Bus Rapid Transit:

Chicago’s New Route to Opportunity

Josh Ellis, BRT Project Manager Metropolitan Planning Council

Who is MPC?

• Since 1934, the Metropolitan Planning Council (MPC) has been dedicated to shaping a more sustainable and prosperous greater Chicago region. As an independent, nonprofit, nonpartisan organization, MPC serves communities and residents by developing, promoting and implementing solutions for sound regional growth.

Livability Principles

• Provide more transportation choices • Promote equitable, affordable housing • Enhance economic competitiveness • Support existing communities • Coordinate policies and leverage investment • Value communities and neighborhoods – http://www.dot.gov/livability/101.html

Key Features of BRT

Pay-before-you-board stations Dedicated bus lanes Mexico City, Mexico At-grade boarding Bogotá, Colombia Signal prioritization Rouen, France Los Angeles, California

Values of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)

• • • •

Congestion relief

: • Chicago’s Cost of Congestion = $7.3 billion/yr • 95% is cost of wasted travel time

Connectivity:

• To existing rapid transit network, recreational centers, education, food, medical, jobs, entertainment…

Community:

• Creates framework for future complementary development

Cost

: • BRT delivers excellent service, costs less, and utilizes existing infrastructure

Our methodology

Phase I: • Eliminate “special” routes Phase II: • Assess segments by right-of-way for BRT feasibility • Assess segments for livability Phase III: • Fill in gaps to integrate with existing rail and provide connectivity Phase IV: • Assess ridership demand and traffic impacts along routes

Phase I – Initial screening and segments

Phase II - Right of way 86 ft. segments

Flow lanes without stations Travel lanes of 86 ft.

Phase II – Right of way 97 ft. segments

2 stations: westbound and eastbound 1 station in the median

Phase II - Right of Way 97 ft. segments

Travel lanes of 97 ft. that are consistent for at least 3 miles BRT station in median with pre-paid boarding, at grade entrance, and designated bus lanes

Phase II – Livability

Criterion Rationale for Selection 2) Connectivity to Educational Institutions 9) Existing Transit Ridership Study Measure Main Corresponding Livability Principles

BRT has the potential to help facilitate the movement of residents, students, tourist, and employees to educational institutions.

Number of educational institutions within a half mile of street segments.

Current bus ridership demonstrates existing demand for transit along the study routes. 3) Enhance Economic Competiveness Average passenger flow by street segment (controlling for direction) during the a.m. peak period. 6) Value Communities and Neighborhoods 1) Provide more transportation choices

13) Population Not Served by Rail

Residents not currently well served by rail transit have a particular and pressing need for rapid transit service within walking distance of their homes. Residential population within a half-mile of street segments that also live beyond a half-mile radius of fixed guideway transit (CTA and/or Metra).

1)Provide more transportation choices 2) Promote Equitable, Affordable Housing

Phase II - Livability

Education Ridership Population > .5mi from Rail • Scoring results from three of the 14 livability criteria – access to education (left), ridership by stop (middle), and population not within walking distance of rail (right).

Phase II - Livability

Weighted Criteria

Criterion 1) Connectivity to Community Services 2) Connectivity to Educational Institutions 3) Connectivity to Entertainment 4) Connectivity to Food Stores 5) Connectivity to Major Medical Care 6) Connectivity to Major Open Space 7) Connectivity to Retail 8) Employment/Job Access 9) Population 10) Existing Transit Travel Time 11) Existing Transit Ridership 12) Transportation Costs 13) Population not Served by Rail 14) Infill Development Potential Weight (%)

3.59

3.59

3.59

3.59

3.59

3.59

3.59

3.59

3.59

16.17

16.17

16.17

16.17

3.00

Phase III – Transit integration and connectivity

•21 CTA rail station connections •15 Metra station connections •12 BRT on BRT connections

Phase IV – Demand modeling

Service Factor Headway Assumptions

5 – 10 minutes (peak) 12 – 15 minutes (off peak)

Station Spacing Speeds

2 stations per mile 20 mph for 20-second stop time 15 mph for 30-second stop time

Dwell Time

20 seconds 30 seconds

Phase IV – Demand modeling

• Impact on

transit

person trips: – Transit trips with both ends in the BRT network increase by 41,000 daily (14% bump) – Transit trips with either a beginning or end in BRT network increase 6.5% – Total regional transit trips increase 3% – Transit mode share increases: • 12.0% to 13.5% within BRT network • 14.7% to 15.8% for trips with one end in BRT network • 9.7% to 10% regionally

Western Corridor

• Alternatives Analysis • Community engagement in station areas • Plan for complementary public and private investment • Evaluate sources for funding capital and operations

Thank You

Josh Ellis Metropolitan Planning Council 312.863.6045

[email protected]

See the full report, technical study, and appendices at www.metroplanning.org/brt