The seven keys to a great bus rapid transit system

Montgomery County is looking at a new bus rapid transit system. How can we make it great? We looked at examples of successful BRT systems around the country.

Montgomery County’s unanimously-approved Countywide Transit Corridors Functional Master Plan calls for a bus rapid transit (BRT) system, also called RTS, that can serve as an alternative to driving and begin to manage the county’s unsustainable traffic problems. Planning for routes along Route 355, Veirs Mill Road, and US 29 are now in “Phase 1,” meaning the county is moving forward with their respective studies and designs.

County Executive Ike Leggett is still deciding how to fund the overall system. Leggett’s decision will affect key components of the network, from the features it will have to when it will get built. There are more than 30 bus rapid transit systems currently running across the US and Canada—many since the early 2000s—and a lot of them have far exceeded expectations.

Below are seven characteristics of great BRT systems from around the country. To ensure a successful BRT system for Montgomery County, Leggett’s plan should allow the county follow their leads.

1. Give buses their own lanes. Keeping BRT buses from getting stuck in traffic makes trips far quicker and more reliable. It also prevents people driving from getting stuck behind buses stopping for riders, which can make traffic flow more smoothly. This can be done without widening roads and with minimal impact to traffic by restriping or repurposing lanes. Hartford, CT’s CTfastrak runs on fully dedicated lanes and just celebrated its millionth passenger since it began operations earlier this spring. Also, York, Ontario’s Viva, Eugene, OR’s EmX, Fort Collins, CO’s MAX, all have dedicated lanes for BRT buses, among many others. Some cities are even in the process of extending their dedicated lanes.

2. Run buses very frequently. When buses arrive every few minutes, riders know that no matter when they get to the station, they don’t have to wait long to hop on the bus. Los Angeles’ Orange Line, Boston’s Silver Line, and Pittsburgh’s East Busway all run buses every 4 minutes during rush hours.

3. Have traffic signals factor in buses. In some places, a system called Traffic Signal Priority (TSP) coordinates traffic signals to accommodate bus routes by slightly lengthening green lights or shortening red lights, and with minimal to no impact to drivers. Los Angeles attributes nearly a third of the time its MetroRapid system saves to TSP.

4. Make boarding quick. Boarding time represents as much as 20% of bus travel time. Level boarding at stations, like Metro has, reduces boarding time for those in wheelchairs, with strollers, or with bicycles. If riders pay fares at stations, boarding is a much faster process. In London, England, off-board fare payment and all-door boarding has reduced boarding time by 75%.

5. Make getting to bus stops safe and easy. Safe, accessible pathways, including wide sidewalks and protected bike lanes on both sides of the street are absolutely necessary for people walking and biking to access stations. Los Angeles’ Orange Line has a mixed-use path that runs parallel to the BRT for its entire 18 miles, which allows riders who live or work in-between stations to walk or bike to the BRT station safely and easily.

6. Give bus systems a cool brand. Unique branding can distinguish the BRT—along withall its new features—from existing transit options and draw in new riders. In 2005, the year the Viva system in Ontario, Canada’s York region opened, 83% of non-riders interviewed recognized Viva. Ridership along those corridors increased by more than 56% in Viva’s first year.

7. Use big buses with extra features. Buses can look and feel more like a light rail train than an ordinary bus. Articulated vehicles with three doors have more space for passengers. Many systems, including Fort Collins, CO’s MAX, offer free Wi-Fi on their vehicles so riders can work, study, or read while traveling. Wi-Fi on board is among the things Montgomery County students and staff want.

This could all come to Montgomery

Since late April, Montgomery County’s Transit Task Force has met regularly to discuss all options for building, funding, and operating the BRT. In the next week or two, the group will release its draft report on its findings and hold a public forum on September 30 before handing the final report over to Leggett.

It’s not often a place has the opportunity to transform its entire transportation network, as Montgomery County does now. If the county can take what works in other systems and listen to the residents who use its roads every day, whether by walking, biking, riding transit, or driving, it can create a transportation network that works for all of its residents now, 20, or even 50 years down the line.

A big part of Leggett’s decision will be whether to fund the system with a single local source or a mix of local sources, or to set it up to depend on mostly dried-up state and federal funding. A dedicated funding source can ensure a well-designed BRT with all of the key features that make it rapid and reliable and distinguish it from all other transportation options.

While creative solutions can be made to fit the BRT onto existing roads and to prevent cost overruns, cutting the features that make BRT great would keep Montgomery County’s system from achieving what it’s setting out to do.

Last week, Communities for Transit and the Coalition for Smarter Growth released a report demonstrating the importance of these and many other features of BRT systems to aid Montgomery County’s citizen task force members, elected officials and staff in their upcoming BRT deliberations.