http://la.streetsblog.org/2014/06/03/guest-opinion-the-future-of-los-angeles-is-bus-rapid-transit/
By Daniel Jacobson, June 3, 2014
Omnitrans’ sbX in San Bernardino is the first on-street Bus Rapid
Transit (BRT) system in Southern California to feature dedicated
on-street bus lanes and rail-like stations. Full-feature on-street BRT
represents a key opportunity for transit expansion in Los Angeles
County. Photo: Omnitrans
Los Angeles is finally on its way toward realizing the dream of a
regional rapid transit system. Five rail lines are simultaneously under
construction, and there is renewed momentum to fund another round of
transit expansion on the 2016 ballot.
Move L.A. recently unveiled a Strawman Proposal for
“Measure R2” to accelerate the completion of the remaining Measure R
projects and offer a new vision for transit, highway, and complete
streets improvements across Los Angeles County.

Move
LA’s Measure R2 “Strawman Proposal” features a number of possible rail
expansions, but does not identify specific bus and BRT improvements.
Source: Move LA
For Angelenos and transit nerds everywhere, there is a lot to get
excited about. The centerpiece of Move LA’s vision is a $27 billion
expansion of Los Angeles’ rail network (right, and also mapped
below). Other features of note include $9 billion toward a “Grand
Boulevards” program for complete streets improvements on the region’s
automobile-oriented thoroughfares, and $3.6 billion toward active
transportation projects. Although Move LA’s vision is just an early
draft, a measure along these lines could transform the region—on par
with the development of the expansive freeway network half a century
ago.
Nevertheless, there’s something missing.
Move LA’s Measure R2 proposal does not effectively articulate one of
the most critical ingredients to reshaping mobility in Los Angeles
County: a spectrum of bus improvements, including bus rapid transit
(BRT), to enhance transit service throughout the region.
Los Angeles already has many features of a
great transit metropolis,
but its greatest challenge is one of geometry: even after another $27
billion rail investment, only a handful of cities, neighborhoods, and
corridors will have convenient rail access. For most Angelenos,
including many in densely-populated, growing, or transit-dependent
areas, buses will continue to serve as the only accessible mode of
transit. Rather than rehashing
bus vs. rail debates,
Los Angeles must embrace upgrades to its bus system (the nation’s
second-busiest) in tandem with rail expansion to reach a level of
transit abundance that brings frequent, quality service to as many
people as possible.
A spectrum of bus improvements are necessary. In many locations, bus
stop upgrades to provide adequate shelters, security, and real-time
arrival information may be sufficient when combined with frequent
service. For other locations, BRT—dedicated lanes and more robust
rail-like infrastructure—is necessary to provide quality service and
room for growth. Yet, details on bus improvements in Move LA’s Measure
R2 proposal are thin: the proportion of funds allocated to transit
operations remains constant, and bus enhancements are mentioned only
briefly under the Grand Boulevards program.
The lack of a comprehensive regional BRT vision in Move LA’s proposal
is indicative of the region’s cautious approach to reallocating street
space for buses and other users. While Metro has implemented two
(mostly) off-street BRT lines—the Orange and Silver Lines—and an
extensive Rapid network, the on-street implementation of BRT has been
limited. A handful of “peak” hour bus lanes (7-9am and 4-7pm) have been
implemented on Wilshire, Sunset, and Figueroa, and similar treatments
have been recommended on
nine additional corridors in Metro’s Countywide Bus Rapid Transit and Street Design study.
However, Metro has currently no plans for more comprehensive bus
improvements, such as all-day dedicated bus lanes and rail-like
stations.
The city of Los Angeles is effectively leading the charge for bus
improvements and more advanced BRT features as it develops concepts for a
Transit-Enhanced Network,
but the city lacks funds to implement these improvements without its
own citywide ballot measure. The city is also is tied to a problematic
on-street advertising contract which has
limited its bus stop amenities.
A step-by-step approach to BRT implementation makes sense to deliver
quick benefits to riders, but it risks setting the bar too low and
degrading the benefits of BRT. What Metro presently brands as BRT offers
only slight improvements over Rapid service: for example, bus lanes on
Wilshire are only active for five hours per day and will be absent in
Westwood and Beverly Hills, which opted out. Even after full
implementation Metro’s countywide BRT plan, none of the designated
corridors would meet the
“Basic BRT” standard set by ITDP or come close to being on-par with Metro’s rail facilities.
More than three quarters of Metro’s ridership is on buses, and many
more people choose not to ride because the service and amenities are
inferior to other alternatives: shelters, safety features, real-time
arrival information, and way-finding elements are often lacking, even at
the busiest stops. Frequency, speed, and reliability can be all-day
issues given the ever-present threat of traffic congestion.
More robust bus improvements are necessary. These improvements not
only benefit existing riders, they also makes transit a more useful
mobility option for millions of people.

This
Rapid/Local stop on Vermont at Manchester in South LA serves
approximately 1,300 people per weekday (more than many light rail
stations) but it lacks basic facilities such as shelters and is
blanketed with trash. Source: Google Streetview

Santa
Monica’s transit provider, Big Blue Bus, is in the process of upgrading
its most heavily used stops to include shelters, seating, real-time
arrival information, and way-finding features. Source: Big Blue Bus
What could a fully developed BRT network look like?
Metro currently operates 400 miles of Rapid service, while other
local providers have their own. In total, roughly 500 miles of Rapid
services are potential candidates for improvements. 500 miles of true
BRT is likely to be cost prohibitive, but it may be conceivable to
imagine a mix of improvements such as:
- 100 miles of “comprehensive” BRT (and complete streets enhancements) that could qualify under the ITDP standards (around $4 billion at $40 million/mile – assuming the cost of Metro’s East San Fernando Valley BRT project)
- 200 miles of BRT-lite “Select Bus” service
featuring dedicated lanes and targeted bus stop and streetscape
improvements (about $2 billion at $10 million/mile – assuming double the
cost of Metro’s Wilshire BRT project)
- 200 miles of signalization, bus stop upgrades, and minor street improvements (roughly $500 million at $2.5 million/mile).
All together, a fully-upgraded Rapid/BRT network could cost in the
ballpark of $6-7 billion—almost the total budget for the Grand
Boulevards program, for which may feature additional non-BRT projects as
well. This order-of-magnitude estimate doesn’t factor in improvements
to the local bus network or associated increases in operating cost to
maintain appropriate all-day frequencies for a core transit service.
Despite the cost, a robust BRT investment appears doable within the
framework of Move LA’s proposal combined with a mix of local, regional,
state, and perhaps federal funds.
For abstract illustrative purposes only, consider the conceptual rail
network from Move LA’s Strawman Proposal overlaid with a countywide BRT
concept, which assumes upgrades to most existing Rapid lines plus the
addition of new BRT services.

Move LA’s rail vision in their Measure R2 Strawman Proposal. Map by author

Move LA’s rail vision overlaid with a sketch of potential BRT lines in red. Map by author
This map represents a very rough idea of what an enhanced Rapid/BRT
network could look like. The key takeaway is that investing in BRT
across Los Angeles County could
triple the size of the region’s rapid transit dream for a relatively affordable cost.
These corridor-level investments, when combined with complete streets
improvements and transit-oriented zoning reforms, provide the framework
for Los Angeles to become a true transit metropolis. Moreover, by
addressing the regional geometry challenge, such an investment could
achieve greater regional equity: many more people could have access to
quality rapid transit service with investments in both rail and buses,
compared to just rail. Ideally, rail and bus services would converge to
the point that riding the bus would be nearly as pleasant, dignified,
and efficient as riding the train, yet buses will serve more places and
more trips.
Transit is crucial to the future of Los Angeles: the region is
dependent upon expanding mobility options to unlock new opportunities
for growth while achieving key environmental, health, and equity goals.
Rail expansion will play a key role in reshaping Los Angeles, but a
comprehensive investment in transit must extend beyond rail.Los Angeles
needs to embrace bus improvements and BRT as core elements of its 21st
Century transit vision to foster abundant, high quality transit service
for all.
Daniel Jacobson is a transportation consultant working with
cities and transit agencies to improve transit, bicycle, and pedestrian
mobility in California. He is a transportation planner at URS and a
car-free resident of Los Angeles.