% This file is part of the
% The Online BRT Planning Guide
%
% DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE MANUALLY!
%
% This file has been automatically generated from its sources
% using the OBRT tool:
%  tool version: 364c3e5
%  haxe version: 3.4.0
%  runtime: JS
%  platform: Linux

\chapter{5}{Corridor and Network Development}
\label{volume:operations:chapter:corridor-and-network-development}
% @ guide/05-network_development/00-corridor-and-network-development.src: lines 1-5: code points 1-37

\quotation{Look at every path closely and deliberately, then ask ourselves this crucial question: Does this path have a heart? If it does, then the path is good. If it doesn’t, it is of no use.}{Carlos Castaneda, author, 1925–1998}
% @ guide/05-network_development/00-corridor-and-network-development.src: lines 3-5: code points 1-37

\emphasis{The BRT Standard} (2014) currently provides a definition of a corridor that can be evaluated as "a section of road or contiguous roads served by a bus route or multiple bus routes with a minimum length of 3 kilometers (1.9 miles) that has dedicated bus lanes."\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/00-corridor-and-network-development.src: lines 7-9: code points 1-65

It then uses a minimum definition of BRT, defined as a minimum score in the “BRT basics,” to determine whether the investments in that corridor constitute BRT or simple bus lanes.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/00-corridor-and-network-development.src: lines 11-12: code points 1-76

The choice of BRT corridors is critical. Not only will the selection of a good corridor increase the number of beneficiaries for the BRT investments, but a strategically located corridor can also, under certain circumstances, stimulate transit-oriented development with profound impacts on the future development of the city.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/00-corridor-and-network-development.src: lines 14-17: code points 1-12

Ultimately, the selection of a BRT network and the prioritization of BRT corridors for implementation is both technical and political. Political decisions around corridor selection are necessary, as it is much more likely that a BRT project will get built where there is political support for the project. However, such a political decision should be made only after a detailed technical analysis recommends a set of corridors that makes sense.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/00-corridor-and-network-development.src: lines 19-23: code points 1-36

Information should be grounded in empirical reality, quantifiable, and independently verifiable. Those harder to quantify, harder to determine factors should be discussed as part of the political process, but should not necessarily be included in the data collection process. This chapter provides a basic approach to defining a BRT network and prioritizing the corridors within that network for phased implementation.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/00-corridor-and-network-development.src: lines 25-28: code points 1-112

The contents of this subchapter on corridor and network development are:\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/00-corridor-and-network-development.src: lines 31-31: code points 1-72

\begin{itemize}
\item Demand Analysis for Corridor Selection;% @ guide/05-network_development/00-corridor-and-network-development.src: lines 33-34: code points 1-0
\item Transit System Speed and Delay Analysis;% @ guide/05-network_development/00-corridor-and-network-development.src: lines 34-35: code points 1-0
\item Corridor Prioritization Based on Existing Demand;% @ guide/05-network_development/00-corridor-and-network-development.src: lines 35-36: code points 1-0
\item Additional Corridors Based on Future Demand;% @ guide/05-network_development/00-corridor-and-network-development.src: lines 36-37: code points 1-0
\item Framework for Comparing Corridors;% @ guide/05-network_development/00-corridor-and-network-development.src: lines 37-38: code points 1-0
\item Corridor Length;% @ guide/05-network_development/00-corridor-and-network-development.src: lines 38-39: code points 1-0
\item Other Considerations in Corridor Selection.% @ guide/05-network_development/00-corridor-and-network-development.src: lines 39-39: code points 1-49
\end{itemize}
% @ guide/05-network_development/00-corridor-and-network-development.src: lines 33-39: code points 1-49

\section{1}{Demand Analysis for Corridor Selection}
\label{volume:operations:chapter:corridor-and-network-development:section:demand-analysis-for-corridor-selection}
% @ guide/05-network_development/51-demand-analysis-for-corridor-selection.src: lines 3-72: code points 1-101

\quotation{Without mathematics, there’s nothing you can do. Everything around you is mathematics. Everything around you is numbers.}{Shakuntala Devi, writer known as the “human calculator,” 1929–2013}
% @ guide/05-network_development/51-demand-analysis-for-corridor-selection.src: lines 5-6: code points 1-68

The most important factor in determining whether a corridor is appropriate for BRT investments is the existing level of public transport demand. This is because the existing customers using a particular corridor are more than likely going to benefit from new BRT investments. A BRT built on a corridor with more existing transit customers is likely to have more beneficiaries than a BRT built on a corridor with fewer existing customers.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/51-demand-analysis-for-corridor-selection.src: lines 8-12: code points 1-25

The methods for determining the existing level of transit ridership on a corridor are reviewed at length in Chapter 4: Demand Analysis. For the corridor selection process, the methodologies identified in Section 4.4 under “Basic Methodologies for Demand Analysis” offer a sufficient level of detail to make a simple determination of which corridors would benefit most from BRT.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/51-demand-analysis-for-corridor-selection.src: lines 14-17: code points 1-61

\ifxetex
	% disabled for now
\else
	{  % group required to avoid fignote settings escaping
		\img{\hsize}{operations/assets/2edb8d7e72010ba307187d21f8d35304a14feb37.jpeg}
		\fignote{1}{As this image of central Bogotá, Colombia, indicates, central business districts are a logical part of any complete BRT network. Photo\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:figure:as-this-image-of-central-bogot-colombia-indicates-central-business-districts-are-a-logical-part-of-any-complete-brt-network-photo}}{Oscar Diaz and Por el País que Queremos (PPQ).}
	}
\fi

Some planners have attempted to determine a minimum level of existing demand below which dedicating a lane exclusively to buses is difficult to justify. \emphasis{The Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual} (TCQSM), a guide generally used in the United States, recommends that a minimum ridership of 1,200 passengers per direction at the peak hour (ppdph) be a minimum threshold for an exclusive bus lane, as this is a reasonable average estimate for the number of customers that are generally able to use the lane when operating in mixed traffic conditions. In developing countries with much higher levels of transit ridership, it is likely that a higher minimum threshold would be set.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/51-demand-analysis-for-corridor-selection.src: lines 23-29: code points 1-58

\ifxetex
	% disabled for now
\else
	{  % group required to avoid fignote settings escaping
		\img{\hsize}{operations/assets/9271c5e248369c55cf579d5092848746bc3c6691.png}
		\fignote{2}{Peak hour passengers, Montgomery County, Maryland, USA.\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:figure:peak-hour-passengers-montgomery-county-maryland-usa}}{ITDP.}
	}
\fi

\ifxetex
	% disabled for now
\else
	{  % group required to avoid fignote settings escaping
		\img{\hsize}{operations/assets/47f2928ca04881acd2d1e3fb2e6419fa5b98abbc.png}
		\fignote{3}{ITDP’s proposed phase 1, 2, and 3 BRT corridors in Yichang, China. The phase 1 corridor opened in mid-2014, while phases 2 and 3 have been selected based primarily on current customer flows, fairly accurately reflected in the bus flows illustrated. The southeastern phase 3 extension is to a new area currently under construction. Note also that phases 1 and 2 both provide downtown, city center access. Map\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:figure:itdps-proposed-phase-1-2-and-3-brt-corridors-in-yichang-china-the-phase-1-corridor-opened-in-mid-2014-while-phases-2-and-3-have-been-selected-based-primarily-on-current-customer-flows-fairly-accurately-reflected-in-the-bus-flows-illustrated-the-southeastern-phase-3-extension-is-to-a-new-area-currently-under-construction-note-also-that-phases-1-and-2-both-provide-downtown-city-center-access-map}}{ITDP.}
	}
\fi

This guide does not mandate a minimum threshold of 1,200 existing bus or minibus pphpd, recognizing that there could be significant latent demand for high-speed transit in highly congested corridors or corridors with high rates of land development along them. The guide does recommend, however, that whatever the existing demand, at least a thousand pphpd should be attainable within the first year of BRT operations. Indeed, \emphasis{The BRT Standard }(2014) deducts maximum points for systems that do not reach this. It should be possible to estimate demand for BRT during the first year of operation through a combination of existing bus or minibus demand, and some indication that there is likely to be new land development in the corridor, that congestion is likely to worsen significantly in the medium term, or that high existing bus, minibus, or rail demand in nearby corridors would shift due to overall travel time improvements.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/51-demand-analysis-for-corridor-selection.src: lines 39-47: code points 1-87

\ifxetex
	% disabled for now
\else
	{  % group required to avoid fignote settings escaping
		\img{\hsize}{operations/assets/2299c543188d872b895e71a9d6a26a1f5439a0f2.jpeg}
		\fignote{4}{Major arterials are not the only options for BRT corridors. In Bogotá roadways in city center are used to give exclusive access for public transport and pedestrians.\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:figure:major-arterials-are-not-the-only-options-for-brt-corridors-in-bogot-roadways-in-city-center-are-used-to-give-exclusive-access-for-public-transport-and-pedestrians}}{Shreya Gadepalli.}
	}
\fi

\ifxetex
	% disabled for now
\else
	{  % group required to avoid fignote settings escaping
		\img{\hsize}{operations/assets/98dae58d8b54cece82aa2f56ca1a7769e521f1d9.jpeg}
		\fignote{5}{Quito, Ecuador have made narrow roadways in city center exclusive to public transport.\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:figure:quito-ecuador-have-made-narrow-roadways-in-city-center-exclusive-to-public-transport}}{Lloyd Wright.}
	}
\fi

Other planners have claimed that BRT as a technology cannot handle more than thirty-five thousand ppphd, so if a corridor has a projected number of customers greater than this then it should be reserved for heavy rail metro investments. Again, this guide does not make a specific recommendation of this type. Under certain conditions, BRT systems are able to carry more than thirty-five thousand pphpd even with only two lanes of exclusive bus lanes per direction. For example, TransBrasil is scheduled to open by the end of 2016 in Rio de Janeiro. This corridor is expected to carry up to sixty thousand customers during peak hour, due to extensive use of express services, two lanes per direction, and larger buses, such as articulated and biarticulated buses.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/51-demand-analysis-for-corridor-selection.src: lines 54-61: code points 1-44

This guide recommends that the existing transit ridership data be presented to stakeholders in transparent form, ideally on a map with link by link loads.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/51-demand-analysis-for-corridor-selection.src: lines 63-64: code points 1-47

\ifxetex
	% disabled for now
\else
	{  % group required to avoid fignote settings escaping
		\img{\hsize}{operations/assets/a33f001eb45dbafad7e3d121727cd545c2973918.png}
		\fignote{6}{Customer loads and boarding and alighting time for Nairobi, Kenya’s A104 BRT Corridor.\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:figure:customer-loads-and-boarding-and-alighting-time-for-nairobi-kenyas-a104-brt-corridor}}{ITDP.}
	}
\fi

\ifxetex
	% disabled for now
\else
	{  % group required to avoid fignote settings escaping
		\img{\hsize}{operations/assets/e8a171ec6dc8184baac96fadd50f70928c775072.png}
		\fignote{7}{Bus flows of all routes in Guangzhou Avenue (being considered for BRT implementation) in Guangzhou, China. Peak points in the proposed north-south BRT corridor (in blue) have more than two hundred buses per hour in a single direction. Peak points in off-corridor locations, showing where the Guangzhou Avenue routes operate, feature more than 150 buses per hour in a single direction.\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:figure:bus-flows-of-all-routes-in-guangzhou-avenue-being-considered-for-brt-implementation-in-guangzhou-china-peak-points-in-the-proposed-north-south-brt-corridor-in-blue-have-more-than-two-hundred-buses-per-hour-in-a-single-direction-peak-points-in-off-corridor-locations-showing-where-the-guangzhou-avenue-routes-operate-feature-more-than-150-buses-per-hour-in-a-single-direction}}{ITDP.}
	}
\fi

\section{2}{Transit System Speed and Delay Analysis}
\label{volume:operations:chapter:corridor-and-network-development:section:transit-system-speed-and-delay-analysis}
% @ guide/05-network_development/52-transit-system-speed-and-delay-analysis.src: lines 3-50: code points 1-208

\quotation{You think that because you understand ONE you understand TWO, because one and one makes two. But you must understand AND.}{Sufi proverb}
% @ guide/05-network_development/52-transit-system-speed-and-delay-analysis.src: lines 5-6: code points 1-14

BRT infrastructure is only going to yield significant benefits if buses on the corridor are currently operating below their optimal speed. Therefore, the slower the existing bus or minibus speeds on an existing corridor, the greater the theoretical potential for BRT investments to improve the situation. For this reason, after looking at existing transit demand, it is a good idea to evaluate existing transit speeds, and to map these speeds in such a way that they are very clear.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/52-transit-system-speed-and-delay-analysis.src: lines 8-12: code points 1-63

Average bus speeds can be calculated either from transit agency data, or by frequently riding the bus routes in corridors being investigated and measuring bus speeds with a GPS. Below is a simple map of average peak hour bus speeds developed during an alternatives analysis for the proposed Tianjin BRT.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/52-transit-system-speed-and-delay-analysis.src: lines 14-16: code points 1-100

\ifxetex
	% disabled for now
\else
	{  % group required to avoid fignote settings escaping
		\img{\hsize}{operations/assets/41288ad6bcdc7513f9b33f061741c619bcf22444.jpeg}
		\fignote{8}{Analysis of existing bus speeds for Tianjin, China, BRT.\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:figure:analysis-of-existing-bus-speeds-for-tianjin-china-brt}}{ITDP.}
	}
\fi

If average bus speeds in a corridor are relatively high, BRT infrastructure is less likely to bring a significant improvement in bus speeds. If, on the other hand, speeds are very low, then BRT investments are more likely to bring about significant passenger time savings and operational benefits.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/52-transit-system-speed-and-delay-analysis.src: lines 22-24: code points 1-91

\highlight{Gold Standard}\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/52-transit-system-speed-and-delay-analysis.src: lines 27-27: code points 1-26

Figure 5.9 is a graphic taken from an analysis of two parallel corridors in Chicago. It compares the existing running time on two proposed BRT corridors to what could be achieved on the corridor were “Gold Standard” BRT investments made.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/52-transit-system-speed-and-delay-analysis.src: lines 29-31: code points 1-31

\ifxetex
	% disabled for now
\else
	{  % group required to avoid fignote settings escaping
		\img{\hsize}{operations/assets/fd5ac9b9a7d91d02da3d2a50956c12452bb5c075.png}
		\fignote{9}{Causes of bus delay for two corridors in Chicago and how Gold Standard BRT can help reduce this delay.\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:figure:causes-of-bus-delay-for-two-corridors-in-chicago-and-how-gold-standard-brt-can-help-reduce-this-delay}}{ITDP.}
	}
\fi

Gold Standard BRT systems are primarily designed to reduce delay caused by boarding and alighting and general traffic congestion. If the cause of delay is congestion, dedicated lanes without other BRT infrastructure may be sufficient. If the primary cause of delay is from boarding and alighting, off-board fare collection and at-level boarding, without exclusive lanes, may be sufficient. Full BRT is most valuable where both types of delay are present.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/52-transit-system-speed-and-delay-analysis.src: lines 36-40: code points 1-27

Without knowing anything else about the BRT system design, it is generally safe to assume that Gold Standard BRT systems operating on urban arterials are likely to increase average speeds to as high as 29 kph, or in dense downtowns, as high as 20 kph. BRT speeds on highways could be significantly higher. More corridor-specific data about the existing causes of delay can yield far more refined estimates of the likely time savings benefits of BRT infrastructure.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/52-transit-system-speed-and-delay-analysis.src: lines 42-46: code points 1-55

\ifxetex
	% disabled for now
\else
	{  % group required to avoid fignote settings escaping
		\img{\hsize}{operations/assets/3cf129f56b0c01187eeab9141fa01bbff40ac4cc.png}
		\fignote{10}{A graphical example of a possible BRT corridor in US29, in Montgomery County, Maryland, USA, and its existing speeds in relation to potential speeds.\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:figure:a-graphical-example-of-a-possible-brt-corridor-in-us29-in-montgomery-county-maryland-usa-and-its-existing-speeds-in-relation-to-potential-speeds}}{ITDP.}
	}
\fi

\ifxetex
	% disabled for now
\else
	{  % group required to avoid fignote settings escaping
		\img{\hsize}{operations/assets/32b32069fe04139405884fa2cc1a8b7d044ed190.jpeg}
		\fignote{11}{Another graphical example of a possible BRT corridor in the same area of previous image. Here (Veirs Mill Road), the potential time savings is much greater on US Route 29.\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:figure:another-graphical-example-of-a-possible-brt-corridor-in-the-same-area-of-previous-image-here-veirs-mill-road-the-potential-time-savings-is-much-greater-on-us-route-29}}{ITDP.}
	}
\fi

\section{3}{Corridor Prioritization Based on Existing Demand}
\label{volume:operations:chapter:corridor-and-network-development:section:corridor-prioritization-based-on-existing-demand}
% @ guide/05-network_development/53-corridor-prioritization-based-on-existing-demand.src: lines 3-122: code points 1-0

\quotation{Many roads lead to the path, but basically there are only two: reason and practice.}{Bodhidharma, Buddhist monk, 6th century}
% @ guide/05-network_development/53-corridor-prioritization-based-on-existing-demand.src: lines 5-6: code points 1-41

Once both existing ridership and existing speed data have been mapped, the two datasets can be overlaid so that there is one map showing where high demand and low speeds overlap. This is a good indication of where BRT is likely to have the most impact.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/53-corridor-prioritization-based-on-existing-demand.src: lines 8-10: code points 1-47

\ifxetex
	% disabled for now
\else
	{  % group required to avoid fignote settings escaping
		\img{\hsize}{operations/assets/77ca8122117ad9ebe11bef14013a592a1575ef47.jpeg}
		\fignote{12}{Boston map of existing bus ridership and speeds. High ridership is depicted with thicker lines, while low speeds are depicted in red.\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:figure:boston-map-of-existing-bus-ridership-and-speeds-high-ridership-is-depicted-with-thicker-lines-while-low-speeds-are-depicted-in-red}}{ITDP.}
	}
\fi

From here, potential corridors should be delineated. Per the definition of a BRT corridor, a corridor must be at least 3 kilometers in length. It is rare that one single corridor will have uniform ridership and speeds along its full length. Therefore, corridors must be selected by choosing 3 kilometer or longer continuous segments of roadway with relatively consistent demand and speed values. This requires some judgment on the part of the planner, and ideally some knowledge of the city. It may make sense to draw corridors along existing bus routes, but it is not necessary since bus routes may enter and exit corridors, so BRT infrastructure might also be built along segments of routes.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/53-corridor-prioritization-based-on-existing-demand.src: lines 15-21: code points 1-67

\ifxetex
	% disabled for now
\else
	{  % group required to avoid fignote settings escaping
		\img{\hsize}{operations/assets/75ccdae4aba919bb00402d0493b1adb4b2ecb2d6.jpeg}
		\fignote{13}{After considering bus ridership, speeds, and city typology, the best potential corridors for BRT in Greater Boston are highlighted on the map.\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:figure:after-considering-bus-ridership-speeds-and-city-typology-the-best-potential-corridors-for-brt-in-greater-boston-are-highlighted-on-the-map}}{ITDP.}
	}
\fi

Once corridors have been identified, they should be ranked from highest demand to lowest demand, with a minimum threshold that planners believe can still reasonably bring the corridor up to 1,000–1,200 pphpd in the first year of operation. Each corridor should be color-coded based on its average speed. Those corridors with unusually high speeds for the region should be screened out, as they are likely already functioning at a relatively high efficiency. Additionally, those corridors on which another public transport project is currently being planned should also be screened out.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/53-corridor-prioritization-based-on-existing-demand.src: lines 26-31: code points 1-63

\tabletitle{1}{Rank order of Boston corridors from map in Figure 5.13. █ represents the least delay, ██ moderate delay, and ███ the most delay. The City Center to Government Center route currently does not exist, and thus the pphpd is not provided. Analysis done by ITDP.}
\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:table:rank-order-of-boston-corridors-from-map-in-figure-513--represents-the-least-delay--moderate-delay-and--the-most-delay-the-city-center-to-government-center-route-currently-does-not-exist-and-thus-the-pphpd-is-not-provided-analysis-done-by-itdp}
\halign to 46\tablemodule{%% requires the ifoddpage package
\relax\checkoddpage\ifoddpage\else%
	\kern -16\tablemodule%
\fi%
	\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=5\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=31\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=5\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=5\tablemodule#}\cr
	\color{gray75}\bfseries Rank& \color{gray75}\bfseries Corridor& \color{gray75}\bfseries pphd& \color{gray75}\bfseries Delay \cr
	\noalign{\vskip 1mm} \hline \noalign{\vskip 2mm} 
	\color{gray50}1a&
	\color{gray50}Upgrade of existing Washington Silver Line&
	\color{gray50}1,615&
	\color{gray50}█\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}1b&
	\color{gray50}Extension Dudley Square to Mattapan&
	\color{gray50}976&
	\color{gray50}██\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}1c&
	\color{gray50}Extension City Center to Government Center&
	\color{gray50}-&
	\color{gray50}███\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}2&
	\color{gray50}Allston Union Square to Dudley Square&
	\color{gray50}1,273&
	\color{gray50}███\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}3&
	\color{gray50}Downtown Chelsea to Government Center&
	\color{gray50}1,215&
	\color{gray50}██\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}4&
	\color{gray50}Forest Hills to West Roxbury&
	\color{gray50}1,077&
	\color{gray50}███\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}5&
	\color{gray50}Harvard Square South to Newton Corner&
	\color{gray50}998&
	\color{gray50}███\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}6&
	\color{gray50}Forest Hills to Wolcott Square&
	\color{gray50}799&
	\color{gray50}█\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}7&
	\color{gray50}Allston Union Square to Longwood&
	\color{gray50}741&
	\color{gray50}███\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}8&
	\color{gray50}Harvard Square to Watertown&
	\color{gray50}413&
	\color{gray50}██\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}}
% @ guide/05-network_development/53-corridor-prioritization-based-on-existing-demand.src: lines 33-92: code points 1-9

In many parts of the world, demand far surpasses these minimums. In such cases, it is generally reasonable to select the top ten corridors based on demand, as these are the corridors on which BRT is likely to have the most impact. In fact, \emphasis{The} \emphasis{BRT Standard} (2014) awards maximum points for corridors that are located in the city’s ten corridors with the highest demand.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/53-corridor-prioritization-based-on-existing-demand.src: lines 94-97: code points 1-60

\ifxetex
	% disabled for now
\else
	{  % group required to avoid fignote settings escaping
		\img{\hsize}{operations/assets/f0024adad6285814a439f0857b5612bc8dbbcdc5.png}
		\fignote{14}{BRT bus flows and proposed BRT corridors in Vientiane, Laos. Peak bus flows will be around eighty buses per hour in a single direction, assuming fifty-customer maximum capacity buses are utilized.\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:figure:brt-bus-flows-and-proposed-brt-corridors-in-vientiane-laos-peak-bus-flows-will-be-around-eighty-buses-per-hour-in-a-single-direction-assuming-fifty-customer-maximum-capacity-buses-are-utilized}}{ITDP.}
	}
\fi

If stop-by-stop boarding and alighting data is available, it is also a good idea to map boarding and alighting volumes along the corridors. The larger the concentration of boardings and alightings along a corridor, the greater the likelihood that a BRT will be beneficial. Boarding and alighting can be used as a third metric for determining which corridors BRT could provide the most benefits.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/53-corridor-prioritization-based-on-existing-demand.src: lines 103-106: code points 1-86

\ifxetex
	% disabled for now
\else
	{  % group required to avoid fignote settings escaping
		\img{\hsize}{operations/assets/75f26948d8dd4c9b913d1e30cda4e6d0245dd9a4.jpeg}
		\fignote{15}{Boarding and alighting volumes at bus stops in Tianjin.\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:figure:boarding-and-alighting-volumes-at-bus-stops-in-tianjin}}{ITDP.}
	}
\fi

With the top corridors ranked based on existing ridership and speed, we can assume that if any of them are upgraded to BRT, the ridership will increase due to the higher speed and attractiveness of the BRT as compared to the current bus routes or other options. In the first year of operation, it is reasonable to expect an increase of 30 percent above existing ridership. Unless ample resources are available to build a model, looking at existing conditions only is generally a reasonable means of determining which corridors are best suited for BRT and what kinds of ridership to expect in the opening year.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/53-corridor-prioritization-based-on-existing-demand.src: lines 110-115: code points 1-92

If a good set of corridors already exists based on this methodology, it is generally enough to build a BRT network plan. But sometimes, for political reasons, other corridors without existing bus routes, or with existing bus routes but with low demand, are desirable for BRT. In these cases, a costlier and more resource-intensive study must be undertaken in order to estimate demand on such a corridor and to insert it into the rank order with the other corridors already prioritized.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/53-corridor-prioritization-based-on-existing-demand.src: lines 117-122: code points 1-0

\section{4}{Additional Corridors Based on Future Demand}
\label{volume:operations:chapter:corridor-and-network-development:section:additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand}
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 3-188: code points 1-0

\quotation{Prediction is difficult, especially about the future.}{Yogi Berra, former baseball player, 1925–2015}
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 5-6: code points 1-47

There are cases in which corridors without existing bus routes, or with existing bus routes with low demand, may still be good BRT corridors. There are four main reasons for this:\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 8-10: code points 1-0

\begin{enumerate}
\item Route Shift: Some trips may shift from nearby public transit routes;% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 10-11: code points 1-0
\item Mode Shift: Some customers may be new to public transport due to the dramatic service improvements that BRT can offer;% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 11-12: code points 1-0
\item Land Use Changes: Land use may change, generating new trips altogether, or BRT can be used to help stimulate land use changes;% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 12-13: code points 1-0
\item Downtown Infiltration: BRT may provide a new link into a city’s downtown, where public or private buses were not previously permitted to go.% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 13-13: code points 1-148
\end{enumerate}
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 10-13: code points 1-148

Transit ridership during the first year of operation, however, is difficult to predict with any accuracy. Hence, future projections of this type are subject to interpretation and manipulation. As such, it is wise not to put too much stock in any hard numbers with regard to projected future ridership. It is also a good idea to require that all assumptions used to predict future ridership be presented to stakeholders in their raw form rather than merely processing the data and burying it in a multi-criteria analysis. This might include:\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 15-20: code points 1-19

\begin{itemize}
\item Service plan assumptions;% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 22-23: code points 1-0
\item Speeds on BRT links;% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 23-24: code points 1-0
\item Source of all origin-destination data;% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 24-25: code points 1-0
\item Land use change assumptions;% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 25-26: code points 1-0
\item Mode-specific constants;% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 26-27: code points 1-0
\item Transfer, walking, and waiting penalties.% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 27-27: code points 1-47
\end{itemize}
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 22-27: code points 1-47

Now we will delve into further detail about how best to estimate future ridership based on the three categories: route shift, mode shift, and land use changes.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 29-30: code points 1-58

\subsection{1}{Route Shift}
\label{volume:operations:chapter:corridor-and-network-development:section:additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand:subSection:route-shift}
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 32-58: code points 1-95

Sometimes a new BRT is built that provides a new or faster public transport link for existing customers. This might be because the BRT offers faster services than parallel bus routes, or because it offers new routes that cover a shorter distance than the previous routes. Such new routes may even eliminate a previously necessary transfer. It is difficult to predict such route shifts without a model.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 34-37: code points 1-81

A public transport model gives us the ability to insert a new public transport link, perhaps at higher speeds than the existing links, and see how many customers make the switch. Unlike modal shift (see below), public transport customers have already made the decision to use public transport, and are therefore most likely to choose the corridor\slash{}service that provides the fastest trip, even if it is new.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 39-42: code points 1-93

Modeling route shifts requires a complete set of transit data about existing conditions, including existing ridership and speeds on all public transport routes. Ideally, there will also be an existing origin-destination matrix indicating the boarding and alighting stations of all public transport. If not, one should be created and include transfer data as well.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 44-47: code points 1-61

In order to ensure a fair comparison between corridors modeled from route shift and corridors selected from the demand analysis, the model should be run as if the BRT were opening today, without accounting for any future system growth. Once the model has been run, the maximum pphpd on the modeled corridor should be extracted from the results. Demand is usually highly elastic, so an increase in the price of the service may significantly reduce demand. This needs to be factored in when modeling demand from route shift, unless all these are consistent between the two services.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 49-54: code points 1-64

Because a BRT corridor is estimated to gain a significant percentage increase in ridership over existing conditions, one must decrease the maximum pphpd identified by the corresponding percentage, so that the corridor may be comparable to the other corridors selected in the existing conditions analysis.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 56-58: code points 1-95

\subsection{2}{Mode Shift}
\label{volume:operations:chapter:corridor-and-network-development:section:additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand:subSection:mode-shift}
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 60-89: code points 1-46

When a new high-quality public transport corridor is built, such as BRT, some people who currently drive may switch over to public transport. This might be because the BRT is faster or more convenient than driving, or because parking is difficult or expensive and the BRT represents a less costly option. Many cities, particularly in developed-world contexts, invest in transit precisely to lower auto use and fundamentally change travel patterns.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 62-66: code points 1-41

It is difficult to model modal shift. Often, it is based on a four-step model that begins with a household survey and a mode choice analysis. This can be quite complex and can hide many important assumptions. Indeed, many models that have predicted a high mode shift have been significantly overestimated.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 68-70: code points 1-96

A BRT corridor cannot be selected based primarily on the assumption that it will lure people out of their cars. This could take many years and could result in empty buses until this goal is realized. Instead, it is safer and more realistic to plan for corridors where existing demand and bus service already exist. This way, BRT corridors are selected where there is certain to be ridership and some modal shift is a good possibility.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 72-76: code points 1-17

International experience has shown a range of percentage increases above existing ridership due to modal shift. In Rio de Janeiro, 5 percent of the people surveyed for the TransOeste Impact Study said they had shifted from car use to the BRT in the system’s first nine months of operation. Likewise, in Mexico City, 17 percent of Metrobús customers left their cars for BRT. According to Metrobús, that percentage translates to 122,000 fewer car trips every day.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 78-82: code points 1-48

\ifxetex
	% disabled for now
\else
	{  % group required to avoid fignote settings escaping
		\img{\hsize}{operations/assets/d62df2d9640545fe06223ca4d8415894f6ae64ee.jpeg}
		\fignote{16}{Mode-shift data from the Guangzhou BRT system. There was an increase in mode shift from cars to BRT between 2010 and 2013.\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:figure:mode-shift-data-from-the-guangzhou-brt-system-there-was-an-increase-in-mode-shift-from-cars-to-brt-between-2010-and-2013}}{ITDP.}
	}
\fi

However, because it is best to apply the mode shift increase to corridors with existing high demand, it is just as well to leave the corridors prioritized as is and, once built, make efforts to attract people to use the new system rather than cars.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 87-89: code points 1-46

\subsection{3}{Land Use Changes}
\label{volume:operations:chapter:corridor-and-network-development:section:additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand:subSection:land-use-changes}
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 91-156: code points 1-80

There are two reasons why a BRT might be built where land use is changing. First, rapid urban revitalization in a certain area might not be reflected in the existing transit services and, if dense enough, is likely to need a high-capacity public transport link in order to discourage auto use from the start. Second, a growing number of cities, particularly in the United States, are looking to BRT as a tool to stimulate urban revitalization and transit-oriented land development. In either of these cases, it might be worth considering BRT in order to serve the newly developed land. First, we describe how to determine if these conditions are met, and second, we describe how to create a BRT corridor in order to serve these changes.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 93-99: code points 1-105

To determine where land is developing and no transit has yet been designed to serve the new development, one should look at net changes in housing and commercial units over the past ten years (Figure 5.18). This information can sometimes be collected from the census or from other sources. Another good source of data is to look at building permits issued but not constructed as a guide to where new development is likely to take place (Figure 5.19). Sometimes these can be collected from the planning department or the buildings department of the municipality. This data about recent existing trends in real estate development is likely to be continued to some extent over the next decade. This grounds future projections on land use changes in reasonably transparent empirical data.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 101-108: code points 1-61

\ifxetex
	% disabled for now
\else
	{  % group required to avoid fignote settings escaping
		\img{\hsize}{operations/assets/f4d2e31ea48d9834764bd0cbf16a5a5ec6d2761a.jpeg}
		\fignote{17}{This map illustrates which neighborhoods in New York City have experienced the greatest change in the construction of housing units.\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:figure:this-map-illustrates-which-neighborhoods-in-new-york-city-have-experienced-the-greatest-change-in-the-construction-of-housing-units}}{ITDP.}
	}
\fi

\ifxetex
	% disabled for now
\else
	{  % group required to avoid fignote settings escaping
		\img{\hsize}{operations/assets/2463390e2129e707de7fad0e1caade4763417c1d.jpeg}
		\fignote{18}{This map illustrates which neighborhoods in New York City have the greatest number of building permits issued but not completed.\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:figure:this-map-illustrates-which-neighborhoods-in-new-york-city-have-the-greatest-number-of-building-permits-issued-but-not-completed}}{New York City Department of Buildings.}
	}
\fi

In addition to using BRT to serve development that is already occurring, BRT is more and more commonly being used to help stimulate development in designated areas. A recent study conducted by ITDP analyzing transit corridors throughout North America found that if BRT is built in the right corridor and the government institutes policies that encourage development around that corridor, there is a strong chance that the land along the corridor will attract development. However, using BRT to drive development is not enough. BRT planning, when premised on development, must be directly linked to government development initiatives.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 116-121: code points 1-106

Often, local planning and urban development authorities have a fairly good sense of where they want to develop, what new development is likely, and where they have been approached by developers asking for zoning variances or other support from the municipality. Sometimes planning authorities have regulatory structures that guide new development in specific areas through spatial development plans, and they may have a good sense of the likely time frame for these developments. So if one of the purposes of BRT corridor selection is to simulate development, information regarding the government’s development plans should be collected and the locations should be mapped.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 124-130: code points 1-48

\ifxetex
	% disabled for now
\else
	{  % group required to avoid fignote settings escaping
		\img{\hsize}{operations/assets/1e96bce5667335bf0f76cf3298420d638be152d4.jpeg}
		\fignote{19}{Areas in Greater Boston where the government is focusing its development efforts or has at least created area plans.\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:figure:areas-in-greater-boston-where-the-government-is-focusing-its-development-efforts-or-has-at-least-created-area-plans}}{ITDP.}
	}
\fi

There are integrated transportation and land use models available, some of them open source like Tranus, which provide more sophisticated modeling tools for predicting future land use changes and hence are able to provide more robust future demand projections than traditional four-step travel demand models. These models generally rely on census-tract-level changes in population and employment as a baseline, and then supplement their future demand projections with additional data sources. In our experience these models are quite difficult to use and require a significant amount of data that is difficult to collect. It is preferable that all of the basic information described above be presented to stakeholder groups in the form of a map to serve as a guide for the BRT corridor selection.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 135-142: code points 1-72

Once all of the information has been mapped and presented, planners must determine how areas of new development can be linked to BRT corridor selection. An underdeveloped area on its own, even if in the process of being developed, is unlikely to be able to support a BRT, particularly if the BRT serves only that area and does not connect with other sectors of the city. It is much better to link areas of new development to transit corridors with already high demand, as this is more likely to provide a useful connection to the people moving into or working in the new development areas. Additionally, in the years during which the development is occurring, the BRT corridor will still be relatively successful due to its serving areas of already high demand.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 144-151: code points 1-41

Ideally, a BRT corridor proposed to serve a new development will be close to existing high demand corridors, because the link between existing high demand and newly developing areas will be short so if buses are empty for a while, it will only be for a short link. Second, studies have found that the closer a new development area is to existing activity, the more likely it will be to develop.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 153-156: code points 1-80

\subsection{4}{Integrating the Downtown}
\label{volume:operations:chapter:corridor-and-network-development:section:additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand:subSection:integrating-the-downtown}
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 158-188: code points 1-0

Sometimes preexisting bus routes stop just short of a city’s downtown. This is rarely due to low demand in the downtown. Instead, it is often simply government policy to keep buses out of the downtown core. In fact, most cities’ downtowns are still where the majority of trips end in the morning and begin in the afternoon. It is almost always the case that providing a city’s downtown with Gold Standard BRT will increase the demand on the BRT as a whole. It is possible to prove this with a demand model; however, it is generally not necessary to model such a situation since in nearly all cases, it turns out to be true.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 160-166: code points 1-5

If a city’s downtown is so blighted that demand is unlikely to materialize in the near term, it is still generally worth serving the downtown with any BRT corridors that are planned to come near it, as it is almost always the case that downtowns revitalize more quickly than any other parts of a city. Additionally, a BRT that passes through the downtown can have positive development impacts along the rest of the corridor as well, since downtown access makes the entire corridor more attractive to developers. Cleveland, Ohio, USA’s Silver Standard HealthLine is a great example of a BRT that was built directly into the downtown and, as a result, leveraged over US\$5.8 billion in development throughout the corridor.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 168-174: code points 1-87

\ifxetex
	% disabled for now
\else
	{  % group required to avoid fignote settings escaping
		\img{\hsize}{operations/assets/5f192ae6bf02927665b10b8f881adc6bbde90811.png}
		\fignote{20}{A public transport system that runs on dedicated lanes in a city’s downtown is more likely to leverage TOD.\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:figure:a-public-transport-system-that-runs-on-dedicated-lanes-in-a-citys-downtown-is-more-likely-to-leverage-tod}}{More Development for Your Transit Dollar: An Analysis of 21 North American Transit Corridors. 2013.}
	}
\fi

Many cities have multiple subcenters that serve as smaller downtowns. It is often the case that serving these subcenters with Gold Standard BRT can have nearly the same effect as bringing BRT directly into the city’s main downtown.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 180-182: code points 1-25

Finally, the specific routing of BRT infrastructure through a city’s downtown or an important subcenter, particularly if there are currently no bus routes to mimic, may be subject to a political negotiation, since downtown streets are often quite narrow. However, the BRT should ideally be routed through the densest part of downtown.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/54-additional-corridors-based-on-future-demand.src: lines 184-188: code points 1-0

\section{5}{Framework for Comparing Corridors}
\label{volume:operations:chapter:corridor-and-network-development:section:framework-for-comparing-corridors}
% @ guide/05-network_development/55framework-for-comparing-corridors.src: lines 3-97: code points 1-584

\quotation{The only relevant test of the validity of a hypothesis is comparison of prediction with experience.}{Milton Friedman, economist, 1912–2006}
% @ guide/05-network_development/55framework-for-comparing-corridors.src: lines 5-6: code points 1-39

Making a good decision in a timely manner is not always facilitated by elaborate analysis. Often detailed economic, financial, social, and environmental impact analyses are too cumbersome and expensive to do. Picking the right corridor is as much a matter of common sense as extensive research. However, the data and mapping suggested above are reasonable analyses to perform at the corridor-selection stage, and should be sufficient to result in a set of corridors that make sense from a technical perspective.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/55framework-for-comparing-corridors.src: lines 8-12: code points 1-91

Once a set of corridors has been selected on technical grounds, it is important that these create a BRT network. Otherwise, the corridor-selection process may still be open to political interference, and a corridor could be selected with no real technical basis. However, it may not be possible to build out every one of the selected corridors, nor must the corridors be implemented in the same order in which they were prioritized. Some additional work may be needed in order to account for factors that are more political in nature, as well as to build a more detailed cost-benefit analysis weighing one corridor against another. In this way, the selected corridors may be narrowed down to a smaller set and\slash{}or reprioritized into a network and phasing plan.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/55framework-for-comparing-corridors.src: lines 14-21: code points 1-32

\subsection{1}{Corridor Right–of-Way and Lane Uses}
\label{volume:operations:chapter:corridor-and-network-development:section:framework-for-comparing-corridors:subSection:corridor-rightof-way-and-lane-uses}
% @ guide/05-network_development/55framework-for-comparing-corridors.src: lines 23-65: code points 1-97

There is rarely anything innate about the characteristics of a corridor that would make it impossible to build BRT. Successful BRTs have been built on corridors as wide as Nueve de Julio Avenue in Buenos Aires—which is allegedly the widest street in the world—and as narrow as the historic downtown of Quito, which, at times, is only three meters across. Almost any road that can accommodate a bus can accommodate BRT in some form. Nevertheless, one-way streets, narrow rights-of-way, and suburban land use patterns all present special challenges for BRT system design.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/55framework-for-comparing-corridors.src: lines 25-30: code points 1-53

A visual corridor review should look primarily at the existing configuration of the road, the basic traffic mix, the available right-of-way, and the land uses along it. One can get a general sense of the corridor now with tools such as Google Earth and Google Street View, but there is no substitute for walking the corridor. If survey data is not available, a laser distance measurer or measuring wheel can be used to record the road right-of-way width throughout each potential corridor.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/55framework-for-comparing-corridors.src: lines 32-36: code points 1-73

There are a variety of ways of presenting this information to stakeholders. Software programs such as Streetmix allow users to display road cross sections and replicate lane widths and rights-of-way on actual streets. Figure 5.20 shows a specific cross section using this software at a specific location along a proposed BRT corridor in Boston.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/55framework-for-comparing-corridors.src: lines 38-41: code points 1-40

\ifxetex
	% disabled for now
\else
	{  % group required to avoid fignote settings escaping
		\img{\hsize}{operations/assets/a77122d64a093d2db2cc9c20c3534f9d6466451b.png}
		\fignote{21}{Right-of-way and lane widths created using Streetmix for a specific location along a proposed BRT corridor in Boston.\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:figure:right-of-way-and-lane-widths-created-using-streetmix-for-a-specific-location-along-a-proposed-brt-corridor-in-boston}}{ITDP.}
	}
\fi

The roadway width can also be graphically shown along the length of the corridor using a plot of width against corridor location.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/55framework-for-comparing-corridors.src: lines 46-47: code points 1-26

In addition to noting physical dimensions along a roadway, an initial survey should also note other features, such as the configuration and condition of medians and the presence of trees, utility poles, public art, or other features that may be expensive or politically difficult to relocate. Are the pedestrian paths adequate for providing access to a public transport system, or do they likely require widening? Are there difficult intersections along the corridor, such as roundabouts with fountains or artwork, or cloverleaf highway-grade interchanges, or narrow flyovers and bridges? Are there locations with low-cost land uses, such as surface parking lots, that could be procured for station stops where the road may need to be widened? A BRT engineer will tend to look for things on a visual survey of the corridor to get a general sense of how expensive it is likely to be to build a good-quality BRT along it.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/55framework-for-comparing-corridors.src: lines 49-57: code points 1-93

While there is no clear metric for prioritizing corridors based on right-of-way, lane uses, or other features, this information should be included in the BRT corridor-prioritization analysis and presented to the public in a transparent way. Generally, if the public and\slash{}or the government supports a proposed corridor despite narrow right-of-way or other related issues, it should be kept on the list.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/55framework-for-comparing-corridors.src: lines 59-62: code points 1-92

\ifxetex
	% disabled for now
\else
	{  % group required to avoid fignote settings escaping
		\img{\hsize}{operations/assets/2b598fd22925c970426decc6af2d85fb91a63102.jpeg}
		\fignote{22}{BRT station rendering in a narrow right-of-way in Rue Setthathilath where a transit mall (BRT bus, bicycles, and pedestrians only) is proposed in Vientiane, Laos.\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:figure:brt-station-rendering-in-a-narrow-right-of-way-in-rue-setthathilath-where-a-transit-mall-brt-bus-bicycles-and-pedestrians-only-is-proposed-in-vientiane-laos}}{ITDP.}
	}
\fi

\subsection{2}{Corridor Typology and Suitability for BRT}
\label{volume:operations:chapter:corridor-and-network-development:section:framework-for-comparing-corridors:subSection:corridor-typology-and-suitability-for-brt}
% @ guide/05-network_development/55framework-for-comparing-corridors.src: lines 67-97: code points 1-584

We define here five corridor types on which BRT projects are often considered. Generally, BRT only makes sense on the first three (Types I, II, and III) and is not recommended for the last two (Types IV and V). While some BRT elements could make sense for the latter types, this guide focuses only on true BRT systems, and so BRT is recommended only on Types I, II, and III.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/55framework-for-comparing-corridors.src: lines 69-73: code points 1-0

\begin{itemize}
\item \highlight{Type I: Urban Corridor}. Urban corridors are typically arterials and secondary streets in dense urban environments with curbside activity, relatively short block lengths, and preexisting bus routes. Euclid Avenue outside of downtown Cleveland is an example of an urban arterial with a Silver Standard BRT. Other urban arterials include the Gold Standard BRT in Yichang, China completed in 2015; Geary Street in San Francisco, where a Silver Standard BRT is being planned; and many others. Most cities have at least a few urban arterial streets, and those streets are, by definition, well integrated into the urban context;% @ guide/05-network_development/55framework-for-comparing-corridors.src: lines 73-74: code points 1-0
\item \highlight{Type II: Downtown Corridor.} Downtown corridors are typically streets that go right through a city’s downtown. Downtowns are still the center of activity in most cities. As cities look to re-urbanize and revitalize their downtown cores, public transport directly through the downtown is critical. Often, downtown streets are narrow and congested, with very high levels of curbside activity. Sometimes there are preexisting bus routes through downtown streets, and other times, bus routes stop on the edge of a city’s downtown due to businesses and other powerful interests that fight to keep them out. Yet if there is any place where BRT could be successful, it is directly through a city’s downtown. Mexico City, Mexico; Bogotá, Colombia; Johannesburg, South Africa; Dar es Salaam, Tanzania; and many other cities have built Silver and Gold Standard BRTs on very narrow downtown streets, providing a large boost to BRT ridership and revitalizing many dying central cities.% @ guide/05-network_development/55framework-for-comparing-corridors.src: lines 74-74: code points 1-990
\end{itemize}
% @ guide/05-network_development/55framework-for-comparing-corridors.src: lines 73-74: code points 1-990

Because Type I corridors are the simplest to verify in terms of ridership, and Type II corridors, while sometimes less simple to verify, are often likely to have the highest ridership of any corridor in a city, Type I and II corridors should be prioritized in the corridor selection process;\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/55framework-for-comparing-corridors.src: lines 76-79: code points 1-0

\begin{itemize}
\item \highlight{Type III: Former Freight Rail Right-of-Way Corridor}. There are many corridors that were once dedicated for freight rail but which at some point were abandoned. These corridors often make attractive corridors for BRT, since they do not require reallocating road space. Both Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA, and Los Angeles have built Bronze Standard BRTs on former freight rail right-of-way corridors. Yet former freight rail corridors do not often have preexisting bus services already operating on them, nor are they generally well integrated into the urban environment.% @ guide/05-network_development/55framework-for-comparing-corridors.src: lines 79-79: code points 1-587
\end{itemize}
% @ guide/05-network_development/55framework-for-comparing-corridors.src: lines 79-79: code points 1-587

Type III corridors have potential, in some cases, to be successful BRT corridors. However, because ridership is less assured than with Types I and II and because they do not generally integrate as well into the urban environment, Type I and II corridors should be prioritized over Type II corridors.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/55framework-for-comparing-corridors.src: lines 81-84: code points 1-0

\begin{itemize}
\item \highlight{Type IV: Suburban Arterial Corridor. }Many streets just outside of urban areas classify as suburban arterials. Suburban arterials are often higher speed, carry higher capacities than urban arterials, and have less curbside activity (parking, deliveries, etc.). This is because suburban arterials tend to be lined by surface parking lots and most deliveries and passenger drop-offs occur from these off-road parking lots. There are also generally lower pedestrian-crossing volumes at intersections to impede right turning movements. As a result, there is little curbside activity, so dedicating the busway to the center of the road is not particularly needed. Hence, other than traffic congestion, the type of bus delay that BRT is designed to reduce does not typically exist on suburban arterials. Additionally, the distributed nature of trip patterns in suburban contexts means that bus boarding and alighting volumes at stops along suburban arterials are typically low, so off-board fare collection has less utility. Therefore, while some bus treatments could make sense on a suburban arterial (e.g., signal priority, curbside bus lanes, etc.), BRT rarely does. BRT on suburban arterial corridors is generally not recommended.% @ guide/05-network_development/55framework-for-comparing-corridors.src: lines 84-84: code points 1-1245
\end{itemize}
% @ guide/05-network_development/55framework-for-comparing-corridors.src: lines 84-84: code points 1-1245

However, there is one condition in which BRT might be considered on a suburban arterial: If there is a concerted effort by the government to urbanize a suburban arterial, and thus transform it into a Type I “Urban Arterial Corridor,” BRT could make sense, provided the application meets the minimum pphpd requirements. In order for a city to demonstrate that a project is on an urbanizing suburban arterial, there must already be zoning changes in place that allow for a more urban form and the corridor must pass through at least one or two pockets of somewhat more urban character. Rockville Pike in Montgomery County, Maryland, USA, falls into this category. The proposed BRT project makes sense in light of the fact that the county has rezoned along Rockville Pike and has special zoning rules around high-capacity public transport stations. Further, and of particular importance, is the fact that the corridor connects to downtown Bethesda and downtown Rockville, both areas of a somewhat urban character. An urbanizing suburban corridor should at least connect to the more urban subcenters.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/55framework-for-comparing-corridors.src: lines 86-97: code points 1-0

\begin{itemize}
\item \highlight{Type V: Highway Corridor. }Highways are often congested and in some cases, carry large volumes of bus customers. However, as on suburban arterials, the delay that BRT is designed to reduce does not typically exist on highways. And, unlike with suburban arterials, there is no possibility that a highway corridor will urbanize. A highway with transit needs is best served by express buses, operating in an HOV lane, which exit the highway to make stops. This is not BRT. Thus, if a Type V corridor has made it onto the list of possible corridors, it should be removed.% @ guide/05-network_development/55framework-for-comparing-corridors.src: lines 97-97: code points 1-584
\end{itemize}
% @ guide/05-network_development/55framework-for-comparing-corridors.src: lines 97-97: code points 1-584

\section{6}{Corridor Length}
\label{volume:operations:chapter:corridor-and-network-development:section:corridor-length}
% @ guide/05-network_development/56corridor-length.src: lines 3-192: code points 1-0

\quotation{Time is the longest distance between two places.}{Tennessee Williams, dramatist, 1911–1983}
% @ guide/05-network_development/56corridor-length.src: lines 5-6: code points 1-42

\ifxetex
	% disabled for now
\else
	{  % group required to avoid fignote settings escaping
		\img{\hsize}{operations/assets/ad459c2c5dcc536142ed8d02dbfbdd928ad2313e.jpeg}
		\fignote{23}{The availability of land for terminal and depot space can be a consideration of the end point for a specific corridor.\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:figure:the-availability-of-land-for-terminal-and-depot-space-can-be-a-consideration-of-the-end-point-for-a-specific-corridor}}{TransMilenio SA.}
	}
\fi

The basis for the cost-benefit analysis of corridor length is typically the time savings generated by the exclusive busway. Once the exclusive busway no longer provides a net time savings benefit in comparison to the construction costs, then the point has been reached when the exclusive busway is no longer cost justifiable. As the number of customers falls with the distance from the city center, the total time savings benefit is reduced. Further, since congestion levels will also likely fall with distance from the city center, the travel-time advantage of an exclusive busway will likewise fall. Table 5.3 provides an example of a cost and benefit analysis plotted against a corridor’s length.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/56corridor-length.src: lines 11-17: code points 1-78

Of course, this time savings benefit will tend to increase as congestion worsens over time. Since a BRT system is likely to last a long time, it is standard practice to roughly estimate the likely congestion along the corridor in the next ten to twenty years rather than simply assuming that current congestion conditions will prevail long into the future.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/56corridor-length.src: lines 19-23: code points 1-0

\tabletitle{2}{Cost-benefit analysis of corridor length}
\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:table:cost-benefit-analysis-of-corridor-length}
\halign to 46\tablemodule{%% requires the ifoddpage package
\relax\checkoddpage\ifoddpage\else%
	\kern -16\tablemodule%
\fi%
	\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=5\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=5\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=5\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=5\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=5\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=5\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=5\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=5\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=5\tablemodule#}\cr
	\color{gray75}\bfseries \highlight{Corridor segment}& \color{gray75}\bfseries \highlight{Length of segment (km)}& \color{gray75}\bfseries \highlight{Demand along segment (x 1000)}& \color{gray75}\bfseries \highlight{Time savings (minutes)}& \color{gray75}\bfseries & \color{gray75}\bfseries \highlight{Cost}& \color{gray75}\bfseries & \color{gray75}\bfseries \highlight{Benefit}& \color{gray75}\bfseries \highlight{Benefit \slash{} cost ratio (B \slash{} C)} \cr
	\noalign{\vskip 1mm} \hline \noalign{\vskip 2mm} 
	\color{gray50}&
	\color{gray50}&
	\color{gray50}&
	\color{gray50}Total&
	\color{gray50}\slash{} km&
	\color{gray50}Total&
	\color{gray50}\slash{} km&
	\color{gray50}\slash{} km&
	\color{gray50}\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}A&
	\color{gray50}3&
	\color{gray50}13&
	\color{gray50}6&
	\color{gray50}2.00&
	\color{gray50}5&
	\color{gray50}1.67&
	\color{gray50}26.00&
	\color{gray50}15.60\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}B&
	\color{gray50}2&
	\color{gray50}12&
	\color{gray50}4&
	\color{gray50}2.00&
	\color{gray50}4&
	\color{gray50}2.00&
	\color{gray50}24.00&
	\color{gray50}12.00\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}C&
	\color{gray50}1.5&
	\color{gray50}13&
	\color{gray50}5&
	\color{gray50}3.33&
	\color{gray50}3&
	\color{gray50}2.00&
	\color{gray50}43.33&
	\color{gray50}21.67\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}D&
	\color{gray50}3&
	\color{gray50}11&
	\color{gray50}4&
	\color{gray50}1.33&
	\color{gray50}4&
	\color{gray50}1.33&
	\color{gray50}14.67&
	\color{gray50}11.00\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}E&
	\color{gray50}1.8&
	\color{gray50}9&
	\color{gray50}1.2&
	\color{gray50}0.67&
	\color{gray50}2&
	\color{gray50}1.11&
	\color{gray50}6.00&
	\color{gray50}5.40\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}F&
	\color{gray50}3.1&
	\color{gray50}7.5&
	\color{gray50}2.5&
	\color{gray50}0.81&
	\color{gray50}4&
	\color{gray50}1.29&
	\color{gray50}6.05&
	\color{gray50}4.69\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}G&
	\color{gray50}2.3&
	\color{gray50}6&
	\color{gray50}0.5&
	\color{gray50}0.22&
	\color{gray50}3&
	\color{gray50}1.30&
	\color{gray50}1.30&
	\color{gray50}1.00\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}H&
	\color{gray50}1.5&
	\color{gray50}4.5&
	\color{gray50}0.6&
	\color{gray50}0.40&
	\color{gray50}2&
	\color{gray50}1.33&
	\color{gray50}1.80&
	\color{gray50}1.35\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}I&
	\color{gray50}3.1&
	\color{gray50}3&
	\color{gray50}1&
	\color{gray50}0.32&
	\color{gray50}5&
	\color{gray50}1.61&
	\color{gray50}0.97&
	\color{gray50}0.60\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}J&
	\color{gray50}1.9&
	\color{gray50}2.2&
	\color{gray50}0.2&
	\color{gray50}0.11&
	\color{gray50}3&
	\color{gray50}1.58&
	\color{gray50}0.23&
	\color{gray50}0.15\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}}
% @ guide/05-network_development/56corridor-length.src: lines 23-144: code points 1-9

In the example given in Table 5.1, the corridor would end after segment “H” if the decision was based only on benefit to cost considerations. After segment “H,” the benefit to cost ratio falls below a value of one, meaning that the costs of extending the exclusive busway corridor outweigh the time savings benefits.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/56corridor-length.src: lines 146-148: code points 1-109

\subsection{1}{Where to Build Infrastructure Versus Where to Run BRT Services}
\label{volume:operations:chapter:corridor-and-network-development:section:corridor-length:subSection:where-to-build-infrastructure-versus-where-to-run-brt-services}
% @ guide/05-network_development/56corridor-length.src: lines 150-192: code points 1-0

Modern thinking in BRT planning has evolved to separate BRT infrastructure from BRT services in such a way that BRT services may operate both on- and off-corridor in a way that optimizes customer benefits versus infrastructure cost. Therefore, in the sections above, “BRT corridor” refers directly to the infrastructure built on a segment of road, rather than to the services that are needed.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/56corridor-length.src: lines 152-155: code points 1-72

Once a corridor has been selected, it is important to make an informed judgment regarding where to design BRT infrastructure and for how long of a stretch. This is best done by graphing the demand distribution and speeds during the peak hour, and selecting the location with both the highest demand and lowest speeds. Per the definition of BRT, the selected corridor must be at least 3 kilometers.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/56corridor-length.src: lines 157-160: code points 1-79

Building BRT infrastructure on the segment of roadway along the corridor with the highest demand means that infrastructure investment will yield the greatest benefits. Oftentimes, however, the sections of a corridor with the highest demand are precisely the sections where politicians are less willing to propose BRT infrastructure, as those sections often face more constraints. As a result, BRT infrastructure often stops just before the segment where it is needed most. \emphasis{The BRT Standard }(2014) awards maximum points to corridors that include the highest quality of BRT infrastructure on the highest demand segment. This often means extending the BRT directly into the city center. For other corridors that do not come near the city center, this may simply mean the area with higher demand than the rest of the city.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/56corridor-length.src: lines 162-169: code points 1-92

Once the location for BRT infrastructure has been selected, one must consider what to do beyond the infrastructure. Many cities propose lower-quality bus treatments beyond the infrastructure. Generally, however, it is preferable to allow BRT services to simply enter mixed traffic beyond the infrastructure. This sends a clear signal to the public that there is a difference between BRT and everything else, and leaves open the possibility of building out the rest of the corridor as full BRT at a later date. If lower-quality bus treatments are implemented beyond the BRT infrastructure, it is less likely that they will ever be upgraded to full BRT.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/56corridor-length.src: lines 171-177: code points 1-34

Finally, it is possible to design BRT services to extend beyond the BRT infrastructure into many parts of the city. This expands the catchment area of the BRT to many more beneficiaries than simply a service that directly matches the infrastructure. It also provides an opportunity to bring new BRT services to sections of the city where no bus services previously existed but where stakeholders wished to see a BRT corridor. That is, in some cases, during the corridor selection process, some selection of stakeholders may advocate for a corridor with no preexisting bus demand. It is unlikely that such a corridor will make it to the list of top corridors for BRT implementation. However, if the requested corridor is located near the corridor ultimately selected, it may be reasonable to run a service into that area to begin to grow demand for future BRT infrastructure in that location, as well as to demonstrate to stakeholders that such an area will be a beneficiary of BRT.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/56corridor-length.src: lines 179-188: code points 1-47

The next chapter covers how to develop and optimize a BRT service plan. But it is worth noting here that a BRT corridor with multiple services receives maximum points on \emphasis{The BRT Standard }(2014).\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/56corridor-length.src: lines 190-192: code points 1-0

\section{7}{Other Considerations in Corridor Selection}
\label{volume:operations:chapter:corridor-and-network-development:section:other-considerations-in-corridor-selection}
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 3-563: code points 1-0

\quotation{Success is a journey, not a destination.}{Ben Sweetland, author}
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 5-6: code points 1-23

The above framework and analysis should be sufficient to determine both the corridors that should be developed for the whole BRT system and the corridor that will be chosen for the pilot phase. While this is often all that is needed to make a decision about the right corridor, below are other considerations that can be used to choose the corridor, including:\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 8-12: code points 1-0

\begin{itemize}
\item Customer time savings;% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 12-13: code points 1-0
\item Impact on mixed-traffic lanes;% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 13-14: code points 1-0
\item Implementation costs;% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 14-15: code points 1-0
\item Detailed cost-benefit analysis;% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 15-16: code points 1-0
\item Political considerations, including social goals.% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 16-16: code points 1-55
\end{itemize}
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 12-16: code points 1-55

\subsection{1}{Customer Time Savings Benefits}
\label{volume:operations:chapter:corridor-and-network-development:section:other-considerations-in-corridor-selection:subSection:customer-time-savings-benefits}
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 18-77: code points 1-27

As discussed above, main public transport service improvements result from reducing congestion and boarding and alighting delays, in addition to upgrading the overall transit experience. The worse the congestion and the larger the number of existing bus customers along the corridor, the more positive the impact of a BRT system. The economic impacts from these effects are typically calculated through time savings analysis. The analysis mentioned above should be sufficient to know where the most savings from delays will occur, but quantifying the economic impact may confirm the decision.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 20-25: code points 1-85

To calculate the time savings benefits to public transport customers, estimations on passenger numbers and vehicle speeds both before and after the new system are required. The average vehicle speeds will directly relate to the amount of travel time for a particular journey. Equation 5.1 provides a framework for calculating the customer time savings.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 27-30: code points 1-42

Eq. 5.1 Customer time savings\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 32-33: code points 1-0

Where:\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 35-35: code points 1-6

P = Number of passengers;\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 37-37: code points 1-25

Tp = Present travel time;\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 39-39: code points 1-25

Tf = Future travel time.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 41-41: code points 1-24

Because benefits will vary quite a lot not only between corridors but within corridors, it is necessary to add up the benefits for each link in the corridor. These benefits will also likely vary according to the time of day and the day of the week. A calculation of this type is most readily accomplished with the assistance of a traffic model. However, a simple spreadsheet analysis with inputted survey data can also suffice. The more complete time savings formula is given in Equation 5.2.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 43-47: code points 1-78

Eq. 5.2 Detailed time savings calculation\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 49-50: code points 1-0

Where:\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 52-52: code points 1-6

i = Link;\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 54-54: code points 1-9

h = Period (morning peak, off peak, night, etc.);\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 56-56: code points 1-49

Pih = Passenger flow on the link (passengers\slash{}hour);\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 58-58: code points 1-51

Hh = duration of period h in hours\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 60-60: code points 1-34

Tpih = present travel time on link I period h\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 62-62: code points 1-45

Tfih = future travel time on link I period h\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 64-64: code points 1-44

Pih*ΔHh produces the total number of passengers on a particular link during a particular period. This value, multiplied by the estimated time savings yields per link, produces the total number of hours saved by public transport customers. This value can then be multiplied by a monetary value of time, or it can be left in the form of hours saved.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 66-69: code points 1-35

The existing public transport vehicle speeds and customer counts should have been collected during the demand analysis work noted in Chapter 4: Demand Analysis. Likewise, the boarding and alighting surveys during this phase should have produced values for both peak and nonpeak periods.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 71-73: code points 1-80

Future average vehicle speeds and customer demand will depend on the system’s design. Future customer volumes should be based on a combination of existing passenger volumes in conjunction with the size of any expected mode shifting.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 75-77: code points 1-27

\subsection{2}{Time Savings Benefits for General Traffic}
\label{volume:operations:chapter:corridor-and-network-development:section:other-considerations-in-corridor-selection:subSection:time-savings-benefits-for-general-traffic}
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 79-229: code points 1-7

Corridor selection may also depend on the impact BRT infrastructure will have on mixed traffic flow. Ideally, BRT will improve mixed traffic speeds by taking the buses out of the traffic lanes and reducing delay from buses pulling over and stopping for customers. However, this might not always be the case. There are select instances where BRT could make mixed traffic flow much worse, which may become a political problem. The three most important indicators of the likely impacts of BRT on mixed traffic are: the current traffic mix; the available right-of-way relative to the existing road; and the possible behavioral and travel changes of motorists once the new public transport system is in place.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 81-87: code points 1-77

\highlight{Current Traffic Mix}\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 90-90: code points 1-32

Normally, for a BRT system to be considered an option, there is likely to be significant congestion on at least part of the corridor. As a general rule, the greater the current contribution of public transport vehicles to the current congestion problem, the greater will be the chance that a new BRT system will actually decongest the mixed traffic-lanes (Figures 5.25 and 5.26).\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 92-95: code points 1-67

\ifxetex
	% disabled for now
\else
	{  % group required to avoid fignote settings escaping
		\img{\hsize}{operations/assets/fba8988df07dac4a479e4c1ce5a4e2037e5ea0da.jpeg}
		\fignote{24}{An exclusive busway on a road in Dallas, Texas, USA, will likely make congestion for mixed traffic worse.\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:figure:an-exclusive-busway-on-a-road-in-dallas-texas-usa-will-likely-make-congestion-for-mixed-traffic-worse}}{Richard Stouffer (iStockphoto)}
	}
\fi

\ifxetex
	% disabled for now
\else
	{  % group required to avoid fignote settings escaping
		\img{\hsize}{operations/assets/d89d7e865109193036eaeceaa6569760a485a867.jpeg}
		\fignote{25}{An exclusive busway on the road in Bangladesh would likely make mixed traffic less congested because of the high number of buses in mixed traffic.\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:figure:an-exclusive-busway-on-the-road-in-bangladesh-would-likely-make-mixed-traffic-less-congested-because-of-the-high-number-of-buses-in-mixed-traffic}}{Karl Fjellstrom.}
	}
\fi

In countries with higher bus volumes, public transport vehicles frequently have a disproportionately higher impact on congestion relative to private vehicles. This impact occurs because the vehicles often stop and go at undesignated bus stops, and because the vehicles sometimes stop two and even three abreast to pick up customers. Bringing these public transport operators into a new BRT system, therefore, frequently offers the opportunity to decongest mixed traffic-lanes even if a full lane or two become exclusive to buses. In such cases, the new BRT system can easily produce a somewhat counterintuitive result; taking away road space and giving a priority lane to public transport can actually give motorists \emphasis{more} space and produce \emphasis{less} overall congestion.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 102-109: code points 1-38

The specific congestion impact of the BRT system will depend on which public transport vehicles are incorporated into the new BRT system and which are excluded. The more public transport trips that can be incorporated into the BRT system, the less adverse impact the remaining public transport trips will have on the mixed-traffic lanes.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 111-114: code points 1-32

\highlight{Methodology for Estimating Impacts on Mixed Traffic}\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 117-117: code points 1-64

As a rough estimate, one can calculate the likely impact of a planned exclusive busway on mixed traffic in the following manner: The existing traffic flow at the most congested point of the road (based on traffic counts) should be converted to passenger car units (PCUs) for each available road lane. If the road lanes are not delineated, then this PCU conversion should be done for every three meters of road width.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 119-123: code points 1-6

Normally, lanes with a width of 3 to 3.5 meters can handle approximately 2,000 PCUs per hour. The more the PCUs over 2,000 per lane, the more congested the road will become.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 125-126: code points 1-70

This level of existing congestion should then be compared to the scenario with the BRT system in place. Some of the current public transport vehicles will be relocated onto the new BRT system, and others will remain in the mixed-traffic lanes. All the vehicles that will not be incorporated into the BRT system, including the buses not incorporated into the system then need to be converted into PCUs, and allocated to the remaining number of lanes (or three-meter road widths). Table 5.2 provides an example of this type of analysis.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 128-134: code points 1-0

\tabletitle{3}{PCU calculation for BRT scenario}
\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:table:pcu-calculation-for-brt-scenario}
\halign to 46\tablemodule{%% requires the ifoddpage package
\relax\checkoddpage\ifoddpage\else%
	\kern -16\tablemodule%
\fi%
	\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=10\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=6\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=8\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=7\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=5\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=5\tablemodule#}\cr
	\color{gray75}\bfseries \highlight{Vehicle type}& \color{gray75}\bfseries \highlight{Traffic volume}& \color{gray75}\bfseries \highlight{Average passengers per vehicle}& \color{gray75}\bfseries \highlight{Total passengers}& \color{gray75}\bfseries \highlight{PCU equivalent}& \color{gray75}\bfseries \highlight{PCU total} \cr
	\noalign{\vskip 1mm} \hline \noalign{\vskip 2mm} 
	\color{gray50}Cars&
	\color{gray50}1,200&
	\color{gray50}2.5&
	\color{gray50}3,000&
	\color{gray50}1&
	\color{gray50}1,200\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}Taxis&
	\color{gray50}500&
	\color{gray50}1.2&
	\color{gray50}600&
	\color{gray50}1&
	\color{gray50}500\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}Motorcycles&
	\color{gray50}170&
	\color{gray50}48&
	\color{gray50}8,160&
	\color{gray50}2&
	\color{gray50}340\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}Remaining buses&
	\color{gray50}300&
	\color{gray50}1.5&
	\color{gray50}450&
	\color{gray50}0.25&
	\color{gray50}75\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}\highlight{Total}&
	\color{gray50}2,170&
	\color{gray50}-&
	\color{gray50}12,210&
	\color{gray50}-&
	\color{gray50}2,115\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}}
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 134-177: code points 1-9

If the PCUs of the BRT scenario are higher than the PCUs of the pre-BRT scenario, then the new BRT system will tend to increase congestion of the mixed-traffic lanes. If it is lower, it will lead to lower congestion levels. Because the PCUs of buses are generally double that of private cars and taxis, and eight times as high as motorcycles, the more buses in the existing traffic stream that are relocated to the new BRT system, the greater the degree to which the remaining mixed-traffic lanes are decongested. A more detailed and accurate calculation of traffic congestion impacts can be obtained through a traffic software model.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 179-185: code points 1-15

Once the level of traffic is estimated for both the baseline case and the BRT case, then the amount of time savings for occupants of mixed-traffic lanes can be calculated. Box 5.1 provides an overview of the time savings calculation.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 187-189: code points 1-32

In practical terms, the changes to intersections along a BRT corridor far exceed the importance of lane allocations to general traffic between intersections, and can result in dramatic improvements for both BRT buses and mixed traffic despite any lane reductions due to BRT lane segregation and the extra space required at BRT stations.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 191-194: code points 1-31

\beginbox{1}{Calculating Time Savings for Vehicle Occupants in General Traffic}
\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:box:calculating-time-savings-for-vehicle-occupants-in-general-traffic}
On some critical sections (i), present general traffic volume on peak periods (j) will exceed the road’s capacity, by a certain amount: ΔSij. The total general traffic prejudice on that point “i” is then estimated by Equation 5.3.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 198-200: code points 1-16

Equation 5.3 Time savings for general traffic\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 202-202: code points 1-45

Where: i = Point of evaluation where one of the following effects takes place:\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 206-209: code points 1-0

\begin{itemize}
\item 1. The point is the bottleneck of the corridor% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 209-210: code points 1-0
\item 2. The point is not the bottleneck, but future capacity (after BRT) will fall below present peak volume% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 210-210: code points 1-109
\end{itemize}
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 209-210: code points 1-109

j = A specific peak hour. There are normally two peak periods, a morning peak and an evening peak. A velocity survey for cars will more accurately identify the peak periods.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 212-213: code points 1-74

TGCj = Total time savings for general traffic\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 215-215: code points 1-45

ΔSj = the amount of change on capacity to the new scheme. This value will be negative value if there is a reduction in capacity; this value will be positive if there is an increase in capacity.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 217-218: code points 2-92

Tcongji = duration of the congestion period being considered. The peak period can be better estimated by traffic velocity surveys that show when travel times increase more drastically. Usual values are around 0.5 to 3 hours.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 220-222: code points 1-39

Ki = reflects a group of factors derived form network analysis and demand elasticity.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 224-224: code points 1-85

It should be noted that reductions of capacity on two successive nearby points are not independent, and the more congested point should usually be considered the important one.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 226-227: code points 1-76

\endbox
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 196-229: code points 1-7

\subsection{3}{Implementation Costs}
\label{volume:operations:chapter:corridor-and-network-development:section:other-considerations-in-corridor-selection:subSection:implementation-costs}
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 231-256: code points 1-51

In general, the more complicated the physical aspects of a corridor, the more costly the planning and construction will be. Any of the following infrastructure components along a proposed corridor can cause costs to escalate:\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 233-236: code points 1-0

\begin{itemize}
\item Road widening;% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 236-237: code points 1-0
\item Use of median;% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 237-238: code points 1-0
\item Relocation of utilities;% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 238-239: code points 1-0
\item Underpass or tunnel;% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 239-240: code points 1-0
\item Flyover, overpass, or elevated segment;% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 240-241: code points 1-0
\item Bridges;% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 241-242: code points 1-0
\item Large roundabouts.% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 242-242: code points 1-24
\end{itemize}
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 236-242: code points 1-24

Road widening can be particularly costly, especially when any property acquisition is considered. These considerations may affect the decision of which corridor to implement when.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 244-245: code points 1-75

As Quito has demonstrated, in some cases, underpasses and complicated roundabouts can be handled without extravagant costs. By contrast, simply converting a mixed-traffic lane to a BRT runway without any of these complications can reduce both planning and infrastructure costs.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 247-249: code points 1-70

Several Chinese cities are contemplating placing BRT runways along ring roads. Much of the reasoning is related to the existing right-of-way space and the relative ease of construction. However, customer access to a ring road station (both in terms of horizontal and vertical distances travelled) can be difficult. Building these “easy” infrastructure projects may eventually undermine the BRT concept. A BRT system with few customers may seem to operate quite smoothly, but it will not be cost effective and is unlikely to move public opinion to support future expansion.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 251-256: code points 1-51

\subsection{4}{Calculating the Cost-Benefit Ratio}
\label{volume:operations:chapter:corridor-and-network-development:section:other-considerations-in-corridor-selection:subSection:calculating-the-cost-benefit-ratio}
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 258-464: code points 1-7

A cost-benefit analysis incorporating the benefits from time savings, fuel savings, and environmental improvements can do much to help shape the eventual decision. Quantifying these benefits will also improve the project’s attractiveness to many financial institutions.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 260-262: code points 1-60

A cost-benefit analysis calculates the ratio of a project’s benefits to its costs. The larger this ratio, the more attractive a project is likely to be to decision makers and financing organizations. Equation 5.4 provides the framework for calculating the cost-benefit ratio.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 264-266: code points 1-75

Equation 5.4 Cost-benefit ratio\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 268-269: code points 1-0

Where:\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 271-271: code points 1-6

BC = Total benefit-cost ratio\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 273-273: code points 1-29

Btp = Time savings for public transport customers\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 275-275: code points 1-49

Btm = Time savings for occupants of mixed-traffic vehicles\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 277-277: code points 1-58

Bfp = Fuel savings to public transport vehicles\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 279-279: code points 1-47

Bfm = Fuel savings to mixed-traffic vehicles\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 281-281: code points 1-44

Be = Environmental benefits\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 283-283: code points 1-27

Ci= Implementation cost.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 285-285: code points 1-24

Box 5.2 provides an example of a multi-criteria analysis using two of the factors presented in this section.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 287-288: code points 1-8

\beginbox{2}{Calculating the Benefit to Cost Ratio}
\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:box:calculating-the-benefit-to-cost-ratio}
As a simplified example of this calculation, the table below presents a hypothetical example of time savings benefits for BRT vehicles and mixed-traffic vehicles. The “weighting” factor indicates how much consideration is given to each stakeholder group (transit users and car users). In this first case, each group is given an equal weighting.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 292-298: code points 1-34

\tabletitle{4}{Time savings benefits, Scenario 1}
\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:table:time-savings-benefits-scenario-1}
\halign to 46\tablemodule{%% requires the ifoddpage package
\relax\checkoddpage\ifoddpage\else%
	\kern -16\tablemodule%
\fi%
	\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=6\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=10\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=5\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=5\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=5\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=10\tablemodule#}\cr
	\color{gray75}\bfseries \highlight{Corridor }& \color{gray75}\bfseries \highlight{Time savings benefits}& \color{gray75}\bfseries & \color{gray75}\bfseries & \color{gray75}\bfseries \highlight{Cost}& \color{gray75}\bfseries \highlight{Benefits to cost ratio} \cr
	\noalign{\vskip 1mm} \hline \noalign{\vskip 2mm} 
	\color{gray50}&
	\color{gray50}\highlight{BRT}&
	\color{gray50}\highlight{Cars}&
	\color{gray50}\highlight{Total}&
	\color{gray50}&
	\color{gray50}\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}Weighting&
	\color{gray50}1&
	\color{gray50}1&
	\color{gray50}&
	\color{gray50}&
	\color{gray50}\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}A&
	\color{gray50}50&
	\color{gray50}-6&
	\color{gray50}44&
	\color{gray50}10&
	\color{gray50}4.4\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}B&
	\color{gray50}2&
	\color{gray50}0&
	\color{gray50}2&
	\color{gray50}5&
	\color{gray50}0.4\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}}
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 301-338: code points 1-9

In the above scenario, corridor A attracts a high volume of ridership. The benefits awarded to transit users in this case will greatly exceed the costs to car users. Corridor B is a low-ridership area but with little congestion, and therefore no time impact on car users. In this case, the time benefit to public transport customers is quite small. From these two options, the benefit to cost ratio for corridor A is eleven times greater than the same ratio for corridor B. Thus, from a time savings perspective, corridor A would be the chosen corridor.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 342-353: code points 1-29

If political officials were concerned about reactions from car owners, then the weighting for this group might be increased to five. But as the table below indicates, even this amount of prioritization to car interests would not change the overall result.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 357-361: code points 1-53

\tabletitle{5}{Time savings benefits, Scenario 2}
\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:table:time-savings-benefits-scenario-2}
\halign to 46\tablemodule{%% requires the ifoddpage package
\relax\checkoddpage\ifoddpage\else%
	\kern -16\tablemodule%
\fi%
	\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=6\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=10\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=5\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=5\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=5\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=10\tablemodule#}\cr
	\color{gray75}\bfseries \highlight{Corridor }& \color{gray75}\bfseries \highlight{Time savings benefits}& \color{gray75}\bfseries & \color{gray75}\bfseries & \color{gray75}\bfseries \highlight{Cost}& \color{gray75}\bfseries \highlight{Benefits to cost ratio} \cr
	\noalign{\vskip 1mm} \hline \noalign{\vskip 2mm} 
	\color{gray50}&
	\color{gray50}\highlight{BRT}&
	\color{gray50}\highlight{Cars}&
	\color{gray50}\highlight{Total}&
	\color{gray50}&
	\color{gray50}\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}Weighting&
	\color{gray50}1&
	\color{gray50}5&
	\color{gray50}&
	\color{gray50}&
	\color{gray50}\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}A&
	\color{gray50}50&
	\color{gray50}-6&
	\color{gray50}20&
	\color{gray50}10&
	\color{gray50}2\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}B&
	\color{gray50}2&
	\color{gray50}0&
	\color{gray50}2&
	\color{gray50}5&
	\color{gray50}0.4\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}}
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 364-400: code points 1-9

However, if officials were particularly worried about car owner reactions, and therefore gave a priority weighting of ten to private vehicles, then the result would change.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 404-407: code points 1-50

\tabletitle{6}{Time savings benefits, Scenario 3}
\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:table:time-savings-benefits-scenario-3}
\halign to 46\tablemodule{%% requires the ifoddpage package
\relax\checkoddpage\ifoddpage\else%
	\kern -16\tablemodule%
\fi%
	\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=7\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=9\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=5\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=5\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=5\tablemodule#}\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}&
	\hbox to 0.5\tablemodule{}\vtop{\sffamily\footnotesize\noindent\hsize=10\tablemodule#}\cr
	\color{gray75}\bfseries \highlight{Corridor }& \color{gray75}\bfseries Time savings benefits& \color{gray75}\bfseries & \color{gray75}\bfseries & \color{gray75}\bfseries \highlight{Cost}& \color{gray75}\bfseries \highlight{Benefits to cost ratio} \cr
	\noalign{\vskip 1mm} \hline \noalign{\vskip 2mm} 
	\color{gray50}&
	\color{gray50}\highlight{BRT}&
	\color{gray50}\highlight{Cars}&
	\color{gray50}\highlight{Total}&
	\color{gray50}&
	\color{gray50}\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}Weighting&
	\color{gray50}1&
	\color{gray50}10&
	\color{gray50}&
	\color{gray50}&
	\color{gray50}\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}A&
	\color{gray50}50&
	\color{gray50}-6&
	\color{gray50}-10&
	\color{gray50}10&
	\color{gray50}-1\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}	\color{gray50}B&
	\color{gray50}2&
	\color{gray50}0&
	\color{gray50}2&
	\color{gray50}5&
	\color{gray50}0.4\cr
	\noalign{\vskip 2mm 
}}
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 410-449: code points 1-9

In this scenario, corridor A would be a less desirable choice than corridor B. However, with the low benefit ratio for public transport customers, corridor B would risk doing little to promote the future prospects of BRT development in the city.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 453-457: code points 1-41

An expanded benefits table could be constructed to also factor in impacts from fuel savings and environmental improvements.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 460-461: code points 1-75

\endbox
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 290-464: code points 1-7

\subsection{5}{Political Considerations}
\label{volume:operations:chapter:corridor-and-network-development:section:other-considerations-in-corridor-selection:subSection:political-considerations}
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 468-563: code points 1-0

Capricious decision-making not grounded in analysis of actual travel demand can result in costly mistakes that do little to support a quality service for the customer (e.g., Lima’s Tren Eléctrico). At the same time, political considerations can be quite appropriate in augmenting technical data. In fact, democratically elected officials have a responsibility to utilize their judgments in making determinations between different sets of costs and benefits. Some of the key instances requiring political inputs include:\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 470-475: code points 1-0

\begin{itemize}
\item Preference to place initial corridors in a high-visibility location in order to promote the BRT concept more widely;% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 475-476: code points 1-0
\item Preference to locate corridors initially in low-income communities in order to promote greater social equity;% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 476-477: code points 1-0
\item Avoidance of corridors that may conflict with other infrastructure plans or with other governmental entities;% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 477-478: code points 1-0
\item Avoidance of corridors requiring extensive reorganization of many existing formal and informal public transport operators.% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 478-478: code points 1-128
\end{itemize}
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 475-478: code points 1-128

A purely technical analysis of the corridor attributes can miss some of the more subtle political considerations that may greatly affect the project’s viability.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 480-481: code points 1-48

Frequently, the most difficult problem is that the corridors with the highest existing public transport volumes have already been included in a master plan for a future metro project. Decision makers are reluctant to plan a BRT on a future metro corridor for fear of eliminating the possibility of national government funds for a metro. In such cases, it may be politically expedient to propose putting BRT in the corridor as a temporary measure that can be upgraded at a later date. While this rationale was utilized successfully with TransJakarta Corridor I, it is currently being dismantled, as construction of the metro has commenced. This reinforces the notion that BRT is a second-class option for rail and undermines the legitimacy of BRT as a high-quality public transport system, and should be undertaken with care.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 483-490: code points 1-82

Political inputs can be particularly appropriate when cultural or social issues are at stake. In Hyderabad, India, the presence of a Muslim graveyard on both sides of the road creates a bottleneck on the main highway bisecting the city from the northwest to the southeast. An engineering solution may call for expropriating parts of the graveyard for road widening. But for a Hindu-dominated government to relocate this graveyard would likely be both politically and socially unsound. Thus, reasoned political judgment may be needed to curtail any discussion of road widening.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 492-497: code points 1-57

It may also be advisable in Phase I not to disrupt too many existing public transport routes that are not going to be incorporated into the new system. Negotiations with existing public transport operators are a delicate part of BRT planning, and it is generally advisable not to take on the entire private-sector transit industry at once. Corridors with a large number of existing separate bus operators will make the negotiations for reforming the system a lot more complex than corridors where there are only a small number of operators. This consideration was a determining factor with the Silver Standard Insurgentes BRT Corridor in Mexico City, and is also a factor in the planning of the Dar es Salaam system.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 499-505: code points 1-94

Social considerations may be a leading determinant in corridor decision-making. Public transport systems perform many key social functions in a city and have often played a central role in regeneration efforts. Political leaders and project developers may thus seek to target areas that would most benefit from a public transport investment.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 507-510: code points 1-28

Focusing the initial phase in a low-income community can produce several economic and social-equity benefits. The new public transport system will connect these residents to jobs and public services in the city’s central areas. The system itself will also likely produce both direct and indirect employment opportunities for the community. Recent studies from Bogotá indicate that the significant reductions in travel costs resulting from TransMilenio have greatly expanded the potential job market for lower-income residents, increasing employment and wages among lower income groups.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 512-517: code points 1-69

A new public transport system can also do much to attract investment to lower-income areas. Additionally, the presence of the system can instill a sense of pride and community in areas that previously felt abandoned and ignored. For these reasons, Bogotá purposefully located its initial BRT corridor in between the central area and the lower-income south side of the city.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 519-522: code points 1-49

In both Guangzhou and Lanzhou, China, BRT systems appeared to lead to significant increases in civic pride in lower-income areas served by the BRT corridor. In Guangzhou those agreeing that, “I am proud of Guangzhou” increased among customers in the BRT corridor from 40 percent before the BRT to 73 percent after the BRT. Among car drivers, the figure was unchanged, and in the control survey in a different corridor, civic pride among bus passengers declined over the same period. The Lanzhou BRT, which opened in January 2013, also spurred large increases in civic pride, with those agreeing “I am proud of Lanzhou” increasing among customers in the BRT corridor from 40 percent before the BRT to 70 percent after the BRT. Pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists saw a similar increase of more than 30 percent, while in the control corridor there was no significant change.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 524-532: code points 1-49

\ifxetex
	% disabled for now
\else
	{  % group required to avoid fignote settings escaping
		\img{\hsize}{operations/assets/49d2974b26a547b9b37d1270041d7923f55f2029.jpeg}
		\fignote{26}{Bogotá’s TransMilenio system has successfully attracted users from a wide spectrum of society.\label{chapter:corridor-and-network-development:figure:bogots-transmilenio-system-has-successfully-attracted-users-from-a-wide-spectrum-of-society}}{Lloyd Wright.}
	}
\fi

Access to BRT can also increase land values, which can be a double-edged sword. Recent studies indicate that TransMilenio led to significant increases in property values in areas served by a TransMilenio feeder bus. For low-income families without land tenure, the benefits of lower transportation costs may be lost to higher rents. It is therefore a good idea to prioritize efforts to give low-income families land tenure in planned BRT corridors so that the resulting property value increases can be captured by the families instead of by land speculators.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 537-542: code points 1-31

At the same time, there are also social and environmental reasons for including middle- and upper-income communities in a project’s early phases. While Bogotá did target the lower-income areas south of the city, Mayor Enrique Peñalosa also intentionally included a corridor extension into the more affluent north of the city. The wealthier areas of a city are obviously the locations of higher vehicle ownership. Thus, from the standpoint of shifting car users to public transport, there is greater emissions and congestion reduction potential in targeting car-owning households. Further, the mayor also saw significant social benefits from encouraging greater interactions between economic classes. Peñalosa has noted that: “A public transport system may be the only place that the rich and the poor interact with one another.” In terms of propagating understanding and awareness among social groups, a high-quality public transport system can thus be a potential social unifier within a city. Having the new system also serve higher-income groups also helps encourage political buy-in to the system by influential families. Finally, in places like Cape Town, South Africa, running the Bronze Standard MyCiTi BRT into middle-income neighborhoods demonstrated that public transport is not just for the poor and garnered more support from rich and poor alike in the rollout of future phases.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 544-557: code points 1-38

Social-equity issues may also be central to loan prerequisites from major international financing organizations. Most development institutions, such as the Asian Development Bank, justify investments in terms of poverty alleviation. Thus, ensuring that a reasonable number of BRT customers are below median income is important to link the system to broader goals of poverty alleviation.\par
% @ guide/05-network_development/57-other-considerations-in-corridor-selection.src: lines 559-563: code points 1-0

