Linking Bicycle Commuting with Bus Rapid Transit

After Gutenberg commentator Country mouse referred to a study of adults aged 18 years or over, which indicated that the most important environmental factors in four areas of a part of London known as Greenwich associated with less mental well-being included: neighbor noise, sense of over-crowding in the home and lack of escape facilities such as green spaces and community facilities, and fear of crime. These factors were independent of each other.

Depiction of a transit hub that includes high speed electric rail


Generally speaking, development focuses upon existing transit hubs or along transit corridors. The depiction of a transit hub that includes high speed electric rail was used as a focal point for a previous consideration of more mass transit and walkable communities.

Country mouse used the Greenwich study and another survey, carried out for Greenspace Scotland, a government-funded umbrella body trying to improve derelict land in urban areas, to support the contention that communities should be designed for people of differing income levels and different levels of health. Would the following attempt get an approving twitch or a disapproving droop to the whiskers?

From Streetsblog1 via Treehugger we learn about BRT (Bus Rapid Transit) in Bogota.

While red buses circulate along main arteries, smaller green buses circulate in the neighborhoods, picking up passengers for free and feeding them into the main stations. Making feeder buses free (while still recognizing the need for easy access to stations) gave the city a serious incentive to pave bike paths to stations. After all, every twenty or so people who bike to the Transmilenio equal one less green feeder bus that the city needs to operate.

“Can BRT Encourage Bike Use?2“

Bus Rapid Transit in Bogota


Bogotá is very similar in size and population to NYC, except that it only has surface transit. In the the opinion of StreetsBlog commentator mfs the Bus Rapid Transit in Bogota known as TransMilenio “is a cosmic leap ahead of the privately-operated shared mini-buses (colectivos) that were the backbone of transit there.” On the other hand, the commentator found the system to be pretty slow by world transit standards.

A major goal of modern inter modal passenger transport is to reduce emissions and improve the health and quality of life for passengers. It most often includes increased use of more efficient public transport and decreased dependence on the automobile for commuting. The example of Bus Rapid Transit in Bogota suggests that rapid bus shuttle service could enable access to and expansion of high-speed rail systems. Presumably, it would be of benefit to populations not directly served by the high-speed rail line if shuttle service connected them quickly and efficiently to nearby commercial, cultural employment, educational and health centers.

Yet what is suggested by commentary to the StreetsBlog post, in addition to the observation by country mouse, is that the design of the transit environment is critical. Country mouse cautions that the design should avoid economic and physical elitism (read accessibility, a.k.a., universal design). One of the challenges of inter modal passenger transport is the interface between modes. Such a change over can be particularly challenging to those lacking mobility and to whom ancillary support systems are unavailable.

Israel Invests in Mass Transit


“Based completely on BRT (Bus Rapid Transit) technology, of the kind pioneered by the Brazilian city of Curitiba, Haifa’s system is by far the cheapest, quickest and simplest of the three, and is expected to be up and running by 2010.”

While enthusiasts and professional planners know there are few distinctions between BRT and light rail, notes StreetsBlog commentator Greg R., the riding public has shown a greater level of interest, rate of adaptation, and level of commitment to light rail. He refers to the Berkeley BRT hullabaloo, to which the lead off comment by Charles Siegel made reference: “You would not believe the opposition to BRT in supposedly progressive Berkeley - hordes of people saying they are against [it].”

Still the pro-BRT crowd has some convincing economic arguments. StreetsBlog commentator Adrianna asserts that TransMilenio has spurred development. “Instead of relying on tracks for a sense of permanence, the system has sophisticated and full-service stations that are not cheap.” She contends that:

  1. 1) the Bogota model would definitely work very well as commuter Rapid Transit from urbanised to suburban areas in almost any setting (assuming you can re-allocate or somehow get enough ROW space).
  2. 2) The Bogota model would serve as a local service with one lane in each direction in smaller urban centres as long as the stops are sufficiently far apart. I think that 400 m used in Periera is too close together. 800 m would have been more suitable.
  3. 3) The stations are the “corner stones” of the system. This is non-negotiable. The busways might be essential to operation, but the stations keep people happy, dry, moving. They give the system it’s permanence.
Congestion Charge Traffic Sign in London


“The congestion charge was introduced 4 years ago into central London as a way of cutting back on traffic entering the centre of the city.”

Unfortunately, most of the pro-BRT crowd seemed to ignore two essential variables contributing to successful future ventures. It would seem appropriate that Bus Rapid Transit coincides with a congestion charge or other disincentive to urban traffic. Second, it would seem critical that BRT could compete with light rail in terms of life cycle emissions.

Advocating standard diesel buses for urban transit may be efficient, yet also would seem contrary to other significant efforts to mitigate anthropogenic carbon emissions and improve the quality of life in urban areas, although StreetsBlog commentator Josh does assert that a BRT could “be electric just as easily as a train.”

Charlotte is looking at rubber-tired vehicles that are powered by overhead lines for some of its future streetcar lines. Of course that will raise initial capital costs, but also eliminates diesel exhaust and noise (and even the high pitched albeit quiet whine of the hybrid buses we have here).

StreetsBlog commentator Eric makes an excellent point, “Different tools are useful for different corridors, and insisting on only one tool is overly simplistic.” And, StreetsBlog commentator mfs reminds those on either side of the debate of the advantages of public transit:

I think it is great to have a debate of BRT vs. light rail. Costs, infrastructure, which is best for which city, etc., [all of this is worthy of consideration.]

But, we need to keep in mind something far more important. I think the number one thing is that we need to be building more of BOTH. And, we need to be getting rid of [investment] that caters to the SOV (Singly Operated Vehicles).

This blog simply would add the condition, when SOVs are less efficient and more burdensome. Utility cycling, i.e., when bicycling is a means of transport rather than sport or recreation, is common in some parts of the world, particularly where the median income precludes the common use of motorized transport. For instance, “in the Chinese city of Beijing alone, there are an estimated four million bicycles in use.”

Free Bicycle Storage in Bogota


“Bogotá is one of the most bike-friendly cities in South America. In addition to paving bike paths, the city set up large, clean and free bicycle storage facilities at the stations, giving people even more incentive to do the first part of their journey to work on two wheels.”

The post to Treehugger by Jesse Fox called attention to the idea of linking bicycle commuting with Bus Rapid Transit, and the Wikipedia entry on inter modal passenger transit included a section on the use of bicycles:

Bicycles are often a good way for people to get to a public transportation station, but they need safe place to leave the bike when they get to the station. Some public transportation systems have provisions for cyclists to take their bicycles on board trains and buses, often at off peak times.

Decisions taken by various levels of government, as well as local groups, residents’ organizations and public- and private-sector employers, can all have an impact on the so-called “modal choice” or “modal split” in daily transport. In some cases various factors may be manipulated in a manner that deliberately seeks to encourage or discourage various transport modes.

The League of American Bicyclists3 have divided those various factors into five major categories, a.k.a., the 5 E’s: Engineering, Encouragement, Evaluation and Planning, Education, Enforcement.

Malmo Sweden RR station


Photo by Ken Coughlin

“Where cycling is being encouraged as an alternative to motoring, efforts are made to make bicycle parking more convenient and attractive to use than the equivalent car parking arrangements.”

Jesse Fox called attention to a more specific issue: Arrangements for Bicycle Parking / Storage and the issue aptly described in the Wikipedia entry on utility cycling:

Secure parking is argued to be a key factor influencing the decision to cycle. To be considered secure, the parking must be of a suitable design: allowing the bicycle to be locked via the frame. In addition, the bike parking must be located in a readily observable location permitting so-called passive security from passers-by. Weather protection is also desirable.

As a rule, where cycling is being encouraged as an alternative to motoring, efforts are made to make bicycle parking more convenient and attractive to use than the equivalent car parking arrangements. This usually means providing a wide distribution of visible, well-signed, parking as close as possible to the entrances of the destinations being served. Storage rooms or bicycle lockers may also be provided.

In some cases large concentrations of bike parking may be more appropriate. These storage facilities can sometimes be supervised and sometimes charge a fee. Examples include large bike parks at public transport interchanges such as railway, subway, tram or bus stations.

The Wikipedia then gave an example of a perceived injustice to the accommodation of bicycling commuters. Calling attention to the frequent bias against utility bicycling suggests to this blog use of the 3 E’s as a means of assessment: Ecology, Economy and Equity.

Continue reading here: The Prairie Proposition

Was this article helpful?

0 0