Monterrey, Nuevo León, Mexico | Transmetro - Corredor Guadalupe | 2016

BRT BasicsElementsMeasurement27/38Notes
Dedicated right-of-way4/8
Physically separated, dedicated lanes (8)
Color-differentiated, dedicated lanes with no physical separation (6)
Dedicated lanes separated by a painted line (4)5.0km/5.0km (100%) -> 4
No dedicated lanes (0)
Busway alignment8/8
Tier 1: Two-way median-aligned busway in the central verge of a two-way road (8)5.0km/5.0km (100%) -> 8
Tier 1: Bus-only corridor where there is a fully exclusive right-of-way and no parallel mixed traffic, such as a transit mall or a converted rail corridor (8)
Tier 1: Busway that runs adjacent to an edge condition like a waterfront or park where there are few intersections to cause conflicts (8)
Tier 1: Busway that runs two-way on the side of a one-way street (6)
Tier 2: Busway that is split into two one-way pairs on separate streets, with each bus lane centrally aligned in the roadway (5)
Tier 2: Busway aligned to the outer curb of the central roadway on a street with a central roadway and parallel service road (4)
Tier 2: Busway aligned to the inner curb of the service road on a street with a central roadway and parallel service road. Busway must be physically separated from other traffic on the service road to receive points (4)
Tier 2: Busway that is split into two one-way pairs on separate streets, with each bus lane aligned to the curb (3)
Tier 3: Virtual busway that operates bidirectionally in a single median lane that alternates direction by block (3)
Curb-aligned busway on a two-way road (0)
Off-board fare collection8/8
Barrier-controlled (8)
Proof-of-payment (7)
Onboard fare validation - all doors (4)
Intersection treatments?/7
Turns prohibited across the busway (7)
Signal priority at intersections (2)
Platform-level boarding7/7
Buses are platform level, having 4 centimeters or less of vertical gap. Buses with steps at entrances do not count as platform-level (7)
Stations in corridor have measures for reducing the horizontal gap (6)No horizontal gap reduction measures
Service PlanningElementsMeasurement4/19Notes
Multiple routes0/4Only one service
Two or more routes exist on the corridor, servicing at least two stations (4)
No multiple routes (0)
Express, limited, and local services0/3Only one service
Local services and multiple types of limited-stop and/or express services (3)
At least one local and one limited-stop or express service option (2)
No limited-stop or express services (0)
Control center?/3
Full-service control center with automated dispatch, active bus control, and automatic vehicle location (3)
Control center with two of the following: automated dispatch, active bus control, and automatic vehicle location (2)
Control center with one of the following: automated dispatch, active bus control, and automatic vehicle location (1)
No control center or center with limited functionality (0)
Located in top ten corridors2/2Within Guadalupe, likely the primary corridor. Not necessarily for the entire metropolitan region.
Corridor is one of top ten demand corridors or all top ten demand corridors have rapid transit infrastructure (2)
Corridor is not one of top ten demand corridors (0)
Demand profile0/3Highest demand segment on western end beyond the busway runs in mixed traffic
Corridor includes highest demand segment, which has a Tier 1 Trunk Corridor configuration (3)
Corridor includes highest demand segment, which has a Tier 2 Trunk Corridor configuration (2)
Corridor includes highest demand segment, which has a Tier 3 Trunk Corridor configuration (1)
Corridor does not include highest demand segment (0)
Hours of operations2/2Source: Moovit
Both late-night and weekend service (2)
Late-night service but no weekend service OR Weekend service but no late night service (1)
No late-night or weekend service (0)
Multi-corridor network0/2
BRT corridor connects to an existing BRT corridor or to the next one planned in the network. Must be BRT and not other rapid transit (2)
BRT corridor connects to a future planned corridor in the BRT network (1)
No connected BRT network planned or built (0)
InfrastructureElementsMeasurement6/13Notes
Passing lanes at stations1/3
Dedicated passing lanes (3)
Buses overtake in oncoming dedicated bus lanes given safe conditions (2)
Passing in mixed traffic given safe conditions (1)
No passing lanes (0)
Minimizing bus emissions?/3It is not possible for us to judge bus emissions quality and so we do not score
Stations set back from intersections3/3Nearly every station is far from an intersection
75% of stations on corridor are set back at least 40m/130ft from intersections or meet at least one exemption (fully grade-separated busways; stations located near intersections due to short block length - <100m/330ft) (3)
75% of stations on corridor are set back 26m/85ft from intersections or meet exemptions (fully grade-separated busways; stations located near intersections due to short block length - <100m/330ft) (2)
25% of stations on corridor are set back 26m/85ft from intersections or meet exemptions (fully grade-separated busways; stations located near intersections due to short block length - <100m/330ft) (1)
<25% of stations on corridor are set back 26m/85ft from intersections or exemptions (fully grade-separated busways; stations located near intersections due to short block length - <100m/330ft) (0)
Center stations2/2Only three stations are side platforms, and two of those are a station pair
>80% of stations on corridor have center platforms serving both directions of service (2)
>50% of stations on corridor have center platforms serving both directions of service (1)
>80% of stations on corridor have center platforms serving only one direction of service (1)
Pavement quality?/2It is not possible for us to judge pavement quality and so we do not score
StationsElementsMeasurement7/10Notes
Distances between stations2/2
Stations are spaced, on average, between 0.3km (0.2mi) and 0.8km (0.5mi) apart (2)
Safe and comfortable stations2/3Stations look a little run-down
Stations have all four of the following: at least 3m/10ft wide, weather protected (as appropriate to location), safe (well-lit, transparent, and have security, and attractive (3)
Stations have three of the following: at least 3m/10ft wide, weather protected (as appropriate to location), safe (well-lit, transparent, and have security, and attractive (2)
Stations have two of the following: at least 3m/10ft wide, weather protected (as appropriate to location), safe (well-lit, transparent, and have security, and attractive (1)
Stations have one of the following: at least 3m/10ft wide, weather protected (as appropriate to location), safe (well-lit, transparent, and have security, and attractive (0)
Number of doors on bus3/3
Buses have at least three doors (articulated) or two wide doors on station side (non-articulated). System allows boarding at all doors (3)
Docking bays and sub-stops0/1
At least two substops or docking bays at the highest-demand stations (1)
Less than two substops or docking bays at the highest-demand stations (0)
Sliding doors in BRT stations0/1Doesn't seem like sliding doors are present
All stations have sliding doors (1)
Otherwise (0)
CommunicationsElementsMeasurement2/5Notes
Branding2/3Branding different from Ecovía due to different operator
All buses, routes, and stations in corridor follow single unifying brand of entire BRT system (3)
All buses, routes, and stations in corridor follow single unifying brand, but differ from rest of system (2)
Some buses, routes, and stations in corridor follow single unifying brand, regardless of rest of system (1)
No corridor brand (0)
Passenger information?/2
Functioning real-time and up-to-date static passenger information corridor-wide (2)
Up-to-date static passenger information (1)
Access and IntegrationElementsMeasurement6/15Notes
Universal access2/3
Full accessibility provided (3)
Only physical accessibility provided (2)
Only audiovisual accessibility provided (1)Cannot see tactile strips
Integration with other public transport3/3Full integration with Metrorrey
Integration of both physical design and fare payment (3)
Integration of physical design or fare payment only (2)
No integration (0)
Pedestrian access and safety1/4Some stations have pedestrian footbridges. Others have faded zebra crossings at best.
Good, safe pedestrian access at every station and many improvements along corridor (4)
Good, safe pedestrian access at every station and modest improvements along corridor (3)
Good, safe pedestrian access at every station and no other improvements along corridor (2)
Good, safe pedestrian access at most stations and no other improvements along corridor (1)
Stations lack good, safe pedestrian access (0)
Secure bicycle parking?/2
Secure bicycle parking at least in higher demand stations and standard bicycle racks elsewhere (2)
Standard bicycle racks in most stations (1)
Little or no bicycle parking (0)
Bicycle lanes0/2
Bicycle lanes on or parallel to entire corridor (2)
Bicycle lanes do not span entire corridor (1)
Poorly-designed or no bicycle infrastructure (0)
Bicycle-sharing integration0/1
Bicycle-sharing at minimum of 50% of stations on corridor (1)
Bicycle-sharing at <50% of stations on corridor (0)
Design ScoreElementsMeasurement52/100
BRT?Basic BRT

External Citations