Federal Transit Administration: Bus Rapid Transit Offers
Communities a Flexible Mass Transit Option (24-JUN-03,
GAO-03-729T).
Buses form the backbone of the nation's mass transit systems.
About 58 percent of all mass transit users take the bus, and even
in many cities with extensive rail systems, more people ride the
bus than take the train. In recent years, innovative Bus Rapid
Transit systems have gained attention as an option for transit
agencies to meet their mass transit needs. These systems are
designed to provide major improvements in the speed, reliability,
and quality of bus service through barrier-separated bus-ways,
high-occupancy vehicle lanes, or reserved lanes or other
enhancements on arterial streets. The characteristics of Bus
Rapid Transit systems vary considerably, but may include (1)
improved physical facilities or specialized structures such as
dedicated rights-of-way; (2) operating differences such as fewer
stops and higher speeds; (3) new equipment such as more advanced,
quieter, and cleaner buses; and (4) new technologies such as more
efficient traffic signalization and real-time information
systems. This testimony, which updates a report GAO issued in
September 2001, provides (1) information on federal support for
Bus Rapid Transit systems and (2) an overview of factors
affecting the selection of Bus Rapid Transit as a mass transit
option.
-------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
REPORTNUM: GAO-03-729T
ACCNO: A06876
TITLE: Federal Transit Administration: Bus Rapid Transit Offers
Communities a Flexible Mass Transit Option
DATE: 06/24/2003
SUBJECT: Federal aid for transportation
Mass transit funding
Mass transit operations
Strategic planning
Transportation industry
Transportation research
Urban development programs
FTA New Starts Program
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a **
** GAO Product. **
** **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but **
** may not resemble those in the printed version. **
** **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed **
** document's contents. **
** **
******************************************************************
GAO-03-729T
Testimony Before the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs U.
S. Senate
United States General Accounting Office
GAO For Release on Delivery Expected at 10: 00 a. m. EDT Tuesday, June 24,
2003 FEDERAL TRANSIT
ADMINISTRATION Bus Rapid Transit Offers Communities a Flexible Mass
Transit Option
Statement of JayEtta Hecker, Director Physical Infrastructure Issues
GAO- 03- 729T
Federal grants are available for Bus Rapid Transit projects, primarily
through the Federal Transit Administration*s (FTA) New Starts program.
However, only one project currently has a funding commitment since few Bus
Rapid Transit projects are ready to compete for funding, competition for
New Starts funding is intense, and certain types of Bus Rapid Transit
projects are not eligible for New Starts funding because the program
provides grants only for projects that operate on a separate right- of-
way for the exclusive use of mass transit and high- occupancy vehicles.
FTA is proposing to change this requirement so that more Bus Rapid Transit
projects can be eligible for New Starts funding. In addition, constraints
on the use or size of the other federal grants may limit their usefulness
for Bus Rapid Transit projects. Under a demonstration program that began
in 1999,
FTA awarded $50, 000 to each of 10 grantees for projects designed to help
determine the extent to which Bus Rapid Transit can increase ridership,
improve efficiency, and provide high- quality service. FTA plans to
evaluate the demonstration projects to determine their most effective
elements.
When selecting a mass transit system, communities consider its capital and
operating costs, performance, and other advantages and disadvantages. In
the cities that GAO reviewed, the per- mile capital costs of Bus Rapid
Transit varied with the type of system* averaging $13.5 million for
busways, $9. 0 million for buses on high- occupancy vehicle lanes, and
$680,000 for buses on
city streets* and compared favorably with the per- mile capital costs of
Light Rail. In the cities that GAO reviewed with both Bus Rapid Transit
and Light Rail service, neither type of service had a consistent advantage
in terms of operating costs, and Bus Rapid Transit was comparable to Light
Rail in terms of ridership and operating speed. A major advantage of Bus
Rapid Transit is its flexibility: buses can be rerouted to accommodate
changing traffic patterns and can operate on busways, high- occupancy
vehicle lanes, and city arterial streets. However, the public may view Bus
Rapid Transit as less likely than Light Rail to improve a community*s
image and spur economic development. Bus Rapid Transit Service on a
Barrier- Separated Busway
Buses form the backbone of the nation*s mass transit systems. About 58
percent of all mass transit users take the bus, and even in many cities
with extensive rail systems, more people ride the bus
than take the train. In recent years, innovative Bus Rapid Transit systems
have gained attention as an option for transit agencies to meet their mass
transit needs. These systems are designed to provide major improvements in
the
speed, reliability, and quality of bus service through barrier- separated
busways (see photo), highoccupancy vehicle lanes, or reserved lanes or
other enhancements on arterial streets. The characteristics of Bus Rapid
Transit systems vary considerably, but may include (1) improved physical
facilities or specialized structures such as dedicated rightsof- way; (2)
operating differences such as fewer stops and higher speeds; (3) new
equipment such as more advanced, quieter, and
cleaner buses; and (4) new technologies such as more efficient traffic
signalization and real- time
information systems. This testimony, which updates a report GAO issued in
September 2001, provides (1) information on federal support for Bus Rapid
Transit systems and (2) an overview of factors affecting the selection of
Bus Rapid Transit as a mass transit option.
www. gao. gov/ cgi- bin/ getrpt? GAO- 03- 729T. To view the full testimony
click on the link above. For more information, contact JayEtta Hecker,
(202) 512- 8984, heckerj@ gao. gov. Highlights of GAO- 03- 729T, a
testimony
before the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs
June 24, 2003
FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION
Bus Rapid Transit Offers Communities a Flexible Mass Transit Option
Page 1 GAO- 03- 729T
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee: We appreciate the opportunity
to testify today on Bus Rapid Transit as an innovative option for
improving bus service. Buses form the backbone of the public mass transit
system in the United States. The majority of those
who use mass transit, about 58 percent of all riders, take the bus. Even
in many cities with extensive rail networks, such as Chicago and San
Francisco, more people ride buses than use the rail systems. In recent
years, innovative Bus Rapid Transit systems have gained
attention as an option for transit agencies to meet their mass transit
needs. In general, Bus Rapid Transit is designed to provide major
improvements in the speed, reliability, and quality of bus service through
barrierseparated busways (see fig. 1), high- occupancy vehicle lanes, or
reserved lanes or other enhancements on arterial streets. Bus Rapid
Transit systems vary considerably in their characteristics but may include
(1) improved physical facilities or specialized structures such as
dedicated rights- ofway; (2) operating differences such as fewer stops and
higher speeds; (3) new equipment such as more advanced, quieter, and
cleaner buses; and (4) new technologies such as more efficient traffic
signalization and real- time information systems.
Page 2 GAO- 03- 729T
Figure 1: Barrier- Separated Busways
My testimony today will provide (1) information on federal support for Bus
Rapid Transit systems and (2) an overview of the factors affecting the
selection of Bus Rapid Transit as a mass transit option. My statement is
primarily based on information presented in our September 2001 report on
Bus Rapid Transit. 1 To complete that effort, we visited transit agencies
in
Dallas, Denver, Los Angeles, Pittsburgh, San Diego, and San Jose to obtain
capital and operating cost information. We made cost and other comparisons
between Bus Rapid Transit and Light Rail transit systems,
1 U. S. General Accounting Office, Mass Transit: Bus Rapid Transit Shows
Promise,
GAO- 01- 984 (Washington, D. C.: Sept. 17, 2001).
Page 3 GAO- 03- 729T
which often compete as project alternatives. We also interviewed federal
officials and industry experts to identify the advantages and
disadvantages of Bus Rapid Transit. In addition, for the testimony, we
obtained updates of the information in our 2001 report from Federal
Transit Administration officials.
In summary: * Federal support for Bus Rapid Transit projects may come from
several
different sources, including the Federal Transit Administration*s New
Starts, Bus Capital, and Urbanized Area Formula Grants programs. 2
However, few Bus Rapid Transit projects are scheduled to receive New
Starts grant funding. Through fiscal year 2004, one Bus Rapid Transit
project in Boston was awarded a New Starts grant, totaling about $331
million. New Starts commitments for Bus Rapid Transit projects are limited
because (1) few Bus Rapid Transit projects are ready to compete for
funding; (2) competition for New Starts funds is intense* currently, 85
mass transit projects at various stages are competing for funds; and (3)
certain types of Bus Rapid Transit projects are not eligible for New
Starts funding because the program provides funding only for projects that
operate on separate right- of- ways for the exclusive use of mass transit
and high- occupancy vehicles. In addition, constraints on the use or size
of the other federal grants may limit their usefulness for Bus Rapid
Transit projects. However, some programs that expand the capacity of
highways, such as introducing new variable toll lanes, can be used in
conjunction with Bus Rapid Transit to the mutual benefit of transit and
highway users. 3 Besides awarding grants to construct systems, the Federal
Transit
Administration supports Bus Rapid Transit through a demonstration program
that began in 1999. Under this program, $50,000 was provided to each of 10
grantees to improve information sharing among transit agencies about
issues pertaining to Bus Rapid Transit. The demonstration program is
designed to determine the extent to which Bus Rapid Transit can
2 The New Starts program is the primary federal program that supports the
construction of new fixed- guideway transit systems. As a result, its
grants have generally been used to fund rail projects. The Bus Capital and
Urbanized Grants programs provide funds to states that may be used to help
fund Bus Rapid Transit projects as well as other state transit
programs. 3 The Federal Highway Administration*s Value Pricing Pilot
Program allows high- occupancy vehicle lanes to be converted to variable
toll lanes. In one pilot program, toll revenues were used to operate an
express bus service on the toll lanes. Expansion of this concept, where
toll revenues fund Bus Rapid Transit service along the toll lanes, has
been proposed in new pilot projects.
Page 4 GAO- 03- 729T
increase ridership, improve efficiency, and provide high- quality service.
The grantees* projects include dedicated busways, bus lanes on arterial
streets, improved technology on buses, and other innovations.
Communities consider several factors when they select mass transit
options. Our 2001 report examined such factors as capital cost and
operating costs, system performance, and other advantages and
disadvantages of Bus Rapid Transit. We found, for example, that the
capital costs of Bus Rapid Transit in the cities we reviewed averaged
$13.5 million per mile for busways, $9.0 million per mile for buses on
highoccupancy
vehicle lanes, and $680,000 per mile for buses on city streets, when
adjusted to 2000 dollars. 4 For comparison, we examined the capital costs
of several Light Rail lines and found that they averaged about $34.8
million per mile, ranging from $12.4 million to $118.8 million per mile. 5
In addition, in the cities we reviewed that had both types of service,
neither Bus Rapid Transit nor Light Rail had a consistent advantage in
terms of operating costs. We also found that Bus Rapid Transit compared
favorably with Light Rail systems in terms of operating speed and
ridership. Furthermore, Bus Rapid Transit has the advantage of being
flexible: buses can be rerouted more easily to accommodate changing travel
patterns to eliminate transfers; buses can operate on busways, high-
occupancy vehicle lanes, and city arterial streets. However, Bus Rapid
Transit has some disadvantages as well. For example, the public may view
buses as slow, noisy, and polluting. Moreover, according to some transit
agency officials, alternatives to Bus Rapid Transit, such as Light Rail,
may be
viewed as a hallmark of a *world- class* city and a means to improve the
community*s image and spur economic development.
Bus Rapid Transit involves coordinated improvements in a transit system*s
infrastructure, equipment, operations, and technology that give
preferential treatment to buses on urban roadways. Bus Rapid Transit is
not a single type of transit system; rather, it encompasses a variety of
approaches designed to improve speed, reliability, and quality of service.
We identified three general types of Bus Rapid Transit systems* those that
4 Capital costs typically include the costs to plan, design, and construct
a project. 5 Light Rail transit is a metropolitan- electric railway system
characterized by its ability to operate in a variety of environments, such
as streets, subways, or elevated structures. Because Light Rail systems
can operate on streets with other traffic, they typically use an overhead
source for their electrical power, and passengers board from the street or
platforms. Background
Page 5 GAO- 03- 729T
(1) use buses on exclusive busways, (2) share high- occupancy vehicle
(HOV) lanes with other vehicles, and (3) provide improved bus service on
city arterial streets. Busways* special roadways designed for the
exclusive use of buses* can be totally separate roadways or separated by
barriers from other traffic within highway rights- of- way. Busways
currently exist in Pittsburgh, Miami, and Charlotte. Buses on HOV lanes
operate on limited- access highways designed for long- distance commuters.
Dallas, Denver, Houston, Los Angeles, and Seattle make extensive use of
HOV lanes for buses. 6 Bus Rapid Transit service on busways or HOV lanes
is sometimes augmented by park and ride facilities and entrances and exits
for these lanes. Bus Rapid Transit systems using arterial streets may have
lanes reserved for buses and street enhancements that speed buses and
improve service. Los Angeles has instituted a type of Bus Rapid Transit
service on two arterial corridors.
Bus Rapid Transit may also include any of the following features:
Traffic signal priority. Buses receiving an early or extended green light
at intersections reduce travel time* in Los Angeles, for example, by as
much as 10 percent.
Boarding and fare collection improvements. Prepaid or electronic passes
increase the convenience and speed of fare collection, and low- floor or
wide- door boarding saves time.
Limited stops. Increasing distances between stations or shelters
improves operating speeds.
Improved stations and shelters. Bus terminals and unique stations or
shelters differentiate Bus Rapid Transit service from standard bus
service. (See fig. 2.)
Intelligent Transportation System technologies. Advanced technology can
maintain consistent distances between buses and inform passengers when the
next bus is arriving.
Cleaner and quieter vehicles. Improved diesel buses and buses using
alternative fuels are cleaner than traditional diesel buses.
6 Los Angeles and Houston originally built their systems as exclusive
busways and later converted them to HOV facilities.
Page 6 GAO- 03- 729T
In our September 2001 review of Bus Rapid Transit systems, we found that
at least 17 U. S. cities were planning to incorporate aspects of Bus Rapid
Transit into their operations.
Figure 2: Improved Stations and Shelters
A variety of federal grant programs could be used to help fund Bus Rapid
Transit projects, but few projects are in line to receive awards. The
Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has also provided funding for several
Bus Rapid Transit projects through a demonstration program. Federal Grants
and a Demonstration
Program Are Available to Help Support Bus Rapid
Transit Projects
Page 7 GAO- 03- 729T
Grant funds administered primarily by FTA and, to a lesser extent, by the
Federal Highway Administration are available for Bus Rapid Transit
projects. However, few Bus Rapid Transit projects are ready to compete for
these funds, competition for funding is intense, and constraints on the
use and size of the grants limit their usefulness for Bus Rapid Transit
projects.
FTA*s New Starts Program is the primary source of federal funding for the
construction of new transit systems and extensions to existing systems. It
provides grants of up to 80 percent of the capital costs of bus and rail
projects that operate on exclusive rights- of- way. 7 To obtain funds, a
project must progress through a local or regional review of alternatives,
develop preliminary engineering plans, and receive FTA*s approval of the
final design. FTA annually proposes New Starts projects to the Congress
for funding, basing its proposal on an evaluation of each project*s
technical merits, including its planned mobility improvements and cost
effectiveness, and the stability of the locality*s financial commitment.
In making its funding proposal each year, FTA gives preference to projects
with existing grant agreements. FTA then considers projects with overall
ratings of *recommended* or *highly recommended* under the evaluation
criteria. The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA- 21)
authorized about $6 billion in *guaranteed* funding over 6 years for New
Starts transit projects. 8 As table 1 indicates, few Bus Rapid Transit
projects are ready to compete
for New Starts funding. Apart from the one project that has already
received a funding commitment, none has progressed far enough for FTA to
evaluate it for funding, and not all of the six projects that are in the
preliminary engineering and final design categories may decide to compete
for New Starts funding.
7 A full- funding grant agreement establishes the terms and conditions for
federal participation, including the maximum amount of federal funds to be
made available to the project. The administration has recommended reducing
the cap on New Starts funding to
50 percent of a project*s cost to ensure that local governments play a
major role in funding these transit projects. Under the current program,
transit agencies could supplement New Starts funds with other federal
transit funds for a total federal contribution of up to 80 percent. In
addition, for fiscal year 2003, FTA instituted a preference policy of
favoring projects seeking only 60 percent for the maximum federal share
for all current and future projects because it wanted to fund more
projects.
8 These funds are subject to a procedural mechanism designed to ensure
that minimum amounts are provided each year. In addition, TEA- 21
authorized FTA to make contingent commitments subject to future
authorizations and appropriations acts. One Bus Rapid Transit Project Is
Receiving
Federal New Starts Grant Funding
Page 8 GAO- 03- 729T
Table 1: Proposed Fiscal Year 2004 New Starts Program Funding for Bus
Rapid Transit
Dollars in millions Total New Starts Bus Rapid Transit portion Category of
projects Number of New
Starts projects Actual or proposed funding a Number of Bus Rapid
Transit projects Actual or proposed funding a
Projects with full- funding grant agreements 26 $7,375 1 $331 Projects
pending full- funding grant agreements 3 772 0 0 Projects in final design
14 3,622 1 123 Projects in preliminary engineering 42 19,343 5 1,149 Other
projects authorized b 123 N/ A 8 N/ A
Total 208 $31,112 15 $1,603
Legend: N/ A = Not applicable. Source: GAO analysis of FTA data.
a For projects with full- funding grant agreements, figures represent
amounts committed; for projects in other categories, figures represent
amounts proposed by transit agencies for New Starts funding. b Includes
projects that were specifically identified in FTA*s Proposed Fiscal Year
2004 Annual Report
on New Starts as having Bus Rapid Transit as one of the transit options
being considered.
In addition to Bus Rapid Transit projects, Light Rail, Heavy Rail, and
Commuter Railroad projects can compete for New Starts funding. Nationwide,
over 200 projects are now in various stages of development, and these
other types of projects outnumber Bus Rapid Transit projects in all of the
New Starts program categories. Of the approximately $7.4 billion
in proposed commitments for New Starts projects with full- funding grant
agreements for fiscal year 2004, about $4.6 billion is for Light Rail,
$2.0 billion for Heavy Rail, $430 million for Commuter Rail, and $330
million for Bus Rapid Transit. The funding for Bus Rapid Transit was
awarded to a project in Boston.
A constraint on the use of New Starts funding further limits its use for
Bus Rapid Transit projects. Currently, the program requires that, to be
eligible for funding, a project must operate on separate rights- of- way
for the
exclusive use of mass transit and high- occupancy vehicles. While some Bus
Rapid Transit projects, such as busways, fit this requirement, others,
such as those that operate buses on city streets in mixed traffic, do not.
FTA has proposed changing the fixed- guideway requirement in its fiscal
year 2004 budget proposal. Under the proposal, new non- fixed- guideway
improvements done on a corridor basis would be eligible for New Starts
funds. This change could allow New Starts funds to be used for arterial
street Bus Rapid Transit projects, because these projects operate in
specific corridors.
Page 9 GAO- 03- 729T
Other federal programs also provide grants for transit projects, but
constraints on the use or size of these grants may limit their usefulness
for Bus Rapid Transit projects. For example:
As we noted in our 2001 report, transit agencies can apply funds
obtained through FTA*s Urbanized Area Formula Grants program to Bus Rapid
Transit and other transit projects. This program provides capital and
operating assistance to urbanized areas with populations of more than
50,000. However, areas with populations over 200,000 may only use the
funds for capital improvements.
The Bus Capital Program provides a large number of relatively small
grants to states and local transit agencies for bus improvements. In
fiscal year 2003, the Congress appropriated about $651 million for 387
grants, ranging from $30,000 to $16 million; the largest amounts were
typically provided for statewide bus projects. In fiscal year 2003, a
number of Bus Rapid Transit projects are expected to receive funds under
this program. For example, the Hartford- New Britain busway project in
Connecticut was allocated about $7.4 million, and the Bus Rapid Transit
system in Honolulu
was allocated about $7.9 million. While these funds can be combined with
funds from other programs, such as New Starts, they are generally not
sufficient to fund a major Bus Rapid Transit project alone. Bus Rapid
Transit and other transit projects can qualify for certain types of
federal highway funds administered by the Federal Highway
Administration. For example, as noted in our 2001 report, transit agencies
have used Surface Transportation Program and Congestion Mitigation and Air
Quality Improvement funds to help pay for transit projects. 9 The
Boston Bus Rapid Transit project, with a full funding grant agreement, did
not plan to use highway funds as part of its project financing.
Bus Rapid Transit can also be utilized in conjunction with the Federal
Highway Administration*s Value Pricing Pilot Program. This program allows
high occupancy vehicle lanes to be converted to variable toll lanes, where
the toll varies with the level of congestion on the highway. In a project
on the I- 15 freeway in San Diego, the revenue generated from the tolls is
used to help fund an express bus service operating on the toll lane. Plans
to build additional variable toll lanes in San Diego include expansion
9 Among other things, Surface Transportation Program funds are provided to
states to be used for the capital costs of transit projects. Congestion
Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program funds are generally
available to states for transportation projects designed to help them meet
the requirements of the Clean Air Act.
Page 10 GAO- 03- 729T
of Bus Rapid Transit to operate on the new lanes. Projects such as this
are limited, however, by a prohibition on charging tolls on the Interstate
Highway System and by the inherently limited scope of the pilot program.
In 1999, FTA initiated a demonstration program to generate familiarity and
interest in Bus Rapid Transit. From FTA*s perspective, Bus Rapid Transit
is a step toward developing public transit systems that have the
performance and appeal of Light Rail systems, but lower capital costs. FTA
contends that using technological advancements will allow buses to operate
with the speed, reliability, and efficiency of rail systems. FTA promotes
the Bus Rapid Transit concept with the slogan *think rail, use buses.*
The goal of the demonstration program was to promote improved bus service
as an alternative to more capital- intensive rail projects. The program
provided $50,000 to 10 transit agencies to share information and data on
new Bus Rapid Transit projects. 10 FTA wanted the Bus Rapid Transit
program to show how using technological advancements and improving the
image of buses would allow buses to increase ridership and operate with
the speed, reliability, and efficiency of Light Rail. The grantees in the
demonstration program may also be eligible for federal capital funds
through the New Starts, Bus Capital, and Urbanized Area Formula Grants
programs. FTA has held workshops focusing on developing components of Bus
Rapid Transit systems, such as vehicles, marketing and promoting the
system*s image, fare collection, and traffic operations.
Some localities participating in the demonstration program have planned or
put in place more extensive components of a Bus Rapid Transit system than
others. For example, Miami and Charlotte have busways for the exclusive
use of buses, while San Jose is implementing technological and service
improvements, such as signal prioritization on a high- ridership HOV- lane
arterial corridor. In Eugene, plans are to purchase buses that will look
like trains and operate in special bus lanes. In Cleveland, an extensive
Bus Rapid Transit project is planned that involves the extensive
reconstruction of Euclid Avenue, including signal prioritization, bus
10 FTA recently provided funding to Los Angeles, California and Las Vegas,
Nevada. The program includes six additional members of the Bus Rapid
Transit consortium. These consortium members attend workshops and support
the program*s goals. FTA Supports Bus Rapid Transit through a
Demonstration Program
Page 11 GAO- 03- 729T
station structures, and reconstructed sidewalks along the corridor. Table
2 summarizes differences in the components of Bus Rapid Transit
demonstration projects. Table 2: Elements of Bus Rapid Transit in the FTA
Demonstration Program*s Projects
Elements Boston Charlotte Cleveland Washington, D. C.; Dulles Eugene
Hartford Honolulu Miami San
Juan San Jose
Busways Bus lanes Bus on HOVExpressways
a Signal priority Fare collection improvements Limited stops Improved
stations and shelters Intelligent transportation systems Cleaner/ quieter
vehicles Source: GAO presentation of FTA information. Note: Individual
elements may change as demonstration projects evolve.
a Includes the use of a limited- access airport road.
FTA plans to evaluate the demonstration projects after they are
implemented. Through these evaluations, FTA wants to determine the most
effective Bus Rapid Transit elements so that other transit agencies can
model similar systems.
Decisions to pursue a Bus Rapid Transit project require significant
planning and analysis of factors associated with transit options. Our 2001
report examined such factors as capital and operating costs, system
performance, and other advantages and disadvantages of Bus Rapid
Transit. The cost of constructing a mass transit system is a major
consideration for communities as they evaluate their transportation
options. Our September 2001 report examined 20 existing Bus Rapid Transit
lines and found that Several Factors Affect
the Selection of Bus Rapid Transit As a Mass Transit Option
Capital and Operating Costs
Page 12 GAO- 03- 729T
Bus Rapid Transit capital costs, when adjusted to 2000 dollars, averaged
$13.5 million per mile for busways, $9.0 million per mile for buses on HOV
lanes, and $680,000 per mile for buses on city streets. 11 To put this
information in perspective, we also determined the capital costs for 18
existing Light Rail lines and found that, when adjusted to 2000 dollars,
they averaged about $34.8 million per mile, ranging from $12.4 million to
$118.8 million per mile. Bus Rapid Transit has some capital cost
advantages because it does not require certain features typical of rail
systems, such as train signals, electrical power systems, and overhead
wires to deliver power to trains, nor does it need rail, ties, and track
ballast. As a result, Bus Rapid Transit projects typically cost less to
build than some alterative approaches.
The operating cost associated with alternatives also need to be considered
in selecting a transit option. Our 2001 report analyzed operating costs
for six cities that had some form of Bus Rapid Transit and Light Rail
systems. 12 In general, we found that the operating cost of Bus Rapid
Transit varied
considerably from city to city and depended on what cost measure was used.
In considering operating costs, we did not find a systematic advantage of
one mode over the other.
An important objective of any mass transit system is to move as many
people as quickly as possible. Ridership and the speed of a system are
therefore factors to be considered in selecting transit options. In the
systems we examined, these factors varied considerably for Bus Rapid
Transit. For example, we found that Bus Rapid Transit ridership on 4
busways ranged from about 7,000 to about 30,000 per day, and averaged
about 15,600 per day. For 13 bus lines on HOV lanes, ridership varied from
about 1,000 to 25,000 per day. In addition, the ridership on the two
arterialstreet Bus Rapid Transit lines in Los Angeles was about 9,000 to
56,000 per day, with an average of 32, 500 per day. Thus, Bus Rapid
Transit systems are capable of moving large numbers of passengers each
day. We also found that Light Rail ridership varied widely on the 18 lines
we reviewed, ranging from 7,000 to 57, 000 riders per day and averaging
about 29,000 per day.
11 Project capital costs typically include the costs to plan, design, and
construct a project. 12 The six cities were Dallas, Denver, Los Angeles,
Pittsburgh, San Diego, and San Jose. System Performance
Page 13 GAO- 03- 729T
According to a transportation consultant we contacted for our 2001 report,
system speed generally depends on characteristics such as the distance
between stops, fare- collection methods, and the degree to which the
roadway or tracks are reserved for transit vehicles or share the right-
ofway with cars and other vehicles. Our analysis for the 2001 report
showed a range of average speeds for Bus Rapid Transit, from 17 miles an
hour for an arterial system on city streets to over 55 miles an hour for a
system that used HOV lanes. We also found that, in most instances, Bus
Rapid Transit was faster than Light Rail in the six cities in our study.
The other advantages and disadvantages of Bus Rapid Transit could also
affect a community*s decision to pursue it as a mass transit option. For
example, Bus Rapid Transit generally has the advantage of being a flexible
system that can respond to changes in employment, land- use, and
community patterns by increasing or decreasing capacity. In addition, Bus
Rapid Transit routes can be adjusted and rerouted over time to serve new
developments and dispersed employment centers that may have resulted from
urban sprawl. Bus Rapid Transit systems also have the ability to operate
both on and off a busway or bus lane, giving them the flexibility to
respond to operating problems. Furthermore, Bus Rapid Transit has
flexibility in how it is implemented and operated. For example, it is not
necessary to include all the final elements of a system before beginning
operations; improvements, such as signal prioritization or new low- floor
buses, can be added as they become available. Another advantage is that
Bus Rapid Transit can be coupled with other transportation system
improvements, such as newly added toll or variable toll lanes, to the
mutual benefit of both transit and highway users. 13 Transit users benefit
from a new high- speed transit option, which could be funded from the toll
revenues generated by the new lanes, while highway users would benefit
from fewer drivers on the highway as a result of adding the high- speed
transit option.
Bus Rapid Transit also presents some disadvantages that may influence
communities* decision- making. For example, according to a number of
transit agency officials and experts, bus service has a negative image,
particularly when compared with rail service. Communities might not
13 For example, under the Federal Highway Administration*s Value Pricing
Pilot Program, a project in San Diego has proposed using toll revenue
generated by newly constructed variable toll lanes to pay for Bus Rapid
Transit service operating on the new capacity. Other Advantages and
Disadvantages of Bus Rapid Transit
Page 14 GAO- 03- 729T
favor Bus Rapid Transit, in part because the public often views buses as
slow, noisy, and polluting. In addition, the public might view an
alternative to Bus Rapid Transit, such as Light Rail, as the mark of a
*world- class* city and a means to improve the community*s image and
stimulate economic development. According to transit agency officials,
because rail systems have permanent stations and routes, developers are
more likely to locate new business, residential, or retail development
along a rail line than along
a bus route. As more experience is gained with Bus Rapid Transit, its
advantages and disadvantages will become better understood.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be pleased to answer
any questions that you or Members of the Committee may have.
For further information on this testimony, please contact JayEtta Hecker
at (202) 512- 2834 or heckerj@ gao. gov. Samer Abbas, Robert Ciszewski,
Elizabeth Eisenstadt, and Glen Trochelman made key contributions to this
testimony. Contact and
Acknowledgments
Page 15 GAO- 03- 729T
Ten locations were originally included in FTA*s Bus Rapid Transit
Demonstration programs. In addition, various locations are consortium
members that do not receive direct funding, but attend workshops and
support program goals. The demonstration and consortium locations are
shown below.
Demonstration Site Consortium Member
Boston, MA Alameda and Contra Costa, CA Charlotte, NC Albany, NY
Cleveland, OH Chicago, IL Dulles Corridor, VA Las Vegas, NV
Eugene, OR Louisville, KY Hartford, CT Montgomery County, MD Honolulu, HI
Pittsburgh, PA Miami, FL San Jose, CA San Juan, PR Appendix I: Locations
in FTA*s Bus Rapid Transit Demonstration Program
(542024)
This is a work of the U. S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, because this
work may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this material
separately.
The General Accounting Office, the audit, evaluation and investigative arm
of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional
responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability of
the federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use of
public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides
analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make
informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO*s commitment to
good government is reflected in its core values of accountability,
integrity, and reliability.
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost
is through the Internet. GAO*s Web site (www. gao. gov) contains abstracts
and fulltext files of current reports and testimony and an expanding
archive of older products. The Web site features a search engine to help
you locate documents using key words and phrases. You can print these
documents in their entirety, including charts and other graphics.
Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as *Today*s Reports,* on its
Web site daily. The list contains links to the full- text document files.
To have GAO e- mail
this list to you every afternoon, go to www. gao. gov and select
*Subscribe to daily E- mail alert for newly released products* under the
GAO Reports heading.
The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of
Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more
copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should
be sent to: U. S. General Accounting Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM
Washington, D. C. 20548 To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512- 6000
TDD: (202) 512- 2537 Fax: (202) 512- 6061
Contact: Web site: www. gao. gov/ fraudnet/ fraudnet. htm E- mail:
fraudnet@ gao. gov Automated answering system: (800) 424- 5454 or (202)
512- 7470 Jeff Nelligan, Managing Director, NelliganJ@ gao. gov (202) 512-
4800
U. S. General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 Washington, D.
C. 20548 GAO*s Mission Obtaining Copies of
GAO Reports and Testimony
Order by Mail or Phone To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal
Programs Public Affairs
*** End of document. ***