E- Implementation within a “speed limit” zone, inevitable trade-off
1- Sites that can be considered as “complete” or “full” BHLS
The following sites appear to have followed a strong, permanent, global and coherent “BHLS system” approach, with a high level of capacity and performance.
Listed below in table 21 are details related to sites that could be considered as having adopted the full BHLS approach concerning urban planning and infrastructure. The second table 22 highlights some data concerning ITS aspects, operation issues and performances at the sites.
Paris Nantes Amsterdam Almere Kent Jonkoping Table 21
TVM (Busway) Line 4 Zuidtangent 10 lines (trunk network) Fastrack A and B "Citybussarna" 3 trunk lines - Opening dates 1993 / June 2007 Nov 2006 2002 / 2007 (2 lines) 1975 March 2006 / June 2007 1996 Role in the
network
tangential line
as the 4th
tram line tangential line
structuring network structuring network structuring net- work Intermodal integration strong (with RER) strong (P+R) strong (P+R, P+B) strong (P+R, P+B) strong strong (P+B only) % of RoW 95% 87% 66% 99% 56% 7,7% position of
RoW mainly central mainly central exclusive lanes exclusive lanes protected protected spacing aver- age (m) 700 500 1900 > 600 450 410 - 440 Cost (infra only) 7,1 M€/ km 7,4 M€/ km 6,5 M€/ km Inside city construction 2 M€/km (PPP) 0,26 M€/km Paris Nantes Amsterdam Almere Kent Jonkoping Table 22
TVM (Busway) Line 4 Zuidtangent
10 lines (trunk net- work) Fastrack A and B 3 trunk lines - "Citybus- sarna" type of bus articulated specific articulated specific articulated identified articulated Standard, standard SD Identified articulated identified dynamic
passenger information
stops and on
board stops and on board yes on progress
stops and on board (plug and wifi on board) stops and in board Priority at
crossroads yes all yes all yes all
trips/day 66 000 27 500 (line 1) 32 000 16 000 (line1) 45 000 a week (B) 18 000 (for 3 lines) commercial
speed 21 / 23 km/h 21 / 23 km/h > 35 km/h 24 - 25 km/h 18.3 km/h 21 - 23 km/h frequency 3,5 – 15 min 3,5 – 20 min 6 – 10 min 7 – 30 min 10 – 15 min 10 – 30 min ridership before / after 287% since 1993 + 60% + 100% in 2005 New net- work +60% than expected + 15 / 20% Branding strong (by TVM) strong strong not for buses strong not for buses
In all these sites, the following common trends for reaching a strong, permanent BHLS sys- tem approach were observed:
- BHLS is a part of the integrated structuring network (like a tram or a metro line), with a strong emphasis on intermodality. A wide schedule span is then observed approaching those of the highest level of the network (regional train, metro, tram).
- A coherent and well-balanced design along the whole route between the two termini has been adopted.
- “Stations” are implemented rather than “bus stops”, as they have a permanent location and can- not be easily displaced.
- Significant bus priority measures have been introduced to aid performance of high frequency services: priority at all crossroads and dedicated lanes, mostly in central position or (and) well protected (lateral position are often less efficient).
- A design for high regularity that supports high capacity. Several lines are often provided in the corridors, e.g. Paris and Kent Fastrack.
- A design with limited bus stops to decrease journey times and operating costs.
- Efforts have been made to reduce on board ticket sales by the driver as much as possible, to de- crease dwell times at stops. Full off-board ticketing is only observed in the Busway of Nantes: the driver cabin is closed like into a modern tramway.
- Continuous monitoring and control by AVM system that allows the maintenance of regularity and frequency.
- A high level of passenger information on-board and at each stop (soon in Almere).
- A strong branding of the route, that often leads to having a dedicated fleet (distinctive to the other buses of the network).
In general these projects are most expensive when a large proportion of RoW is included. The example of Jönköping however is an interesting example: it is a small urban area and just 10% of RoW was enough to reach a high level of quality. This could be achieved with few traffic problems, and by efficient bus priority measures at every crossroads. In some cases, sites have chosen to design BHLS systems with a view to a possible conversion to tram at some time in the future (Nantes, Twente, Zuidtangent).
The sites in “TEOR” of Rouen and “TVRCAS Línea 1” of Castellón (a very short first phase on service with 3 trolleybuses) have been designed like a tram system, utilising optical guid- ance vehicles offering very small and consistent gaps, fruitful for high ridership.
In Cambridge, the kerb-guided bus project can also be considered as a full BHLS system approach. (the system opened in August 2011 after some delays). Strong emphasis has been placed on the integration in urban planning and intermodality (connection with the rail sta- tion, P+B at each station with CCTV and some P+R). The introduction of dedicated bus lanes will provide certainly many advantages to aid performance and quality.
The case of Bus VAO in Madrid (alternative dedicated lane for buses and carpooling for half distance, in the middle of the motorway A-6 along - 16km) remains very impressive and unique in Europe. Although these lines are not branded and a dynamic information is not yet available everywhere, this scheme can be considered as a full BHLS for the following rea- sons:
- A very efficient RoW type A (grade separated) along the motorway that provided a high regularity and a much better speed.
- A strong, impressive and close connection with the metro ring line of Madrid (Moncloa sta- tion), that provides a high level of intermodality with the structuring network of the whole region.
This approach has achieved a very good modal shift from cars and a high increase of rider- ship (+50%). However, Real Time Information has still to be introduced to support services at stops and on board (on progress). Sharing the lanes with other uncontrolled traffic (motor- cycles, carpooling, taxi) can provide some drawbacks sometimes. Nonetheless, in Madrid, this sharing seems to work well.