Nairobi Ndovu A104 BRT Service Plan

Nairobi
Ndovu/A104 BRT
Service Plan
TheInstitutefor
Transportationand
DevelopmentPolicy
26February,2015
ThisreportwaswrittenbyAnnieWeinstock,Dr.WalterHook,andStephanieLotshawoftheInstituteforTransportation
&DevelopmentPolicy(ITDP),withcriticalinputsfromRemiJeanneret(modeling),ChrisKost(modeling),ZhuXianyuan
(datacollection+modeling),ElkinBello(modeling),andChrisVanEyken(datacollection+GIS).Itwasmadepossibleby
DebashishBhattacharjee,RahabMundara,andTomaszSudraofUNHabitat,undertheUNEPGlobalEnvironmental
FacilitySUSTRANEastAfricaproject,supervisedbyGeordieColville.TheInstituteforTransportationandDevelopment
PolicyalsoprovidedmatchingfundsfromitsNewInitiativesProgram,fundedbyClimateWorks.ITDPwouldliketogive
specialthankstoEngineersDenisOdeckandKibetTeriginofKeNHAfortheirconstantsupport,input,andoversight,
withoutwhichthisreportwouldnothavebeenpossible.
NairobiNdovu/A104BRTServicePlan
Page2
TableofContents
List of Figures .................................................................................................................. 5
List of Tables ................................................................................................................... 7
List of Abbreviations .......................................................................................................... 8
0
Executive Summary ...................................................................................................... 9

0.1
Scenarios Compared ................................................................................................ 9
0.2
Recommended Service Scenario: Scenario V .................................................................. 11
Project Background ..................................................................................................... 16

1.1
The Ndovu/A104 BRT project .................................................................................... 16
1.2
What is a service plan ............................................................................................. 17
1.3
MRTS Harmonisation Study and the Ndovu/A104 BRT Corridor ............................................. 19
Objectives of this assignment ......................................................................................... 20

2.1
Existing Conditions ...................................................................................................... 21

3.1
Personnel and timeframe ......................................................................................... 21

Surveys .............................................................................................................. 21
3.1.1
Identifying the affected street network and bus routes ........................................................... 22
3.1.2
On-board and at-station boarding and alighting (BA) surveys .................................................... 25
3.1.3
Bus frequency & occupancy surveys .................................................................................. 25
3.1.4
Bus passenger transfer surveys ........................................................................................ 26
Existing (baseline) conditions ......................................................................................... 27

4.1
Existing frequencies ............................................................................................... 27
4.2
Existing public transport speeds ................................................................................. 29
4.3
Existing public transport passenger demand .................................................................. 30
Service plan for the Ndovu/A104 BRT ................................................................................ 36

5.1
Modeling process ................................................................................................... 36
5.2
Model calibration .................................................................................................. 38
5.3
General Objectives ................................................................................................ 40
5.4
BRT Infrastructure Scenarios ..................................................................................... 40
5.4.1
Infrastructure Scenario 1 ............................................................................................... 41
5.4.2
5.4.3
Page3
5.4.4
5.4.5
A note on BRT infrastructure through the CBD ...................................................................... 44
5.5
BRT Service Scenarios ............................................................................................. 47
5.5.1
Inclusion or exclusion of routes........................................................................................ 47
5.5.2
BRT service types ........................................................................................................ 50
5.5.3
Scenario I: Trunk-Feeder on KeNHA Infrastructure (Infrastructure Scenario 1) ............................... 57
5.5.4
Scenario II: Direct services on KeNHA Infrastructure (Infrastructure Scenario 1) ............................. 59
5.5.5
Scenario III: Trunk-Feeder on KeNHA Infrastructure + CBD (Infrastructure Scenario 3) ...................... 61
5.5.6
Scenario IV: Direct services on KeNHA Infrastructure + CBD (Infrastructure Scenario 3) .................... 63
5.5.7
Scenario V: Direct services on KeNHA Infrastructure + CBD + Langata (Infrastructure Scenario 4) ........ 64
5.6
Comparison of scenarios .......................................................................................... 66
5.6.1
5.7
Basic cost-benefit analysis of each scenario ........................................................................ 70
BRT station locations and sizing ................................................................................. 73
5.7.1
Routes included in Scenario V ......................................................................................... 78
Page4
List of Figures
Figure1:BRTservicescenarioV:DirectservicesonKeNHAInfrastructure+CBD+Langata..............................................12
Figure2:BRTstationinJohannesburgwithtwosubstops...................................................................................................14
Figure3:Numberofsubstopsneededateachstationunderrecommendedserviceplanscenario..................................14
Figure4:A104Highwayproject............................................................................................................................................16
Figure5:A104BRTinfrastructureasdefinedbyKeNHA......................................................................................................17
Figure6:FiveBRTlinesproposedbytheMRTSHarmonisationStudy.................................................................................19
Figure7:Ndovu/A104BRTinfrastructureasfoundinMRTSHarmonisationStudy.............................................................20
Figure8MapofNairobismatatuservices...........................................................................................................................23
Figure9:SurveyedroutesoperatinginthewiderNairobiarea...........................................................................................24
Figure10:SurveyedroutesoperatingintheCentralBusinessDistrict................................................................................24
Figure11:FVOsurveylocationsforNdovu/A104BRTserviceplanningdatacollection......................................................26
Figure12:TransfersurveylocationsforNdovu/A104BRTserviceplanningdatacollection...............................................27
Figure13:ExistingaggregatematatufrequenciesforallroutessurveyedduringAMpeakhour.......................................29
Figure14:Existingaveragematatuspeedsforallroutessurveyed.AMpeakhour............................................................30
Figure15:Existingstopbystopboardingandalightingvolumesforallroutessurveyed...................................................31
Figure16:ExistingmatatuloadsonA104northernsegmentfromNaivashaRdtoKikuyuRd............................................32
Figure17:ExistingmatatuloadsonA104,fromNaivahsaRdtoWestlandsRoundabout...................................................33
Figure18:ExistingmatatuloadonA104corridorandCBD..................................................................................................34
Figure19:ExistingmatatuloadsonA104corridor,southofCBDtoImaraDiamaRailway................................................35
Figure20:ExistingmatatuloadsonA104corridor,approachingairport,fromLikoniRdtoJKIA.......................................36
Figure21Overviewofsurvey,modelingandBRTserviceplanprocess...............................................................................37
Figure22:CalibrationofmodelforexistingmataturoutesonA104...................................................................................39
Figure23:CalibrationofmodelforexistingmataturoutesonA104&Lanata....................................................................40
Figure24:InfrastructureScenario1KeNHA'scurrentdesign............................................................................................41
Figure25:InfrastructureScenario2MRTSHarmonizationStudy......................................................................................42
Figure26:InfrastructureScenario3KeNHA+CBDloop....................................................................................................43
Figure27:InfrastructureScenario4KeNHA+CBDloop+Langata....................................................................................44
Figure28:TripgenerationdensityinNairobiCBD................................................................................................................45
Figure29:Bogota'sTransMilenioBRTgoesrightthroughtheCBD.....................................................................................46
Figure30:VolumeofwalkingtripsalongCBDstreetsifBRTinfrastructureisnotincludedintheCBD..............................46
Figure31:MexicoCity'sBRTsystemwasdesignedwith"trunkonly"services...................................................................50
Figure32:Jakarta'sBRTwasalsodesignedwith"trunkonly"services...............................................................................51
Figure33:HarmoniStationtransferfacilityinJakarta.........................................................................................................52
Figure34:Jakartaaddedsomeintercorridorservices........................................................................................................53
Figure35:Guangzhou'sfullydirectservicesBRTsystem.....................................................................................................55
Figure36:Johannesburgimplementedahybridsystemofdirectservicesandtrunkfeederservices...............................56
Figure37:BRTServiceScenarioI:TrunkFeederonKeNHAInfrastructure.........................................................................57
Figure38:UnderScenarioI,twomajortransferfacilities....................................................................................................58
Figure39:BRTServiceScenarioII:DirectservicesonKeNHAInfrastructure.......................................................................60
Page5
Figure40:BRTServiceScenarioIII:TrunkfeederonKeNHAInfrastructure+CBD..............................................................61
Figure41:BRTServiceScenarioIV:DirectservicesonKeNHAInfrastructure+CBD...........................................................63
Figure42:BRTservicescenarioV:DirectservicesonKeNHAInfrastructure+CBD+Langata............................................65
Figure43:ComparisonofdailyBRTpassengersacrossthefivescenarios...........................................................................67
Figure44:ComparisonofpassengervolumestransferringoffofsurveyedmataturoutesandontotheBRT....................68
Figure45:Averagetime(inminutes)savedbyallpublictransportpassengersundereachscenario................................69
Figure46:Averagetime(minutes)savedbyBRTpassengers..............................................................................................69
Figure47:ProposedstationstopsalongA104,CBD,andLangataRoad..............................................................................74
Figure48:Highstationsaturationhasaninverseeffectonspeed......................................................................................74
Figure49:Multipledockingbaysandsubstops...................................................................................................................75
Figure50:WithBRTinfrastructureandstationsintheCBD,demandiscanbedistributedthroughout9CBDstations....76
Figure51:WithoutBRTinfrastructureandstationsintheCBD,demandisconcentratedatonlyafewstationsonUhur77
Figure52:Numberofsubstopsrequiredinatrunkonlysystemwithmultiplecorridors..................................................77
Figure53:MaximumnumberofsubstopsforBRTsystemsaroundtheworld...................................................................78
Page6
List of Tables
Table1:Comparisonofthe5serviceplanscenarios..............................................................................................................9
Table2:SummaryofEstimatedCapitalCostsbyServicePlanScenario..............................................................................10
Table3:Summaryofrateofreturnbyserviceplanscenario...............................................................................................11
Table4:ResultsofScenarioV...............................................................................................................................................13
Table5:Frequencycountsofsurveyedroutes.Source:ITDPSurvey...................................................................................28
Table6:RoutesconsideredforinclusioninBRTservicescenarios......................................................................................49
Table7:ResultsofScenarioI................................................................................................................................................59
Table8:ResultsofScenarioII...............................................................................................................................................60
Table9:ResultsofScenarioIII..............................................................................................................................................62
Table10:ResultsofScenarioIV............................................................................................................................................64
Table11:ResultsofScenarioV.............................................................................................................................................65
Table12:Cost,Benefit,andRateofReturncomparisonofFiveServicePlanScenarios.....................................................71
Table13:ScenarioVBRTRoutes..........................................................................................................................................79
Page7
List of Abbreviations
Artic:Articulatedbuses(18meter)
BA:BoardingandAlighting
BRT:BusRapidTransit
CBD:CentralBusinessDistrict
FVO:FrequencyandVisualOccupancy
ITDP:InstituteforTransportation&DevelopmentPolicy
JKIA:JomoKenyattaInternationalAirport
KeNHA:KenyaNationalHighwaysAuthority
LRT:LightRailTransit
MRTS:MassRapidTransitSystem
MIT:MassachusettsInstituteofTechnology
NMR:NairobiMetropolitanRegion
NUTRIP:NationalUrbanTransportImprovementProject
OD:OriginDestination
Std:Standardbuses(12meter)
Page8
0 Executive Summary
TheInstituteforTransportationandDevelopmentPolicy(ITDP)isanonprofitorganizationwithextensive
technicalexpertiseonBusRapidTransit(BRT)planning.Oneofourcoremissionsistohelpcitiestoimprove
thequalityoftheirBRTprojects.Assuch,wehaveworkedincitiesaroundtheworldtohelpdesignand
implementsomeofthebestranking,goldstandardBRTsystems.
TheNdovu/A104BRTprojectinNairobiiscurrentlyonatrajectorytobecomeaworldclassBRTproject.The
highestqualityBRTsystemsaredesignedaroundagoodserviceplan.Aserviceplandetermineswherethe
BRTrouteswillgo,howbigstationswillneedtobe,andhowmanypassengersaBRTsystemwillattract.The
BRTinfrastructureisthendesignedspecificallyforthisserviceplan.
AttherequestoftheKenyaNationalHighwaysAuthority(KeNHA),ITDPhaspreparedapreliminaryBRT
serviceplanfortheNdovu/A104BRTprojectaccordingtointernationalbestpracticeinBRTserviceplanning.
Thisreportdetailstheprocess,methodology,andmodelingresultsfromseveraldetailedalternativeservice
scenarios.Therecommendedservicescenariointhisreportminimizeslandacquisition,reducesthecapital
costsneededfortransferstations,minimizestraveltimeforpassengers,andattractsthemostpassengers.The
resultsofeachalternativeoptionareshown.Thebestscenariofortheprojectwouldresultinatopquality
BRTthatcanbereplicatedinNairobi,inKenya,inEastAfrica,andthroughouttheworld.
0.1 Scenarios Compared

ComparisonofFiveServicePlanScenarios
Scenario
Baseline
Description
Existing
TripsonMatatus
Dailytrips
Timeperpassenger
Timesavingsallpassengers
TimesavingsperBRTpassenger
BRTVehicles
Dailypassengersperbus
Transferstationsneeded
966,213
0
78.36
0
0
0
0
0
II
I:Trunk&
Feeder,noCBD
732,213
234,000
77.21
1.15
5.1
284
824
6
III
IV
II:Direct
III:Trunk&
Services,noCBD Feeder,CBD
606,213
360,000
76.40
1.96
5.7
352
1023
0
669,213
297,000
75.4
2.96
10.5
343
866
6
V:Direct
Services,CBD+
Langata
597,213
516,213
369,000
450,000
74.10
72.03
4.26
6.33
12.1
14.7
335
385
1101
1169
0
0
IV:Direct
Services,CBD
Table 1: Comparison of the 5 service plan scenarios
Sixscenariosweremodeledandcompared.Thesesixscenariosareasfollows:
Baseline:Existingconditions
ScenarioI:TrunkfeederserviceswithtrunkservicesonA104only
ScenarioII:DirectserviceswithBRTinfrastructureonA104only
Page9
ScenarioIII:TrunkfeederserviceswithtrunkservicesonA104andthroughtheCBD(BRT
infrastructurethroughCBDtoo)
ScenarioIV:DirectserviceswithBRTinfrastructureonA104andthroughtheCBD
ScenarioV:DirectserviceswithBRTinfrastructureonA104,throughtheCBD+1.5kmofLangataRd.
Eachscenariowascomparedonthefollowingterms:
DailyridershipontheBRT;
Averagetimesavingsalltransitpassengers(BRT+matatu);
Averagetimesavings,BRTpassengers;
#BRTvehiclesneeded;
Dailypassengersoneachbus;and
#Transferstationsneeded.
ThebestBRTserviceplanwillcaptureasmuchoftheexistingmatatudemandcurrentlyusingthecorridoras
possible.Thishastwobenefits:First,itmeansmoreofthematatuscanberemovedfromtheremainingtraffic
lanes,decongestingtheroad.Second,itmeansmorepassengerscanbenefitfromthenewBRTsystem.
ScenarioVcapturesbyfarthemostpassengers,andhencewoulddecongesttheroadthemost.
ThebestBRTserviceplanwillsavethemosttimeforallthetransitpassengersinthecorridor,boththoseon
theBRTsystemandthosethatcannotusetheBRTsystem.Itisalsoworthknowinghowmuchtimejustthe
BRTpassengerssave.Inthisrespect,ScenarioValsoperformsthebest.Alltransitpassengerssave6.33
minutesandtheBRTpassengerssave14.7minutespertripunderScenarioV.ScenarioVperformsthebest
becausetheinfrastructureisconcentratedonthemostcongestedpartsofexistingtransittrips,andbecause
thereareminimalforcedtransfersimposedonpassengers.
ThebestBRTserviceplancarriesthemostpassengersperbusbutdoesnotnecessaryrequirethesmallest
fleet.ThebestBRTserviceplanrequiresabiggerfleetbecauseitiscarryingalotmorepassengersthan
alternativescenarios,buteachoneofthosebusesiscarryingmoredailypassengersthanintheother
scenarios,sothesystemoverallwillbemoreprofitable.
ThebestBRTserviceplanrequireslowercapitalcostsandlandacquisition.
SummaryofEstimatedCapitalCostsbyServicePlanScenario
Scenario
Baseline
Description
Existing
TotalEstimatedCapitalCost
II
III
Trunk&Feeder,no DirectServices,no Trunk&Feeder,

CBD
CBD
CBD
IV
DirectServices,CBD
DirectServices,CBD
+Langata
0 $262,950,000 $208,200,000 $296,150,000 $210,300,000 $239,650,000
Table 2: Summary of Estimated Capital Costs by Service Plan Scenario
Thecapitalcostsforthetrunkandfeederscenarios(I&III)aremuchhigherlargelybecauseoftheneedto
acquirelandandconstructsixtransferstations.Thisaddsanestimated$106.8milliontothecostofalltrunk
Page10
andfeederscenarios(thoughsomeofthisisoffsetbysmallerfleetsizesduetoamuchlowerridership).Inthe
scenarioswithinfrastructureintheCBD,thatinfrastructureaddsonly$2.7millioninbuswaycostsandabout
$6.5millioninstationcosts,soabout$9.2milliontotal.ExtensivelandacquisitionintheCBDisunlikelytobe
necessaryunderthedirectservicesscenarios,astherightofwayisalreadyquitewide.Forthisinitial
investment,about$70millionmoreisachievedinuserbenefitsinthetrunkfeederscenario,andmorethan
$110millionayearinadditionalbenefitsinthedirectservicescenario.Thecapitalcostinthedirectservice
scenarioswithCBD(ScenariosIV&V)forbusesdropsbecauseitrunsservicesinhighlycongesteddowntown
streets,andincreasingthesespeedssignificantlyreducestheamountoffleetneeded.
SummaryofRateofReturnbyServicePlanScenario
Scenario
Baseline
Description
Existing
Estimatedannualbenefit(USD)
PV12Years@5%
RateofReturn
II
III

CBD
CBD
CBD
IV
DirectServices,CBD
DirectServices,CBD
+Langata
$5,592,894 $9,123,762 $13,422,946 $21,897,029 $25,286,662

$49,571,230 $80,866,199 $118,970,952 $194,078,877 $224,122,047
0 $262,950,000 $208,200,000 $296,150,000 $210,300,000 $239,650,000
0.188519605
0.388406334
0.401725316
0.922866748
0.935205703
Table 3: Summary of rate of return by service plan scenario
Intermsofrateofreturn,theCBDsectionhasthehighestrateofreturnofanycapitalinvestmentinthe
corridor.Finally,therateofreturnisfarbetterforthedirectservicescenarios,andforallofthescenarios
includingtheCBDinfrastructure,andsomewhatbetterstillifLangataisincluded.This,onceagain,pointsto
ScenarioVasbeingthebestinvestment.
0.2 Recommended Service Scenario: Scenario V

ThebestperformingscenariowasScenarioV:DirectservicesonKeNHAInfrastructure+CBD+Langata.In
thisscenario,multipleservices,whichmimicthemostpopularexistingmataturoutes,operateinmixedtraffic
forapartoftheirroute,thenenterfullBRTinfrastructurealongtheA104.ThisscenarioalsorequiresfullBRT
infrastructureonthefirst1.5kmofLangataRdandinthecitycenter.Thisserviceoptioncapturesmostofthe
existingpassengersusingthecorridortodayandoffersthemaconvenientoneseatride.Ofthedozensof
existingmataturoutes,wesimplifiedthemandreducedthemto16criticalrouteswhichincludesomelocal
andexpressversionsofthesameroutes.Theresultingserviceplanisdepictedbelow,withdetailsincludedin
Chapter5.
Page11
Figure 1: BRT service scenario V: Direct services on KeNHA Infrastructure + CBD + Langata
ThetotalnumberofAMpeakhourpassengerswhowillusetheBRTinthisscenariois49,887,whichwill
attractapproximately450,000dailypassengers,makingitthehighestperformingscenario.Thiswillrequirea
totalfleetof385buses:266articulated18meterbusesand119standard12meterbuses.Toensureoptimal
operationalflexibility,the18meterbusesshouldbespecifiedtohavefourplatformleveldoorsontheright
sideofthebus,andtwocurbleveldoorsontheleftside.The12meterbusesshouldhavetwoplatformlevel
doorsontherightsideandtwocurbleveldoorsontheleft.Ifalowfloordesignisoptedfor,bothsetsof
doorscanbeatthesamelevel.
Currentlytheaveragetripconsumes78.36minuteequivalents,andtherecommendedscenarioreducesthis
to72.03minutes,areductionof6.33minutesforalltransitpassengersusingthecorridorandareductionof
14.7minutesperpeakhourBRTpassengeronaverage.Whenthisfigureiscombinedwiththeestimatedcost
ofbuildingthesystem,apreliminaryeconomicrateofreturncanbecalculated,whichwillbeneededtojustify
theinvestmenttotheWorldBank.
Wearealsoconfidentthatthisserviceplanwillattractsufficientcustomerswillingtopayareasonablefare
thataprivateinvestorwillbeabletorecovertheirneededinvestmentinbusesfromthefareboxaswellas
theirongoingoperatingcostsandstillreturnaprofit.
ThisresultdependscriticallyonthecompletionoffullBRTinfrastructureonUniversityWay,HaileSelassie
Ave,andMoiintheNairobiCBD.Additionally,asfourofthehighervolumeroutescomefromLangataRd,this
Page12
resultalsodependsonfullBRTinfrastructureforthefirst1.5kmofLangataRd,designedaspartofPhaseI.
Further,thefullydedicatedBRTonlyturnsthatwererecommendedintheNairobiBRTPhaseIInfrastructure
&Intersectionsreport(RiversideDr,UniversityWay,HaileSelassieAve,LangataRd,PopoRd,EnterpriseRd,
andAirportNRd)remaincriticaltoaccommodatingtheseservicesandensuringthattheBRTspeedsdonot
dropsharplyduetolackofintersectioncapacity.IftheseelementsofBRTinfrastructureareexcludedfrom
PhaseI,amajorityofthebenefitsoftheprojectarelost.
Thedetailedresultsofthemodeling(shownfortheAMpeakhour)arebelow.NotethatArticindicatesan
18meterarticulatedbus,andStdindicatesa12meterbus.Bothmustbeconfiguredforuseonandoff
corridor.
DATA MODEL
Veh
Route
type
B105X
Artic
B11
Std
B110A
Std
B110B
Std
B12
Std
B125
Artic
B14
Std
B15
Artic
B23
Artic
B30
Artic
B33
Artic
B33F
Artic
B33N
Artic
B33U
Std
B34
Artic
B48
Artic
TOTAL
Length
(km)
44.9
15.5
62.4
41.7
16.5
28.5
10.5
25.1
22.0
29.6
24.0
35.4
15.9
50.3
38.4
28.1
489
MODEL RESULTS
Run time
(min)
Boarding
162.34
7 599
67.08
1 996
168.21
2 338
108.12
1 575
80.61
1 136
154.39
3 284
35.70
1 152
137.44
3 615
62.36
5 672
89.16
6 142
56.42
5 336
139.64
3 148
56.90
2 378
232.00
3 620
108.79
3 480
140.04
4 071
1799
56 542
Pax
km
101 573
6 732
37 183
18 440
4 255
22 645
3 501
17 833
37 227
39 934
44 092
29 658
13 086
20 678
38 189
35 198
470 225
Pax
hours
6 276
576
1 427
713
241
2 395
210
1 675
1 859
1 960
1 801
1 505
866
1 569
1 579
2 768
27 420
Max
volume
3 846
1 024
973
906
592
1 789
909
1 211
2 980
2 707
2 888
1 343
2 063
929
1 643
2 540
Max
load
1.20
0.57
0.54
0.50
0.33
0.56
0.51
0.38
0.93
0.85
0.90
0.42
0.64
0.52
0.51
0.79
Freq
24.0
11.4
10.8
10.1
6.6
11.2
10.1
7.6
18.6
16.9
18.1
8.4
12.9
10.3
10.3
15.9
Hdwy
(min)
2.5
5.3
5.5
6.0
9.1
5.4
5.9
7.9
3.2
3.5
3.3
7.1
4.7
5.8
5.8
3.8
Fleet
66
13
31
19
9
29
7
18
20
26
17
20
13
40
19
38
385
Table 4: Results of Scenario V
Ourmodelingalsoproducedstationbystationpassengerboardingandalightingvolumes,fromwhichweare
abletoprovidestationsizingrecommendationsintermsofnumberofsubstops.Asubstopisastation
modulewithenoughspacefortwobusestodock.Substopsshouldbeseparatedbyenoughspaceforabusto
easilypullinandpulloutifthereisanotherbusinfrontofit.
Page13
Figure 2: BRT station in Johannesburg with two substops
Themapbelowshowshowmanysubstopsareneededateachstationinordertoaccommodatethe
passengerdemandwithoutsaturating.TheneedforthegreatestnumberofsubstopsintheCBDunderscores
thedemandandneedforBRTinfrastructureintheCBDfromthestartofoperations.
Figure 3: Number of sub-stops needed at each station under recommended service plan scenario
OneofthemainreasonsITDPrecommendedafullBRTringthroughtheNairobiCBDwastoincreasethe
numberofstationsabletohandleCBDboundpassengers.Byhaving9fullBRTstationsinafullringaroundthe
NairobiCBD,theCBDbounddemandontheA104canbedistributedthroughouttheCBD.Thisnotonlyavoids
Page14
anyonestationbecomingovercrowdedandsaturated,italsominimizeswalkingtimes.Thealternative
proposal,tohaveonly4stationsalongtheA104wouldresultinallofthedemandconcentratedinonly4
stations,andnotonlywouldthesestationssaturate,theywouldalsobefarfromtriporiginsanddestinations,
meaningmuchlessconvenienceforpassengers.
Whenthedemandisdistributedto9CBDstations,theywouldrequire3substopseachtoavoidsaturation.
Even3substopsisalotforaCBD.Giventheseresults,ITDPsuggeststhatfullBRTinfrastructurealsobebuilt
alongKenyattathroughtheCBD,includingatleast2stationsalongtheKenyattalink,tofurtherdisbursethis
demandtomorealternativestations,allowingustomaketheremainingCBDstationssmaller.
Page15
1 Project Background
TheAfricaofficeoftheInstituteforTransportation&DevelopmentPolicyisresponsibleforpreparingthe
NairobiNdovu/A104BRTserviceplan.
1.1 The Ndovu/A104 BRT project

TheA104HighwayprojectispartoftheNationalUrbanTransportImprovementProject(NUTRIP)being
undertakenbytheKenyaNationalHighwaysAuthority(KeNHA)withthesupportoftheWorldBank.TheA104
HighwayisoneofthemostimportantroadsinNairobi,connectingtheairporttodowntownandserving
criticallongdistancefreightandpassengerlinks(asbelow).
Figure 4: A104 Highway project
Responsibilityfordesigningthisroadissplitbetweenthreecontractors:Lot1fromJKIAtoLikoniRoadisunder
thepurviewofGibbAfrica,Lot2fromLikoniRoadtoJamesGichuruRoadisunderthepurviewofCOWI,and
Lot3,fromJamesGichuruRoadtoUthiruisunderthepurviewofEser(Turkey).
TheFeasibilityStudyforMassRapidTransitSystemfortheNairobiMetropolitanRegion(CES/APEC,2011)that
was commissioned by the Ministry of Transport recommended a mixed LRT and BRT system for further
Page16
detailing.TheNairobiRailwayStationJKIAAthiRiverandtheNairobiRailwayStationKabeteKikuyu
wereamongthe9corridorsidentifiedtobeappropriateforaMassRapidTransportationSystem.
In2013,KeNHAthusmadethedecisiontoretrofittheA104highwaydesignstoincludeworldclassBusRapid
Transit(BRT).TheplansareforhighqualitypossiblygoldstandardBRTinfrastructurealongtheA104.
KeNHAscurrentplanistobuildBRTinfrastructurefromtheCityCabanasinterchangetoJamesGichuruRoad,
maintainingampleroadreserveforanextensionoftheBRTtothenorthinthefuture.
Figure 5: A104 BRT infrastructure as defined by KeNHA (also, Infrastructure Scenario 1, as below)
However,manyofthedecisionsonBRTdesignweremadepriortodevelopingaserviceplanfortheproject.
WhileitisagoodideatohavesomesenseofwhatthedesignwillbeandwhereBRTinfrastructureshouldbe
built,onlyaserviceplancantellyouwhereBRTinfrastructureismostneededandhowintersectionsand
stationsshouldbedesignedtoaccommodatetheBRTservices.
1.2 What is a service plan

ThestartingpointforthedesignofaBRTsystemshouldnotbetheinfrastructureorthevehicles.Instead,the
systemshouldbedesignedtoachievetheoperationalcharacteristicsthataredesiredbythecustomer.From
the customers perspective, some of the most important factors affecting their choice of travel modes are
Page17
whethertheserviceswilltakethemwheretheywanttogoandhowlongitwilltake.Thestartingpointforthe
designofthebestBRTsystemshasthereforebeenthecreationofaserviceplan.
AserviceplantellsyouhowbusesshouldberoutedontoandoffoftheBRTcorridortobringpassengersto
theirdestinationswith asfewtransfersaspossible.It specifiesbusroutes,schedules,locationsandsizesof
BRTstations,numberofbusesneeded,andtechnicalspecificationsforthebuses.Italsotellsyouhowwhat
theridershipwilllikelybeoneachroute,wherepassengerswillboardandalight,andhowtheexistingbusand
mataturouteswillbeimpactedbytheBRT.
Becauseofthis,aserviceplanwillaffectmanyaspectsoftheBRTdesignandplanningprocess:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Placement of Dedicated Bus Lanes: A service plan will guide the placement of dedicated lanes.
Becauseaserviceplanwilltellyouwherebusesshouldberouted,howmanyshouldbeplacedon
eachroute,andhowcurrentspeedsdifferfromwhatcanbeachievedwithBRT,itwillindicatewhere
dedicatedlaneswouldbemosteffective.
IntersectionDesign:Aserviceplanwillalsodrivethedesignofintersections.Forexample,ifhalfof
thebusesareexitingUhuruHighwayatHaileSelassie,thatintersectionwillneedtobedesignedto
handletheseturningvolumesfromthebusway.
StationDesign:AserviceplanwilldriveBRTstationdesignbecausetheservicesprovidedwillaffect
thenumberofpassengersboardingandalightingateachstationandthisinturnwillaffectthesizeof
thestations,andparticularly,thenumberofsubstopsrequiredtoavoidstationsaturation.Ifthere
arecertainsegmentsofthetrunkBRTwhichhavemultiplebusroutesoperatingonthem(whichthe
service plan will show), then certain stations will need to be designed to handle multiple buses
dockingatthesametime.
Feeder Stations: A service plan will tell you whether it will be necessary to bring feeder buses to
access the trunk corridor. If so, the BRT design will need to include feeder stations so that these
busesmaydropoffpassengersandturnaround.Aserviceplanwillalsotellyouwhetheritmakes
moresensetobringfeederbusesdirectlyontothetrunkcorridor(calledcomplementaryservices)
andifso,afeederstationwillnotneedtobedesigned.
ExistingBus/MatatuRoutes:Aserviceplanwilltellyou,foreachbusormataturoute,whetheritwill
needtostopoperatingorbereroutedsinceitisnotintheinterestofaBRTsystemtoallowmatatus
tocontinueoperatingincompetitionwiththeBRT.Therefore,aserviceplanmustbedonepriorto
implementinganystrategyforhandlingtheimpactedmatatuandbusowners.
FinancialModeling:Aserviceplanwilltellyouhowmanypassengerswillusethesystemandhow
many buses will be needed. It is, therefore, a key input into a BRT systems financial model. The
number of passengers will help determine what fare/tariff can be supported and the number of
buseswillhelpdeterminethecostofthesystemandtheamountofequitythatwilllikelyneedtobe
raisedbyshareholders.
Page18
It is therefore important that the service plan happen prior to many other critical decisions in the BRT
planning, design, and financial modeling process. However, once design and financial modeling begins, it is
generallynecessarytogobackandupdatethefinancialmodeltoreflectcertaindesignandfinancialdecisions.
Therefore,thoughtheserviceplanmustbethefirststep,serviceplanningdoesnotendoncedesignbegins.
Rather,itmusthappeninaniterativeway,beingfrequentlyupdatedtoreflectchangesintheinfrastructure
designandfinancialmodel.
1.3 MRTS Harmonisation Study and the Ndovu/A104 BRT Corridor

In2014,theMinistryofTransportandInfrastructure,togetherwiththeirconsultants,Gauff,completedthe
MRTSHarmonisationStudy.Theaimofthestudywastobringtogetherallpreviousstudiesandplansandto
developanintegratedpublictransportationnetworkforNairobiandtheNairobiMetropolitanRegion(NMR).
TheHarmonisationStudyconsistsoftwomajorparts.1TheMRTSHarmonisationStudyrecommendedfive
MRTSlineswithafocusonBRT.
Figure 6: Five BRT lines proposed by the MRTS Harmonisation Study. Source: Rail & Road Based Mass Rapid Transit System on
Jogoo Road Corridor, Results of the Harmonisation Study Stakeholder Presentation. Gauff Consultants. May 16, 2014
Gauff Consultants, Mass Rapid Transit System Harmonisation Study Nairobi Metropolitan Region, 2014.
Page19
Further,itconcurredwiththechoiceofBRTontheA104tobecomeLine1.However,itrecommendeda
differentextentofBRTinfrastructurethaniscurrentlybeingdesignedbyKeNHA.TheHarmonisationStudys
Line1BRTinfrastructurehasbeendefinedasfollows:
Figure 7: Ndovu/A104 BRT infrastructure as found in MRTS Harmonisation Study (also, Infrastructure Scenario 2, as below)
TheHarmonisationStudyisrelevanttothisserviceplanningeffortinthatitattemptstodefineabasicservice
planthatshouldbeadoptedforallBRTcorridors.However,itdefinedthisserviceplanbasedonverymacro
leveldataanddidnotinvolveadetaileddatacollectionormodelingprocess.Therefore,ITDPhastestedthe
HarmonisationStudysserviceplanfortheNdovu/A104corridorasoneofthescenariosbutdidnotlimitits
scenariotestingtoonlythisscenariosincesuchascenario,inourexperience,limitsthebenefitsoftheBRT
systemandthus,negativelyimpactstheridership.TheserviceplandefinedbytheHarmonisationStudyis
describedindetailandtestedinSection5.5.3.
2 Objectives of this assignment

ITDPisanonprofitwhosecorecompetencyisinprovidingtechnicalsupportforBRTprojectsandhashelped
todesignserviceplansformanyofthebestBRTsystemsaroundtheworld.Assuch,ITDPisworkingwith
KeNHAtocreatetheserviceplanfortheNdovu/A104BRTcorridor.Theobjectiveofthisworkistoprovide
Page20
operationaldesignforthefirstcorridorofahighquality,highcapacitybusrapidtransit(BRT)systemin
Nairobi,Kenya.
2.1 Personnel and timeframe

ITDPsserviceplanningworkinNairobiwascarriedoutfromOctober2013topresentandincludedthe
followingexperts:
AnnieWeinstock
WalterHook
StephanieLotshaw
ChristopherVanEyken
ElkinBello
ChristopherKost
ZhuXianyuan
RemiJeanneret
JacobMason
3 Existing Conditions
Awelldesignedserviceplanisbasedonacarefulevaluationandunderstandingoftheexistingbusandmatatu
servicesthatarecurrentlyservingpublictransportpassengersintheareaimpactedbythenewBRT.Itisthese
passengersmostlikelytotransferontotheBRTandthesepassengerswhowillmakeupthemajorityoffuture
BRTusers.
InordertomodelexistingconditionsforpublictransportuseontheA104,ITDPcollectedrealdataalongthe
corridorthroughaseriesofsurveys,asdescribedbelow.Thisbecamethebasisformodeledsimulationof
baselineconditions,andlaterformodeleddemandestimatesoffutureuseoftheBRT.
3.1 Surveys
InOctober2013andFebruary2014,ITDPcompletedallofthenecessarysurveysanddatacollection:
Boarding&alightingsurveysfor48routes,withatleast5samplesforeachrouteineachtimeperiod
(AMpeak);
Matatufrequency&occupancysurveysatmultiplelocations;
Matatustoptransfersurveys;
Atstationboardingandalightingsurveys;and
Speedanddelaysurveys
TheNairobiagenciesprovidedexcellentassistanceintheformof:
Awarenessraisingamongstthegeneralpublicviaradio,televisionadsandnotices;and
Page21

3.1.1
SupportfromthePoliceandlocalauthorities.
Identifying the affected street network and bus routes
Inordertocarryoutthedatacollectionsurvey,ITDPfirstidentifiedtheaffectedstreetnetwork.Thisrefers
tothestreetswithintheNairobistreetnetworkwhichcarrymatatuand/orandbusroutesthatinteractwith
theA104corridor.Thisincludes:
StreetswhichintersectA104,
StreetswhichrunparallelandneartoA104,A104itself,and
StreetsintheCBD.
Wealsoincludedadditionalsurveylocationsbeyondthisareatobetteridentifythecityspassengerdemand
behavior.
Priortoconductingthesurvey,itwasessentialtoidentifythecurrentitineraryforeachrouteandthe
registeredstops(designatedornondesignated).AsinmanyAfricancities,Nairobismataturoutesaresubject
tofrequentmodification,underminingreliabilityforpassengers.Whilemostrouteshaveadefiniteoriginand
finaldestination,theitineraryeachmatatutakescanvarydailyorevenhourlyduetocongestion,
construction,andthepresenceofthetrafficpolice.Evenamatatu'soriginsanddestinationscanchangefor
example,ifamatatustageiscrowdedanddriversrelocatetodifferentparks.Thatsaid,abasicsenseofthe
routesiscriticaltounderstandingexistingpublictransportpatternsonthecorridor.
TheUniversityofNairobi/ColumbiaUniversity/MITteamdidacomprehensiveanalysisofNairobismatatu
routescompilingtheexistingstoppinglocationsbothdesignatedandnondesignatedforatotalof118routes.
Weusedthismapasastartingpointandidentifiedtheexistingroutesandregisteredstopsintheaffected
networksothatwecouldselectroutesandpointsforperformingtheonboardandatstationboardingand
alightingsurvey.
Page22
Figure 8 Map of Nairobis matatu services. Source: Digital Matatus
Usingthismapasastartingpoint,weidentifiedthemataturouteswhichinterfacedenoughwiththecorridor
thattheyshouldbeinitiallyconsideredfortheBRTserviceplan.Itwasfortheseroutesthatweperformeda
detailedsurvey.Thisselectionconsideredthreemaincategories:
1) Routefrequency(routeswithgreaterthan3buses/hour),
2) Routeoverlap(routeswithatleast20%overlapontheA104corridor),and
3) Areaofinfluenceanalysis(routesnearthecorridorthatcouldeventuallybecapturedbyaBRT).
Atotalof48routeswereselectedforthesurveys.Somerouteswereidentifiedtooperatealongparallel
corridorsandthusmarkedasimportantundertheareaofinfluenceaspect(item#3).
ThemapsbelowshowalloftheroutessurveyedaspartofITDPsA104survey.
Page23
Figure 9: Surveyed routes operating in the wider Nairobi area.
Figure 10: Surveyed routes operating in the Central Business District.
Page24
3.1.2
Onboard and atstation boarding and alighting (BA) surveys
Theboardingandalighting(BA)surveyisacarefulmappingofprecisematatustoppinglocations,aswellasa
countofhowmanypassengersgetonandoffamatatuorbusateachstopalongtheroute.Two
methodologiesarecommonlyusedtocarryoutBAsurveys:
1. OnboardBAsurveyswhichrequiressurveyorstoridearoute(infullorpartially)andcountnumbersof
passengersboardingandalightingateachstop.
2. AtstationBAsurveywhichrequiressurveyorstorecordpassengermovementsperrouteatagiven
physicallocationorstop.
AtstationBAsurveysrequirelessstaffbutareconsiderablymoredifficulttoprocessandadjust,whileon
boardBAsurveysprovideamoreconsistentandeasiertoprocessdataset.Theatstationmethodologyis
usefulwhenahighvolumeofroutesisobservedalongthecorridorwheretheBRTservicesandinfrastructure
willbeimplemented.Thissurveywascarriedoutusingtheonboardmethodology.However,onandoff
volumeswerecapturedatthecentralstretchofrouteswithlongitinerarieswherethehighestdemandoccurs.
3.1.3
Bus frequency & occupancy surveys
AFrequencyandVisualOccupancy(FVO)surveyisasurveyofhowfrequenteachbusormataturouteruns
andwhattheapproximateoccupancyisofeachvehicle.Thisshowsexistingdemandonthematatunetwork.
We initially selected 78 points for this survey. At each point, one or two surveyors (determined based on
approximate expected bus frequencies at each survey point) recorded the matatu route and assessed the
capacityandoccupancylevel.
TheimagebelowshowsthelocationswheretheFVOwascarriedout.
Page25
Figure 11: FVO survey locations for Ndovu/A104 BRT service planning data collection. Source: ITDP
3.1.4
Bus passenger transfer surveys
ThedatacollectedduringtheBAsurveyprovidespassengerbehavioronasingleroutebysingleroutebasis.
However,manypassengersmaketheirfulltripusingmorethanoneroute.Atransfersurveyishelpfulinorder
togetabettersenseoffullpassengertrips,includingtriporiginandtripdestination,beyondasingleroute.
Weselectedthefollowingstrategiclocationstoquestionpassengersabouttheirtrippatterns:
Belleviewbusstop,
Nyayobusstop,
GPObusstop,
AfricaInternationalUniversity,
Railwaysbusstop,
Nairobibusstation,
Kencombusstage,
Odeonbusstage,
Westlandsbusstage,
34busstation,
ChurchArmybusstop,and
JogooRoadRailwaystation.
Page26
Thesewerechosenbasedontheresultscollectedintheothersurveys.Atthesepoints,surveyorsaskedhow
didpassengersgettothesurveypointandwherewilltheygofromhereaswellasquestionsabouthowthey
arriveattheirstartpoint,howmanytransferstheymake,andthetotalcostoftheirjourney.Thefigurebelow
showsthelocationsofthebuspassengertransfersurveys.
Figure 12: Transfer survey locations for Ndovu/A104 BRT service planning data collection. Source: ITDP
4 Existing (baseline) conditions

AfullpictureofcurrentpublictransportpatternsalongandneartheA104corridorisacriticalfirststepto
determiningwhowillrideBRTservicesandwhatthemostimportantroutesandareasaretoserve.We
thereforeprocessedthesurveydataandplacedtheresultsinmapsandtablesinordertobestconveyexisting
peakhourtravelpatterns.
4.1 Existing frequencies

MatatufrequenciesalongtheA104arehigh,withtheaveragemataturoutesoperatingatafrequencyofone
matatuevery3minutesinthepeakhour.Thefrequencyperroutesurveyedisshownbelow.
Page27
OUTBOUND(AWAYFROMCBD)
Frequency
Frequency
Route (buses/hr) Route (buses/hr)
2
32.8
33PJ
39.3
4W
11.8
33PM
20.0
7C
22.5
34B
4.0
8
33.7
34JK
18.0
11
15.3
46KW
32.3
11A
15.7
46YA
32.5
11B
17.3
58
6.3
12C
6.2
69
142.0
12D
2.5
102
15.4
15
51.9
105
57.5
16
9.8
110A
15.3
19C2
28.5
111
30.7
23KN
59.3
115
4.5
24
6.4
118
5.0
24C
39.1
119
10.8
32AY
20.0
3839
13.1
33CA
20.0
33FE
26.8
33NG
39.3
Route
2
4W
7C
8
11
11A
11B
14A
14B
19C2
24c
30
32AY
33CA
33IM
33MK
33NG
33PJ
33UT
INBOUND(TOCBD)
Frequency
Frequency
(buses/hr) Route (buses/hr)
29.4
34B
28.0
13.4
34JK
18.0
41.0
46KW
58.0
53.3
46YA
77.2
26.3
48A
28.1
15.7
48B
4.5
21.3
48KW
10.0
10.1
48OT
12.0
4.0
58
6.8
27.0
69
29.7
39.1
102
16.9
32.5
110K
13.7
13.0
111
29.0
20.0
118
12.5
29.9
119
14.0
9.5
125
32.4
60.0
126
10.0
26.0
3839
17.5
30.8
Table 5: Frequency counts of surveyed routes. Source: ITDP Survey
Ifwelookattheaggregatebusfrequenciesbyroadinthestudyarea,wefindthatthehighestfrequencies
(greaterthan400busesintheAMpeakhour)areonHaileSelassieAvenueintheCBD.Frequenciesalmostas
highareexperiencedonKenyattaandonthesegmentsofroadsnearesttheCBD.
Page28
Figure 13: Existing aggregate matatu frequencies for all routes surveyed during AM peak hour.
4.2 Existing public transport speeds

Themapbelowshowsexistingbusspeedsonallofthestreetswheresurveyswereconducted.Unsurprisingly,
theslowestspeedsarenearestthecitycenter,andinsideofthecitycenter,whilethespeedsgetfasterfarther
awayfromthecitycenter.OntheA104,theslowestspeedsarefoundbetweenLangataRoadandthe
WestlandsRoundabout.Withinthecitycenter,allroadssufferveryslowspeeds.
Page29
Figure 14: Existing average matatu speeds for all routes surveyed. AM peak hour
4.3 Existing public transport passenger demand

Themapbelowshowsexistingstopbystopboardingandalightingvolumesforallmataturoutessurveyed.
Theorangetrianglespointinguprepresentboardingsandthepurpletrianglespointingdownrepresent
alightings.ItshowsthatthemostboardingsandalightingshappenintheCBD,particularlyontheeasternside.
BecausethesurveywasfortheAMpeakhour,therearemorealightingsinandneartheCBDthanboardings.
Thismapisimportantasitshowswheremostpassengersareactuallygoing.AswedesignBRTservice
scenarios,asdescribedinthesectionstofollow,weattempttorouteserviceswherepassengerdemand
actuallyis.
Page30
Figure 15: Existing stop-by-stop boarding and alighting volumes for all routes surveyed. AM peak hour.
Page31
Figure 16: Existing matatu loads on A104 northern segment from Naivasha Rd to Kikuyu Rd, AM peak hour.
Page32

Figure 17: Existing matatu loads on A104, from Naivahsa Rd to Westlands Roundabout AM peak.
Page33
Figure 18: Existing matatu load on A104 corridor and CBD, AM peak hour.
Thepeakhourridershipisalsohighwithanaggregateridershipof10,346passengersperhourperdirection
(pphpd)justnorthoftheCBD(headedsouthboundintotheCBD)and8,564justsouthoftheCBD(headed
northboundintotheCBD).ThispphpdoccursonUhuruHighwayjustnorthoftheCBDinthesouthbound
directionwheremanymataturoutesoperateanddemandishigh.
Page34
Figure 19: Existing matatu loads on A104 corridor, south of CBD to Imara Diama Railway.
Page35
Figure 20: Existing matatu loads on A104 corridor, approaching airport, from Likoni Rd to JKIA. AM peak.
5 Service plan for the Ndovu/A104 BRT

5.1 Modeling process
Usingalloftheexistingconditionsinformationshownintheprevioussection,wethenbuiltapublictransport
modelforthecorridor.Thismodelallowsustoprovideareasonableestimate,groundedinactualdata,ofBRT
ridershipunderavarietyofservicescenarios.Becausethismodelisbasedonactualexistingtransportdata
collectedinthefield,itismorereliablethanamodelwhichlooksonlyatpopulationandemploymentand
makesbroadassumptionsabouttripmaking.
Page36
ThefigurebelowprovidesanoverviewofthemodelingprocesscarriedoutbyITDPinNairobi.
Figure 21 Overview of survey, modeling and BRT service plan process.
Inordertobuildamodel,wefirstreplicatedtherelevantportionsoftheNairobistreetnetworkinourmodel,
usingthemodelingsoftwarepackageEmme4.Onthestreetnetwork,wethencodedtheexistingpeakhour
speeds,ascollected.
Inordertomodelexistingtrippatterns,wethenusedthestopbystopboardingandalightingdataand
converteditintofulltriporigindestinationpairs.Thatis,thesurveysallowedustocounthowmanypeople
wereboardingatonestation(e.g.,Nyayo)andhowmanypeoplewerealightingatanotherstation(e.g.,
Railways).ButthiskindofsurveydoesnottellushowmanyofthepeopleboardingatNyayoarealightingat
Railways.WedonotknowwherethepassengersboardingatNyayoalight.
Page37
WethereforeusedwhatiscalledaFratardistributionmodel2inordertotransformtheboarding/alighting
surveyintoastoptostoptripmatrix.AFratarmodelisaprobabilistictoolwhichestimateshowmany
passengersboardingatonespecificstationarealightingatanotherspecificstation.Theresult,therefore,isa
stoptostoptripmatrix.
Thestoptostopmatrixwasthentransformedintoafullorigindestination(OD)matrixaccordingtotransfer
surveydata.However,theODmatrixatthatpointwasonlybasedonasurveysampleofpassengersboarding
andalighting.TogetthefullODmatrix,wethenrelatedthenumberofpeoplecountedasboardingand
alightingateachstop,tothetotalnumberoftransitpassengersperdirectionperhourateachsurveypoint.
Thetotalnumberofpublictransitpassengersinthepeakhourwastakenfromthedatacollectedduringthe
FVOsurvey,inwhichweobtainedactualdataonhourlypassengertripspassingcheckpoints.Wethus
expandedthisODmatrixbytheactualnumberofpassengersusingthesysteminthepeakhour.
Oncewehadcompletedthis,wewerereadytobeginmodelingfuturescenarios.ABRTservicescenariois
modeledbyincreasingthespeedsontheroadlinkswhereBRTinfrastructureisexpectedsincepassengersin
themodelmaketheirfuturetravelchoicesbasedonfindingthefastestoveralltrip.Wethenaddedasetof
BRTroutes(BRTservicescenarios)tointeractwiththeBRTinfrastructure.However,noteveryscenario
assumesthesamebuildoutofBRTinfrastructure.WethereforealsodefinedBRTInfrastructureScenarios
(seeSection5.4below).
Finally,wemadetheassumption,basedonstandardpractice,thatmataturoutesthatcompetedirectlywitha
BRTroutewouldbecancelledandthereforeremoveditfromthemodelasatraveloption.Dependingonthe
BRTservicescenario,somepassengerswillchoosetousetheBRTandotherswillseekanalternaterouteusing
matatus(againnotingthatmodeledpassengerswouldhavetoseekamorecircuitousmataturoutingdueto
thefactthatdirectmatatucompetitionhasbeeneliminatedfromthemode).BRTserviceswereassumedto
carryafareof70Kshwhilematatuserviceswereassumedtocarryafareof50Ksh.Weseektofindthe
scenariothatattractsthemostpassengersatthelowestgeneralizedcostperpassengertothecity.
5.2 Model calibration

ThesurveyresultswereplacedintoEmmeIVandatransitdemandmodelwascreated.Themodelwas
calibratedintwosteps:First,wecalibratedthemodeleddemandforeachofthemataturoutesusingtheA104
forwhichboardingandalightingdatawascollectedandcomparedtolinkspecificdemandcalculatedfrom
frequencyandoccupancysurveys.Thisyieldedaveryhighgoodnessoffit(R2)of.964.
InFigures22and23below,eachbluepointrepresentsonelocationwhereafrequencyandoccupancycount
wasdone,asshownonthemaponp.26(Figure11).Theyaxisshowsthepassengersperhourperdirection
(PPHPD)predictedbythemodelateachofthefrequencyandoccupancysurveypointsshownonthemap
2
National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Travel Demand Forecasting: Parameters and Techniques, 2012
Page38
(Figure11).ThexaxisshowstheactualobservedPPHPDfromthesurveyateachofthesamepoints.When
thesetwofiguresmatchexactly,thebluepointshouldfallexactlyonthediagonalblueline.Thedeviancefrom
thislineiswhatismeasuredbytheR2.
IfthesamemapwerecreatedforthecalibrationofthemodelusedintheMRTSHarmonisationStudy,for
instance,therewouldonlybetwobluepoints,astheyonlycalibratedtheirmodelwithtwolocations,not
enoughtobestatisticallysignificant.
Figure 22: Calibration of model for existing matatu routes on A104 yielded a very good R2 of .964
Second,themodeledresultswerecomparedtothefrequencyandoccupancycountsforalltheroutesalong
theA104andLangata.Thisyieldedanacceptablegoodnessoffit(R2)of0.875.
Page39
Figure 23: Calibration of model for existing matatu routes on A104 & Langata yielded an acceptable R2 of 0.875
5.3 General Objectives

Generalobjectivesforthemodelingwere:
Accommodateasmanypassengersaspossible,
AdjustBRTroutestodemandpatterns.Forexample,addnewserviceswhichmoreefficientlylinkthe
corridorwiththeCBD,airport,Kibera,andlargeemploymentcentersinNairobi.
IncludeBRTinfrastructureinadditionallocationsifithelpsgreatlytoimproveahighdemandBRT
servicebutminimizenewinfrastructureadded.
MinimizeunnecessaryturningmovementsatintersectionsbothonA104andintheCBD,
Calculatestationdimensions(length,width,andnumberofsubstops),and
CalculateBRTbusfleetrequirements(sizeandnumber).
5.4 BRT Infrastructure Scenarios

BeforetestingaBRTservicescenario,theextentoftheBRTinfrastructureonwhichtheservicesinascenario
willrunmustbedefined.Thisisbecauseinthetransitmodel,thelinkswhereBRTinfrastructurewillbeplaced
willbecodedwithhigherspeeds.Inthisway,passengerswillmaketheirtripdecisionsbasedonselectionof
theshortesttrip.
Intestingservicescenarios,onedoesnotnecessarilyholdconstanttheinfrastructurescenarios.Thesecanbe
adjustediterativelyinordertofindthebestinfrastructure/servicecombination.Ofcourse,politicalandfiscal
constraintsmayultimatelydeterminetheextentoftheinfrastructure.However,wheresmallchangesinBRT
Page40
infrastructureyieldlargeincreasesinBRTpassengervolumes,itmaybeworthconsideringmakingthese
changes.
BeforedescribingtheBRTservicescenarios,webeginbydescribingasetofBRTinfrastructurescenarios.All
servicescenarios(below)areassociatedwithoneoftheseinfrastructurescenarios.
5.4.1
Infrastructure Scenario 1
InfrastructureScenario1istheextentoftheinfrastructurethatKeNHAiscurrentlyplanningtobuild.TheBRT
infrastructuresitsonA104onlyandextendsfromtheCityCabanasinterchangetotheJamesGichuru
roundabout.BeyondtheJamesGichururoundabout,spacewillbereservedforfutureBRTbutwillnotbebuilt
immediately.
Figure 24: Infrastructure Scenario 1 - KeNHA's current design
5.4.2
InfrastructureScenario2istheextentoftheinfrastructurerecommendedbytheMRTSHarmonisationStudy.
LikeinInfrastructureScenario1,theBRTinfrastructurewillbebuiltonA104onlybutthelengthisgreater,
beginningattheImaraDiamarailstationandextendingtoUthiru.
Page41
Figure 25: Infrastructure Scenario 2 - MRTS Harmonization Study
5.4.3
InfrastructureScenario3istheKeNHAinfrastructureonA104(InfrastructureScenario1)plusaloopthrough
theCBD.TheCBDlooptravelsonHaileSelassieAvenue,northontoMoiAvenue,andacrossUniversityWay
backtoA104.TheCBDloopwasincludedduetoextremelyslowtravelspeedsintheCBDplusamultitudeof
passengerscurrentlytravelingtoCBDdestinations.
Page42
Figure 26: Infrastructure Scenario 3 - KeNHA + CBD loop
5.4.4
InfrastructureScenario4istheKeNHAinfrastructureonA104plustheCBD(InfrastructureScenario3)plusa
1.5kilometerstretchwestonLangataRoadtotheMagadiRoadjunction.ThestretchonLangataRoadwas
includedduetoextremelyslowtravelspeedsintheCBDplusamultitudeofpassengerscurrentlytravelingto
CBDdestinations.
Page43
Figure 27: Infrastructure Scenario 4 - KeNHA + CBD loop + Langata
5.4.5
A note on BRT infrastructure through the CBD
MostoftheboardingsandalightingsonmatatusoccurintheCBD.WesawinFigures15&18thatthehighest
concentrationofboardingsandalightingsforallroutessurveyedwereintheCBD.Infact,someobservations
ofwalkingtripswithintheCBDrevealedthatmostCBDtripsaredestinedforpointsaroundMoiAvenueand
east.Thisisshowninthefigurebelow.
Page44
Figure 28: Trip generation density in Nairobi CBD. The numbers, found around Moi Avenue and to the east, indicate where the
highest number of trips originate
Infact,theworldsbestBRTsystemsincludefullBRTinfrastructurerightthroughtheCBD.Thisisthecasein
Bogota,Johannesburg,MexicoCity,mostrecentlyDaresSalaam,andmanymore.
Page45
Figure 29: Bogota's TransMilenio BRT goes right through the CBD
InNairobi,modelingoftheBRTcorridorshowedthatifBRTinfrastructureisnotbuiltthroughtheCBD,many
peoplewouldbeforcedtowalk0.7to1kilometertogettotheBRTonUhuruHighway.Yetingeneral,people
arewillingtowalkonly0.5kilometersatmost.
Figure 30: Volume of walking trips along CBD streets if BRT infrastructure is not included in the CBD but only on Uhuru
Highway
Therefore,werecommendprioritizingtheservicescenarios(below)whichoperateoneitherofthetwo
infrastructurescenarioswhichincludetheCBD(i.e,InfrastructureScenarios3&4).ThisincludesBRTServices
Page46
ScenariosIII,IV,andV.Aswewill,see,thesescenariosperformbetterthanServiceScenariosIandIIwhichdo
notincludeBRTinfrastructureintheCBD.
5.5 BRT Service Scenarios

5.5.1
Inclusion or exclusion of routes
Thedeterminationofwhichroutestoincludeintheserviceplanisbased,first,onexistingpublictransporttrip
patterns.TheexistingmatatuandbusroutesserveasgoodproxiesfortransitdemandpatternsinNairobi.
Matatusare,toagreatextent,routedastheyaretorespondtotheneedsofthepublictransporttraveling
public.Therefore,thereissomelogictotheexistingmataturoutingpatterns.Peoplearealsoaccustomedto
theseroutes.Therefore,wemakeourinitialserviceplanningdecisionswithsomecorrelationtotheexisting
routingsofthematatusandbusesalreadyoperatinginNairobi.Byanalyzingtheexistingroutingsanddemand
ofthematatusandbuses,wecandesignandtestasetofservicescenarios.Inordertomakethis
determination,weusethefollowingtwocriteria:
1. Percentageexistingrouteoverlapwiththecorridor:AroutethathassignificantoverlapwiththeBRT
corridorisagoodcandidateforinclusionintotheBRTsystemsincethepassengersthatusethatroute
todaywillbenefitlargelyfromBRTimprovements.However,aroutethatisincludedasaBRTroute
generallyrequirestheprocurementofnewfleet.Thus,ifmostofthetripforarouteisoperatingoff
theBRTtrunkcorridor,thebenefitsofinclusionintotheBRTserviceplanmaynotjustifythebus
procurementcost.WeconsiderpercentageoverlapforeachBRTInfrastructureScenarioasdefined
aboveasonecriterion.
2. Avoidanceofredundancy:Therewereoftenseveralroutesservingverysimilartriporiginsand
destinations.BRTsystemsgenerallyhaveroutingstructuresthataresimpleenoughtobeeasily
understoodbyvisitorsandavoidredundancy.
3. AvoidanceofStationSaturation:Ouranalysisshowsthatseveraldowntownstationsarelikelyto
saturateunlessfoursubstopsarebuilt.Itmayproveimpossibletobuildthismanysubstops
downtown,inwhichcaseroutesthatareparticularlyintensiveusersofthebottleneckstationswill
needtobeselectivelyremoved.
Theabovecriteriaarethemostimportantfactorsfordeterminingwhichroutesshouldbeincludedintothe
BRTsystem.
Thebelowtableshowseachroutesurveyed,thefrequencyoftheroute(inbuses/hour),andthepercentage
therouteoperatesonA104corridor.Fromthiswewereabletomakeaninitialdeterminationastowhich
routestoconsiderforBRTservices.Thosewithhighoverlap,(thosewithgreaterthan10%overlaponA104,
identifiedonthegraphasStructuralRoutes),regardlessoffrequency,werethenevaluatedfurtherto
determineiftheymadesensetoturnintoBRTservices.ThosewithloweroverlapontheA104corridor
Page47
(identifiedasComplementaryRoutes),werealsoevaluated.Theroutesthathadverylittleoverlapwiththe
A104corridorwereeliminatedfromconsiderationforBRTservices.
TheremainingrouteswereanalyzedtodetermineifinclusioninanyoftheBRTservicescenarioswouldbe
beneficial,frombothapassengerbenefitandfromanoperationalandfinancialperspective(theaddedbus
fleetoutweighstheoperationalcost).Thetablebelowshowsalltheroutessurveyed,thepercentageoverlap
withtheA104corridor,andwhethertheroutewasincludedforconsiderationinanyoftheservicescenarios.
NotethatexistingmataturoutesthatoverlapwithproposedBRTserviceswereassumedtobecancelled,
whilethoseservingODpairsnotwellservedbytheBRTservicesareassumedtocontinuedowntheA104
followingtheircurrentroute.Itisstandardpracticetocancelparallelminibusormataturouteswhenplanning
anewBRTsystem.We,therefore,didnotrunascenarioinwhichnomataturoutesarecancelledalthoughwe
arewilling.TheresultwouldlikelybeadropindemandontheBRTbutitisuncertainbyhowmuch.However,
thiswillultimatelybeapoliticaldecisionandthebusinessplanforthisBRTprojectisstillunderconsideration.
Page48
Table 6: Routes considered for inclusion in BRT service scenarios.
Page49
Oncethisinitialsetofrouteswasdefined,variouscombinationsofservices(servicescenarios)weretested.
FivemainservicescenariosweredefinedbasedonthedifferingBRTInfrastructureScenarios.Thatis,some
servicesmadesensetoincludewhentherewasmoreBRTinfrastructureandtoexcludewhentherewasless.
Additionally,wetestedtwodifferenttypesofBRTservicepatternsdirectservicesandtrunkfeederservices.
Assuch,wedescribethevarioustypesofBRTservicepatternsbelow.
5.5.2
BRT service types
InearlyBRTsystems,BRTservicesmimickedrailservices:thatis,oneBRTservicetraveledoneachBRT
corridor.Thesearecalledtrunkonlyservicessincetheservicesoperateonlyonthetrunkinfrastructure.The
mostprimitiveformoftrunkonlyBRTsystemsoperateservicesthatmimicrailsystems:oneBRTcorridor,one
busroute.MexicoCitysBRTwasinitiallydesignedthisway.
Figure 31: Mexico City's BRT system was designed with "trunk-only" services
JakartasBRTwasalsoinitiallydesignedthisway.
Page50
Figure 32: Jakarta's BRT was also designed with "trunk-only" services. Harmoni Station is where Lines 1, 2, and 3 intersect.
Theresultofdesigningtrunkonlyserviceswithoutanyintercorridorrouteswastheneedforverylarge
transferstations.Passengerswishingtopassfromonetrunkroutetoanotherhadtotransfer.Thisforcedlarge
volumesofpassengerstoneedlesslytransferbetweenonetrunkserviceandanother.InJakarta,thisprimitive
serviceapproachrequiredaverylargeamountoflandforatransferstation,andevenso,thestationquickly
becameovercrowdedasnewcorridorswereadded.
Page51
Figure 33: Harmoni Station transfer facility in Jakarta could have been avoided if trunk services had been continued rather
than forcing a transfer between trunk-only services
Overtime,sometrunkonlyBRTsystemsgraduallyevolvedtointroduceintercorridorservices.Intercorridor
servicesstilltravelonlyontheBRTinfrastructurebuttravelbetweencorridorssoastoavoidthesemajor
transfers.JakartaandMexicoCitybothfinallyintroducedintercorridorservicestoreducesevere
overcrowdingattransferstations.
Page52
Figure 34: Jakarta added some inter-corridor services to alleviate some of the major transfer volumes occurring at stations like
Harmoni Station
Inadditiontothedesignquestionofhowtorouteservicesthatoperateonthetrunk,therealsoemergeda
questionofhowtodesignservicesthatcapturepassengersthatdonotlivewithinwalkingdistanceofatrunk
corridor.NotallBRTpassengersliveorworkdirectlyonthetrunkcorridor,soinordertobringmore
passengerstothesystem,itisgenerallynecessarytoroutesomebusesontomixedtrafficstreets(direct
services)orprovidefeederbuses.
EarlierBRTsystemssolvedthisproblembyusingfeederbuses.Inatrunkfeedersystem,trunkservices
operateonthetrunkinfrastructureonly(whethertrunkonlyorintercorridorservices)andfeederservices
Page53
operateinmixedtrafficonly,bringingpassengerstoandfromtheBRTcorridor.BogotasTransMileniowas
designedasatrunkfeedersystem.Likewithtrunkonlyservices,trunkfeederservicesrequirelargetransfer
facilitiesbecausemanypassengersareforcedtomaketransfersbetweentrunkandfeederservices.
Additionally,manypassengerschoosenottousethesystembecauseofthetimedelayassociatedwiththis
cumbersometransfer.
Foryears,itwasbelievedthatdirectserviceswerenotcompatiblewithfullfeaturedBRTtrunkservices.Inthe
lastfewyears,however,directserviceshavebeensuccessfullycombinedwithfullfeaturedBRTontrunk
routes,allowingthebestofbothworlds.PriortoenteringdedicatedBRTinfrastructure,servicesoperatein
mixedtrafficonlocalstreets.ThesamevehiclethenenterstheBRTinfrastructure,eliminatinganyneedfora
transfer.ThisrequiresabusthatcansuccessfullyinterfacewithatrunkBRTstationwhilealsoprovidinga
comfortabletraditionalcurbentrance.Thisisdoneeitherbyhavinglowfloorbusesandlowplatformsattrunk
BRTstations,orbyhavingBRTbuseshavinghighplatformdoorsononesideofthebusandstepsfornormal
curbentry.
Byeliminatingtheneedtotransfer,passengersoveralltriptimesarereducedandtheyhavethecomfortofa
oneseatride.OntheBRTcorridor,servicesoperatewithintheBRTinfrastructure,withstopsatcenteraligned
stationplatformsanddoorsontherightsideofthebuses.OfftheBRTcorridor,servicesstopalongthe
curbsidewithadditionaldoorsontheleftsideofthebuses.Inadditiontohighertimesavingsandmoredirect
routing,directservicesalsoreduceinfrastructurecostsandlandconsumptionduetoareductionintheneed
forlargetransferfacilities.
Guangzhou,ChinawasthefirstBRTsystemtohaveafullydirectservicesmodelthatalsohadfullfeaturedBRT
trunkinfrastructure.
Page54
Figure 35: Guangzhou's fully direct services BRT system includes services that operate both on- and off-corridor
Aroundthesametime,Johannesburg,SouthAfricaalsoimplementedsomedirectservicesontheReaVaya
BRT(knowninJohannesburgascomplementaryservices).Infact,Johannesburgimplementedahybrid
systemoftrunkfeederanddirectservices.
Page55
Figure 36: Johannesburg implemented a hybrid system of direct services and trunk-feeder services
Becausedirectservicestendtoattractmorepassengers,dueprovidingaoneseatride,becausedirectservices
tendtoneedlessfleet,andbecausedirectservicesavoidtransferterminaldelayandindirectnessofroute
delay,andastheyalsoavoidtheneedforalargeandexpensivetransferfacility,wegenerallyprefertotest
directservices.
TheMRTSHarmonisationStudyassumedatrunkonlyservicewithnointercorridorroutes:themostbasic
formofBRTservices.Asthestudynevermadeclearwhetherthereweretobenofeederservicesorwhether
Page56
theservicewasassumedtohavefeederroutesyettobespecified,ITDPcreatedtwoservicescenarios
(ScenariosI&III)whichsplitourproposeddirectservicesintotrunkfeederservices.
5.5.3
Scenario I: TrunkFeeder on KeNHA Infrastructure (Infrastructure Scenario 1)
ScenarioIisasetoftrunkfeederservicesthatoperateonA104underthecurrentKeNHAinfrastructureplan
(InfrastructureScenario1).Thisisamoredetailedserviceplanscenariothatisconsistentwithwhatwas
proposedintheHarmonisationStudy.ItprovidesfortrunkservicesthatoperatebetweenCityCabanasand
JamesGichuruwithonelocalandoneexpressservice.AstheinfrastructureontheA104haspassinglanes,we
addedatrunkexpressserviceasitdidnotappeartobeprecludedbytheHarmonisationStudyproposals,and
ithadsignificanttimesavingsadvantages.Transferterminalswouldberequiredatbothends(i.e.,City
CabanasandJamesGichuru)aswellasneartheCBD.Fromthere,weaddedseveralfeederservicesthatwere
notdetailedbutnotprecludedbytheHarmonisationStudyproposal.Thesefeedpassengersintothetrunk
terminalsfrommultiplepopulardestinations.
Figure 37: BRT Service Scenario I: Trunk-Feeder on KeNHA Infrastructure
Additionally,whilethisscenarioincludesfeederservicesatthefourterminals,becausetheserviceplanforthe
longertermMRTSnetwork,asfoundintheMRTSHarmonisationStudy,precludestheinclusionofinter
corridorroutes,threeadditionaltransferstationswouldneedtobebuiltwheretheBRTNdovuService(A104)
Page57
crossestheproposedBRTSimbaServiceatLangataRoad,wherethesetwoservicescrosstheChuiLine(Red)
atHaileSelassie,andwherethesetwoservicescrosstheNyati(Green)LineatKenyatta.Inaddition,an
exclusiveBRTturningmovementwouldneedtobeprovidedtheintersectionoftheA104andUniversityWay.
Figure 38: Under Scenario I, two major transfer facilities will be required in order to facilitate transfers to future BRT corridors
Page58
Runningthisscenariothroughthemodelyieldedthefollowingresults:
DATA MODEL
Veh
Route
type
T1
Artic
T2
Artic
TOTAL
Length
(km)
32.7
32.7
65
MODEL RESULTS
Run time
(min)
Boarding
84.03
13 602
66.03
13 802
150
27 404
Pax
km
68 516
92 119
160 635
Pax
hours
2 921
3 097
6 017
Max
volume
3 834
5 318
Max
load
2.00
1.66
Freq
24.0
33.2
Hdwy
(min)
2.5
1.8
DATA MODEL
Veh
Route
type
F105
Std
F11
Std
F110A
Std
F110B
Std
F12
Std
F23
Std
F30
Std
F33
Std
F33F
Std
F33U
Std
F34
Std
F48
Std
TOTAL
Length
(km)
29.8
9.5
39.2
18.4
9.3
6.9
14.6
2.3
12.1
27.0
15.2
13.0
197
MODEL RESULTS
Run time
(min)
Boarding
126.7
7 254
53.9
1 562
115.9
1 687
54.8
1 033
71.8
130
18.6
3 111
50.9
2 140
5.9
2 354
83.9
1 107
165.2
1 406
54.0
76
105.3
760
907
22 620
Pax
km
74 773
4 385
23 559
7 544
249
10 645
9 706
2 636
3 490
11 721
228
2 752
151 689
Pax
hours
5 223
445
924
310
32
528
595
182
389
1 067
17
387
10 098
Max
volume
4 348
950
967
650
76
2 481
1 227
1 716
568
813
76
339
Max
load
4.03
0.88
0.90
0.60
0.07
2.30
1.14
1.59
0.53
0.75
0.07
0.31
Freq
48.3
10.6
10.7
7.2
4.0
27.6
13.6
19.1
6.3
9.0
4.0
3.8
Hdwy
(min)
1.2
5.7
5.6
8.3
15.0
2.2
4.4
3.1
9.5
6.6
15.0
15.9
Fleet
34
37
71
Fleet
102
10
21
7
5
9
12
2
9
25
4
7
213
Table 7: Results of Scenario I
Thisscenariorequires284busesintotal,71articulated(18meter)and213standard(12meter).Thescenario
isexpectedtoattractapproximately305,000passengersperday,and33,877passengersduringthepeak
hour.Some63%ofthetotaltripsareforcedtotransferfromafeederrouteontothetrunkservice.(27,404+
22,620=50,024*0.63=33,877).Dailydemandiscomposedof58,257tripsboardingafeederbusandgetting
offthefeederbeforeitreachesthetrunkservice,another154,322dailytripsthatboardfeedersandtransfer
ontothetrunkservice,andanother92,313dailytripsthatareboardingdirectlyontoatrunkservice.
5.5.4
Scenario II: Direct services on KeNHA Infrastructure (Infrastructure Scenario 1)
ScenarioIIproposesasetofdirectservicesthatwouldoperateontheA104onthecurrentKeNHA
infrastructureplan(InfrastructureScenario1)butwouldtravelthroughtheCBDwherepassengerdemandis
high.Thatis,servicesoperatealongtrunkBRTinfrastructurebetweenCityCabanasandJamesGichuruand
continuebeyondtomultipledestinations,withoutaforcedtransfer.Theroutesaregenerallythesameinthis
scenarioasinScenarioIexceptratherthancuttingtheroutesatfourterminalsandcontinuingthemas
feeders,theroutesaresimplycontinuous.Thisscenariodoesnotrequiretransferfacilities.Thisscenarioalso
variesfromScenarioIinthattheroutestravelthroughtheCBD.InScenarioI,thiswouldnothavemadesense
aswewouldhaveneededtocreatefeederroutesforjusttheCBDportionoftheserviceplan.Thesefeeder
routeswouldhavebeenextremelyshortandstuckintrafficfortheirentireroutes.Hence,weonlybegan
routingservicesthroughtheCBDinthisscenario.
Page59
Figure 39: BRT Service Scenario II: Direct services on KeNHA Infrastructure
Runningthisscenariothroughthemodelyieldedthefollowingresults:
DATA MODEL
Veh
Route
type
B105X
Artic
B11
Std
B110A
Std
B110B
Std
B12
Std
B23
Artic
B30
Artic
B33
Artic
B33F
Artic
B33U
Std
B34
Artic
B48
Artic
TOTAL
Length
(km)
44.9
15.5
62.4
41.7
16.5
22.0
29.7
24.0
35.3
50.3
38.4
28.2
409
MODEL RESULTS
Run time
(min)
Boarding
183.73
8 495
82.76
2 055
184.39
2 047
126.30
1 466
96.29
1 212
82.75
6 188
110.56
3 363
73.11
5 655
155.33
2 899
247.68
2 965
124.48
3 245
161.43
3 872
1629
43 462
Pax
km
112 243
6 811
35 766
16 667
4 386
44 143
23 758
46 305
27 868
18 738
36 387
34 738
407 810
Pax
hours
7 489
647
1 520
758
347
2 952
1 546
2 240
1 750
1 473
1 850
3 095
25 666
Max
volume
4 568
1 024
973
690
637
3 252
1 500
2 997
1 064
676
1 745
2 490
Max
load
1.43
0.57
0.54
0.38
0.35
1.02
0.47
0.94
0.33
0.38
0.55
0.78
Freq
28.6
11.4
10.8
7.7
7.1
20.3
9.4
18.7
6.7
7.5
10.9
15.6
Hdwy
(min)
2.1
5.3
5.5
7.8
8.5
3.0
6.4
3.2
9.0
8.0
5.5
3.9
Fleet
88
16
34
17
12
29
18
23
18
32
23
42
352
Table 8: Results of Scenario II
Thisscenariorequires352busesintotal,241articulated(18meter)and111standard(12meter).Thescenario
isexpectedtoattractapproximately391,158passengersperdayand43,462passengersduringthepeakhour.
Thisscenariohas86,000moredailypassengersthanthetrunkfeederscenario,andeachbuscarries1,111
dailypassengers,comparedtothetrunkfeederscenariowhereeachbusonlycaries1,074dailypassengers.In
Page60
otherwords,inanapplestoapplescomparison,thedirectservicescenarioattractsmorepassengersand
requireslessfleetperpassengerthanthetrunkfeederscenarioonthesameinfrastructure.However,thelack
ofBRTinfrastructureintheCBDslowsdowntheseservicesdramaticallyascomparedtothefollowingthree
scenarios.
5.5.5
Scenario III: TrunkFeeder on KeNHA Infrastructure + CBD (Infrastructure Scenario 3)
ForScenarioIII,fullBRTinfrastructureinalooparoundtheCBDwasassumed.Basedonpreviouswork,
discussedindetailintheNairobiBRTPhaseIInfrastructure&IntersectionRecommendationsDetailed
Report,thebestloopforBRTinfrastructureisHaileSelassieAvenue,MoiAvenue,andUniversityWay.
ScenarioIIIassumesthattrunkserviceoperateinsidethisCBDloop.Feederserviceswereincludedinthis
scenarioinamannersimilartothoseinScenarioI:trunkrouteswereseveredatthetwoterminals(City
CabanasandJamesGichuru)andseveralfeederservicestookpassengersinmultipledirectionsfromthere.
Twotransferterminalsarerequiredinthisscenario.
Figure 40: BRT Service Scenario III: Trunk-feeder on KeNHA Infrastructure + CBD
Page61
Additionally,aswithScenarioI,severaladditionaltransferfacilitieswouldberequiredinandaroundtheCBD
inordertofacilitatethetransferbetweentheNdovuCorridorandfutureBRTcorridors.
InScenarioIII,wedidnotincludethemataturoutesthatcurrentlycomeinfromLangataRoad.Thisisbecause
LangataRoadistoocongestedtoprovideareliableBRTfeederservice.Weconsideredasanalternative,
includingfullBRTinfrastructureonLangataRoadinthisscenariosothatfeederservicescouldbypassthis
congestion.However,LangataRoadissoclosetotheCBDandthetimepenaltytopassengerscomingfrom
LangataRoadimposedbyatransfertothetrunkrouteforsuchashortdistanceistoogreatandcannotbe
justifiedbyprovidingafeederservice.Instead,themataturouteswhichcurrentlyuseLangataRoadandturn
ontoA104willcontinueastheycurrentlyaretoday.ThiswillreducethenumberofpassengersusingtheBRT
andwillmeanmorematatusonA104inthesegmentbetweenLangataRoadandtheCBD.Forasimilar
reason,RoutesB11&B12,whichalsoturnoffofA104atadistanceneartheCBD,wereeliminatedaswell.
ScenarioIIIlosespassengerstononBRTroutesbecauseofthetransferrequired.Forexample,passengerswho
aregoingtotheairportfromtheCBDwilltravelsouthoneitherroutesB34,B33U,B33Fbutwillhavetomake
atransfertoafeederroute(F34)tocompletetheirtrip.Alternatively,mataturoute34JKIAcircumventsthisby
travellingfromtheCBDalongJogooRoadanddoesnotrequirepassengerstotransfer.Despitethefaster
speedsontheBRT,the34JKIAisstillashortertripanddoesntrequireatransfer.
DATA MODEL
Veh
Route
type
B1
Artic
B2
Artic
TOTAL
DATA MODEL
Veh
Route
type
F105
Std
F11
Std
F110A
Std
F110B
Std
F12
Std
F23
Std
F30
Std
F33
Std
F33F
Std
F33U
Std
F34
Std
F48
Std
TOTAL
Length
(km)
35.6
35.6
71
MODEL RESULTS
Run time
(min)
Boarding
91.01
21 123
73.01
12 296
164
33 419
Pax
km
112 358
95 191
207 549
Pax
hours
4 797
3 229
8 026
Max
volume
6 375
4 157
Max
load
1.99
1.52
Freq
39.8
26.0
Hdwy
(min)
1.5
2.3
Length
(km)
29.8
9.5
39.2
18.4
9.3
6.9
14.6
2.3
12.1
27.0
15.2
13.0
197
MODEL RESULTS
Run time
(min)
Boarding
126.7
7 254
53.9
1 568
115.9
1 687
54.8
1 033
71.8
114
18.6
3 111
50.9
2 140
5.9
2 354
83.9
1 376
165.2
1 544
54.0
121
105.3
2 366
907
24 668
Pax
km
74 773
4 535
23 559
7 544
217
10 645
9 706
2 636
4 393
11 939
479
12 203
162 628
Pax
hours
5 223
467
924
310
29
528
595
182
487
1 096
34
1 619
11 493
Max
volume
4 348
950
967
650
54
2 481
1 227
1 716
714
937
121
1 966
Max
load
4.03
0.35
1.07
0.60
0.02
0.92
0.45
0.64
0.53
0.69
0.04
2.91
Freq
48.3
10.6
10.7
7.2
4.0
27.6
13.6
19.1
7.9
10.4
1.3
21.8
Hdwy
(min)
1.2
5.7
5.6
8.3
15.0
2.2
4.4
3.1
7.6
5.8
44.6
2.7
Fleet
61
32
93
Fleet
102
10
21
7
5
9
12
2
12
29
2
39
250
Table 9: Results of Scenario III
Page62
Thisscenarioresultedin32,574AMpeakhourpassengersand297,000dailypassengers.Afleetof343buses,
with93articulatedbusesand250standardbusesisrequired.
5.5.6
Scenario IV: Direct services on KeNHA Infrastructure + CBD (Infrastructure Scenario 3)
ThisscenarioissimilartotheScenarioIIIbutincludesdirectservicesratherthantrunkfeederservices.Again,
asinScenarioIII,BRTservicesthatturnontothecorridorfromLangataRoadwerenotincluded.Thelackof
BRTinfrastructureonLangataRoadwouldtoodrasticallyaffecttheoperationofBRTservicesonLangata.This
scenario,therefore,performsbetter,intermsofoveralltriptime,ifthoseservicesarenotincludedintheBRT
serviceplanandkeptasmataturoutes.Thereare12BRTroutesinthisscenario.
Figure 41: BRT Service Scenario IV: Direct services on KeNHA Infrastructure + CBD
Becausethisisadirectservicesscenario,transferterminalsarenotrequired,eithertodayorforconnection
withfutureBRTcorridors.
Page63
DATA MODEL
Veh
Route
type
B105X
Artic
B11
Std
B110A
Artic
B110B
Std
B12
Std
B23
Artic
B30
Artic
B33
Artic
B33F
Std
B33U
Std
B34
Std
B48
Artic
TOTAL
Length
(km)
43.2
14.6
61.5
41.7
16.5
21.3
32.1
23.1
35.4
49.4
38.4
28.1
405
MODEL RESULTS
Run time
(min)
Boarding
161.96
9 882
67.49
1 948
168.62
4 224
113.61
1 423
84.10
870
47.58
3 539
77.48
4 120
57.83
5 552
143.13
3 293
232.41
3 528
112.28
3 178
143.53
4 769
1410
46 326
Pax
km
112 985
6 421
58 074
10 969
1 934
30 080
29 743
44 159
27 637
20 737
28 896
44 813
416 448
Pax
hours
6 671
552
2 114
445
147
1 155
1 093
1 811
1 524
1 497
1 256
3 652
21 916
Max
volume
4 153
986
1 811
517
289
2 581
2 539
2 834
1 367
786
1 356
3 388
Max
load
0.87
0.37
0.38
0.19
0.11
0.54
0.53
0.59
0.51
0.29
0.50
0.71
Freq
26.0
11.0
11.3
5.7
3.2
16.1
15.9
17.7
15.2
8.7
15.1
21.2
Hdwy
(min)
2.3
5.5
5.3
10.4
18.7
3.7
3.8
3.4
4.0
6.9
4.0
2.8
Fleet
71
13
32
11
5
13
21
18
37
34
29
51
335
Table 10: Results of Scenario IV
ThetotalnumberofAMpeakhour passengersinthisscenarioisapproximately41,000andthetotalnumber
ofdailypassengersisapproximately369,000passengersperday.Thisscenariorequiresafleetof335buses,
with206articulatedand129standardsize.
5.5.7
Scenario V: Direct services on KeNHA Infrastructure + CBD + Langata (Infrastructure Scenario 4)
Inthisscenario,thoseserviceswhichmimictheitinerariesofthehighestdemandexistingmataturouteswere
allincluded.SincemuchofthepassengerdemandgoesdirectlyintotheCBD,mostoftheroutesinthisservice
planentertheCBD.DuetoparticularlyhighcongestionintheCBD,andthefactthatoperatingtheseroutesin
CBDtrafficwouldmeanlongdelaysfortheBRTsystemasawhole,thisscenarioassumesthatfullBRT
infrastructurewillbebuiltintheCBDtoaccommodatetheseservices.Someoftheseroutescomefromother
partsofthecity,operateinmixedtrafficforapartoftheirroute,thenjointheBRTinfrastructurealongthe
A104beforeturningintotheCBD.Forthemostpart,thecongestionontheseotherroadsisnotsobadthat
thesystemwouldbeunviable.
However,inthisscenario,unlikeintheothers,BRTservicesthatturnontothecorridorfromLangataRoad
wereincluded.Butcongestiononthefirst1.5kmissobadthattheseserviceswouldnotbeviableifleftin
mixedtraffic.Thus,ScenarioValsoincludesfullBRTinfrastructureforthisfirst1.5kilometersofLangataRoad
(InfrastructureScenario4).
Regardingwhichmataturouteswereincluded,somewereincludedasisandtransformedintoBRTroutes,
whileothersweresimplifiedorcombinedwithothers.ThetotalnumberofBRTservicesincludedinthis
scenariois16.Thisalsoincludessomelocalandexpressversionsofthesameservice.
Page64
Figure 42: BRT service scenario V: Direct services on KeNHA Infrastructure + CBD + Langata
Thefollowingtabledetailsthemodelingresults,byBRTroute,intheAMpeakhour:
DATA MODEL
Veh
Route
type
B105X
Artic
B11
Std
B110A
Std
B110B
Std
B12
Std
B125
Artic
B14
Std
B15
Artic
B23
Artic
B30
Artic
B33
Artic
B33F
Artic
B33N
Artic
B33U
Std
B34
Artic
B48
Artic
TOTAL
Length
(km)
44.9
15.5
62.4
41.7
16.5
28.5
10.5
25.1
22.0
29.6
24.0
35.4
15.9
50.3
38.4
28.1
489
MODEL RESULTS
Run time
(min)
Boarding
162.34
7 599
67.08
1 996
168.21
2 338
108.12
1 575
80.61
1 136
154.39
3 284
35.70
1 152
137.44
3 615
62.36
5 672
89.16
6 142
56.42
5 336
139.64
3 148
56.90
2 378
232.00
3 620
108.79
3 480
140.04
4 071
1799
56 542
Pax
km
101 573
6 732
37 183
18 440
4 255
22 645
3 501
17 833
37 227
39 934
44 092
29 658
13 086
20 678
38 189
35 198
470 225
Pax
hours
6 276
576
1 427
713
241
2 395
210
1 675
1 859
1 960
1 801
1 505
866
1 569
1 579
2 768
27 420
Max
volume
3 846
1 024
973
906
592
1 789
909
1 211
2 980
2 707
2 888
1 343
2 063
929
1 643
2 540
Max
load
1.20
0.57
0.54
0.50
0.33
0.56
0.51
0.38
0.93
0.85
0.90
0.42
0.64
0.52
0.51
0.79
Freq
24.0
11.4
10.8
10.1
6.6
11.2
10.1
7.6
18.6
16.9
18.1
8.4
12.9
10.3
10.3
15.9
Hdwy
(min)
2.5
5.3
5.5
6.0
9.1
5.4
5.9
7.9
3.2
3.5
3.3
7.1
4.7
5.8
5.8
3.8
Fleet
66
13
31
19
9
29
7
18
20
26
17
20
13
40
19
38
385
Table 11: Results of Scenario V
Page65
ThetotalnumberofAMpeakhourpassengerswhowillusetheBRTinthisscenarioisapproximately49,887,
whichtranslatestoapproximately450,000dailypassengers.Thiswillrequireatotalfleetof385buses:266
articulated18meterbusesand119standard12meterbuses.
ItisimportanttoreiteratethattheresultsofthisscenarioaredependentonthecompletionoffullBRT
infrastructureonUniversityWay,HaileSelassieAvenue,andMoiAvenueintheNairobiCBDandonthefirst
1.5kilometersofLangataRoad.Further,thefullydedicatedBRTonlyturnsthatwerecommendedinthe
NairobiBRTPhaseIInfrastructure&Intersectionsreport(RiversideDrive,UniversityWay,HaileSelassie
Avenue,LangataRoad,PopoRoad,EnterpriseRoad,andAirportNorthRoad)remaincriticalto
accommodatingtheseservicesandensuringthatthesystemdoesnotbreakdown.Ifanyoftheseelementsof
BRTinfrastructureareexcludedfromtheNdovuCorridor,amajorityofthebenefitsoftheprojectarelost.
ThebelowfigureshowsthechangeinallpublictransportpassengervolumesontheBRTcorridorandon
nearbystreetsforthisscenario.Thegreenindicatesagaininpassengersandtheredindicatesalossin
passengers.Notsurprisingly,themostnewpassengersaregainedontheA104itself.Thisisduetoseveral
routesbeingpulledontotheBRTinfrastructure.TripspreviouslymadeontheB48,B33N,andB34matatu
routes,whichtraveledonJogooRoad,EnterpriseRoad,MbagathiWay,andNgongRoad,havealsoshiftedto
otherstreets,mainlyontotheBRTonA104.
5.6 Comparison of scenarios

ABRTSystemshouldbedesignedtoserveasmanypassengersaspossible.Indeed,theMRTSHarmonisation
StudydefinedtheaimoftheMRTSasbeing,torealiseapublictransportsystemwithacapacityashighas
possibleandwithahighdegreeofindependencefromothertraffic.Wetherefore,begincomparisonofthe
fivescenariosbylookingatdailyBRTpassengers.
Page66
BRT passengers
500,000
450,000
400,000
Passengers
350,000
300,000
250,000
200,000
150,000
100,000
50,000
0
I: Trunk &
Feeder, no
CBD
II: Direct
III: Trunk & IV: Direct
V: Direct
Services, no Feeder, CBD Services, CBD Services, CBD
CBD
+ Langata
Figure 43: Comparison of daily BRT passengers across the five scenarios
Fromthischart,wecanseethatthedirectservicesscenariosattractmorepassengersthanthetrunkfeeder
scenarios.Thisislogicalsinceitismoreattractiveforapassengertorideamasstransitsystemifhe/shedoes
nothavetomakeatransfer.WealsoseethatbyaddingCBDinfrastructureandservices,ridershipalso
increases.Finally,byaddingBRTinfrastructureandservicesonthefirst1.5kilometersofLangataRoad,we
reacharidershipof450,000perday.Fromaridershipperspective,ScenarioVperformsthebest.
NotethatScenariosIIandIVattractsimilarnumbersofpassengers.Thatisbecausebothscenariosaredirect
servicescenarioswhichgothroughtheCBD.However,aswewillseeinFigures45and46below,ScenarioIV
createsamuchgreatertimesavingsperpassengerduetotheBRTinfrastructurewhichisassumedinScenario
IVtogothroughtheCBD.
Nomatterwhatthescenario,somenumberofpassengerswillremainonmatatus.First,thisisbecausesome
ofthemataturouteswesurveyedarenotbeincludedinanyofthefivescenariosasBRTroutes.Forexample,
wesurveyedseveralroutesonJogooRoadwhicharenotincludedunderanyofthescenarios.Second,there
Page67
aresomemataturouteswhichdonotdirectlycompetewiththeBRTsystembutwhichhavetheabilitytotake
passengersfromtheirorigintotheirdestinationviaanalternatepath,eitherwithaoneseatrideorwitha
transfer.Insomeofthescenarios,itisstillfastertotakeamatatuviaanalternatepath,evenwithtraffic
congestionthantotaketheBRTwhichrequiresatransferandmaynotgodirectlyintotheCBD.Thechart
belowshowswhatpercentageofpassengerswillremainonthesurveyedmatatusundereachofthefive
scenarios,aswellasthebaseline.
TripsCapturedbyBRT
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
BRTTrips
40%
RemainingonMatatus
30%
20%
10%
0%
Baseline
II
III
IV
Figure 44: Comparison of passenger volumes transferring off of surveyed matatu routes and onto the BRT under each scenario
Aswiththepreviouschartwhichshowedonlyridership,thischartshowsthatmoreriderswillshiftoutoftheir
matatusunderScenarioV.Asaresult,fewermatatuswillbeonthestreets,providingsomealleviationforthe
highlevelsoftrafficcongestioninNairobi.
WealsolookedathowmuchtimeeachpassengersavesbyusingtheBRT.Thechartbelowshowstimesaved
perpassengerinminutesbutitmustbekeptinmindthatthesevaluesareaveragedoutacrossallpublic
transportpassengersmatatuandBRTforallroutessurveyed.Thatis,itincludespassengerswhoremainon
matatus.
Page68
Time saved per passenger

7
6
Minutes
5
4
3
2
1
0
I: Trunk & II: Direct III: Trunk IV: Direct V: Direct
Feeder, no Services, & Feeder, Services, Services,
CBD
no CBD
CBD
CBD
CBD +
Langata
Figure 45: Average time (in minutes) saved by all public transport passengers under each scenario
IfjustthebenefitstotheBRTpassengersareconsidered,thetimesavingsforScenarioVremainsbetterthan
theotherscenarios,andlooksmuchmoresignificantasashareofthetotaltriptime.
TimesavingsperBRTpassenger
16
14
12
10
8
TimesavingsperBRT
passenger
6
4
2
0
Baseline
II
III
IV
Figure 46: Average time (minutes) saved by BRT passengers
Page69
Basedonridershipandoverallpassengertimesavings,thebestperformingscenarioisScenarioV.Thatis,the
PhaseIBRTcorridorontheA104highwaywouldbestserveitsusersifitoffereddirectservicesratherthan
trunkfeederservicesandprovidedtheseservicesonfullydedicatedBRTinfrastructurethroughtheCBDand
onLangataRoad.
Thisscenariocapturesmostoftheexistingpassengersusingthecorridortodayandoffersthemaconvenient
oneseatride.Thisdirectservicesscenarioalsocapturesmoreoftheexistingpublictransportdemandinside
theBRTsystembyincorporatingasmanymataturoutesintothesystemaspossible,therebymaximizingthe
utilizationoftheBRTlanesandstations.
ScenarioValsoremovedcompetingmataturoutesfromthemixedtrafficlanes,andthereforewouldhavethe
maximumimpactondecongestingthemixedtrafficlanesaswell.Inadditiontoperformingwellinregardsto
thenumberofpassengersattractedandtheoveralltriptime,thisscenariodrawspassengersoffthematatu
routesandontotheBRTbecausemorerouteshavebeenconvertedintoBRTroutes,makingforfaster,more
convenienttrips.
Thetrunkfeederscenariosshowednosignificantoperationaladvantageoverdirectservices,andwouldhave
thefollowingdisadvantages:
5.6.1
Higherinfrastructurecosts,asitwouldrequirelargetransferterminalsandinterchanges,and
LowerbusflowsinsidetheBRT,andmuchhigherbusflowsoutsidetheBRT(inthesameroadway)
muchlowerridershipontheBRTandthereforeloweroperationalrevenue
Basic costbenefit analysis of each scenario
Byfocusingonthoseelementsthatvarysignificantlyfromonescenariototheother,wecanalsocomparethe
relativerateofreturnofeachscenario.Asthecostsarefocusedonthosethatvaryandnotnecessarilyonall
costs,thisestimateshouldnotbeusedforthepurposeoffullprojectfeasibilityappraisal.However,itshould
besufficienttohelpmakeaserviceplandecision.
Page70
ComparisonofFiveServicePlanScenarios
Scenario
Baseline
Cost/Unit
(USD)
Description
MatatuTrips
BRTTrips
Generalizedcost(timeperpassenger)
Generalizedcostsavingsperpassenger
Peakhourgeneralizedbenefit(minutes)
Peakhourgeneralizedbenefit(Ksh)
Dailybenefit(Ksh)
Annualbenefit(Ksh)
Estimatedannualbenefit(USD)
PV12Years@5%
#BRTVehicles
#Articulated18meterbuses
Totalcostof18meterbuses(USD)
#12meterbuses
Totalcostof12meterbusesUSD)
TotalBusCost(USD)
KilometersofTrunkInfrastructure
BuswayCost(USD)
Stations
AdditionalSubStations
TotalStationCost(USD)
Transferstationsneeded
Large(atTerminusortrunktrunktransfer)
Small(intermediate,1or2feeders)
Landaquisitoinlargeoutoftown(terminal)
Landacquisitionlargeintown
LandAcuisitionsmallintown
TotalTransferFacilityCost
RateofReturn
$450,000
$250,000
$2,500,000
$550,000
$350,000
$3,000,000
$400,000
$5,000,000
$40,000,000
$2,000,000
Existing
II
III

CBD
CBD
CBD
BenefitsCalculation
966,213
661,320
575,055
0
304,893
391,158
78.36
76.71
74.13
0
1.65
2.69
0 159,425 260,072
304,502 496,738
1,827,012 2,980,429
548,103,649 894,128,679
$5,592,894 $9,123,762
$49,571,230 $80,866,199
CostCalculation
0
284
352
0
71
241
$31,950,000 $108,450,000
0
213
111
$53,250,000 $27,750,000
$85,200,000 $136,200,000
0
16.7
16.7
$41,750,000 $41,750,000
48
48
8
11
$29,200,000 $30,250,000
0
6
0
$12,000,000 $
$800,000 $
$10,000,000 $
$80,000,000 $
$4,000,000 $
$106,800,000 $
0 $262,950,000 $208,200,000
0.188519605
0.388406334
IV
DirectServices,CBD
DirectServices,CBD
+Langata
646,213
320,000
74.4
3.96
382,620
730,805
4,384,829
1,315,448,756
$13,422,946
$118,970,952
532,800
433,413
71.9
6.46
624,174
1,192,172
7,153,029
2,145,908,830
$21,897,029
$194,078,877
456,128
510,085
70.9
7.46
720,795
1,376,718
8,260,310
2,478,092,859
$25,286,662
$224,122,047
343
93
$41,850,000
250
$62,500,000
$104,350,000
19.4
$48,500,000
53
21
$36,500,000
6
$12,000,000
$800,000
$10,000,000
$80,000,000
$4,000,000
$106,800,000
$296,150,000
0.401725316
335
206
$92,700,000
129
$32,250,000
$124,950,000
19.4
$48,500,000
53
22
$36,850,000
0
$
$
$
$
$
$
$210,300,000
0.922866748
385
266
$119,700,000
119
$29,750,000
$149,450,000
20.9
$52,250,000
55
22
$37,950,000
0
$
$
$
$
$
$
$239,650,000
0.935205703
Table 12: Cost, Benefit, and Rate of Return comparison of Five Service Plan Scenarios3
MatatuTrips:Thecalculationofnetuserbenefitsdonehereincludesthegeneralizedcostsavingsaccruingtoalltransitpassengersinthe
corridor.Noeffortwasmadetocalculatetheimpactonmixedtrafficgeneralizedtravelcost.Thepassengersthatelecttostayonmatatusare
assumedtofacethesametraveltimeasbeforetheproject,andtheimpactoftheprojectonmixedtrafficisassumedtobeneutral.However,the
largestimpedancefactorformixedtrafficisthenumberofmatatusremaininginthemixedtrafficlanesaftertheprojectbegins.Asthisisa
functionofthenumberoftripsthatcanbecapturedbythenewBRTsystem,thenumberoftripsremainingonmatatushasbeenretainedasan
indicatorofthelevelofadversemixedtrafficimpact,butitisnotfurthercalculated.Werethecostsoftheprojecttomixedtrafficcalculated,these
costswouldbehigher(andbenefitslower),thegreaterthenumberoftripsremaininginmatatus.
BRTTrips:NumberofpassengerscapturedbythenewBRTsystem.Variesaccordingtoservicescenario.
GeneralizedCost:Generalizedcostoftheaveragetrippertransitpassenger,whethertheyareontheBRToronamatatu,expressedinunitsof
time.OurfieldresearchindicatedthatthevalueoftimeinNairobiis1Ksh=0.52333minutes.Thegeneralizedcostoftheaverageexistingtripwas
firstcalculatedbyaddinginvehicle(matatu)time+2*waitingtime(standardwaitingfactor)+3*walkingtime(standardwalkingfactorforAfrica)
+thefareequivalent,forwhichweused50Kshforthematatutrip.Forforcedtransfers,weused5minutesformatatutransfersand3minutesfor
theBRTtransfers,basedonobservedvaluesinmostsystems.Wethenraneachscenariousingthesameassumptions,butassuming70Kshforthe
futureBRTtrip.Thesecostswereconvertedintotheirtimeequivalent(50Ksh=26.17min,and70Ksh=36.63min).Thesameassumptionswere
appliedtoeachscenario.
Page71
Ascanbeobserved,anyofthescenariosshowveryrobustbenefitsthatcaneasilyjustifytheprojectedcosts,
withratesofreturnwellabovewhattheWorldBankisgenerallylookingfor(12%orso).
Generalizedcostsavingsperpassenger:Thedifferencebetweenthegeneralizedcostofthetripunderthescenarioandthebaselinecostofthe
trip,soitreflectsthegeneralizedbenefitperpassengerexpressedinminutes.
Peakhourgeneralizedbenefit(minutes):Dailytransittripswereconvertedintopeakhourtripstoshowthepeakhourbenefits,becausethe
benefitsprimarilyoccuronlyduringpeakhours.
Peakhourgeneralizedbenefit(Ksh):ThepeakhouraggregatebenefitsexpressedinKshusingthevalueoftimeof1Ksh=0.5233.
Dailybenefit(Ksh):Toconvertpeakhourintodailybenefit,amultiplierof6wasused.Takenfromempiricalobservation,andreflectsthefactthat
thepeakhourisgenerallyabout1/10ofdailydemand,butthetimesavingsbenefitsareprimarilyaccruedduringthepeak3hourmorningand
eveningperiod.Withmoredatawecouldimproveuponthisestimate,butasthesamefactorsareusedforeachscenarioitisnotnecessaryfor
purposesofcomparisonbetweenscenarios.
Annualbenefit(Ksh):Convertsdailybenefitintoannualbenefitbyusingamultiplierof300,whichisastandardmultiplier.Itcouldbeimproved
uponwithlocaldatabutissufficientforcomparisonpurposes.
Annualbenefit(USD):ConvertsannualbenefitsfromKshtoUSDusingcurrentexchangerates
PV12Years@5%:AsBRTprojectsnormallyamortizethelifeofthebusesover12yearsandbusesareoneofthemajorcapitalinvestments,we
normallydefinetheprojectlifefor12years.Theinfrastructureshouldlastlonger,butitdoesntmatterforpurposesofcomparison.Thispresent
valuecalculationreflectsthefactthatthebenefitsareaccruedonanannualbasis,sowetookthepresentvaluebyassumingastreamofequal
benefitsover12yearsata5%discountrate(theopportunitycostofmoney).
#Articulated18meterbuses:Variesbyservicescenarioandoptimizedbasedontheprojecteddemandoneachrouteandofftrunkcorridor
conditions.
Totalcostof18meterbuses(USD):Assumedtobe$450,000perbus.ThiswasroughlythecostofthelandedarticulatedbusesforReaVayain
Johannesburg.Thiscouldbereplacedwithabetterfigureifavailablebutiswithin$100,000.LowercostbusescanbefoundfromChinaandIndia
butwithashorterlifespan.Asthesamecostswereusedbyscenario,inaccuracyhereshouldnotdistortsignificantlytheoutcomeofcomparative
analysis.
#12meterbuses:Variesbyservicescenario.
Totalcostof12meterbuses(USD):Assumedtobe$250,000whichwasroughlytheircostinJohannesburg.Asabovewith18meterbuses.
Buswaycost(USD):Assumedtobe$2.5millionperkilometer,basedontheBRTPlanningGuideInfrastructureCostCalculator.Aseachscenario
usesthesameassumptions,varianceswillnotdistorttheoutcome.
Stations:Thenumberofstationsistakenfromtheserviceplanandtheinfrastructureplan.
Additionalsubstations:Variesbyservicescenario.Eachstationisassignedanumberofsubstopsbasedonthescenariospecificprojected
boardingandalightingnumbers,andtheyaredesignedwithenoughsubstopstoavoidsaturation.Thesevarysomewhatbyscenariobasedon
differentdemandanddifferentservicesoffered.
Totalstationcost(USD):ThecostofastationandasubstationistakenfromtheBRTPlanningGuideInfrastructureCostCalculator.
Large(Atterminusortrunktrunktransfer):Thenumberoflargetransferterminalsandtheircostisdeterminedbytheserviceplan.Theseare
stationswherealargenumberoffeederbusesmeettotransferpassengerstoatrunkfacility.Thetrunkandfeederscenariosallrequirefourlarge
transferstations,twoandtheendsofthecorridorontheA104,andtwointheCBDwheretheBRTCorridorsIandIIcrossfuturecorridors.Thecost
ofatransferstationistakenfromtheBRTPlanningGuideInfrastructureCostCalculator.Alargetransferfacilityisestimatedtocost$3million.
Small(Intermediate,1or2feeders):Variesbyservicescenario.Theseareterminalswhereoneortwofeedersjointthetrunkcorridor.Thereare
twointhetrunkandfeederserviceproposals,andtheirestimatedcostof$400,000istakenfromtheBRTPlanningGuideInfrastructureCost
Calculator.
Landacquisitionlargeoutoftown(terminal):Landacquisitionforatransferterminalisoneofthemaincostsofatransferterminal.Theyare
usuallylocatedneartheendoftheBRTcorridor.UsuallyattheendofaBRTcorridor,landisnotthatexpensive.Basedonempiricallyobserved
averages,theBRTPlanningGuideInfrastructureCostCalculatorestimates$5millionforalargetransferterminaloutoftown.Landvaluesin
Nairobiarereasonablyhigh,sothisseemsplausible.Apropercostingwouldrequiresizingthefacilitytotheserviceplanandthelocationof
equivalentpropertiesandtheirsalecost.
Landacquisitionlargeintown:Landacquisitionisrequiredtobuildaverylargestationthatwouldallowalargevolumeofpassengerstotransfer
fromthetwotrunkservicesontheA104totwofutureBRTCorridorsthatcrossitintheCBD.Suchtransferfacilitiesaredifficulttoestimatethe
costsfor,butasthelandisintheheartofNairobi,weestimateeachwillcost$40million.
Landacquisitionsmallintown:Landacquisitionisrequiredfortwosmalltransferfacilitiesinthetrunkandfeederscenario,andbothoftheseare
intown.Weestimateherethatthelandwouldcostaround$2millionbutthiscouldbereplacedwithmoreaccuratedataifavailable.
Rateofreturn:Calculatedbytakingthepresentvalueofthestringofuserbenefitsanddividingitbythetotalcapitalcost.Someonewithmore
familiaritywiththewaytheWorldBankdoesEconomicRateofReturncalculationsinthetransitspaceshouldbeabletotaketheinformation
presentedhereandputitinmorestandardWorldBankformat.ForcomparisonpurposesthisshouldgiveareasonableestimatedIRRcomparison
foreachofthescenarios.
Page72
However,thecapitalcostsforthetrunkandfeederscenariosaremuchhigherlargelybecauseoftheneedto
acquirelandandconstructsixtransferstations.Thisaddsanestimated$106.8milliontothecostofalltrunk
andfeederscenarios(thoughsomeofthisisoffsetbysmallerfleetsizesduetoamuchlowerridership).
InthescenarioswithinfrastructureintheCBD,thatinfrastructureaddsonly$2.7millioninbuswaycostsand
about$6.5millioninstationcosts,soabout$9.2milliontotal.Wedonotforeseetheneedforextensiveland
acquisitionintheCBDunderthedirectservicesscenarios,astherightofwayisalreadyquitewide.Forthis
initialinvestment,about$70millionmoreisachievedinuserbenefitsinthetrunkfeederscenario,andmore
than$110millionayearinadditionalbenefitsinthedirectservicescenario.Thecapitalcostinthedirect
servicescenarioswithCBD(ScenariosIV&V)forbusesdropsbecauseitrunsservicesinhighlycongested
downtownstreets,andincreasingthesespeedssignificantlyreducestheamountoffleetneeded.TheCBD
sectionhasthehighestrateofreturnofanycapitalinvestmentinthecorridor.
Notethattherateofreturnisfarbetterforthedirectservicescenarios,andforallofthescenariosincluding
theCBDinfrastructure,andsomewhatbetterstillifLangataisincluded.This,onceagain,pointstoScenarioV
asbeingthebestinvestment.
5.7 BRT station locations and sizing

BRTstationlocationswereproposedaspartoftheserviceplanningprocess,butpriortothemodeling.They
weredeterminedbyconsideringtheinitialplacementdonebyeachconsultantandmakingmodifications
basedonthefollowing:
Stationlocationproposalsmadebythedesignconsultants(GIBB,COWIandESER),
Currentpassengerboardingandalightinglocationsobtainedfrom2013transitfieldsurveys,
CBDaccessanalysis,
Areadensityandaccessibility,and
Typicalstationspacingbetween500and800meters.
TheCBDaccessanalysisandareadensityandaccessibilityanalyses,foundinITDPsNairobiInfrastructure&
IntersectionRecommendationsDetailedReport,helpedtodetermineareasoftheCBDthatdonotcurrently
havesufficientservice.Thislackofserviceisduetorestrictionsontheflowofbusesandmatatusoncertain
roadsintheCBD,aswellastheflowofpedestriansaroundtheCBD.
Page73
Figure 47: Proposed station stops along A104, CBD, and Langata Road
Thestationbystationpassengerboardingandalightingvolumes,calculatedbythemodel,enableusto
determinetheoptimalsizeforeachstationandthus,providestationsizingrecommendations.SizingaBRT
stationsothatitdoesnotsaturateisacriticalelementinachievinghighcapacitiesandhighspeedsalonga
BRTcorridor.Highstationsaturationhasaninverseeffectonoverallspeed,asshowninthegraphbelow.
Figure 48: High station saturation has an inverse effect on speed
Page74
Ingeneral,stationsshouldbeatlessthan40percentsaturationorelsetheriskofcongestionincreases
significantlyandthereisahighriskofdeteriorationofservicequality.Stationsaturationiscalculatedby:
Saturation=(A*Freq.bus+B*Boardings+C*Alighting)/3600
A=FixedDwelltime;13secondsforStandardbusesand15secondsforArticulatedbuses
B=BoardingTimeperpassenger;0.5forbothStandardandArticulatedBuses
C=Alightingtimeperpassenger;0.5forbothStandardandArticulatedBuses
Knowingthepassengerboardingperstationperroute,wewereabletocalculatethesaturationlevelsateach
station.Wherestationswillface40percentorgreatersaturation,werecommendincludingmultiplesub
stops.Atypicalstationhastwodockingbays.Addingmoredockingbayshelpstodropthesaturationlevel.
Aftertwodockingbays,additionaldockingbaysaretypicallyaddedviasubstops,whichisanadditional
stationmodulewithenoughspaceforabustoeasilypullinandpulloutifthereisanotherbusattheadjacent
substop.
Figure 49: Multiple docking bays and sub-stops not only increase the capacity of a station, they help stations provide multiple
services at the station as well. Source: BRT Standard
Underourrecommendedscenario,mostBRTstationsalongA104arecalculatedashavingacceptable
saturationlevelsanddonotneedadditionalsubstops.However,thestationsintheCBDhaveasaturationof
between65and145percentandrequireadditionalsubstops.OneoftheprimaryreasonsITDP
recommendedafullBRTringthroughtheNairobiCBDwastoincreasethenumberofstationsabletohandle
CBDboundpassengers,therebydistributingdemandacrossseveralstations.With9fullBRTstationsinaring
Page75
aroundtheNairobiCBD,theCBDbounddemandontheA104iswelldistributedandminimizeswalkingtimes
forpassengersboardingandalightingtheBRTsystem.Themaximumnumberofsubstopsinthisscenariois3.
Figure 50: With BRT infrastructure and stations in the CBD, demand is can be distributed throughout 9 CBD stations, thus
requiring fewer sub-stops
Thealternativeproposaltohaveonly4stationsalongtheA104wouldresultinallofthedemand
concentratedinonly4stations,andthesestationswould,thus,needtobelarger,includinguptofoursub
stopsatatleasttwostations.
Page76
Figure 51: Without BRT infrastructure and stations in the CBD, demand is concentrated at only a few stations on Uhuru
Highway, thus requiring more sub-stops
Further,ifweconsiderafuturewhereadditionalcorridorsarebuiltandtransfersbetweenBRTroutesare
forced,thesestationscouldgrowtohavingfoursubstopseachwithonestationaslargeassixsubstops.
Figure 52: Number of sub-stops required in a trunk-only system with multiple corridors far exceeds international best practice
Page77
Tocomparethiswithothersystemsinternationally,welookatthefollowingchart:
Figure 53: Maximum number of sub-stops for BRT systems around the world. None are as high as the Uhuru Highway-only
scenario with trunk-only services
Toavoidstationsaturationandtoavoidthesignificantamountoflandacquisitionrequiredtobuildmultiple
substops,werecommendacarefuldistributionofstationsaroundtheCBD.
5.7.1
Routes included in Scenario V
Carefulanalysisofdemandconditionsresultedin16differentservices.Theseservicesprovideoptimalrouting
forpassengersfromresidentialareastomajordestinations.Theroutesare:
Page78
BRTRoute Description
TypeofService
B105X
KikuyutoCBD
Express
B11
HazinatoCBD
Express
B110A
KitengelatoCBD
Express
B110B
MlolongotoCBD
Express
B12
HighwayEstatetoCBD Express
B125
MbagathitoCBD
Express
B14
MadarakaEstatetoCBD Express
B15
KijijitoCBD
Express
B23
KangemitoCBD
Express
B30
UthirutoCBD
Express
B33
ImaraDaimatoCBD
Express
B33F
NyayoEstatetoCBD
Express
B33N
NgummotoCBD
Express
B33U
UtawalatoCBD
Local
B34
JKIAtoCBD
Express
B48
KawangwaretoCBD
Express
Table 13: Scenario V BRT Routes
Route B105X Express Service
Page79
ExpressservicerunningfromKikuyutoCBD
7,600passengerboardingsduringthepeakhour.
Requiresanoperationalfleetof66articulatedbuses.
Requiredfrequencyof24busesperhour
5.7.1.1 Route B30 Express service
ExpressservicerunningfromUthirutoCBD
Page80
ExpressservicerunningfromKangemitoCBD
Page81
ExpressservicerunningfromKawangwaretoCBD
Page82
5.7.1.4 Route B110A Express service
ExpressservicerunningfromKitengelatoCBD.
Requiresanoperationalfleetof31standardbuses.
Page83
5.7.1.5 Route B110B Express service
ExpressservicerunningfromMlolongotoCBD.
Page84
ExpressservicerunningfromHazinatoCBD
Page85
ExpressservicerunningfromHighwayEstatetoCBD
Page86
ExpressservicerunningfromImaraDaimatoCBD
Page87
5.7.1.9 Route B33F Express service
ExpressservicerunningfromNyayoEstatetoCBD
Page88
5.7.1.10 Route B33U Local service
LocalservicerunningfromUtawalatoCBD
3,600passengersboardingsduringthepeakhour.
Page89
ExpressservicerunningfromJomoKenyattaInternationalAirporttoCBD
Itrequiresanoperationalfleetof19articulatedbuses.
Ithasaproposedfrequencyof10busesperhour
Page90
5.7.1.12 Route B125 Express Service
ExpressservicerunningfromMbagathitoCBD
Page91
ExpressservicerunningfromMadarakaEstatetoCBD
Page92
ExpressservicerunningfromKijijitoCBD
Page93
5.7.1.15 Route B33N Express service
ExpressservicerunningfromNgummotoCBD
Page94

Nairobi Ndovu A104 BRT Service Plan

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Nairobi Ndovu A104 BRT Service Plan

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Nairobi

Executive Summary ...................................................................................................... 9

Scenarios Compared ................................................................................................ 9

Recommended Service Scenario: Scenario V .................................................................. 11

Project Background ..................................................................................................... 16

The Ndovu/A104 BRT project .................................................................................... 16

What is a service plan ............................................................................................. 17

MRTS Harmonisation Study and the Ndovu/A104 BRT Corridor ............................................. 19

Objectives of this assignment ......................................................................................... 20

Existing Conditions ...................................................................................................... 21

Personnel and timeframe ......................................................................................... 21

Identifying the affected street network and bus routes ........................................................... 22

On-board and at-station boarding and alighting (BA) surveys .................................................... 25

Bus frequency & occupancy surveys .................................................................................. 25

Bus passenger transfer surveys ........................................................................................ 26

Existing (baseline) conditions ......................................................................................... 27

Existing frequencies ............................................................................................... 27

Existing public transport speeds ................................................................................. 29

Existing public transport passenger demand .................................................................. 30

Service plan for the Ndovu/A104 BRT ................................................................................ 36

Modeling process ................................................................................................... 36

Model calibration .................................................................................................. 38

General Objectives ................................................................................................ 40

BRT Infrastructure Scenarios ..................................................................................... 40

Infrastructure Scenario 1 ............................................................................................... 41

Infrastructure Scenario 2 ............................................................................................... 41

Infrastructure Scenario 3 ............................................................................................... 42

Infrastructure Scenario 4 ............................................................................................... 43

A note on BRT infrastructure through the CBD ...................................................................... 44

BRT Service Scenarios ............................................................................................. 47

Inclusion or exclusion of routes........................................................................................ 47

BRT service types ........................................................................................................ 50

Scenario I: Trunk-Feeder on KeNHA Infrastructure (Infrastructure Scenario 1) ............................... 57

Scenario II: Direct services on KeNHA Infrastructure (Infrastructure Scenario 1) ............................. 59

Scenario III: Trunk-Feeder on KeNHA Infrastructure + CBD (Infrastructure Scenario 3) ...................... 61

Comparison of scenarios .......................................................................................... 66

Basic cost-benefit analysis of each scenario ........................................................................ 70

BRT station locations and sizing ................................................................................. 73

Routes included in Scenario V ......................................................................................... 78

0.1 Scenarios Compared

Table 1: Comparison of the 5 service plan scenarios

Trunk&Feeder,no DirectServices,no Trunk&Feeder,

0 $262,950,000 $208,200,000 $296,150,000 $210,300,000 $239,650,000

Table 2: Summary of Estimated Capital Costs by Service Plan Scenario

Trunk&Feeder,no DirectServices,no Trunk&Feeder,

$5,592,894 $9,123,762 $13,422,946 $21,897,029 $25,286,662

Table 3: Summary of rate of return by service plan scenario

0.2 Recommended Service Scenario: Scenario V

Table 4: Results of Scenario V

Figure 2: BRT station in Johannesburg with two substops

1.1 The Ndovu/A104 BRT project

Figure 4: A104 Highway project

1.2 What is a service plan

1.3 MRTS Harmonisation Study and the Ndovu/A104 BRT Corridor

2 Objectives of this assignment

2.1 Personnel and timeframe

Figure 8 Map of Nairobis matatu services. Source: Digital Matatus

Figure 9: Surveyed routes operating in the wider Nairobi area.

Figure 10: Surveyed routes operating in the Central Business District.

Onboard and atstation boarding and alighting (BA) surveys

Bus frequency & occupancy surveys

Bus passenger transfer surveys

4 Existing (baseline) conditions

4.1 Existing frequencies