BRT Standard

Last updated
Document defining the 2016 BRT Standard 2016 BRT Standard Cover.png
Document defining the 2016 BRT Standard

The BRT Standard is an evaluation tool for bus rapid transit (BRT) corridors around the world, based on international best practices. [1] The Standard establishes a common definition for BRT and identifies BRT best practices, as well as functioning as a scoring system to allow BRT corridors to be evaluated and recognized for their superior design and management aspects. [2] [3]

Contents

The Standard was conceived by the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP) in 2012 to ensure that BRT corridors worldwide meet a minimum quality standard and deliver consistent passenger, economic, and environmental benefits. This is of particular relevance in countries where "BRTs qualify for special funding from national or provincial governments. In addition to serving as an overview of BRT design elements, the Standard can be used to evaluate existing BRT corridors and certify them as a Basic, Bronze, Silver, or Gold rated corridors. Corridors which fail to meet minimum standards for Basic ratings are not considered to be BRT. [4] The latest edition of the Standard was published in 2024. [5]

BRT systems which do not meet the BRT standard ("Not BRT" by the ITDP), but is marketed as BRT, meet the phenomenon known as "BRT creep".

History and Purpose

First released in 2012, the BRT Standard was created “to establish a common definition of bus rapid transit (BRT) and ensure that BRT corridors more uniformly deliver world-class passenger experiences, significant economic benefits, and positive environmental impact”. The Standard was developed in response to a lack of consensus among planners and engineers as to what constitutes a true BRT corridor. Without a clear definition, the term BRT was used for corridors that provided only minor improvements in bus service and lacked the elements of BRT that make it competitive with light rail or metro alternatives. This caused a backlash against the BRT "brand", and confusion as to its benefits. [6]

A Transjakarta bus on a dedicated bus lane, an exclusive right-of-way separated from heavy traffic. Bundaran Senayan Transjakarta stop.jpg
A Transjakarta bus on a dedicated bus lane, an exclusive right-of-way separated from heavy traffic.

The 2014 edition made some improvements to the methodology, including adjustments to the corridor definition, infrequent-service penalties, and increased emphasis on basics. In order to allow BRT corridors in downtown areas to qualify as BRT, the definition of a BRT corridor has been reduced to a minimum of 3 km (1.9 mi) in length. [7] The peak and off-peak frequency design metrics have been removed, and penalties for low peak and off-peak frequencies have been added. An additional point was added to each of the BRT basic elements, to put greater emphasis on the basic elements of a BRT corridor. [7]

The 2016 edition proposed six major changes, including greater focus on safety and system operations, separation of the design score and the full score (i.e. including both design and operations), improved dedicated right-of-way definition, new types of busway alignments, and partial points for onboard fare validation. [8]

The latest BRT Standard, 2024 edition, is the product of feedback from BRT practitioners around the world. Suggestions were formulated into concrete proposals and evaluated by the BRT Standard Technical Committee, a group of leading BRT engineers, designers, and planners. The Standard has been refreshed by adding, combining, and revising elements based on expert feedback and increasing deductions for operations. The most significant changes include an expanded focus on gender, safety, and access; more attention to climate, greening, and resiliency; an improved passenger and customer experience; and a new focus on business operations. [9]

Technical Committee and Institutional Endorsers

The Technical Committee of The BRT Standard comprises experts on BRT. This committee serves as a source of technical advice with respect to BRT and is the basis for establishing the credibility of The BRT Standard. The Technical Committee certifies corridors and recommends revisions to The Standard as needed.

The Institutional Endorsers are an integrated group of institutions in the fields of city building, public transport systems, and climate change with decision-making abilities over the BRT Standard certification process. The endorsers establish the strategic direction of the BRT Standard, ensure that BRT projects ranked by the scoring system uphold the goals of the BRT Standard, and promote the BRT Standard as a quality check for BRT projects. [9]

Definition of BRT

Center of roadway or bus-only corridors keep buses away from the busy curbside, as seen here in San Francisco, USA. Van Ness Bus Rapid Transit 01.jpg
Center of roadway or bus-only corridors keep buses away from the busy curbside, as seen here in San Francisco, USA.
BRT stations should be at level with the bus for quick and easy boarding, as seen here in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. BRT Bus Station in Dar es Salaam 01.jpg
BRT stations should be at level with the bus for quick and easy boarding, as seen here in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.

BRT is a high-capacity bus-based transit system that delivers fast, reliable, high quality, safe, and cost-effective services at relatively low cost, metro-level capacities. It achieves that through dedicated bus lanes that are median aligned, off-board fare collection, level boarding, bus priority at intersections, and fast and frequent operations. [10] [11] Because BRT contains features similar to a light rail or metro system, it is much more reliable, convenient and faster than regular bus services. The three main delays facing public transport are 1) boarding and alighting, 2) intersections, and 3) traffic congestion. BRT solves for all three. With the right features, BRT is able to avoid the causes of delay that typically slow regular bus services, while also improving service quality, safety and security, and passenger experience. [11]

Basic characteristics

There are five essential characteristics of a BRT corridor. [12]

Standard Scoring

The BRT Standard has defined 5 main categories for design with 32 metrics totaling 100 points and an operational deductions category that has 13 metrics totaling 77 points. Together, these form the total score for the corridor. Both design and operations are critical to creating a high quality BRT corridor. Design decisions are often locked in planning and construction. We often see corridors score well here, getting a bronze or above in design, but then do poorly in operations, dropping their overall score.

While operational deductions may bring the overall score down, these are aspects that can be easily improved in order to improve the score. From there, the updated scoring details can be found in the 2024 BRT Standard with detailed guidance on how to score. The Standard only evaluates a corridor and not a whole system, since different corridors can vary widely in design and quality. Certifying a BRT corridor as Gold, Silver, Bronze, or Basic sets an internationally recognized standard for the current best practices for BRT and can only be done with the full score (Design + Operational Deductions) six months after opening to allow usage and operations to be more representative of longer-term patterns. The combination of the design evaluation (positive points) and operational evaluation (negative points) gives the final score from the BRT Standard. [13]

Below is a list of all BRT corridors that have been scored and verified by The BRT Standard technical committee, listed by year scored and country. [14]

BRT Standard VersionCountryCitySystem-CorridorCorridor Length (km)Year ScoredDesign ScoreTotal ScoreRank
2014 Argentina Buenos Aires Metrobus - 9 de Julio3.520147070Silver
2013 Argentina Buenos Aires Metrobus - Juan B Justo12.520136261Bronze
2013 Australia Brisbane (no BRT system name) - South East Busway16.520138077Silver
2024 Brazil Niteroi TransOceânica9.020245536BRT certified
2014 Brazil Belo Horizonte MOVE - MOVE - Antônio Carlos16.020159179Silver
2014 Brazil Belo Horizonte MOVE - MOVE - Cristiano Machado7.120148986Gold
2014 Brazil Brasília Expresso DF - Expresso DF Sul36.220157159Bronze
2013 Brazil Curitiba Rede Integrada de Transporte (RIT) - Linha Verde7.020139292Gold
2013 Brazil Curitiba Rede Integrada de Transporte (RIT) - Leste12.420138282Silver
2013 Brazil Curitiba Rede Integrada de Transporte (RIT) - Oeste10.420138282Silver
2013 Brazil Curitiba Rede Integrada de Transporte (RIT) - Norte8.920138282Silver
2013 Brazil Curitiba Rede Integrada de Transporte (RIT) - Sul10.620138282Silver
2013 Brazil Curitiba Rede Integrada de Transporte (RIT) - Boqueirão10.320138282Silver
2013 Brazil Curitiba Rede Integrada de Transporte (RIT) - Circular Sul14.520138282Silver
2014 Brazil Goiânia (no BRT system name) - Eixo Anhanguera13.520156856Bronze
2016 Brazil Recife Via Livre - Via Livre Leste/Oeste8.220176852BRT certified
2016 Brazil Recife Via Livre - Via Livre Norte/Sul22.820177664Bronze
2014 Brazil Rio de Janeiro BRT Rio - TransOeste52.020148977Silver
2014 Brazil Rio de Janeiro BRT Rio - TransCarioca39.020148986Gold
2013 Brazil Rio de Janeiro BRT Rio - TransOeste52.020139088Gold
2016 Brazil Rio de Janeiro BRT Rio - TransOlimpica23.020178875Silver
2013 Brazil São Paulo (no BRT system Name) - Expresso Tiradentes (Eixo Sudeste)12.020138080Silver
2013 Brazil São Paulo Corredor Metropolitano ABD - ABD Diadema33.020136060Bronze
2014 Brazil São Paulo Corredor Metropolitano ABD - ABD Extensão Morumbi10.820155247BRT certified
2016 Brazil Uberaba VETOR - VETOR Leste-Oeste5.120168272Silver
2014 Brazil Uberlândia (no BRT system name) - Corredor Estrutural Sudeste (Av. João Naves de Ávila)7.520157070Silver
2013 Canada Ottawa, ONTransitway - (All corridors)30.020136464Bronze
2016 Canada York Region, Ontario Viva - Highway 7 Corridor10.320197164Bronze
2014 Chile Santiago Transantiago - Avenida Grecia10.020145656Bronze
2014 Chile Santiago Transantiago - Avenidas Las Industrias - Seirra Bella/Carmen9.220145757Bronze
2014 Chile Santiago Transantiago - Pedro Aguirre Cerda - Exposicion/Bascunan Guerrero11.520145757Bronze
2014 Chile Santiago Transantiago - Santa Rosa Norte7.220145757Bronze
2014 Chile Santiago Transantiago - Santa Rosa Sur8.520145757Bronze
2013 China Beijing Beijing BRT - Entire Network59.020135757Bronze
2014 China Changde Changde BRT - Changde Dadao18.920145853BRT certified
2014 China Chengdu Chengdu BRT - Erhuan Lu28.820147272Silver
2013 China Changzhou Changzhou BRT - Entire Network51.920136868Bronze
2014 China Dalian Dalian BRT - Zhangqian Lu - Songjiang Lu - Huabei Lu - Xi'an Lu9.020145151BRT certified
2013 China Guangzhou Guangzhou BRT - Zhongshan Avenue22.520139191Gold
2014 China Hefei Hefei BRT - Hefei Line 1 (Changjiang)7.220145752BRT certified
2014 China Jinan Jinan BRT - B7 corridor Xierhuan7.120146560Bronze
2013 China Jinan Jinan BRT - Beiyuan dajie15.020136767Bronze
2013 China Jinan Jinan BRT - Lishan Lu4.820136767Bronze
2013 China Jinan Jinan BRT - Erhuandonglu8.020136767Bronze
2013 China Jinan Jinan BRT - Gongyebeilu-Aotizonglu Line 66.620136767Bronze
2013 China Lanzhou Lanzhou BRT - Anning Lu8.620138484Silver
2014 China Lianyungang Lianyungang BRT - Xingfu-Hailian-Xingangcheng-Gangcheng32.020146461Bronze
2014 China Urumuqi Urumuqi BRT - Corridor 1 (Beijinglu-Xibeilu-Yangzijianglu)15.520147060Bronze
2014 China Xiamen Xiamen BRT - 051.020147774Silver
2014 China Yancheng Yancheng BRT - Kaifang Dadao - Jiefang Nanlu16.020145855Bronze
2014 China Yichang Yichang BRT - Yixing Ave-Dongshan Ave-Jucheng Rd23.020158585Gold
2014 China Yinchuan Yinchuan BRT - Huanghe East-Nanxun-Qinghe17.020146256Bronze
2014 China Zaozhuang Zaozhuang BRT - B133.520146057Bronze
2014 China Zaozhuang Zaozhuang BRT - B332.220145749BRT certified
2014 China Zaozhuang Zaozhuang BRT - B518.520145850BRT certified
2014 China Zhengzhou Zhengzhou BRT - 030.520146559Bronze
2014 China Zhongshan Zhongshan BRT - Zhongshan 2nd-5th Rd - Jiangling Rd13.020146762Bronze
2013 Colombia Barranquilla Transmetro - (no name)13.220138277Silver
2013 Colombia Bogota TransMilenio - Autonorte11.620138683Silver
2013 Colombia Bogota TransMilenio - Suba9.620139289Gold
2013 Colombia Bogota TransMilenio - Caracas7.320138683Silver
2013 Colombia Bogota TransMilenio - Calle 807.520138986Gold
2013 Colombia Bogota TransMilenio - Americas12.720139188Gold
2013 Colombia Bogota TransMilenio - NQS8.620139289Gold
2013 Colombia Bogota TransMilenio - El Dorado10.820138986Gold
2016 Colombia Bucaramanga Metrolinea - Lagos - Quebradaseca7.520188475Silver
2013 Colombia Cali MIO - 1st phase (all corridors)39.020138682Silver
2016 Colombia Cartegena 0 - Transcaribe10.520178781Silver
2013 Colombia Medellin Metroplús - (no corridor name)12.520138585Gold
2013 Colombia Pereira Megabús - (no corridor name)19.220137777Silver
2013 Ecuador Guayaquil Metrovia - Troncal 3: Bastion-Centro16.520137467Bronze
2013 Ecuador Guayaquil Metrovia - Troncal 1: Guasmo-Río Daule13.920137568Bronze
2014 Ecuador Quito Metrobus - Corredor sur occidental13.420146762Bronze
2013 Ecuador Quito Metrobus-Q - Trolebus, Central-Norte and Ecovia65.420137874Silver
2014 Ecuador Quito Metrobus - Corredor sur oriental11.120147366Bronze
2014 France Île-de-France (Greater Paris)Trans-Val-de-Marne (TVM) - TVM (Antony-La Croix de Berny - Saint-Maur-Créteil16.220147171Silver
2013 France Nantes Nantes Busway - Line 46.920126969Bronze
2013 France Rouen TEOR (Transport Est-Ouest Rouennais) - (All Corridors)13.020137473Silver
2014 Guatemala Guatemala City Transmetro - Eje Sur13.020148585Gold
2014 Guatemala Guatemala City Transmetro - Eje Central11.720147373Silver
2013 India Ahmedabad Janmarg - RTO-Maninagar21.520137468Bronze
2013 India Ahmedabad Janmarg - Narol-Naroda13.220137872Silver
2014 India Ahmedabad Janmarg - Sola-AEC3.120147465Bronze
2013 India Delhi Delhi BRTS (closed) - Moolchand-Ambedkar Nagar (closed)5.820134230BRT certified
2016 India Indore iBus - iBus Trunk Corridor11.520177168Bronze
2016 India Pimpri-Chinchwad Rainbow BRTS - Corridor 214.520175543BRT certified
2014 India Surat Sitilink - Udhna - Sachin GIDC10.020146658Bronze
2013 Indonesia Jakarta Transjakarta - Corridor 112.920137161Bronze
2014 Indonesia Jakarta Transjakarta - Corridor 112.920147471Silver
2024 Mexico Mexico city Insurgentes - Line 127.920248885Gold
2024 Mexico Mexico city Trolebús Elevado - Line 10 (TE-L10)7.920248373Silver
2024 Mexico Merida IE-Tram Plancha Kanasín27.020247668Bronze
2024 Mexico Guadalajara MiMacro Periférico41.520248476Silver
2013 Mexico Guadalajara Macrobus - Línea 116.020139393Gold
2013 Mexico Mexico City Metrobus - Line 127.420137673Silver
2013 Mexico Mexico City Metrobus - Line 220.020137575Silver
2013 Mexico Mexico City Metrobus - Line 317.020137878Silver
2013 Mexico Mexico City Metrobus - Line 428.020136155Bronze
2013 Mexico Mexico City Mexibus - Line 116.020138383Silver
2014 Mexico Mexico City Metrobus - L5 Río de los Remedios - San Lazaro10.020148282Silver
2014 Mexico Mexico City Mexibus - L3 Pantitlán-Chimalhuacan14.520147872Silver
2014 Mexico Monterrey Ecovia - Lincoln-Ruiz Cortines30.020147575Silver
2014 Mexico Puebla RUTA - Linea 1: Chachapa -Tlaxcalancingo18.520147369Bronze
2014 Pakistan Islamabad-Pindi Metro Bus - Twin Cities22.520156764Bronze
2014 Pakistan Lahore Metro Bus - Green Line27.020155652BRT certified
2016 Pakistan Peshawar Zu Peshawar - Chamkani-Hayatabad27.020219797Gold
2013 Peru Lima El Metropolitano - (only 1 line)26.620138988Gold
2013 South Africa Cape Town MyCiTi - Phase 1A17.020136363Bronze
2013 South Africa Johannesburg Rea Vaya - Phase IA25.520138175Silver
2014 South Africa Johannesburg Rea Vaya - Phase IB16.720147461Bronze
2016 South Korea Sejong Sejong Express Intercity (B0) - Express Intercity23.420227675Silver
2014 South Korea Seoul 0 - Yeouidaebang-ro/Siheung-daero9.520145751BRT certified
2014 South Korea Seoul 0 - Gyeongin-ro5.620145549BRT certified
2014 South Korea Seoul 0 - Gangnam-Daero4.720145751BRT certified
2014 South Korea Seoul 0 - Dongsomun-ro/Dobong-ro14.320145751BRT certified
2014 South Korea Seoul 0 - Susack BRT20.020145953BRT certified
2014 South Korea Seoul 0 - Cheonho-Daero - West5.420145751BRT certified
2014 South Korea Seoul 0 - Cheonho-Daero - East9.220145953BRT certified
2014 Thailand Bangkok Bangkok BRT - Sathorn Station to Rama III Station11.520145959Bronze
2014 Turkey Istanbul Metrobüs - Avcılar - Söğütlüçeşme52.020157870Silver
2013 United Kingdom Cambridge Cambridgeshire Busway - Route A26.020126666Bronze
2013 United States Cleveland, OH(no BRT system name) - Healthline6.920137676Silver
2013 United States Eugene, OREmerald Express (EmX) - Green Line12.520135855Bronze
2016 United States Hartford CTfastrak - Hartford-New Britain Busway15.020168479Silver
2013 United States Las Vegas, NV(no BRT system name) - Strip & Downtown Express (SDX)2.020135754BRT certified
2013 United States Los Angeles, CA(no BRT system name) - Orange line22.920136565Bronze
2013 United States Pittsburgh, PA(no BRT system name) - Martin Luther King Jr. East Busway15.020135656Bronze
2013 United States Pittsburgh, PA(no BRT system name) - West Busway8.120135151BRT certified
2013 United States Pittsburgh, PA(no BRT system name) - South Busway7.020135050BRT certified
2016 United States Richmond GRTC - Pulse4.220197057Bronze
2014 United States San Bernardino sbX - E Street8.320146663Bronze
2024 United States Richmond Pulse4.220247763Bronze
2024 United States San Francisco Van Ness3.220247573Silver
2014 Venezuela Caracas BusCaracas - Línea 75.220147572Silver

Criticisms

The BRT Standard has been noted as a one-size-fits-all tool that is not context sensitive. Also, pro-car politicians' opposition to public transit may result in higher construction costs and greater land acquisition needs whenever a public transit agency sets a Gold Standard goal. In one recent case in Indianapolis, State Senator Aaron Freeman, a former auto industry lobbyist and an aggressive opponent of public transit, threatened to introduce a bill that would kill the IndyGo Blue Line project that was aiming for Gold classification unless IndyGo agreed to share lanes with private civilian cars for at least 70% of the BRT route. Freeman's hostility towards public transit resulted in high costs and land acquisition needs for IndyGo to meet his demands so he would withdraw his anti-transit bill. Freeman withdrew his bill when IndyGo complied with his demands, but by complying, IndyGo faced such difficulty constructing the Blue Line right-of-way that the project was cancelled by city-level political decision-makers. [15] Aaron Freeman's opposition to public transit has been praised by notable anti-transit activist Randal O'Toole, who has attacked BRT proposals on his "Antiplanner" blog. [16]

In response to that criticism, those in favor of the Standard point out that the overwhelming majority of the Standard elements work well and would also benefit lower demand systems. Above all, BRT designers should take advantage of the flexibility inherent in bus systems and consider lower-standard busway sections to avoid physical or political constraints, especially where such sections can later be upgraded to address future demand increases.

There are many situations where lower-grade BRT or non-BRT bus schemes are the appropriate solution to upgrade public transit. The Standard should not be a reason to forgo such improvements. However, in many cases, the Standard provides a scoring tool that can motivate cities to develop high quality mass transit corridors where possible under the city's prevailing financial and spatial conditions. [8]

See also

References

  1. ↑ "About the Standard: What's New in 2016?". Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP). 2016. Retrieved 2019-04-11.
  2. ↑ Goldmark, Alex. BRT Systems Getting an International Rating Standard WNYC 01 May 2012. http://www.wnyc.org/blogs/transportation-nation/2012/may/01/brt-systems-getting-an-international-rating-standard/
  3. ↑ Weingart, Eden (2023-12-07). "Could Better Buses Fix Your Commute?". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved 2024-03-14.
  4. ↑ "Recapturing Global Leadership in Bus Rapid Transit: A Survey of Select U.S. Cities". Institute for Transportation and Development Policy. Retrieved 2014-05-23.
  5. ↑ "The BRT Standard - Institute for Transportation and Development Policy". Institute for Transportation and Development Policy - Promoting sustainable and equitable transportation worldwide. 2024-03-01. Retrieved 2024-03-14.
  6. ↑ Greenfield, John (2013-03-12). "Taking the Guesswork Out of Rating BRT: An Interview With Walter Hook | Streetsblog Chicago". Chi.streetsblog.org. Retrieved 2013-08-19.
  7. 1 2 "The BRT Standard: 2014 Edition". Institute for Transportation and Development Policy. Retrieved 28 October 2019.
  8. 1 2 "The BRT Standard". Institute for Transportation and Development Policy. 21 June 2016. Retrieved 17 July 2017.
  9. 1 2 "About the BRT Standard". Institute for Transportation and Development Policy - Promoting sustainable and equitable transportation worldwide. 2014-07-24. Retrieved 2024-03-14.
  10. ↑ Kimmelman, Michael (2023-12-07). "How One City Tried to Solve Gridlock for Us All". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved 2024-03-14.
  11. 1 2 "What is BRT?". Institute for Transportation and Development Policy - Promoting sustainable and equitable transportation worldwide. 2014-07-24. Retrieved 2024-03-14.
  12. ↑ "Institute for Transportation and Development Policy: BRT Basics". ITDP. Retrieved 2014-02-06.
  13. ↑ "The Scorecard". Institute for Transportation and Development Policy - Promoting sustainable and equitable transportation worldwide. 2014-07-24. Retrieved 2024-03-14.
  14. ↑ "BRT Scores". Institute for Transportation and Development Policy - Promoting sustainable and equitable transportation worldwide. 2024-03-14. Retrieved 2025-04-26.
  15. ↑ "What Drives Republican Opposition to Transit?". 13 March 2024.
  16. ↑ "Why do Democrats Support Transit? – the Antiplanner". 15 March 2024.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.