How to apply a BHLS Concept

Several BHLS concept approaches have been observed and written into guidelines, some at national level, such as in France, in Sweden and in Netherlands, some other more detailed at city level like in Dublin, Paris, Manchester and Hamburg whose strategy were applied later on also in Berlin and in Munich.

The appellations are very different, choosing wording judged the most appropriate according to the context, the branding objectives or language matters, such as “service”, corridor”, “quality”. Other have chosen “metro” for branding a mode similar to a heavy one which quality is very well known. We observe that the terms “transit” or “rapid” are never used in Europe.

Moreover, for some cities, we observe a need to define several levels of service, several con- cept according to the role, the size of the bus line, or the readability that is expected for the passengers, such as in Nantes, Paris or Hamburg, according to the survey results presented into the chapter 3.4. Actually, since some years, it can be observed in Europe, a trend toward a much stronger hierarchisation of all bus lines in the network. This has evolved due to, among others, the recent BHLS approach, spreading at different levels of service.

Briefly, the main characteristics highlighted for the structuring bus lines “BHLS” are: Connection with the upper level (intercity rail network, regional train, metro,…) High capacity

High frequency

Long span, straight routes, “Go fast”

And the reasons that are more often pointed out are mainly: To make the bus network clear, readable.

To tackle congestion and to contribute to solve environmental issues.

To prioritise by infrastructure investment, according to the potential capacity. To concentrate the demand.

The users needs, as the basis of any BHLS con- cept approach Reliability ap- pears to be the most important objective

In any case, to increase the cost coverage, while some weak bus lines can be then suppressed, as said in Nantes.

The cities interested by hierarchisation of bus lines in the network are designing several types of bus solutions and we can present a spectrum from local lines to BHLS “full or com- plete” offering a high level of quality, as shown in the graph below:

Stronger or more perennial system with more capacity, stronger “system” approach

Belong to the structuring network (by the schedule span, identification etc).

A higher capacity justifies a higher Investment.

Are suitable in smaller corridors or as feeder lines to the structuring network

Figure 31: Toward a hierarchisation approach of the bus-based solutions

All these solutions are fruitful solutions and should be designed according to a system ap- proach, integrating the infrastructure in a coherent manner with the vehicle and the operation condition and components.

Obviously, as all urban contexts are different from each other, it is up to the local authorities to decide upon and define its mobility plan with the suitable hierarchisation of the bus-based system.

The BHLS concept should be seen as a method or a guideline for local decision makers for reviewing and designing the different types of bus-based solutions.

The identification of each level of service will be very fruitful for the passenger, it can be achieved through several means, such as:

The numbering of the line, the choice of a logo, A specific design for the bus itself

An specific design of all stations

Specific features along the infrastructure itself, a contrast, piece of furniture, marks,…

The clear identification of the route in all network maps and information tools.

Then several questions have been raised:

 Is there really a need to write down an EU BHLS concept? With its own guidelines? with a specific acronym for all countries?

 Is it better to let each EU country building / translating its own BHLS concept guide- lines according to its own language, regulation, urban context? With its own acro- nym?

 Is it anyway better to advise cities (mainly the biggest one…) building by them- selves their different concept application, as they could need several “levels of ser- vice”?

The first option does not seem so useful, as so many guide books have already been pub- lished in USA, Canada and in some countries in Europe, France, UK, Netherlands. A Euro- pean guide book will not add more inputs. On an other hand EU countries have a different

language, a different culture in organising public transport, with very different levels of PT use, with different PT financing ways.

The two other options seems to be the best, but, as said into the recommendation chapter, a high interest to exchange the existing experiences, to keep and improve this knowledge net- work built through this COST action:

 It is up to each authority to define and build up its hierarchisation through its urban planning.

 The BHLS concept should be seen as a method or a guideline for local decision makers for designing the different types of bus-based solutions.

This final report can be the basis of fruitful advises and existing references for countries and cities feeling the interest to set up a conceptual phase, at one or several “levels of service”. A BHLS concept can be seen as:

- A strategy, system approach, of improving, boosting, or revamping Public Transport (more than trunk lines), as a strategy for regeneration to new standards.

- A tool to fix the main characteristics of High Quality Urban insertion, according to the economic, cultural and social context.

- A pedagogic tool towards all stakeholders.

BHLS: new ways of think- ing Urban Quality and Public Trans- port.