Prodded by the Federal Transit Administration, U.S. cities and suburbs are borrowing a page from Latin America and considering the development of low cost rapid bus-ways to speed transit trips, extend networks and add needed passenger capacity. 

Cities in Brazil, Columbia and Ecuador have developed entire transit systems based on networks of bus-only and bus-priority routes. For example, according to the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy, Bogota's TransMilenio system is built around three exclusive bus corridors, which move 550,000 people daily. The system began service in December, 2000, and was developed in only three years. Expansion plans would create 19 more corridors that would provide up to 5 million passenger trips daily by 2015.

Last week, the New York region's transportation agencies, the National Transit Institute and the University Transportation Research Center at City College convened for a day-long workshop on bus rapid transit and its potential application here. So far, there are no new rapid bus projects underway in New York or New Jersey, though the exclusive bus lane in the Lincoln Tunnel carries more passengers than any other bus facility in the U.S. New York City in fact is reputed to have the slowest urban transit buses in the U.S. Officials at Connecticut DOT are developing a new exclusive bus-way in a corridor linking New Britain and downtown Hartford.

Bus rapid transit proponents cite dramatically lower costs and time of project implementation as major advantages over construction of new light or commuter rail lines. They also promote buses' flexibility to operate on and off of dedicated rights-of-way, and therefore their ability to deliver travel over a complex network with fewer transfers between routes.

California examples presented at the session bore these contentions out. Rex Gebhart of the Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority described two bus-priority routes implemented for about $10 million during a 9 month period. The routes feature a dynamic signal priority system that estimates bus speed and either extends green signals for buses, or else triggers them early after a red phase. The rapid buses are located on the opposite side of the street from local service (the buses also have a different color than the locals), and stops are spaced .85 miles apart. Bus stop shelters are ample and distinctive, and feature real-time information about approaching buses. Bus service is organized on a headway basis instead of a prescriptive route schedule for each bus.

Increased bus speed on the two rapid routes has produced ridership gains of 42% and 38%. One-third of the increase is bus riders using buses more often, one-third is riders switching from parallel routes and one-third is new riders - motorists switching to transit. In the next few months, L.A. will begin to implement the first pieces of exclusive bus right of way for its developing rapid bus system. Gebhart said the rapid routes could not have been implemented without close cooperation between city government and the MTA. 

Rapid bus proponents also say that with strong travel time savings and attention to the quality of passengers' experience, public preference for rail over bus can be minimized, and the decision about bus vs. rail transformed into a purely technical issue. 

Indeed, Leon Goodman of the Parsons Transportation Group suggested that certain rail rights-of-way in our region would capture more passengers as bus rapid transit facilities, because they could be used by buses coming from disparate origins, and could provide one-seat rides to a variety of destinations. He said the Newark City Subway and the Staten Island Railway were candidates in this regard. Goodman displayed a pre-World War II map of planned subway system extensions - which have not been implemented - to show that New York City's transit system is far from complete. He said rapid bus systems could play roles in corridors once slated for subways like Queens' Hillside Avenue and along Flatbush, Utica and Nostrand Avenues in Brooklyn.

It's unclear where bus rapid transit ideas in the region go from here. Participants from NYC DOT, NYC Transit, NJ Transit and other departments expressed interest in the topic. However, a number of statements during the conference's concluding session predictably bemoaned the region's multiplicity of jurisdictions and the difficulties of inter-agency cooperation. It's likely that political leaders are the most important constituency to educate about bus rapid transit's potential.

Buzz grows for bus rapid transit 
(Nov., 2001)

NYC express bus ridership booms (April, 2001)

Business backs Staten Island bus-way (Feb., 2000)

MTR search facilityand back issues:

Search our database of all past issues of Mobilizing the Region since Fall, 1994.

Go to indexof all Mobilizing the Region back issues