Journal of Environmental Protection and Ecology 13, No 2, (2012)

Transcription

1 Journal of Environmental Protection and Ecology 13, No 2, (2012) Environmental protection and sustainable development Bus Rapid Transit as a Contribution to Sustainable Transportation. The Case of Athens, Greece I. Stamos*, D. Triantafyllos School of Technology, Department of Transportation and Hydraulic Engineering, Faculty of Rural and Surveying Engineering, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece instamos@gmail.com Abstract. This paper examines the framework under which the implementation of a bus rapid transit (BRT) system would be feasible in a major metropolitan area. In an effort to enhance comprehension about this innovative mean of public transport and to determine its contribution to rising sustainability issues, the technical and operational features of the BRT system are presented and discussed. The paper then outlines the basic demographical and geographical characteristics of the city of Athens, Greece, before briefly analysing the dominant transportational conditions of it. The techniques and approaches used in former international practices of the system are reviewed and related with the city of Athens, on which all respective steps of the planning process are subsequently represented. The paper concludes with a proposal of a possible realisation (area and corridor selection) of the BRT system in Athens, underlying the role of the decision-making process that precedes the selection of public transport technology, and proposing a more detailed multi-criteria analysis for the detailed evaluation of the impacts of a probable BRT implementation. Keywords: sustainable transportation, public transport systems, bus rapid transit. AIMS AND BACKGROUND In an era where sustainable transportation is more of a necessity rather than a global trend, public transport role is of undoubtable importance. Being at the crux of the agenda of any city that yearns for community coherence and prioritises people needs over vehicles, public transport came to be an indispensable element of today society. Planning and realising a first-class, cost-effective system, however, that could attract passengers off the automobile, proves to be a puzzling and complicated procedure. Despite its limited applications, bus rapid transit (BRT) is increasingly aknowledged as a cost-effective solution to provide high-quality transit services in urban areas. The Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP) claims that BRT permits low-income cities to deploy a high-quality public transport system by allowing them to provide a functional network of public transport corridors 1. * For correspondence. 611

2 The goal of this research is to raise awareness about this scarcely used mass transportation technology and apply the experience and lessons learnt from former international practices of the system to the city of Athens, Greece that serves as an implementation paradigm. By exploring the technical and operational aspects of the BRT technology, the paper aims to investigate and identify its accordance with sustainable transportation and analyse how a currently spreading public transport technology could be applied in a major metropolitan area. The idea of sustainability emerged on a global level in 1987 and the concept was given form under what the Brundtland report 2 stated in meeting the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Accounting for approximately 25% of today CO 2 emmisions in Europe and having largely shaped the structure of cities, transportation patterns and mobility habits have had huge impacts on the environment of urban areas 3. The advent of the automobile and its excessive usage thereafter bolstered the freedom of mobility, at a great cost, however, air pollution, urban noise, severance of communities, congestion costs, increasing dependence on oil supplies and social isolation are only a few among the many effects of the automobile dominance 4. Public transport, on the other hand, has often been claimed to be a tool for handling and managing upcoming environmental and mobility puzzles deriving from today rising motorisation. The BRT system came to be an integral element of the public transport category. Interest in the BRT concept sparkled in the early 70 s in an effort of developing cities to meet the transport needs of the increasing population with limited financial resources. Wright 5 defined BRT as a term applied to a high-quality bus-based transit system that delivers fast, comfortable and cost-effective transportation through the provision of segregated right-of-way infrastructure, rapid and frequent operations, and excellence in marketing and customer service. On the same notion, Thomas 6 purports that a BRT system essentially emulates the quality, performance and amenity characteristics of a modern rail-based transit system but at a fraction of the cost (BRT will typically cost 4 to 20 times less than a tram or light rail transit (LRT) system and 10 to 100 times less than a metro system 1 ) while combining the flexibility of buses. However, BRT inherent flexibility means that no two BRT systems will look exactly the same within a given region. The term encompasses a broad variety of modes, including those known or formerly known as express bus systems, limited busways and rapid busways systems, metro-buses or surface metro. Levinson et al. 7 set up 7 principle components that a public transport system should include for it to qualify as BRT. These encompass busways (segregated busways over the majority of the length of the system corridors), stations (convenient, secure stations that provide level access between the platform and the vehicle floor), vehicles (low emission vehicle technologies), services (clear route maps, signage), route structure (integrated network of routes and corridors), fare collec- 612

3 tion (pre-board fare collection and fare verification) and intelligent transportation systems (automatic vehicle location, real time passenger information). EXPERIMENTAL Athens is the capital and largest city of Greece currently accommodating citizens 8. According to the European Urban Audit, the Athens larger urban zone populates inhabitants at a density rate of 1054 people per km 2 (Ref. 9). Throughout its long history, Athens has experienced many different population levels, partly through absorbing and engulfing neighbour suburbs and villages into its greater Athens area. As Athens grew in size, the original monocentric structure of a large metropolis dissolved progressively with time into a polycentric structure. The CBD (Central Business District) lost its dominant primacy, and clusters of activities generating trips spread within the built-up area. The Athens polycentric development along with the lack of a complete public transport system, largely accounts for its car-based orbital transportation due to the pattern of the trips with random origin and destination points. According to the Hellenic Statistical Authority, during the last decade the population in the metropolitan region of Athens has increased by about 15% while at the same time car ownership has increased by about 84% (Fig. 1), reaching private automobiles per inhabitant in 2006 (the respective car ownership in 1996 was automobiles per inhabitant) 8. This has led to a 30% increase in travel time in the last 10 years, which, along with the insufficient urban road network in the central areas, has contributed to the deterioration of the traffic conditions in the capital. As presented in the Metro Development Study for the Athens metropolitan region, there is a daily demand for 6.3 mil. journeys, while there are 8.1 mil. single mode daily trips (26% increase in the last 12 years) 10. The same study states that there are 2.01 daily trips per person (1.56 journeys/person), while 55% of the population makes at least one trip per day with business trips (45% of total daily travel) having the highest portion. The modal split reveals the private vehicle (PrV) prevalence with an approximate percentage of 55.3%, followed by that of public transport with a share of 31.7% (Ref. 11). The share of taxis, however, is differentiated from the PrV category holding a noteworthy 13% (Ref. 12), which adds to a total of 68.3% of private vehicles (cars and motorcycles) in the road network of Athens. 613

4 Fig. 1. Private car ownership development in Attica from 1986 to 2006 Source: H.S.A., 2006 Athens currently accommodates all possible public transport modes but that of BRT. Transit providers have to serve a system, which faces a 3.5% annual increase in traffic for the last 10 years, and which has 22% of the signalised intersection approaches in the center of the city highly congested 10. Since the new metro lines have been delivered, there has been a steady increase in public transport use (+17% between 2000 and 2006) 13. Nevertheless, the area coverage and thus the offered service and supply of public transport throughout the city is considered as deficient, leaving many suburban areas without the expected level of public transport supply. Taking into consideration that the financing of new public transport infrastructure meets upcoming obstacles due to the economic recession, a financial sound implementation of a system that would require less resources and at the same time would integrate with the existent public transport network should be carefully examined. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The importance of analysing the transportation demand in order to be able to predict the expected number of trips in a given network can not be overstated. The demand for transportation forms the primary input in any decision related to the creation and management of transport infrastructure and services according to customer needs. In the case of Athens, no travel demand data were available at the time of the writing of this paper. Instead, a set of mobility and urban factors was used for identifying the area and corridor of a probable BRT system in the city. Population density, land use, location of major attraction points and the existence of a public transport network were the main reasons behind the choice of the respective area highlighted in purple-scaled rectangles in Fig. 2. The municipalities belong to the east and south-east suburbs of Athens, and as shown, are not currently served by a direct public transport line. Despite the fact that these municipalities accommodate more than 20% of Athens inhabitants and that highly attractive commercial 614

5 and business areas are located within their limits, the connection between them still remains rather weak, with the focus given on their connection with the city center 8. In an effort to relieve the already burdened city center from additional trips, a BRT line offering a direct service through these municipalities as well as acting as a feeder line to the existent subway lines is proposed. The BRT link depicted in Fig. 2 will provide a strong connection for 8 municipalities, integrating with the 3 subway lines, the tramline and the suburban rail line. The selected municipalities share certain characteristics concerning their population density and land use. This BRT proposal attempts to take into consideration social issues, by offering a strong link to cities mainly inhabited by low to medium income citizens 14. Moreover, the line largely follows the route and direction of Kifissos avenue in an attempt to decongest and relieve traffic from this oversaturated avenue, which is believed to be host of approximately vehicles per day 15. Modal integration is very important for a BRT system and this is the reason why the line seeks to build small transportation hubs with the existent metro lines, the tramline and the suburban rail line. In the end, the new system will not try to compete with and antagonise the currently offered public transport services but pull people from private to mass transportation. Fig. 2. The BRT proposal for the city of Athens Two scenarios have been developed for the corridor in which the new BRT system of Athens will run. In both cases a series of factors have been determinant for the choice of the specific route. Travel-time for the selected route both for transit users and mixed traffic vehicles, the number of people served and affected by the line, the modal integration with other public transport systems, the improvement 615

6 and development of the urban environment and the performance capabilities of the BRT system were among the factors based on which the corridor selection was made. Scenario A, as depicted in Fig. 3, considers linking the municipalities mentioned above mainly via the Kifissos avenue, in an attempt to create a strong direct business link, to relieve the saturation of this major arterial road due its commuting and business trips and to attract passengers moving along the peak hours. Fig. 3. Scenario A of the BRT implementation in Athens the business link (source: Google, 2009) The corridor in the scenario A has a total length of km offering large segments of separated bus way to the BRT vehicles, allowing them thus to reach their maximum speed (close to 40 km/h). This is one of the most important features of this case, since the estimated time for the bus to complete this route will be near 45 min (including approximated delays at bus stops). However, the number of people served by this line could possibly be low, since the link is not heavily interfering with the inner parts of the municipalities, but is mainly running on the outskirts of them. The relative low number of stations planned (7) also reflects the latter fact. In this scenario modal integration with other public transport modes is rather weak, since the line shares common stations with the suburban rail system at the start of its route and partially integrates with the tram line in the end of its route. The conversion of lanes where currently parking spaces are offered, to lanes 616

7 of general traffic will preserve the existing current traffic conditions (since no mixed traffic lane will be removed for the BRT utilisation) but pose an obstacle to people searching for parking places. Moreover, the right turn from the left lane often used by the BRT vehicle can prove to be dangerous, especially in the case of the Kifissos avenue. Scenario B attempts to provide a link that will enhance the attraction of the system to the residents of these cities (Fig. 4) focusing not only on a fast direct service but also on its role as a feeder to the public transport system. The line could possibly serve recreational and other purposes rather than commuting and business ones and this is why it is planned to run through the majority of the municipalities. Fig. 4. Scenario B of the BRT implementation in Athens the leisure link (source: Google, 2009) The corridor in scenario B is significantly larger than that of scenario A, having a total of 18.6 km. This corridor is designed to serve trips mainly during the nonpeak hours and this is why it attempts to serve a bigger percentage of people. 17 stations along the whole route will delay the BRT system considerably compared to scenario A, since the estimated time for the completion of the route is close to 73 min. The modal integration, however, is quite strong in this case, enhancing the role of the BRT as feeder line to the other public transport systems, since the line shares one station with each metro line and is partially integrated with the tram line of Athens. 617

8 CONCLUSIONS This report has offered an insight on the initial steps of the realisation of a BRT system in Athens. A BRT system is not ideal and optimum for every city but it largely depends on the local demographical and transportational characteristics of it. Temporal and financial resources largely determine the extent to which a full BRT system will be implemented. In order to evaluate all impacts and assess its accordance with sustainable transprotation, a multi-criteria analysis including socio-economic data is needed. What concerns the travel demand of a particular region or district, this is without doubt an important tool to have. Despite its unquestionable necessity though, this paper has concluded that it is the components the travel demand consists of, that can be investigated and studied when this voluminous data is not available. A series of important estimations, projections and comparisons are dominantly based on this data, but the main concept behind a decision (e.g. the selection of the implementation corridor of a system) can be roughly shaped by travel demand contributing features: population, population density, land use, existence of public transport systems, supply of private transport infrastructure, major origin and destination attraction areas within a region. This methodology has been followed and applied in this paper not only for the selection of the areas that would be served by a BRT system in Athens but also for the specification of the corridor through which such a system would operate. Athens, a city whose polycentric structure encourages the already excessive use of private transport, serves in this report as an illustration paradigm of a European metropolitan region suffering from the severe impacts of high motorisation in the society, the economy and the environment. The enrichment of the scarce public transport network with a BRT system would only then improve current transportational problems if planned with special consideration on the integration of the new system to the existing one and if combined with a series of corrective measures. REFERENCES 1. Institute for Transportation and Development Policy: Bus Rapid Transit Planning Guide H. Brundtland: Our Common Future. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development, A. MILUKAS: European Green Car Initiatives and the Prospects for Clean Transport. In: Proc. of the 5th International Congress on Transportation Research, Volos, P. Newman, J. Kenworthy: Sustainability and Cities: Overcoming Automobile Dependence. 1st ed. Island Press, Washington, D.C., Covelo, California, 1999, L. Wright: Bus Rapid Transit. 1st ed. Eschborn, GTZ, E. Thomas: Bus Rapid Transit. Presentation at the Institute of Transportation Engineers, Annual Meeting, Chicago,

9 7. H. Levinson, S. Rutherford, S. Zimmerman, J. Clinger, J. Gast, E. Bruhn: Bus Rapid Transit. Vol. 1. Implementation Guidelines, TCRP Report 90. Washington, Hellenic Statistical Authority: online at retrieved on European Urban Audit: online at retrieved on Metro Development Study: Public-private Transport Mode Inventory for Athens. Attiko Metro Agency, Athens, European Metropolitan Transport Authorities: Barometer of Public Transport in the European Metropolitan Areas, A. ANASTASAKI, D. PANAYIOTAKOPOULOS: A Transport Model for the Athens Olympic Games. Attico Metro, Greece, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development: OECD Environmental Reviews. Greece, OECD, Hellenic Ministry of Finance: Data on the Attica Periphery for the Financial Year Greece, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development: OECD Territorial Reviews. Athens, Greece, OECD, Received 8 December 2010 Revised 20 February