. In this guidance option, the only running way requirement is to
have large double striped lines in the center of the respective lanes.
Complex electronic/mechanical systems are required for each vehicle
Electromagnetic Guidance Magnetic Sensors$20,000

per Mile
Electromagnetic guidance involves the placement of electric or magnetic
markers in the pavement such as an electro-magnetic induction wire or
permanent magnets in the pavement. Sensors in the vehicle read these
Hardware and Integration
markers to direct the path of the vehicle. This type of guidance requires
per $50,000 - $95,000
significant advanced planning in order to embed the markers under the
Vehicle
pavement.
Mechanical Guidance NA
Mechanical guidance requires the highest running way investment of all
guidance options, but the lowest requirement for complex vehicle systems.
Vehicles are guided by a physical connection from the running way to the
vehicle steering mechanism, such as a steel wheel on the vehicle following
a center rail, a rubber guide wheel following a raised curb, or the normal
vehicle front wheels following a specifically profiled gutter next to station
platforms.
STATIONS
STATIONS
Station Types
Simple Stop Cost: $15,000 to $20,000

per shelter. (Only includes
This is the simplest form of the four BRT station types listed within this
cost of the shelter, does
section. It consists of a “basic” transit stop with a simple shelter (often
not
purchased “off the shelf”) to protect waiting passengers from the weather.
In general, this type of station has the lowest capital cost and provides the include cost of platform or
lowest level of passenger amenities. soft-costs)
Enhanced Stop Cost: $25,000 to $35,000

per shelter. (Only includes
Enhanced BRT stations include enhanced shelters, which are often
cost of the shelter, does
specially designed for BRT to differentiate it from other transit stations and
not include cost of
to provide additional features such as more weather protection and
platform or soft-costs)
lighting. This BRT station type often incorporates additional design
treatments such as walls made of glass or other transparent material, high
quality material finishes, and passenger amenities such as benches, trash
cans, or pay phones.
Designated Station Cost: $150,000 to $2.5

million per station (lower
The designated BRT station may include level passenger boarding and
cost stations include cost
alighting, a grade separated connection from one platform to another and
of canopy, platform,
a full range of passenger amenities including retail service and a complete
station enclosure and
array of passenger information.
pedestrian access; higher
cost stations designed for
higher ridership and
include longer platforms
and canopies, larger
station structure,
passenger amenities and
roadway access; parking
facility costs are not
included nor are soft-
costs)
Intermodal Terminal or Transit Center Cost: $5 million to $20

million per facility or
The intermodal terminal or transit center is the most complex and costly of
higher. (Includes the cost
the BRT stations listed in this section. This type of BRT facility will often
of platforms, canopies,
have level boarding, provides a host of amenities, and accommodates the
STATIONS
transfers from BRT service to local bus, other public transit modes, e.g., rail large station structure,
transit, and even intercity bus and rail. passenger amenities,
pedestrian access, auto
access and transit mode
for all transit modes
served. Does not include
soft-costs).
Platform Height
Standard Curb Cost: No incremental cost

for station platform
The standard curb causes a vertical gap between the height of the station
platform or the curb and the vehicle entry step or floor. This causes
customers to step up to enter the BRT vehicle and step down to exit the
BRT vehicle. In most instances, this type of platform treatment is used
when the station right-of-way cannot be altered.
Raised Curb Cost: No significant

incremental cost, requires
A raised curb reduces the vertical gap between the platform and the
an additional 3-4 inches of
vehicle floor. The raised curb platform height should be no more than 10
concrete
inches above the height of the BRT running way or Arterial Street on which
the BRT system operates. In some cases, the raised curb will more closely depth
match the height of BRT vehicle’s entry step or floor to accommodate
“near” level boarding. This treatment is preferred over the standard curb.
Level Platform Cost: No significant

incremental cost, requires
To create the safest, easiest, and efficient manner of customer boarding
an additional 8 inches of
and alighting, platforms level with BRT vehicle floors (approximately 14
concrete Depth
inches above the pavement for low floor vehicles) are the preferred station
platform treatment. Level station platform boarding and alighting
platforms enhances the customers traveling experience by creating a
seamless transition between station and vehicle.
Platform Layout
Single Vehicle Length Platform

This is the shortest platform length necessary for the entry and exit of one
BRT vehicle at a time at a station.
STATIONS
Extended Platform with Un-Assigned Berths Cost: Incremental cost will

be a multiple of a single
Extended platforms usually accommodate no less than two vehicles and
vehicle length platform
allow multiple vehicles to simultaneously to load and unload passengers.
based on the maximum
Since this platform can accommodate more than one vehicle at a time,
number of vehicles
overlay services can more easily utilize the BRT stations and running way.
accommodated
Extended Platform with Assigned Berths Cost: Incremental cost will

be a multiple of a single
Extended platforms with assigned berths have all of the features of
vehicle length platform
extended platforms but also assign vehicles serving specific routes to
based on the maximum
specific positions on the platform. This is the longest of the two platform
number of vehicles
length options.
accommodated
Passing Capability
Bus Pull-outs Cost: $0.05 million – 0.06

million per pull-out (per
For both arterial BRT operation and exclusive lanes, bus pull-outs at
station platform)
stations allow buses serving a station to pull out of the BRT running way
and, thus out of the way of BRT vehicles that need to pass vehicles stopped
at the stations.
Passing Lanes at Stations Cost: $2.5 - $2.9 million

per lane mile (excluding
Passing lanes at stations allow a vehicle in express services to pass through
ROW acquisition)
a station at full speed or a vehicle to overtake stopped.
Station Access
Pedestrian Linkages Cost: Typically included in

the base cost for
Pedestrian linkages, such as sidewalks, overpasses and pedestrian paths
Designated Stations and
are important to establish physical connections from BRT stations to
Intermodal Terminals or
adjacent sites, buildings, and activity centers.
Transit Centers
Park-and-Ride Facility Cost: $3,500 - $5,000 for a

surface space $10,000 to
Park-and-ride lots allow stations, especially those without significant
$25,000 per space for
development, to attract passengers from a wide area around BRT stations.
VEHICLES
Because services can be routed off the primary running way, regional park- structured space
and-ride facilities can also be located off the running way. This
arrangement can link BRT service with existing parking lots, potentially
reducing capital investment costs.
VEHICLES
Vehicle Configuration
Conventional Standard Cost: Typical base price

range-$300,000 to
Conventional standard vehicles are 40-45 feet in length and have a
$350,000
conventional (“boxy”) body. The partial low-floor variety (now the norm
among urban transit applications) contains internal floors that are
significantly lower (14 inches above pavement) than high floor buses. They
typically have at least two doors and a rapidly deployable ramp for
wheelchair –bound and other mobility-impaired customers.
Capacity:
A typical 40-foot vehicle has seating for 35-44 patrons expanding to
between 50 and 60 seated and standing.
A typical 45-foot vehicle can carry 35-52 passengers seated and 60-70,
seated and standing, counting stands.
Stylized Standard Cost: Typical base price

range-$300,000 to
Stylized Standard vehicles have all of the features of a conventional step
$370,000
low-floor vehicle. The major difference is that they incorporate slight body
modifications or additions to make the body appear more modern,
aerodynamic and attractive.
Capacity: Similar to Conventional Standard vehicles of the same size.
Conventional Articulated Cost: Typical base price-

$500,000 to $645,000
The longer, articulated vehicles have a higher passenger carrying capacity
(50% more) than standard vehicles. Typical floors are partial low floors
with steps with two or three doors.
VEHICLES
Capacity: Articulated vehicle seating capacity depends heavily on the

number and placement of doors ranging from 31 (four wide doors) to 65 (2
doors) and total capacity of 80-90 passengers, including standees.
Stylized Articulated Cost: Typical price range -

$ 630,000 to $950,000
Stylized articulated vehicles are emerging in the US to respond to BRT
communities’ desire for more modern, sleeker and more comfortable
vehicles. Step-low floors, at least three doors, with 2 double stream and
quick deploy ramps all facilitate boarding and alighting to shorten stop
dwell times.
Specialized BRT Vehicles Cost: Typical price range -

$ 950,000 to $1,600,000.
Specialized vehicles employ a modern, aerodynamic body that has a look
similar to that of rail vehicles. They also employ advanced propulsion
systems and often come with advanced ITS and guidance systems.
Aesthetic Enhancement
Specialized Logos and Livery Cost: No cost increment.

Specialized logos and vehicle livery are often used to create a specialized
identity by establishing a brand and a theme that patrons recognize and
associate with the positive attributes for the BRT system. Use of such
features to differentiate BRT systems from other services requires a
dedicated fleet, which may preclude operations strategies such as
interlining and rotating vehicles with local transit service.
Larger Windows and Enhanced Lighting Cost: Normally a part of

vehicle base price.
The incorporation of larger windows (especially on low floor vehicles) and
interior light fixtures that allow for abundant, flattering light, day or night
to provide an “open feeling” can improve the perception and reality of
passenger security. Larger windows for each passenger – to see in and out
– is important for perceived patron security.
Enhanced Interior Amenity Cost: Normally included a

part of vehicle base price.
Enhanced interior amenities such as more comfortable seating, higher
The increment above basic
quality materials and finishes, better lighting, and climate control can
interior amenities
VEHICLES
improve the perception of cleanliness, quality construction, and safety. depends upon the
particular vehicle order.
Passenger Circulation Enhancement
Alternative Seat Layout Cost: Normally a part of

vehicle base price.
Alternative seat layout with seating placed against the sides of the vehicle
can increase the aisle width within the vehicle increasing the standing
capacity of the vehicle as well as providing additional space for passenger
circulation. This layout may also provide intangible benefits such as
conveying an impression of openness and accessibility.
Additional Door Channels Cost: Not significant for

original vehicle orders.
Curb side – Additional door channels and wider doors facilitate the
Opposite side doors may
boarding process by allowing multiple queues of passengers to enter the
require additional
BRT vehicle at one time.
structural modifications to
vehicle orders.
Opposite side – Adding doors to the opposite side of the vehicle (the left
side in the United States) can allow for access from center platform
stations in the median of an arterial. This additional feature improves the
flexibility of running ways in which the BRT system can operate and
simulates the flexibility of rail systems.
Enhanced Wheelchair Securement Cost: Not yet widely

available commercially
Conventional wheelchair securement involves the use of tie-downs, wheel
locks and belts, involving a process that takes between 60 and 200 seconds
including boarding time. Alternative wheelchair securement devices are
currently being explored to reduce the amount of time to secure
wheelchairs in bus operation. In BRT applications, particularly in Europe,
rear facing wheel chair positions and no-gap, no-step boarding and
alighting eliminate the requirement for lifts, ramps and wheel chair
securement. Other types of alternative restraint systems include a 4-point
belt tie-down system (kinedyne) and an automated docking system
securing the rear of the wheelchair.
Propulsion System
Internal Combustion Engines Cost: CNG price increment
VEHICLES
The internal combustion engine fueled by ultra low-sulfur diesel (ULSD) or over ULSD is ~$40,000 per
compressed natural gas (CNG) with spark-ignition coupled with an vehicle. Infrastructure
automatic transmission is the most common propulsion system today. capital ~ $700,000-
Some transit authorities are testing other fuels such as biodiesel, diesel $1,000,000
emulsion blends and even LNG but these are a small fraction of transit
applications. The impending EPA requirements on emissions in 2007 and
2010 for NOx and PM will require engines with Exhaust Gas Re-circulation
(EGR) plus exhaust after treatment technology.
Trolley, Dual Mode and Thermal-Electric Drives Cost: Cost increment over
diesel ICE is $200,000 to
Electric trolley bus drives powered by overhead catenary-delivered power
$400,000.
are still produced today and are planned in limited quantities for operation
in tunnel BRT applications. Dual mode systems with an on-board thermal
engine (usually diesel) can provide a capability to operate as a trolley and
as an ICE vehicle off the catenary for specialized operations. Also, a
thermal-electric drive, which couples an ICE to a generator, is used as a
drive system in vehicles such as Civis by Irisbus being deployed in Las Vegas
BRT.
Hybrid-Electric Drives Cost: Price increment over

diesel ICE is $100,000 to
Hybrid-electric drive systems offer improved performance and fuel
$250,000.
economy with reduced emissions (e.g., of nitrogen oxides (NOx) and
particulates (PM). They differ from dual-mode systems in that they
incorporate some type of on-board energy storage device (e.g., batteries
or ultra capacitors).
Though the thermal or internal combustion engines used for hybrid drives
are diesel in most transit applications, in a number of cases (e.g., Denver
16th Street Mall Vehicles) CNG or gasoline fueled engines have been used.
Fuel economy gains of up to 60 % are being claimed in urban service.
Operational tests show improved range and reliability over ICE buses.
Hybrid buses have entered operation in places such as New York and
Seattle.
Hybrid drive offers numerous operational advantages over conventional

diesel buses, such as smoother and quicker acceleration, more efficient
braking, improved fuel economy and reduced emissions.
Fuel Cells Currently not

commercially available.
A number of operational tests of fuel cell buses are underway this year and
FARE COLLECTION
next in Europe and the US. Although the price is prohibitive currently,
there is great interest in future development to provide zero emissions
using domestically produced hydrogen. There are no plans as yet for fuel
cell buses in BRT system applications in the United States or Europe.
FARE COLLECTION
Fare Collection Process
Pay on-board system (i.e., inside or upon entering the vehicle) Cost: No incremental cost,
assuming this is the
Typically involves a fare box or a processing unit for tickets or cards
current fare collection
adjacent to the operator. The considerable advantage of this system is that
process. Low to moderate
it does not require significant fare collection infrastructure outside the
equipment costs. Low to
vehicle. Requiring passengers to board through a single front door and pay
moderate labor costs
the fare as they enter, however, will result in significant dwell times on
including, for example,
busy BRT routes, particularly those with heavy passenger turn-over. If fares
several Full-Time
are paid without driver supervision, there is increased risk of fare evasion.
Equivalent (FTE) staff for
maintenance, revenues
servicing/collector,
security, and clerical/data
support.
Conductor-validated system Cost: There are additional

labor costs involved in
Requires the rider to either pre-pay or buy a ticket on-board from a
visual ticket validation in
conductor. However, this system is generally not applicable to BRT systems
comparison with other pay
in the United States because of the high labor costs involved in visually
on-board and pre-
validating all tickets.
payment systems. As an
example, one fare
inspector (1 FTE) is needed
to validate about 3,300
daily passengers.
Barrier Enforced Fare Payment system (i.e., pay-on-entering and/or Cost: $30,000 to $60,000
exiting a station or loading area) per Ticket Vending
Machine (TVM); $20,000
Involves turnstiles, fare gates, and ticket agents or some combination of all
to $35,000 per Fare Gate.
three in an enclosed station area or bus platform. It may involve entry
May include additional
control only or entry and exit control (particularly for distance-based
station hardware/software
fares).
costs. Estimated additional
labor requirements for a
small implementation (i.e.,
FARE COLLECTION
25 TVMs and associated

systems) may involve
maintenance personnel (1
FTE), revenues
servicing/collector (1 FTE),
security staff (1 FTE), data
procession/clerical staff (1
FTE), and fare media sales
staff (2.5 FTE).5
Barrier-Free (self-service) or Proof-of-Payment (POP) system Cost: $30,000 to $60,000

per Ticket Vending
Requires the rider to carry a valid (usually by time and day) ticket or pass
Machine (TVM); labor
when on the vehicle and is subject to random inspection by roving
costs for roving personnel.
personnel. It typically requires ticket vending and/or validating machines.
May include validator
The advantage of this less restrictive system is that it supports multiple
equipment and/or
door boarding and thus lower dwell times. The disadvantage is the
additional station
increased risk of fare evasion. When implementing proof-of-payment,
hardware and software
transit agencies should consider how passenger loads, passenger turnover
costs. Estimated additional
and how interior layout may affect the ability and ease of inspection
labor requirements for a
onboard vehicles.
small implementation (i.e.,
150 validators and
associated systems) may
involve maintenance
personnel (1 FTE),
revenues
servicing/collector (1 FTE),
security staff (1 FTE), data
procession/clerical staff (1
FTE), and fare media sales
staff (2.5 FTE). Issue of
potential difficulty of
inspection on vehicles
Fare Transaction Media
Cash (Coins, Bills, and Tokens) and Paper Media (Tickets, Transfers, and Cost: No incremental cost,
Flash Passes) assuming this is the
current fare collection
This is simplest but slowest fare media option because of the necessary
process. $2,000 (low cost
transaction time, particularly if exact fare is required. Stored value tickets
mechanical farebox) -
(the cost of each ride taken being deducted from the stored value) or
$5,000 (complex
stored ride tickets (for a single or a given number of rides including
electronic registering
booklets with tear-off paper and punch tickets) may require visual
farebox)
verification or manual validation that have an implication on service times
FARE COLLECTION
depending on the fare collection process.
Period passes (for a specific calendar period, such as a calendar month or

week, or special event) or rolling period passes (for a specific number of
days after first use, such as day or multi-day tourist passes) usually
requires visual verification but can be processed faster than cash or tickets.
Magnetic Stripe Media One-Time Cost: $10,000 to

$12,000 per validating
These cards are made of heavy paper or plastic and have an imprinted
farebox with magnetic
magnetic stripe that stores information about its value or use. This type of
card processing unit
fare media requires electronic readers, which determine the fare payment
($5,000 to $10,000 more
time and have implications for dwell times depending on the fare
than a standard farebox);
collection process and machinery.
$0.01 to $0.30 per
magnetic stripe card;
$10,000 to $20,000 per
garage for
hardware/software. May
include additional central
hardware/software costs.
Smart Cards One-Time Cost: $12,000 to

$14,000 per validating
Smart Cards generally support faster and more flexible fare collection
farebox with smart card
systems.
reader ($7,000 to $12,000
Contactless or Proximity Smart Cards permit faster processing times than more than a standard
magnetic stripe cards or contact smart cards. They also facilitate farebox); $1.50 to $5.00
processing of differentiated fare structures such as time-based and per smart card; $10,000 to
distance-based fare structures and fare integration across several modes $20,000 per garage for
and operators. A hybrid or "dual-interface" smart card can expand the hardware/software. May
application of smart cards beyond transit. require expenditure on
additional central
hardware and software.
Fare Structure
Flat Fares
Flat fares impose the same fare regardless of distance or quality of service. This policy simplifies the
responsibilities of the bus operators by reducing potential confusion and disputes and thus can speed up
boarding.
INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS (ITS)
Differentiated fares
Differentiated fares are charged depending on length of trip, time of day, type of customer, speed or
quality of service. There are various types of differentiated fare strategies.
1. Distance-based or zonal fare is charged as a direct or indirect function of the distance traveled.
Bus operators may collect the fare when passengers board or, more rarely, as they exit the
vehicle.
2. Time-based fares are charged depending on the time of day or length of the trip.
3. Service-based fares depend on the type or quality of transit service, which may share stations or
infrastructure with other services. Express bus or BRT services may be an example. Generally,
this approach is used for multi-modal transit systems and may include transfers.
4. Other differentiated fare structures include market-based or consumer-based fares, discounted
fares, and free-fare zones.

Signal Timing / Phasing Signal Retiming $3,500 per

Intersection
Optimization of traffic signals along a corridor to make better use of
available green time capacity by favoring peak, e.g., BRT flows. Requires
simulation modeling and analysis using traffic vehicle and person flow data
but does not require additional components for the vehicle or
infrastructure.
Station and Lane Access Control Controller Software for

Entire System - $25,000 to
Allow access to dedicated BRT running ways and stations with variable
$50,000
message signs and gate control systems requires the installation of barrier
control systems that identify a driver and vehicle and/or similar Gate Hardware per
surveillance and monitoring systems. Typically utilizes an electronic Entrance- $100,000 to
transponder (similar to an electronic toll collection system) to allow access $150,000
while the BRT vehicle is operating at highway speeds.
Transit Signal Priority Signal Priority Software -

$300 to $600
Traffic Signal Priority (TSP) technologies can be used to extend or advance
green times or allow left turn swaps to allow buses that are behind Signal Controller
schedule to get back on schedule, improving schedule adherence, Hardware - $4,000 to
reliability, and speed. Requires traffic signal controllers and software and $10,000
TSP capable equipment on the transit vehicle and at the intersection for
identifying the transit vehicle and generating low priority request when Vehicle Hardware - $500
appropriate. It is important to note that although priority and preemption to $2,000
are often used synonymously, they are in fact different processes. While
they may utilize similar equipment, transit signal priority modifies the
normal signal operation process to better accommodate transit vehicles,
while preemption interrupts the normal process for special events or
responding emergency vehicles. Objectives of preemption include reducing
response time to emergencies, improving safety and stress levels of
emergency vehicle personnel, and reducing accidents involving emergency
vehicles at intersections. On the other hand, objectives of transit signal
priority include reduced travel time, improved schedule adherence,
improved transit efficiency, contribution to enhanced transit information,
and increased road network efficiency.
Driver Assist and Automation Technology
Collision Avoidance
Provision to control the BRT vehicle so that it avoids striking obstacles in or
along its path. This includes forward, rear or side impacts or integrated 360
degree system. Requires installation of sensors (infrared, video, or other),
driver notification devices, and automated controls within the vehicle.
These systems are currently in the research stage and are not available for
installation on a BRT vehicle. However, it is expected that over the next
five years the BRT vehicle will be used as a platform on which to test these
technologies.
Collision Warning Sensor Integration per

Vehicle - $3,500
Provision of warning for BRT vehicle driver about the presence of obstacles
or the impending impact with the pedestrian or obstacle. This includes
forward, rear or side impact collision avoidance or integrated 360 degree
system. Requires installation of sensors (infrared, video, or other) and
driver notification devices within the vehicle. These systems have some
limited commercial availability.
Precision Docking Magnetic Sensors per

Station - $4,000
System that assists BRT vehicle drivers to correctly place a vehicle at a stop
or station location both latitude and longitude. There are two primary ITS- Optical Markings per
based methods to implement Precision Docking: magnetic and optical. This Station - $4,000
requires the installation of markings on the pavement (paint, magnets),
Hardware and Integration
vehicle-based sensors to read the markings, and linkages with the vehicle
per Vehicle - $50,000
steering system. The availability of these systems is currently limited to
international suppliers as an additional option for new vehicle purchases.

Commercial availability from US suppliers as an add-on option is expected
in the next 2 to 5 years.
Vehicle Guidance Magnetic Sensors per Mile

- $20,000
Guides BRT vehicles on running ways while maintaining speed, using a
variety of technologies. These technologies, also known as “lane assist Optical per Mile - $20,000
technologies”, allow BRT vehicles to safely operate at higher speeds. There
GPS - $125,000
are three primary Vehicle Guidance technologies: magnetic, optical, and
GPS-based. They either require the installation of markings on or in the Hardware and Integration
running way pavement (paint, magnets) or development of a GPS-based per Vehicle - $50,000 -
route map). They also require vehicle-based sensors to read the markings, $95,000
and linkages with the vehicle steering. The availability of these systems is
currently limited. However, commercial deployment is expected within 2
to 5 years.
Operations Management Technology
Automated Scheduling Dispatch System Hardware and Software

Acquisition - $20,000 -
Utilization of real-time vehicle data (location, schedule adherence,
$40,000
passenger counters) to manage all BRT vehicles in the system and insure
proper level of service for passengers. Requires a communication system System Integration - $225k
and vehicle tracking components integrated with an ASDS software - $500k
package.
Sensors and Fleet
Integration - $1,100k -
$2,200k
Vehicle Mechanical Monitoring and Maintenance Sensors and Fleet

Integration - $1,100k -
Automatically monitor the condition of transit vehicle engine components
$2,200k
via engine sensors and provide warnings of impending (out of tolerance
indicators) and actual failures occur. Requires a communication system
and on-board mechanical monitoring system that is capable of collecting
and transmitting necessary vehicle data.
Vehicle Tracking Operations Center

Hardware - $15,000 -
Provide transit operations personnel with the current location of BRT
$30,000
vehicles on the network. Transit location information will be used for
improved traveler advisory services, schedule adherence and archived to Software Integration &
support future planning efforts. Requires a communication system Development - $815k -
integrated with vehicle tracking components. The most typical installation $1,720k
is based upon the global positioning system (GPS) to identify vehicle
Vehicle Hardware - $600 -
location. There are other options which are quickly being replaced.
$1,000
Passenger Information
Traveler Information at Stations Transit Information Status

Sign - $4,000 - $8,000
Provision of information about vehicle schedule, next bus information or
delays within the system via dynamic message sign at the station. Requires
techniques to predict the vehicle arrival time and the ability to display this
information at the station/stop.
Traveler Information on Vehicle

Provision of information about next stop, vehicle schedule, transfer/other
bus information or delays within the system via dynamic message sign on
the vehicle. Requires techniques to predict the vehicle arrival time at the
station/stop, receive data on other vehicles along the route and the ability
to display this information to transit customers riding on the vehicle.
Traveler Information on Person

Provision of information about vehicle schedule, next bus information or
delays within the system via PDA, cell phone or similar device used by the
traveler. Requires software to provide personal traveler information, and
provision of information through the internet or mobile communications
(either directly, or through a service provider).
Trip Itinerary Planning

Provision for a traveler to request trip information by specifying a trip
origin and destination, time and date. Also provision for a traveler to
specify their special equipment or handling requirements.
Silent Alarms Security Package (Fleet) -

$420k - $700k
Alarms installed on the BRT vehicle that are activated by the BRT vehicle
driver. A message such has “Call 911” can be displayed on the exterior sign
board for others to see or messages can be sent back to the operations
center to indicate an emergency or problem.
Voice and Video Monitoring Security Package (Fleet)

$420k - $700k
Surveillance of the vehicle, by use of microphone or CCTV camera. Data is
sent to an operations center to monitor.
Appendix B: Dynamic formulas
APPENDIX B: DYNAMIC FORMULAS

Attribute Details
Running Ways Lookup

Type: Integer
Formula:
IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:Running Ways Lookup:Roadway_Type ] = "Unimproved

Mixed Flow Lanes" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Unimproved Mixed Flow Lanes Costs ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:Running Ways Lookup:Roadway_Type ] = "Mixed Flow Lanes with Queue
Jumpers " ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Mixed Flow Lanes with Queue Jumpers ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:Running Ways Lookup:Roadway_Type ] = "Designated Arterial Lanes" ),
Cost
Then ( [ Assumption:Designated Arterial Lane Costs ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:Running Ways Lookup:Roadway_Type ] = "At-Grade Transitways" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:At-Grade Transition Costs ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:Running Ways Lookup:Roadway_Type ] = "Exclusive Aerial Transitways"
),
Then ( [ Assumption:Exclusive Aerial Transitway Costs ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:Running Ways Lookup:Roadway_Type ] = "Exclusive BelowGrade
Transitways" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Exclusive Below-Grade Transitway Costs ] ),
Else ( 0 ) )
New_BRT_Route
Type: Small Integer
Additional Door Formula:
Channels
UserInputB ( "Additional Door Channels", Yes )
Type: Small Integer
Alternative Seat Formula:
Layout
UserInputB ( "Alternative Seat Layout", Yes )
Type: Small Integer
Collision Avoidance Formula:
UserInputB ( "Driver Assist and Automation Technology", Yes )
Type: Small Integer
Collision Warning Formula:
UserInputB ( "Collision Warning", Yes )
Type: Double
Formula:
Design Speed
IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Running Way Type ] = "Unimproved Mixed
Flow Lanes" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Design Speed - Unimproved Mixed Flow Lanes ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Running Way Type ] = "Mixed Flow Lanes with Queue

Jumpers" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Design Speed - Mixed Flow Lanes with Queue Jumpers ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Running Way Type ] = "Designated Arterial Lanes" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Design Speed - Designated Arterial Lanes ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Running Way Type ] = "Exclusive Aerial Transitways" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Design Speed - Exclusive Aerial Transitways ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Running Way Type ] = "Exclusive BelowGrade
Transitways" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Design Speed - Exclusive Aerial Transitways ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Running Way Type ] = "At-Grade Transitways" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Design Speed - At-Grade Transitways ] ),
Else ( 1 ) )
Type: Double
Formula:
Design Time
[ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Distance ] / [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Design Speed ]
Type: Double
Formula:
Distance
( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:SHAPE_Length ] / 5280 )
Type: Double
Formula:
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Collision Avoidance ] = 1, Then ( [
Assumption:Collision Warning ] * [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:No of Buses ] ),
Else ( 0 ) ) )
+
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Collision Warning ] = 1, Then ( [ Assumption:Collision
Warning ] * [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:No of Buses ] ),
Driver Assist and
Else ( 0 ) ) )
Automation
+
Technology Costs
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Precsion Docking ] = 1,
Then ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Precision Docking Costs ] ),
Else ( 0 ) ) )
+
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Vehicle Guidance ] = 1,
Then ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Vehicle Guidance Costs ] ),
Else ( 0 ) ) )
Type: Small Integer

Enhanced Interior Formula:
Amenity
UserInputB ( "Enhanced Interior Amenity", Yes )
Type: Small Integer
Enhanced Wheelchair Formula:
Securement
UserInputB ( "Enhanced Wheelchair Securement", Yes )
Type: Double
Existing_Lanes Formula:
UserInput ( "Type a number of Existing_Lanes", 1 )
Type: String
Guidance Formula:
[ Assumption:Type of Guidance ]
Type: Double
Formula:
( IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Vehicle Prioritization ] = "Vehicle

Prioritization" ),
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Vehicle Prioritization Lookup:Identity Rank ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Vehicle Prioritization Lookup:Type ] = "Vehicle Prioritization" ) ) ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Vehicle Prioritization ] = "Station and Lane Access
Control" ),
Where ( [ Attribute:Vehicle Prioritization Lookup:Type ] = "Station and Lane Access
Control" ) ) ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Vehicle Prioritization ] = "Transit Signal Priority" ),
Where ( [ Attribute:Vehicle Prioritization Lookup:Type ] = "Transit Signal Priority" ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Collision Avoidance ] = 1,
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Driver Assist and Automation Technology Lookup:Identity Rank
],
Where ( [ Attribute:Driver Assist and Automation Technology Lookup:Type ] =
ITS1 - Identity Rank
"Collision Avoidance" ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Collision Warning ] = 1,
],
"Collision Warning" ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
],
"Precision Docking" ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
],
Where ( [ Attribute:Driver Assist and Automation Technology Lookup:Type ] = "Vehicle
Guidance" ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) )
Type: Double
Formula:
ITS1 Safety Rank ( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Collision Avoidance ] = 1,

Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Driver Assist and Automation Technology Lookup:Safety Rank ],
"Collision Avoidance" ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Collision Warning ] = 1,
"Collision Warning" ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
"Precision Docking" ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
Where ( [ Attribute:Driver Assist and Automation Technology Lookup:Type ] = "Vehicle
Guidance" ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) )
Type: Double
Larger Windows and Formula:
Enhanced Lighting
UserInputB ( "Larger Windows and Enhanced Lighting", Yes )
Type: Double
No of Buses Formula:
UserInput ( "No of Buses", 0 )
Type: Double
No of Signals Formula:
UserInput ( "No of Signals" )
Type: Double
Formula:
IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Precsion Docking ] = "Magnetic" ),
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Precison Docking:Costs ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Precison Docking:Type ] = [ Attribute:Precsion Docking ] ) ) + ( ( [
Attribute:New_BRT_Route:No of Buses ] ) * [ Assumption:Vehicle Guidance - Hardware
Precision Docking
Integration - System ] ) ),
Costs
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Precsion Docking ] = "Optical Markings" ),
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Precison Docking:Costs ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Precison Docking:Type ] = [ Attribute:Precsion Docking ] ) ) + ( ( [
Attribute:New_BRT_Route:No of Buses ] ) * [ Assumption:Vehicle Guidance - Hardware
Integration - System ] ) ),
Else ( 0 ) )
Type: String
Formula:
Precsion Docking
UserChoiceGet ( "Select a value for Precsion Docking.", [ Attribute:Precison
Docking:Type ] )
Type: Double
Proposed_Lanes Formula:
UserInput ( "No of Proposed Lanes = ", 1 )
Type: Double
Propulsion Costs
Formula:
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Propulsion System ] = "Internal Combustion Engines",

Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Propulsion System:System Costs ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Propulsion System:Type ] = [ Attribute:Propulsion System ] ) ) + ( [
Assumption:Internal Combustion Engines - Per Vehicle ] * [
Attribute:New_BRT_Route:No of Buses ] ) ),
Else ( Get ( [ Attribute:Propulsion System:System Costs ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Propulsion System:Type ] = [ Attribute:Propulsion System ] ) ) ) )
Type: String
Formula:
Propulsion System
UserChoiceGet ( "Select a value for Propoulsuion System.", [ Attribute:Propulsion
System:Type ] )
Type: Double
Formula:
If ( [ Assumption:Type of Guidance ] = "Electromagnetic Guidance", Then ( ( ( [
Attribute:New_BRT_Route:SHAPE_Length ] / 5280 ) * Get ( [ Attribute:Running Ways
Lookup:Cost ], Where ( [ Attribute:Running Ways Lookup:Roadway_Type ] = [
Running Way
Attribute:Running Way Type ] ) ) ) + ( ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:SHAPE_Length ] /
Construction Cost
5280 ) * [ Assumption:Magnetic Sensors ] ) ), Else ( ( [
Attribute:New_BRT_Route:SHAPE_Length ] / 5280 ) * Get ( [ Attribute:Running Ways
Lookup:Cost ], Where ( [ Attribute:Running Ways Lookup:Roadway_Type ] = [
Attribute:Running Way Type ] ) ) ) )
Type: String
Running Way Formula:
Marking UserChoiceGet ( "Select a value for Running Way Marking.", [ Attribute:Running Way
Marking Lookup:Type ] )
Type: String
Formula:
Running Way Type
UserChoiceGet ( "Select a value for Running Way Type.", [ Attribute:Running Ways
Lookup:Roadway_Type ] )
Type: Double
Formula:
Flow Lanes" ),
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Running Ways Lookup:Identity Rank ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Running Ways Lookup:Roadway_Type ] = [ Attribute:Running Way
Type ] ) ) ),
Runningway Identity If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Running Way Type ] = "Mixed Flow Lanes with Queue
Rank Jumpers" ),
Type ] ) ) ),
Type ] ) ) ),

Type ] ) ) ),
Transitways" ),
Type ] ) ) ),
Type ] ) ) ),
Else ( 1 ) ) +
IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Running Way Marking ] = "Signage and
Striping" ),
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Running Way Marking Lookup:Identity Rank ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Running Way Marking Lookup:Type ] = [ Attribute:Running Way
Marking ] ) ) ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Running Way Marking ] = "Raised Lane Delineators" ),
Marking ] ) ) ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Running Way Marking ] = "Alternate Pavement Color /
Texture" ),
Marking ] ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) +
IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Guidance ] = "Optical Guidance" ),
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Guidance Lookup:Identity Rank ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Guidance Lookup:Type ] = [ Attribute:Guidance ] ) ) ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Guidance ] = "Electromagnetic Guidance" ),
Where ( [ Attribute:Guidance Lookup:Type ] = "Electromagnetic Guidance: Magnetic
Sensors" ) ) ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Guidance ] = "Mechanical Guidance" ),
Else ( 0 ) )
Type: Double
Formula:

Flow Lanes" ),
Runningways Safety
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Running Ways Lookup:Safety rank ],
Rank
Type ] ) ) ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Running Way Type ] = "Mixed Flow Lanes with Queue
Jumpers" ),

Type ] ) ) ),
Type ] ) ) ),
Type ] ) ) ),
Transitways" ),
Type ] ) ) ),
Type ] ) ) ),
Else ( 1 ) ) +
IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Guidance ] = "Optical Guidance" ),
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Guidance Lookup:Safety Rank ],
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Guidance ] = "Electromagnetic Guidance" ),
Where ( [ Attribute:Guidance Lookup:Type ] = "Electromagnetic Guidance: Magnetic
Sensors" ) ) ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Guidance ] = "Mechanical Guidance" ),
Else ( 0 ) )
Type: Small Integer
Specialized Logos and Formula:
Livery
UserInputB ( "Specialized Logos and Livery", Yes )
Type: Double
Formula:
Total Travel Time

[ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Travel Time - Dedicated ] + [
Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Travel Time - Exclusive ] + [
Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Travel Time - General ]
Type: Double
Formula:
IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Running Way Type ] = "Designated Arterial

Travel Time - Lanes" ),
Dedicated Then ( ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Distance ] ) / ( IfThenElse ( If ( ( Count ( [
Layer:New_BRT_Station ] ) / ( Sum ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Distance ] ) ) <= 0.1 )
And ( Mean ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Station Dwell Time ] ) <= 10 ) ),
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Travel Time Dedicated Arterial:DT 10 ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Travel Time Dedicated Arterial:ID ] = 1 ) ) ),
If ( ( Count ( [ Layer:New_BRT_Station ] ) / ( Sum ( [

Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Distance ] ) ) <=
0.1 ) And ( ( Mean ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Station Dwell Time ] ) > 10 ) And (
Mean ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Station Dwell Time ] ) <= 20 ) ) ),




If ( ( ( Count ( [ Layer:New_BRT_Station ] ) / ( Sum ( [

Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Distance ] ) ) >
0.1 ) And ( Count ( [ Layer:New_BRT_Station ] ) / ( Sum ( [
Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Distance ] )
) <= 0.2 ) ) And ( Mean ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Station Dwell Time ] ) <= 10 ) ),

) <= 0.2 ) ) And ( ( Mean ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Station Dwell Time ] ) > 10 )
And (

And (

And (

And (

And (



And (

And (

And (

And (

And (

0.25 ) And ( Mean ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Station Dwell Time ] ) <= 10 ) ),





Else ( 0 ) )
) ),
Else ( 0 ) )
Type: Double
Formula:
Travel Time -
Exclusive
IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Running Way Type ] = "Exclusive Aerial
Transitways" Or [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Running Way Type ] = "Exclusive
BelowGrade Transitways" Or [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Running Way Type ] = "At-
Grade Transitways" ),
Then ( ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Distance ] ) / ( IfThenElse ( If ( ( Count ( [

Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Travel time Exclusive Freeway:DT 0 ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Travel time Exclusive Freeway:ID ] = 1 ) ) ),






) <= 1.0 ) ) And ( ( Mean ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Station Dwell Time ] ) > 0 ) And
(

And (

And (

And (


(


And (

And (

And (


(

And (

And (

And (






Else ( 0 ) )
) ),
Else ( 0 ) )
Type: Double
Formula:

Flow Lanes" Or [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Running Way Type ] = "Mixed Flow Lanes
with Queue Jumpers
" ),
Then ( ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Distance ] ) / ( IfThenElse ( If ( ( Count ( [
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Travel Time General Traffic:DT 10 ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Travel Time General Traffic:ID ] = 1 ) ) ),


Travel Time - General






And (

And (

And (

And (

And (


And (

And (

And (


And (

And (







Else ( 0 ) )
) ),
Else ( 0 ) )
Type: Double
Formula:
( IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Vehicle Type ] = "Conventional Standard"
),
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:BRT_Vehicle_Lookup:Safety Rank ],
Where ( [ Attribute:BRT_Vehicle_Lookup:Vehicle_Type ] = [ Attribute:Vehicle Type ] ) )
),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Vehicle Type ] = "Stylized Standard" ),
),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Vehicle Type ] = "Conventional Articulated" ),
),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Vehicle Type ] = "Stylized Articulated" ),
),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Vehicle Type ] = "Specialized BRT Vehicles" ),
Vechicle Safety Rank Where ( [ Attribute:BRT_Vehicle_Lookup:Vehicle_Type ] = [ Attribute:Vehicle Type ] ) )
),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Specialized Logos and Livery ] = 1,
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Aesthetic Enhancement Lookup:Safety Rank ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Aesthetic Enhancement Lookup:Type ] = "Specialized Logos and
Livery" ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Larger Windows and Enhanced Lighting ] = 1,
Where ( [ Attribute:Aesthetic Enhancement Lookup:Type ] = "Larger Windows and
Enhanced Lighting " ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Enhanced Interior Amenity ] = 1,
Where ( [ Attribute:Aesthetic Enhancement Lookup:Type ] = "Enhanced Interior
Amenity" ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Alternative Seat Layout ] = 1,
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Passenger Circulation Enhancement Lookup:Safety Rank ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Passenger Circulation Enhancement Lookup:Type ] = "Alternative
Seat Layout" ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Additional Door Channels ] = 1,
Where ( [ Attribute:Passenger Circulation Enhancement Lookup:Type ] = "Additional
Door Channels" ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Enhanced Wheelchair Securement ] = 1,
Where ( [ Attribute:Passenger Circulation Enhancement Lookup:Type ] = "Enhanced
Wheelchair Securement" ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) )
Type: Double
Formula:
Vehicle Costs ( Get ( [ Attribute:BRT_Vehicle_Lookup:Cost_Per_Vehicle ],

Where ( [ Attribute:BRT_Vehicle_Lookup:Vehicle_Type ] = [
Attribute:BRT_Vehicle_Lookup:Vehicle_Type ] ) ) * [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:No of
Buses ] ) + ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Propulsion Costs ] )
Type: String
Formula:
Vehicle Guidance
UserChoiceGet ( "Select a value for Vehicle Guidance.", [ Attribute:Vehicle
Guidance:Type ] )
Type: Double
Formula:
IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Vehicle Guidance ] = "Magnetic Sensors" ),
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Vehicle Guidance:Costs ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Vehicle Guidance:Type ] = [ Attribute:Vehicle Guidance ] ) * ( [
Vehicle Guidance
Attribute:New_BRT_Route:No of Buses ] ) ) ),
Costs
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Vehicle Guidance ] = "Optical per Mile" ),
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Vehicle Guidance:Costs ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Vehicle Guidance:Type ] = [ Attribute:Vehicle Guidance ] ) * ( [
Attribute:New_BRT_Route:No of Buses ] ) ) ),
Else ( [ Assumption:GPS - Vehicle Guidance - System ] ) )
Type: Double
Formula:
( IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Vehicle Type ] = "Conventional Standard"

),
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:BRT_Vehicle_Lookup:Identity Rank ],
),
Vehicle idenity Rank
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Vehicle Type ] = "Stylized Standard" ),
),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Vehicle Type ] = "Conventional Articulated" ),
),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Vehicle Type ] = "Stylized Articulated" ),

),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Vehicle Type ] = "Specialized BRT Vehicles" ),
),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Propulsion System ] = "Internal
Combustion Engines" ),
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Propulsion System:Identity Rank ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Propulsion System:Type ] = [ Attribute:Propulsion System ] ) ) ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Propulsion System ] = "Trolley, Dual Mode and
Thermal-Electric Drives - Capital" ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Propulsion System ] = "Hybrid-Electric Drives Capital" ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Propulsion System ] = "Fuel Cells" ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Specialized Logos and Livery ] = 1,
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Aesthetic Enhancement Lookup:Identity Rank ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Aesthetic Enhancement Lookup:Type ] = "Specialized Logos and
Livery" ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Larger Windows and Enhanced Lighting ] = 1,
Where ( [ Attribute:Aesthetic Enhancement Lookup:Type ] = "Larger Windows and
Enhanced Lighting " ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Enhanced Interior Amenity ] = 1,
Where ( [ Attribute:Aesthetic Enhancement Lookup:Type ] = "Enhanced Interior
Amenity" ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Alternative Seat Layout ] = 1,
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Passenger Circulation Enhancement Lookup:Identity Rank ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Passenger Circulation Enhancement Lookup:Type ] = "Alternative
Seat Layout" ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Additional Door Channels ] = 1,
Where ( [ Attribute:Passenger Circulation Enhancement Lookup:Type ] = "Additional
Door Channels" ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Enhanced Wheelchair Securement ] = 1,
Where ( [ Attribute:Passenger Circulation Enhancement Lookup:Type ] = "Enhanced
Wheelchair Securement" ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) )
Type: String
Formula:
UserChoiceGet ( "Select a value for Vehicle Prioritization.", [ Attribute:Vehicle
Prioritization Lookup:Type ] )
Type: Double
Formula:
IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Vehicle Prioritization ] = "Vehicle

Prioritization" ),
Then ( ( Get ( [ Attribute:Vehicle Prioritization Lookup:Cost Per Signal ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Vehicle Prioritization Lookup:Type ] = [ Attribute:Vehicle
Prioritization ] ) ) * [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:No of Signals ] ) ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Vehicle Prioritization ] = "Station and Lane Access
Vehicle Prioritization Control" ),
Costs Then ( ( Get ( [ Attribute:Vehicle Prioritization Lookup:Per Station Cost ],
Prioritization ] ) ) * Count ( [ Layer:New_BRT_Station ] ) ) + [ Assumption:Station and
Lane Access Control - System ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Vehicle Prioritization ] = "Transit Signal Priority" ),
Then ( ( Get ( [ Attribute:Vehicle Prioritization Lookup:Cost Per Signal ],
Prioritization ] ) ) * [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:No of Signals ] ) + [ Assumption:Transit
Signal Priority - Vehicle Hardware ] ),
Else ( 0 ) )
Type: String
Formula:
Vehicle Type
UserChoiceGet ( "Select a value for Vehicle Type.", [
Attribute:BRT_Vehicle_Lookup:Vehicle_Type ] )
New_BRT_Station
Type: Small Integer
Automated Formula:
Scheduling Dispatch
UserInputB ( "Automated Scheduling Dispatch System
System
", Yes )
Type: Double
Formula:
Automated
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Automated Scheduling Dispatch System ] = 1,
Scheduling Dispatch
Then ( [ Assumption:ASDS - Hardware and Software Acquisition ] + [ Assumption:ASDS
System Costs
- Sensors and Fleet Integration ] + [ Assumption:ASDS - System Integration ] ),
Else ( 0 ) )
Type: Double
Formula:
Fare Collection
( IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Fare Collection Process ] = "Pay onboard
Identity Rank
system" ),
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Fare Collection Process Lookup:Identity Rank ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Fare Collection Process Lookup:Type ] = [ Attribute:Fare Collection

Process ] ) ) ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Fare Collection Process ] = "Conductor validated
system" ),
Process ] ) ) ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Fare Collection Process ] = "Barrier Enforced Fare
Payment system - TVM" ),
Process ] ) ) ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Fare Collection Process ] = "Barrier Enforced Fare
Payment system - Fare Gate" ),
Process ] ) ) ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Fare Collection Process ] = "Barrier Free/Proof of
Payment system" ),
Process ] ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Fare transaction media ] = "Low cost
mechanical farebox" ),
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Fare Collection Media Lookup:Identity Rank ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Fare Collection Media Lookup:Type ] = "Low cost mechanical
farebox" ) ) ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Fare transaction media ] = "Complex electronic
registering farebox" ),
Where ( [ Attribute:Fare Collection Media Lookup:Type ] = "Complex electronic
registering farebox" ) ) ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Fare transaction media ] = "Magnetic Stripe Media" ),
Where ( [ Attribute:Fare Collection Media Lookup:Type ] = "Magnetic Stripe Media" ) )
),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Fare transaction media ] = "Smart Card Media" ),
Where ( [ Attribute:Fare Collection Media Lookup:Type ] = "Smart Card Media" ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Fare Structure ] = "Flat Structure" ),
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Fare Structure:Identity Rank ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Fare Structure:Type ] = "Flat Structure" ) ) ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Fare Structure ] = "Differentiated Structure" ),
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Fare Structure:Identity Rank ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Fare Structure:Type ] = "Differentiated Structure" ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) )
Type: String
Fare Collection Formula:
Process
UserChoiceGet ( "Select a value for Fare Collection Process.", [ Attribute:Fare
Collection Process Lookup:Type ] )

Type: Double
Formula:
Fare Collection
Process Costs Get ( [ Attribute:Fare Collection Process Lookup:Costs ],
Process ] ) ) * [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:No of Ticket Vending Machines ]
Type: Double
Formula:
( IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Fare transaction media ] = "Low cost

mechanical farebox" ),
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Fare Collection Media Lookup:Safety Rank ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Fare Collection Media Lookup:Type ] = "Low cost mechanical
farebox" ) ) ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Fare transaction media ] = "Complex electronic
registering farebox" ),
Fare Collection Safety
Rank
Where ( [ Attribute:Fare Collection Media Lookup:Type ] = "Complex electronic
registering farebox" ) ) ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Fare transaction media ] = "Magnetic Stripe Media" ),
Where ( [ Attribute:Fare Collection Media Lookup:Type ] = "Magnetic Stripe Media" ) )
),
Where ( [ Attribute:Fare Collection Media Lookup:Type ] = "Smart Card Media" ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) )
Type: Double
Formula:
Fare Collection Total
Costs
Sum ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Fare Collection Process Costs ] )
+ Sum ( [ Attribute:Fare Transaction Media Costs ] )
Type: String
Fare Structure Formula:
UserChoiceGet ( "Select a value for Fare Structure.", [ Attribute:Fare Structure:Type ] )
Type: String
Fare transaction Formula:
media UserChoiceGet ( "Select a value for Fare transaction media.", [ Attribute:Fare
Collection Media Lookup:Type ] )
Type: Double
Formula:
IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Fare transaction media ] = "Magnetic
Fare Transaction Stripe Media" ),
Media Costs Then ( ( Get ( [ Attribute:Fare Collection Media Lookup:Costs per Vehicle ], Where ( [
Attribute:Fare Collection Media Lookup:Type ] = [ Attribute:Fare transaction media ] ) )
* Sum ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:No of Buses ] ) ) + ( [ Assumption:Magnetic Stripe
Media Garage Installation ] ) ),

Then ( ( Get ( [ Attribute:Fare Collection Media Lookup:Costs per Vehicle ], Where ( [
* Sum ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:No of Buses ] ) ) + ( [ Assumption:Smart Card
Garage Installation ] ) ),
Else ( ( Get ( [ Attribute:Fare Collection Media Lookup:Costs per Vehicle ], Where ( [
* Sum ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:No of Buses ] ) ) ) )
Type: Double
Formula:
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Traveler Information at Stations ] = 1,
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Passenger Information:Identity Rank ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Passenger Information:Type ] = "Traveler Information at Stations" )
) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Traveler Information on Person ] = 1,
Where ( [ Attribute:Passenger Information:Type ] = "Traveler Information on Person" )
) ),
ITS2 Identity Rank Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Traveler Information on Vehicle ] = 1,
Where ( [ Attribute:Passenger Information:Type ] = "Traveler Information on Vehicle" )
) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Trip Itinerary Planning ] = 1,
Where ( [ Attribute:Passenger Information:Type ] = "Trip Itinerary Planning" ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) )
Type: Double
Formula:
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Automated Scheduling Dispatch System ] = 1,

Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Operations Management Technology:Safety Rank ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Operations Management Technology:Type ] = "Automated
Scheduling Dispatch System" ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
ITS2 Safety rank ( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Vehicle Mechanical Monitoring and Maintenance ] =
1,
Where ( [ Attribute:Operations Management Technology:Type ] = "Vehicle Mechanical
Monitoring and Maintenance" ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Vehicle Tracking ] = 1,
Where ( [ Attribute:Operations Management Technology:Type ] = "Vehicle Tracking" ) )
),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Traveler Information at Stations ] = 1,
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Passenger Information:Safety Rank ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Passenger Information:Type ] = "Traveler Information at Stations" )
) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Traveler Information on Person ] = 1,
Where ( [ Attribute:Passenger Information:Type ] = "Traveler Information on Person" )
) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Traveler Information on Vehicle ] = 1,
Where ( [ Attribute:Passenger Information:Type ] = "Traveler Information on Vehicle" )
) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Trip Itinerary Planning ] = 1,
Where ( [ Attribute:Passenger Information:Type ] = "Trip Itinerary Planning" ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Silent Alarms ] = 1,
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Safety and Security technology Lookup:Safety Rank ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Safety and Security technology Lookup:Type ] = "Silent Alarms" ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Silent Alarms ] = 1,
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Safety and Security technology Lookup:Safety Rank ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Safety and Security technology Lookup:Type ] = "Voice and Video
Monitoring" ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) )
Type: Double
No of Ticket Vending Formula:
Machines
UserInput ( "Type a number for No of Ticket Vending Machines" )
Type: Double
Operations Formula:
Management [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Automated Scheduling Dispatch System Costs ] + [
Technology Costs Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Vehicle Mechanical Monitoring and Maintenance Cost ]
+ [ Attribute:Vehicle Tracking Costs ]
Type: Double
Passenger Formula:
Information Costs
[ Assumption:Traveler Information at Stations ]
Type: String
Formula:
Passing Capability
UserChoiceGet ( "Select a value for Passing Capability.", [ Attribute:Passing Capability
Lookup:Type ] )
Type: Double
Passing Costs Formula:
Get ( [ Attribute:Passing Capability Lookup:Costs ],

Where ( [ Attribute:Passing Capability Lookup:Type ] = [ Attribute:Passing Capability ] )
)
Type: String
Formula:
Platform Height
UserChoiceGet ( "Select a value for Platform Height.", [ Attribute:Platform Height
Lookup:Type ] )
Type: Small Integer
Formula:
Silent Alarms
UserInputB ( "Silent Alarms
", Yes )
Type: Double
Formula:
Silent Alarms Costs

If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Silent Alarms ] = 1,
Then ( [ Assumption:Silent Alarms ] ),
Else ( 0 ) )
Type: String
Formula:
Station Access
UserChoiceGet ( "Select a value for Station Access.", [ Attribute:Station Access
Lookup:Type ] )
Type: Double
Formula:
Station Access Costs Get ( [ Attribute:Station Access Lookup:Cost ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Station Access Lookup:Type ] = [
Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Station Access ] ) )
Type: Double
Formula:
Station Costs
Get ( [ Attribute:Stations Lookup:Cost ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Stations Lookup:Type ] = [ Attribute:Type_of_Station ] ) )
Type: Double
Formula:
IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Type_of_Station ] = "Simple Stop" ),

Then ( [ Assumption:Dwell Time - Simple Station ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Type_of_Station ] = "Enhanced Stop" ),
Station Dwell Time Then ( [ Assumption:Dwell Time - Enhanced Stop ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Type_of_Station ] = "Designated Station" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Dwell Time - Designated Station ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Type_of_Station ] = "Intermodal Terminal or Transit
Center" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Dwell Time - Intermodal Terminal or Transit Center ] ),
Else ( 0 ) )
Type: Double
Station Identity rank
Formula:
( IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Type_of_Station ] = "Simple Stop" ),

Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Stations Lookup:Identity Rank ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Stations Lookup:Type ] = [ Attribute:Type_of_Station ] ) ) ),
Center" ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Platform Height ] = "Standard Curb" ),
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Platform Height Lookup:Identity Rank ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Platform Height Lookup:Type ] = [ Attribute:Platform Height ] ) ) ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Platform Height ] = "Raised Curb" ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Platform Height ] = "Level Platform" ),
Else ( 0 ) ) )
Type: Double
Formula:
( IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Type_of_Station ] = "Simple Stop" ),
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Stations Lookup:Safety Rank ],
Center" ),
Station Safety rank Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Stations Lookup:Safety Rank ],
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Platform Height ] = "Standard Curb" ),
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Platform Height Lookup:Safety Rank ],
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Platform Height ] = "Raised Curb" ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Platform Height ] = "Level Platform" ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) +
( IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Station Access ] = "Pedestrian Linkages"
),
Then ( Get ( [ Attribute:Station Access Lookup:Safety Rank ],
Where ( [ Attribute:Station Access Lookup:Type ] = "Pedestrian Linkages" ) ) ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Station Access ] = "Surface Parking" ),
Where ( [ Attribute:Station Access Lookup:Type ] = "Surface Parking" ) ) ),
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Station Access ] = "Structured Parking" ),
Where ( [ Attribute:Station Access Lookup:Type ] = "Structured Parking" ) ) ),
Else ( 0 ) ) )
Type: Double
Formula:
Total Station Access
Sum ( [ Attribute:Station Costs ] ) + Sum ( [ Attribute:Station Access Costs ] ) + Sum ( [
Attribute:Passing Costs ] )
Type: Small Integer
Traveler Information Formula:
at Stations UserInputB ( "Traveler Information at Stations
", Yes )
Type: Small Integer
on Person UserInputB ( "Traveler Information on Person
", Yes )
Type: Small Integer
on Vehicle UserInputB ( "Traveler Information on Vehicle
", Yes )
Type: Small Integer
Trip Itinerary Formula:
Planning UserInputB ( "Trip Itinerary Planning
", Yes )
Type: String
Formula:
Type of Platform
UserChoiceGet ( "Select a value for Type of Platform.", [ Attribute:Platform Layout
Lookup:Type ] )
Type: String
Formula:
Type_of_Station
UserChoiceGet ( "Select a value for Type_of_Station.", [ Attribute:Stations Lookup:type
])
Type: Small Integer
Vehicle Mechanical Formula:
Monitoring and
UserInputB ( "Vehicle Mechanical Monitoring and Maintenance
Maintenance
", Yes )
Vehicle Mechanical Type: Double

Monitoring and Formula:
Maintenance Cost
If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Vehicle Mechanical Monitoring and Maintenance ] =

1,
Then ( [ Assumption:VMMM - Sensors and Fleet Integration ] ),
Else ( 0 ) )
Type: Small Integer
Formula:
Vehicle Tracking
UserInputB ( "Vehicle Tracking
", Yes )
Type: Double
Formula:
Vehicle Tracking If ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Vehicle Tracking ] = 1,

Costs Then ( [ Assumption:Vehicle Tracking - Operations Center Hardware ] + [
Assumption:Vehicle Tracking - Software Integration Developme ] + [
Assumption:Vehicle Tracking - Vehicle Hardware ] ),
Else ( 0 ) )
Type: Small Integer
Voice and Video Formula:
Monitoring UserInputB ( "Voice and Video Monitoring
", Yes )
BRT_Vehicle_Lookup
Type: Integer
Formula:
IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:BRT_Vehicle_Lookup:Vehicle_Type ] = "Conventional
Standard" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Conventional Standard ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:BRT_Vehicle_Lookup:Vehicle_Type ] = "Stylized Standard" ),
Cost_Per_Vehicle
Then ( [ Assumption:Stylized Standard ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:BRT_Vehicle_Lookup:Vehicle_Type ] = "Conventional Articulated" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Conventional Articulated ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:BRT_Vehicle_Lookup:Vehicle_Type ] = "Stylized Articulated" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Stylized Articulated ] ),
Else ( [ Assumption:Specialized BRT Vehicles ] ) )
Guidance Lookup
Type: Integer
Formula:
IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:Guidance Lookup:Type ] = "Optical Guidance" ),

Costs Then ( [ Assumption:Optical Guidance Costs ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:Guidance Lookup:Type ] = "Electromagnetic Guidance: Magnetic
Sensors" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Electromagnetic Guidance Costs ] ),
Else ( [ Assumption:Mechanical Guidance Costs ] ) )
Stations Lookup
Type: Double
Formula:
IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:Stations Lookup:Type ] = "Simple Stop" ),

Then ( [ Assumption:Simple Station ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:Stations Lookup:Type ] = "Enhanced Stop" ),
Cost
Then ( [ Assumption:Enhanced Stop ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:Stations Lookup:Type ] = "Designated Station" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Designated Station ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:Stations Lookup:Type ] = "Intermodal Terminal or Transit Center" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Intermodal Terminal or Transit Center ] ),
Else ( 0 ) )
Passing Capability Lookup

Type: Double
Formula:
IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:Passing Capability Lookup:Type ] = "Bus Pull-outs" ),
Costs Then ( [ Assumption:Bus Pull-outs ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:Passing Capability Lookup:Type ] = "Passing Lanes at Stations" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Surface Parking ] ),
Else ( 0 ) )
Station Access Lookup

Type: Double
Formula:
IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:Station Access Lookup:Type ] = "Pedestrian Linkages" ),

Cost
Then ( [ Assumption:Pedestrian Linkages ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:Station Access Lookup:Type ] = "Surface Parking" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Surface Parking ] ),
Else ( [ Assumption:Structured Parking ] ) )
Propulsion System
Type: Double
Formula:
Cost If ( [ Attribute:Propulsion System:Type ] = "Internal Combustion Engines",
Then ( [ Assumption:Internal Combustion Engines - Per Vehicle ] ),
Else ( 0 ) )
Type: Double
Formula:
IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:Propulsion System:Type ] = "Internal Combustion Engines" ),

System Costs Then ( [ Assumption:Internal Combustion Engines - System Costs ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:Propulsion System:Type ] = "Trolley, Dual Mode and Thermal-Electric
Drives" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Trolley Dual Mode and Thermal - System Costs ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:Propulsion System:Type ] = "Hybrid-Electric Drives" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Hybrid-Electric Drives - System Costs ] ),

Else ( [ Assumption:Fuel Cells - System Costs ] ) )
Fare Collection Process Lookup

Type: Double
Formula:
IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:Fare Collection Process Lookup:Type ] = "Pay onboard
system" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Pay onboard system ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:Fare Collection Process Lookup:Type ] = "Conductor validated system" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Conductor validated system ] ),
Costs If ( [ Attribute:Fare Collection Process Lookup:Type ] = "Barrier Enforced Fare Payment
system - TVM" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Barrier Enforced Fare Payment system - TVM ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:Fare Collection Process Lookup:Type ] = "Barrier Enforced Fare Payment
system - Fare Gate" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Barrier Enforced Fare Payment system - Fare gate ] ),
Else ( [ Assumption:Barrier Free or Proof of Payment system ] )
)
Fare Collection Media Lookup

Type: Double
Formula:
IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:Fare Collection Media Lookup:Type ] = "Low cost mechanical
farebox" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Low cost mechanical farebox ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:Fare Collection Media Lookup:Type ] = "Complex electronic registering
Costs per Vehicle farebox" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Complex electronic registering farebox ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:Fare Collection Media Lookup:Type ] = "Magnetic Stripe Media" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Magnetic Stripe Media ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:Fare Collection Media Lookup:Type ] = "Smart Card Media" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Smart Card Media ] ),
Else ( 0 ) )
Vehicle Prioritization Lookup

Type: Double
Formula:
IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:Vehicle Prioritization Lookup:Type ] = "Vehicle Prioritization"

),
Cost Per Signal
Then ( [ Assumption:Vehicle Prioritization Per Signal ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:Vehicle Prioritization Lookup:Type ] = "Transit Signal Priority" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Transit Signal Priority Hardware- Per Signal ] + [
Assumption:Transit Signal Priority Software- Per Signal ] ),
Else ( 0 ) )
Type: Double
Per Station Cost
Formula:
If ( [ Attribute:Vehicle Prioritization Lookup:Type ] = "Station and Lane Access Control",

Then ( [ Assumption:Station and Lane Access Control Per Station ] ),
Else ( 0 ) )
Type: Double
Formula:
Per Vehicle Cost

If ( [ Attribute:Vehicle Prioritization Lookup:Type ] = "Transit Signal Priority",
Then ( [ Assumption:Transit Signal Priority - Vehicle Hardware ] ),
Else ( 0 ) )
Precison Docking
Type: Double
Formula:
IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:Precison Docking:Type ] = "Magnetic" ),

Costs
Then ( [ Assumption:Magnetic Precision Docking - Per Station ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:Precison Docking:Type ] = "Optical Markings" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Optical Guidance Costs ] ),
Else ( 0 ) )
Vehicle Guidance
Type: Double
Formula:
IfThenElse ( If ( [ Attribute:Vehicle Guidance:Type ] = "Magnetic Sensors" ),

Costs
Then ( [ Assumption:Magnetic Vehicle Guidance ] ),
If ( [ Attribute:Vehicle Guidance:Type ] = "Optical per Mile" ),
Then ( [ Assumption:Optical Guidance Costs ] ),
Else ( [ Assumption:GPS - Vehicle Guidance - System ] ) )
Appedix c: Indicator formulas
APPEDIX C: INDICATOR FORMULAS

Indicator Details
Travel Time
Units:
Travel Time Formula:
Savings ( Sum ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Total Travel Time ] ) / Sum ( [
Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Design Time ] ) ) * 100
Identity Rank
Units:
Formula:
Identity ( ( Mean ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Runningway Identity Rank ] ) + Mean ( [

Performance Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Station Identity rank ] ) + Mean ( [
Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Vehicle idenity Rank ] ) + Mean ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Fare
Collection Identity Rank ] ) + Mean ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:ITS1 - Identity Rank ] ) +
Mean ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:ITS2 Identity Rank ] ) ) / 63 ) * 100
Units:
Formula:
Safety ( ( Mean ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Runningways Safety Rank ] ) + Mean ( [

Performance Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Station Safety rank ] ) + Mean ( [
Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Vechicle Safety Rank ] ) + Mean ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Fare
Collection Safety Rank ] ) + Mean ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:ITS1 Safety Rank ] ) + Mean ( [
Attribute:New_BRT_Station:ITS2 Safety rank ] ) ) / 67 ) * 100

Units:
Formula:
Get ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Vehicle Prioritization Costs ] ) + Get ( [

Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Driver Assist and Automation Technology Costs ] ) + Get ( [
Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Operations Management Technology Costs ] )
ITS Costs
+ Get ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Passenger Information Costs ] ) + ( If ( Get ( [
Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Silent Alarms ] ) = 1,
Then ( [ Assumption:Silent Alarms ] ),
Else ( 0 ) ) ) + ( If ( Get ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Voice and Video Monitoring ] ) = 0,
Then ( [ Assumption:Voice and Video Monitoring ] ),
Else ( 0 ) ) )
System
Fare Units: $
Collection Formula:
Costs
Appedix c: Indicator formulas
Sum ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Fare Collection Total Costs ] )

Units: $
Running Way Formula:
Costs
Sum ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Running Way Construction Cost ] )
Units: $
Station Costs Formula:
Sum ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Station:Total Station Access ] )
Units: $
Formula:
Vehicle Costs
Sum ( [ Attribute:New_BRT_Route:Vehicle Costs ] )

Yedavall Sarathy Aswanth

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Yedavall Sarathy Aswanth

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI

Sarathy Aswanth Yedavalli

This work and its defense approved by:

Division of Research and Advanced Studies

in partial fulfillment of the

MASTER OF COMMUNITY PLANNING

Sarathy Aswanth Yedavalli

Faculty Member: Dr. Lin Liu

Reader: Mr. David Shuey

performance of the BRT systems.

encouragement in every step that I took.

difficulty, especially Bharathi for her moral support.

little I have, in my career.

1.1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 2

Figure 2: Transit Investment Planning and Project Development Process..…………………………………………….12

Figure 3: Decision support System for BRT - Methodology ........................................................................ 17

Figure 5: Scenario Comparison ................................................................................................................... 61

Figure 6: Alerts ............................................................................................................................................ 63

Figure 7: Dynamic Formulas........................................................................................................................ 62

Figure 8: Intuitive Controls ......................................................................................................................... 63

Figure 9: General Model Work Flow ........................................................................................................... 69

Figure 10: BRT Decision Support System Model Flow ................................................................................ 81

Figure 11: Running Way Cost Assumptions ............................................................................................... 84

Figure 12: Station Cost Assumptions .......................................................................................................... 85

Figure 13: Vehicle Cost Assumptions .......................................................................................................... 86

Figure 14: Fare Collection Process Cost Assumptions ................................................................................ 87

Figure 15: ITS Cost Assumptions ................................................................................................................. 88

Figure 16: ITS Cost Assumptions 2 .............................................................................................................. 89

Figure 18: Scenario 360 and Editor Toolbars .............................................................................................. 91

Figure 25: Individual Cost Elements Comparison By Scenarios ................................................................ 106

Figure 26: Performance By Scenario ......................................................................................................... 106

Figure 27: Total Capital Costs comparison by scenario ............................................................................ 106

Figure 28: Travel Time Savings Comparison By Scenario.......................................................................... 106

way of providing high-quality, high-performance transit (TCRP 2003, a.)

Decision Support System for Bus Rapid Transit | Yash Yedavalli 2

1.2. NEED FOR INNOVATIVE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION

Transit (BRT) is seen as a cost-effective means of achieving these objectives.

1.3. WHAT IS BUS RAPID TRANIST (BRT)?

Decision Support System for Bus Rapid Transit | Yash Yedavalli 3

a). An illustration of BRT in charlotte area is shown in Figure 1.

1.4. WHY CHOOSE BRT?

Decision Support System for Bus Rapid Transit | Yash Yedavalli 4

investment if and when it is warranted.

bus-only lanes or HOV lanes.

environments. BRT vehicles, whether driver-steered or guided mechanically or electronically,

often force multiple transfers to serve the same markets.

Decision Support System for Bus Rapid Transit | Yash Yedavalli 5

power, such as trolley/diesel);

10. Low-floor vehicles that allow quick, level boarding; and

11. Mechanical, electronic, and optical guidance systems.

Decision Support System for Bus Rapid Transit | Yash Yedavalli 6

1.5. DECISION MAKING ELEMENTS OF BRT

thus helping people reach their destination more quickly.

convenience of close-to-home stops with the speed of express service.

7. Intelligent Transportation Systems: Technology keeps track of vehicles, provides passengers

with updated travel information, and improves safety.

1.6. INTEGRATION OF BRT ELEMENTS

independently developed, it is also possible to make incremental investments to upgrade the

Decision Support System for Bus Rapid Transit | Yash Yedavalli 8

rail and bus projects.

Decision Support System for Bus Rapid Transit | Yash Yedavalli 9

GOALS & OBJECTIVES

Decision Support System for Bus Rapid Transit | Yash Yedavalli 10