Design and Implementation challenges for BHLS

Design and Implementation Challenges are normally issues that can be resolved, but either have features unique to BHLS, or require more careful attention to design and/or sufficient resources. They will include features deployed on the BHLS that have not (yet) been de- ployed on the rest of the bus fleet.

Infrastructure issues

This sub-system is the most expensive, and the most challenging. There are various options available to cities, central or lateral position, flexible or not, common section with tram or other lines.

Difficulties with asphalt choice for high capacity for station or for running ways (problems of pavement rutting).

Difficulties with choosing a contrasted colour (not in UK, always red for every level) Enforcement of the RoW remains a key-issue for achieving the quality objectives. It in- creases the operating cost, even if some are made at low cost like in Cambridge with “car traps”, there is a need to compare the efficiency or effects of these enforcement tools imple- mented.

Bus stations design

Implementing a BHLS station is always difficult, as it is for a tram station. It requires a wider place for providing good comfort and should have permanence for BHLS schemes. Difficulties to enlarge the stop spacing, for increasing the speed, is a very important factor for good BHLS effectiveness:

- Decision makers normally consider that the public does not like to walk more than previously, but public could be ready to walk a little more if urban management for pedestrians are improved (as shown in BAHN.VILLE project), and in case also of a high quality.

- The needs of elderly and disabled people should be recognized in the design of BHLS systems.Most of these measures are advantages for all passengers and the at- tractiveness for the public transport system – accessibility to stops, spacing, light- ning, clear visible and audible information and non-level boarding.

Regarding vehicle issues

Difficulties for choosing an alternative cleaner energy (cost vs. environmental impact). It is sometimes difficult to choose between improved diesel buses, electrical energy (trolley- buses), hybrid solutions or alternative cleaner energy. This issue is not specific of BHLS: it is an issue of strategy for the whole bus fleet.

Access by all doors is not compatible with problems of fraud, but a good speed of boarding is required for BHLS.

Seating capacity or standing capacity? What is best for “speed” of service – UK has history of high seating capacity and single doors – can this be changed. Comfort on board related to average trip length (in min).

Space for prams, wheelchairs, bags, etc.

Balance capacity with service hours, to spread demand and reduce peaks.

Promote the use of monthly / yearly passes or / and smart cards at reduced price to reduce the number of transactions. Moreover, the greater the number of passes is, the lower the problem of fraud is (as in Germany or Switzerland).

Regarding ITS issues, mainly the AVM

AVM: this is one of the key components when considering BHLS. It needs to be managed at a network level.

A good level of knowledge is required to introduce a good AVM system. The required ex- pertise might not be easy to get in small urban areas. However, it may be possible to partner with a more experienced bus operator who could provide mentoring and support. Developing good operations strategy and good operations procedures, supported by appropriate staff organisation and training, is at least as important as the technology.

Providing and displaying dynamic information at all stops and/or in BHLS vehicle is expen- sive. However, information is an indispensable component for BHLS level. There is a need to evaluate the potential of providing this information to mobile devices direct to the cus- tomer or by flash codes. There is also a need to build systems to respond to changing condi- tions, with more efficiency.

Traffic light priority: these can be difficult to achieve in some areas due to political and geo- graphic issues. Even where the operator has an AVM system, there may be difficulties to achieve sufficient precision if the polling cycle is fixed or coverage is poor.

It is more difficult to assure an efficient priority at traffic lights with smaller vehicles that are operating with a higher frequency (and we have to consider priority for both directions). In a deregulated market, ITS, with a high level of passenger information appears to be diffi- cult to implement due to institutional issues and responsibility for financing; in that case, a PPP approach or other framework agreement may be a solution.

Regarding marketing / branding issues

The ability to sell BHLS requires a strong marketing strategy, at network level, integrating the long term. This strategy can include a bus-based network hierarchisation.

Difficulties in an open market (UK), How do you control market? Who decides timetables? Who decides fares?

Other Issues

Hierarchisation is a key issue for big urban areas, with a need to be able to rationalise some current services with too low ridership.

Tram project seems to have an advantage regarding esthetic issues in implementation, How- ever, some BHLS schemes have shown very good achievements in that regard (Castellón, Nantes, Twente, Rouen, Cambridge) and there are no reason why a BHLS system cannot be given the same urban quality.

The urban quality, especially around stops and accessibility to them should be given a high attention in a BHLS system. There are clear indications in recent literature that the urban quality and accessibility to stops can give increased ridership on the same level as improved public transport operations.

4.2 Recommendations / messages for policy-makers decision-

takers

Based on the experience gained to date in the 35 European BHLS schemes examined by the COST TU603 action, a number of recommendations and messages can be formulated to policy makers and decision-takers. We have clustered these at EU/National Level (i.e. those who set policy and programmes) and at City/Regional level (i.e. those who implement, and are locally accountable).