February 2017
Agenda
1. Corridor Overview
2. Project Goals
3. Key Challenges
4. Four (4) Preliminary BRT Concepts
5. Assessment of Preferred BRT Concepts
6. Key Findings
7. Next Steps
2
Background
(includes sidewalks/medians)
> ROW is narrowest in segments
with highest boarding activity
> Sparse bus stop environments
4
Studied how it would work in LA
Why Improve Transit on Vermont Corridor ?
5
Project Goals for Improving Bus Service
6
There are Five (5) Key Project Challenges
7
Delegations to Curitiba in 1997 and 1999
Common
Metro BRTThree
Operates Elements
Types of BRT Services
8
What Weve Heard
9
Four (4) Preliminary BRT Concepts Were Identified
10
Concept 1: End-to-End Side Running BRT
11
Concept 2: Combo Side / Center Running BRT
12
Concept 3: Curbside Running BRT
13
Concept 4: Peak Period Curbside Running BRT
14
Performance Assessment of BRT Concepts
Performance Measures
> Passenger Travel Time Savings
> Average Bus Speeds
> Ridership
> Estimated Project Costs
> Person Throughput
> Impacts to Existing Facilities
15
Passenger Travel Time Savings
Midday 13 20%
Concept 1
PM Peak 19 27%
Midday 13 21%
Concept 2
PM Peak 20 28%
Midday 7 11%
Concept 3
PM Peak 8 12%
Midday 0 0%
Concept 4
PM Peak 6 9%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Midday PM Peak Midday PM Peak Midday PM Peak Midday PM Peak
Concept 1 Concept 2 Concept 3 Concept 4
17
Ridership (Daily Boardings)
18
Estimated Project Costs
Dedicated bus lanes for the entire corridor (Concepts 1 and 2) result in a
higher upfront Capital Cost but lower annual Operating & Maintenance Costs
19
Person Throughput
20
Level of Service (LOS) / Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
21
Impacts to Existing On-Street Parking
Removed On-
% Reduction
street parking
Corridor-wide
spaces (all-day)
Current
Concept 1 446 22%
average on-
Concept 2 464 23% street parking
occupancy
Concept 3 1,100 55% along Vermont
Concept 4 83 4%
Avenue is 55%
22
Summary of Performance
Increase in
Capital
Average Travel Time (PM Average Total Corridor Ridership Annual O&M
Cost ($ in
Peak, SB, in Minutes) Bus Speed (weekday) Cost ($ in
Millions)
Millions)
Concepts
No Build (2035)
Rapid Line 754
Current Metro
Build (2035)
from current
Metro Rapid
Post Project
Post Project
Post Project
% Change
% Change
% Change
Line 754
(2015)
(2035)
(2035)
(2035)
Concept 1 51 27% 37% 74,050 36% 322 3.4
Concepts 1 and 2 offer the greatest improvements in travel time, bus speed,
and ridership
23
Summary of Impacts
Travel Lane
Person Throughput Parking Impacts
Impacts (by
(per lane) (reduction)
direction)
Concepts
Current (2015)
Current (2015)
Current (2015)
Post Project
Post Project
Post Project
% Change
% Change
(2035)
(2035)
(2035)
Concept 1 1-2 -446 -22%
24
Key Findings
Concept 1 Concept 2
25
Next Steps
> Phase II of the study will look at how the BRT could be
converted to rail in the future
26
Thank You
27