+ All Categories
Home > Documents > Bus Rapid Transit: Chicago’s New Route to Opportunity Josh Ellis, BRT Project Manager Metropolitan...

Bus Rapid Transit: Chicago’s New Route to Opportunity Josh Ellis, BRT Project Manager Metropolitan...

Date post: 26-Dec-2015
Category:
Upload: rodney-griffith
View: 220 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
Popular Tags:
18
Bus Rapid Transit: Chicago’s New Route to Opportunity Josh Ellis, BRT Project Manager Metropolitan Planning Council
Transcript

Bus Rapid Transit: Chicago’s New Route to Opportunity

Josh Ellis, BRT Project Manager

Metropolitan Planning Council

Who is MPC?

• Since 1934, the Metropolitan Planning Council (MPC) has been dedicated to shaping a more sustainable and prosperous greater Chicago region. As an independent, nonprofit, nonpartisan organization, MPC serves communities and residents by developing, promoting and implementing solutions for sound regional growth.

Livability Principles• Provide more transportation choices• Promote equitable, affordable housing• Enhance economic competitiveness• Support existing communities• Coordinate policies and leverage investment• Value communities and neighborhoods

– http://www.dot.gov/livability/101.html

Key Features of BRT

Bogotá, Colombia

Dedicated bus lanes

At-grade boarding

Rouen, France

Pay-before-you-board stations

Mexico City, Mexico

Los Angeles, California

Signal prioritization

Values of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)

• Congestion relief: • Chicago’s Cost of Congestion = $7.3 billion/yr• 95% is cost of wasted travel time

• Connectivity:• To existing rapid transit network, recreational centers,

education, food, medical, jobs, entertainment…• Community:

• Creates framework for future complementary development

• Cost:• BRT delivers excellent service, costs less, and utilizes

existing infrastructure

Our methodology

Phase I:• Eliminate “special” routes

Phase II:• Assess segments by right-of-way for BRT feasibility• Assess segments for livability

Phase III:• Fill in gaps to integrate with existing rail and provide connectivity

Phase IV:• Assess ridership demand and traffic impacts along routes

Phase I – Initial screening and segments

Phase II - Right of way 86 ft. segments

Travel lanes of 86 ft.

Flow lanes without stations

Phase II – Right of way 97 ft. segments

2 stations: westbound and eastbound

1 station in the median

Phase II - Right of Way 97 ft. segments

Travel lanes of 97 ft. that are consistent for

at least 3 miles

BRT station in median with pre-paid boarding, at grade entrance, and designated bus lanes

Phase II – LivabilityCriterion Rationale for Selection Study Measure Main Corresponding

Livability Principles

2) Connectivity to Educational Institutions

BRT has the potential to help facilitate the movement of residents, students, tourist, and employees to educational institutions.

Number of educational institutions within a half-mile of street segments.

3) Enhance Economic Competiveness

6) Value Communities and Neighborhoods

9) Existing Transit Ridership

Current bus ridership demonstrates existing demand for transit along the study routes.

Average passenger flow by street segment (controlling for direction) during the a.m. peak period.

1) Provide more transportation choices

13) Population Not Served by Rail

Residents not currently well served by rail transit have a particular and pressing need for rapid transit service within walking distance of their homes.

Residential population within a half-mile of street segments that also live beyond a half-mile radius of fixed guideway transit (CTA and/or Metra).

1)Provide more transportation choices

2) Promote Equitable, Affordable Housing

Phase II - Livability

• Scoring results from three of the 14 livability criteria – access to education (left), ridership by stop (middle), and population not within walking distance of rail (right).

Education Ridership Population > .5mi from Rail

Phase II - Livability Weighted CriteriaCriterion Weight (%)

1) Connectivity to Community Services

3.59

2) Connectivity to Educational Institutions

3.59

3) Connectivity to Entertainment

3.59

4) Connectivity to Food Stores

3.59

5) Connectivity to Major Medical Care

3.59

6) Connectivity to Major Open Space

3.59

7) Connectivity to Retail 3.59

8) Employment/Job Access 3.59

9) Population 3.59

10) Existing Transit Travel Time

16.17

11) Existing Transit Ridership

16.17

12) Transportation Costs 16.17

13) Population not Served by Rail

16.17

14) Infill Development Potential

3.00

Phase III – Transit

integration and connectivity

• 21 CTA rail stationconnections

• 15 Metra station connections

• 12 BRT on BRT connections

Mandy Burrell Booth
Should we play this up as our big deliverable in Chicago, i.e., the 10-route network?

Phase IV – Demand modeling

Service Factor Assumptions

Headway 5 – 10 minutes (peak)

12 – 15 minutes (off-peak)

Station Spacing 2 stations per mile

Speeds 20 mph for 20-second stop time

15 mph for 30-second stop time

Dwell Time 20 seconds

30 seconds

Phase IV – Demand modeling

• Impact on transit person trips:– Transit trips with both ends in the BRT network increase by

41,000 daily (14% bump)– Transit trips with either a beginning or end in BRT network

increase 6.5%– Total regional transit trips increase 3%

– Transit mode share increases:• 12.0% to 13.5% within BRT network• 14.7% to 15.8% for trips with one end in BRT network• 9.7% to 10% regionally

Western Corridor

• Alternatives Analysis• Community

engagement in station areas

• Plan for complementary public and private investment

• Evaluate sources for funding capital and operations

Thank You

Josh Ellis

Metropolitan Planning Council

312.863.6045

[email protected]

See the full report, technical study, and appendices at www.metroplanning.org/brt


Recommended