Metro Manila Bus Rapid Transit

Line 2 (EDSA BRT)

DRAFT, 19 July 2015
Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 7.2 Ortigas to BGC busway . . . . . . . . . . . 262
1.1 Project overview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 7.3 Shaw Boulevard BRT station . . . . . . . . 296
1.2 Project context. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 7.4 Flooding considerations. . . . . . . . . . . 305
1.3 Policy support for BRT . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.4 Project scope area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 8. Traffic Circulation and Impacts . . . . . 307
8.1 General approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308
2. Current Situation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 8.2 Methodology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309
2.1 Bus stops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 8.3 Selected locations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 310
2.2 Bus route itineraries and frequencies . . .12 8.4 Mixed traffic impacts at stations. . . . . . 321
2.3 Bus speed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20 8.5 Mixed traffic impacts at critical points . . 323
2.4 Bus reliability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23
2.5 Other projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 9. Terminals, Depots and Control Center 325
9.1 BRT terminals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 326
3. BRT Modelling and Operations . . . . . . 28 9.2 BRT staging areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329
3.1 Proposed phasing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29 9.3 Depots . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329
3.2 Possible alternative phasing . . . . . . . . .29 9.4 BRT control center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 332
3.3 Surveys and data collection . . . . . . . . .34
3.4 Methodology and calibration . . . . . . . .34 10. Stakeholder Consultation . . . . . . . . 333
3.5 Results and recommendations. . . . . . . .46 10.1 Meetings & presentations . . . . . . . . . . 334
3.6 BRT Vehicles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .79 10.2 Seminar on 29 May 2015 . . . . . . . . . . 335

4. Benefits of BRT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 11. Implementation Cost . . . . . . . . . . . 337

4.1 Maintain transit as the dominant mode . .81 12. Conceptual Institutional Strategy . . . 392
4.2 Time and operational savings . . . . . . . .81 12.1 Establishing a project office . . . . . . . . 393
4.3 Other benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .84 12.2 International experience with alternative
4.4 Section by section impact & administrative structures . . . . . . . . . . 394
benefit analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .88 12.3 Administrative considerations
5. BRT Stations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 for Manila . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 400
5.1 Station locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .94 12.4 Options for Contracting
5.2 Station substops. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .94 of Critical Functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . 403
5.3 Station configuration and door positions 95 12.5 Managing the transition
5.4 Station architecture and MRT integration 97 of the bus and jeepney industry. . . . . . 409
5.5 Accessibility infrastructure . . . . . . . . . 119 12.6 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 417

6. BRT Sections (At & Between Stations) . 121 13. Next Steps and Time Frame . . . . . . . 419
13.1 Next steps. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 420
7. BRT Roadways and Intersections . . . . 195 13.2 Project timeline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 420
7.1 BRT roadways, stations,
and intersections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197
1. Introduction
1.1 Project overview
Objectives
The main objective of this study and preliminary
design is to provide a basis for the implementa-
tion of a high quality, high capacity bus rapid
transit (BRT) system in Metro Manila.
There are many aspects to a BRT project, espe-
cially in a city with such complex and demanding
traffic conditions as Manila, but a crucial initial
step is to develop a physical and operational
design and approach that is feasible and practical,
and will ideally improve conditions for all road
users. This conceptual design provides a practical
foundation for all of the follow-up work needed
on BRT planning, design, and implementation
in Manila, including recommended approaches
to institutions, contracting and regulation. of the
BRT.
Another project objective is to provide a BRT
design and plan that does not adversely impact
non-BRT traffic modes. This is not always pos-
sible, but has generally been achieved in Manila.
Work scope, personnel, time frame
This work was carried over a five month period
from January to May 2015, with the most inten-
sive inputs taking place during February to May.
A large team worked on the project, including:
Karl Fjellstrom (team leader)
Xianyuan Zhu (surveys & modeling)
Shanshan Li (project coordinator)
Li Wei (costings, renderings, simulations)
Ma Wenxuan (roads and intersections, BRT)
Shaokun Liu (roads and intersections)
Xiaomei Duan (BRT design)
Deng Han (surveys & data analysis)
Lin Xi (surveys and data processing/analysis)
Li Yang (modal integration & TOD)
Ren Bin (costings)
Chen Dan (renderings)
Derek Trusler (architecture)
Remi Jeanneret (modeling & operations)
Walter Hook, BRTPlan (business plan).
The project team expresses great appreciation
for the local support and guidance provided by
Department of Transport and Communications
(DOTC) staff, especially Robert Siy, Gyeng Chul
Draft, ITDP-China
Kim and Maria Concepcion Garcia, and Lloyd
Wright of the Asian Development Bank (ADB).
1.2 Project context
Related ITDP urban transport studies
In 2015 in addition to this BRT study, ITDP-
China completed reports and preliminary design
studies on greenways (high quality bicycle and
pedestrian networks) and parking reform in
Manila, funded by the ADB. The greenways mate-
rial is provided in a separate report, though some
components of the greenways work is included in
the BRT design, including proposed green bridge
across Pasig River (Sta. Monica-Lawton Bridge).
Institutional setting
Public transit in Manila is dominated by four
modes; elevated rail systems (including LRT1,
LRT2, MRT3, and low utilization Commuter Rail
lines), city and provincial buses (PUB), jeepneys
(PUJ), and shared minibus taxis (Asian Utility
Vehicles or UVs). The rapid rail network and the
primary and secondary road networks are limited,
relative to the size of Manila. Despite plans to
expand the LRT system, unless lower cost bus-
based solutions are found, it is unlikely that Metro
Manila will be able to successfully address its
growing urban mobility needs. Traffic congestion
in Manila is extreme and the economic costs of
this congestion are significant.
A number of proposals have been put forward
to address this need: a bus corridor improvement
proposal for Quezon Avenue proposed by the
World Bank and their consultants, a proposed
route restructuring and licensing modification on
C5, and various new express bus services being
proposed by the bus industry.
The proposal to put a full BRT on EDSA and
continuing onto several other arterials was first
mooted by the DOTC with support from ADB
consultants ITDP. EDSA is a perfect future BRT
corridor because it has very high bus volumes,
and these bus volumes are a major contributor to
traffic congestion. This creates the potential of a
classic “win-win” solution where the introduction
of BRT infrastructure, if properly designed, could
dramatically increase both the speeds of the buses
and the speed of the remaining mixed traffic, with
little or no land acquisition required.
2 19 July 2015
 Public transit on EDSA, where the majority
of the ITDP proposed BRT trunk infrastructure
is planned, is dominated by two elevated rail
lines: the MRT3, and a short section of the LRT1.
Underneath these rail lines run a multitude of
normal buses which together carry more pas-
sengers than the rail lines. The normal buses are
further divided into city and provincial buses. On
limited sections of the northern and southern sec-
tions of EDSA there are some 15 jeepney routes
that also use EDSA for a significant part of their
route. LRT1 primarily serves the western side of
the old CBD, but it loops around to serve a short
section of the northern part of EDSA.
The MRT system is operated by a unit
within the Department of Transportation and
Communications (DOTC). DOTC pays the
MRTC for the right to use the infrastructure.
The LRT1 was, until 2014, also operated by the
LRTA. Operations, modernization, and expan-
sion of the system has recently been contracted
out by LRTA to a consortium, Light Rail Manila
Consortium (LRMC). The former LRTA now
merely has to manage the LRMC contract, and
staff cuts are likely. The LRMC contract allows the
operating consortium to collect all ticket revenue
for decades and develop property around the
LRT1, and it will also receive government invest-
ment funds to extend the LRT1 to connect to the
MRT. The overlap of the LRT1 with the proposed
BRT system on EDSA is limited to a short section
in the north.
Most passengers do not have both trip origins
and trip destinations directly along EDSA and
so prefer to take a bus to avoid the transfer and
double payment required to take an MRT or LRT
line. As a result, the majority of transit trips using
EDSA depend on bus routes operating under the
elevated rail system. Traffic under the elevated rail
lines is heavily congested, and buses constitute a
significant share of this congestion, particularly
around stations.
Regulatory authorities have for the most part
restricted jeepneys to non-EDSA routes, but there
are short sections where jeepneys access to EDSA
to complete their routes.
The ITDP proposal for BRT along EDSA is to
redesign EDSA for high speed bus travel using
BRT trunk infrastructure that accommodates
bus routes which resemble some current bus
routes but are also significantly restructured and
Draft, ITDP-China
simplified compared to the current routes. In
other words, modified bus routes that use EDSA
for only part of their journeys, would operate in
mixed traffic for some of their route, enter into
trunk BRT infrastructure while on EDSA, and
then return to mixed traffic for the remainder of
their journey.
1.3 Policy support for BRT
A high proportion of trips in Manila are by public
transport, and conditions are generally extremely
poor for passengers.
In a sign of the dysfunctionality of the formal
bus sector, services in air-conditioned minibuses
(UVs) are mushrooming, with 153 UV routes
recorded in frequency surveys. Passengers experi-
ence long and uncertain waits for public trans-
port, slow traffic once on the buses, a high level
of transfers, and poor access conditions to public
transport stops.
In interviews and meetings in Manila ITDP
repeatedly found that there is a very high level
of interest among practically all stakeholders
in drastically improving conditions for public
transport passengers. There is a keen awareness
that the appeal and functioning of Manila is
being seriously degraded by the negative impact
of rapid motorization, chronic congestion, and
poor public transport service. The strong support
for public transport improvements in Manila was
striking and provides an excellent basis and vision
for implementation of BRT improvements starting
with the main corridors of the city and gradually
extending citywide.
At senior levels in the government there was
a near-uniform high level of interest and sup-
port for measures to drastically improve public
transport service in Manila through the provision
of a high quality, high capacity BRT system, and
public transport improvements are a core part of
the policy framework in the city.
1.4 Project scope area
It was agreed during the initial project setup work
in January 2015 that ITDP’s work on BRT would
focus on the corridors shown in Figure 1-1.
3 19 July 2015
Figure 1-1: Project scope area, and (over page) project
scope area with MRT & LRT stations, ITDP’s proposed
greenway network, and other proposed BRT corridors.

Draft, ITDP-China 4 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 5 19 July 2015
2. Current Situation
2.1 Bus stops of the routes, especially in the area around Cubao.
Following a visit to the Guangzhou BRT in 2012
Bus stops along roads in Metro Manila are often the MMDA implemented a scheme in which bus
non-existent. Where they do exist, they are gener- stops were divided into ‘A’, ‘B’, and ‘C’ stops in the
ally poorly located, inadequate to meet demand, highest demand areas, with buses labelled accord-
difficult to access, ugly, provide poor weather ingly and required to stop only at the matching
protection, provide practically no information to stop.
passengers, and it could be said are therefore fairly In practice, in high demand locations along
accurately representative of the overall bus-based EDSA, as was true in Guangzhou before the BRT
public transport conditions in the city. (Figure 2-2), passengers simply spread out along
Figure 2-1 shows the location of bus stops along the edge of the roadway, ignoring the physical
EDSA compared to the proposed BRT stations. structure of the bus stop (Figure 2-3).
The coverage is similar overall, with the same Bus stop access is also very difficult, especially
number of BRT stations as there are current bus along EDSA, requiring long detours and arduous
stops in the highest demand part of EDSA from climbs over poorly designed pedestrian bridges.
Shaw Boulevard to MOA. Note also that in Figure When it is raining, bus stop conditions are even
2-1 some of the current bus stops do not serve all more miserable.

Draft, ITDP-China 7 19 July 2015

Figure 2-2: Gangding bus stop, before the BRT in 2007 (top left) and with the BRT in 2010 (above). Top right shows
a similar situation at Shangshe before the BRT. Before the BRT, passengers spread out along the roadway in the
same way as passengers currently wait for buses in Manila. With BRT, conditions for all modes are improved.
Draft, ITDP-China 8 19 July 2015
Figure 2-3: Conditions at bus stops in Manila.

Bus stop along Commonwealth Avenue Bus stop along along EDSA, at Boni

Bus stop along along EDSA, at Shaw Boulevard (north Bus stop along along EDSA, at Shaw Boulevard (south
of the intersection) of the intersection)

Draft, ITDP-China 9 19 July 2015

 Bus stop along along EDSA, at Estrella. The bus stop
structure in the foreground is largely irrelevant.

Bus stop along along EDSA, at Buendia

Draft, ITDP-China 10 19 July 2015

 Bus stop along along EDSA, at Ayala

Bus stop along along EDSA, at Ortigas. Bus stop along along EDSA, at Ayala

Draft, ITDP-China 11 19 July 2015

2.2 Bus route itineraries and Transit buses in Metro Manila do not have route
numbers; only names of start and end points and some
frequencies key points or roads passed. This makes it very difficult
Maps of all city bus, provincial bus, jeepney and and time consuming to accurately identify the route
UV routes in Metro Manila, especially those oper- that each bus/jeepney/UV is operating on. As part of
the BRT project, bus route numbers will be introduced,
ating in the central areas, are avaialble at http://
to enable better planning and control of operations.
www.manilabus.net, which was prepared as part
of this report. The manilabus.net site also includes
the peak hour frequency of all routes.
Figure 2-4 shows the current public transport
vehicle frequency based on frequency counts
around Metro Manila during January to May
2015. The frequency map is a useful indicator of
demand; much moreso than a map of just the bus
routes alone, since it takes into account the actual
buses operating.
These frequency maps were produced by start-
ing with dozens of on-street frequency counts to
identify the routes which are actually operating.
This was a laborious task in Manila because the
routes do not have numbers; only names. All of
the identified routes were mapped, and using GIS
the frequency of buses could then be mapped.
These frequency totals derived from mapping the
routes were then calibrated with the site specific
frequency counts. Discrepancies such as missing
routes or incorrect route maps or insufficient fre-
quency samples were then addressed, and the end
result presented in these maps is quite accurate.

Draft, ITDP-China 12 19 July 2015

 The frequency maps reveal a number of useful
points, including:
City buses
− Bus services are concentrated along major
roads rather than dispersed.
− The highest city bus volumes are along EDSA,
and Commonwealth Avenue, with volumes
exceeding 250 buses per hour per direction
along EDSA between Cubao and Makati.
− High city bus volumes can also be seen in
Makati, SLEX, and along the southern part of
Roxas Boulevard.
− The roads with high bus volumes correspond
very well with the proposed phase 1 BRT,
which is a key indicator that the proposed
phase 1 corridor is sound.
− City buses do not operate at high frequencies
inside the ‘circle’ formed by EDSA and Roxas
Boulevard, and this is reflected in the pro-
posed first phase BRT operational plan.
Provincial buses
− The provincial bus route frequency map is
very revealing. (Note that the blue lines show
where the provincial buses are operating in
the phase 1 BRT corridor.) Provincial bus
routes are even more concentrated along
some major roads than are city bus routes.
− Overall the provincial bus frequency is much
lower (at least 5-10 times lower on most
roads) than city buses, jeepneys, or UVs.
− The striking features is that provincial bus
routes are concentrated along a few major
roads, and enter EDSA at two main points:
Balintawak near East Grace Park in the north,
and SLEX at Magallanes in the south. A third
somewhat lower frequency point of entry is
from Cavitex entering Roxas Boulevard in the
south.
− This concentration of provincial buses enter-
ing EDSA at these points makes it much
easier to plan to cut off those routes and
enable passengers to conveniently transfer to
BRT buses before entering the EDSA cor-
ridor, than if the routes had been entering at
multiple points. Transfer points have been
designed for this purpose at Balintawak, ITS
South, and ITS Southwest.
− Note that the provincial bus frequency
graphic only includes routes with at least one
Draft, ITDP-China
bus per hour, as routes with a frequency of
less than this are considered insignificant.
Jeepneys
− In contrast to city buses, provincial buses and
UVs, jeepney routes are extremely dispersed,
and much more oriented in radial patterns
from the city center.
− Jeepney frequencies are extremely high on
some roads, with volumes approaching 500
vehicles per hour in a single direction.
− Jeepney frequency is very low or non-existent
along EDSA, which makes EDSA a desirable
early phase BRT option.
− The graphic showing phase 1 BRT stations
superimposed on jeepney frequencies con-
firms the relatively low level of overlap with
jeepney routes in the phase 1 BRT.
UVs
− UV distribution is similar to city buses in
terms of being fairly concentrated along some
roads rather than dispersed throughout the
city.
− UVs are overwhelmingly concentrated in high
volumes along Cavitex and Roxas Boulevard,
Quezon Avenue, Commonwealth Avenue,
Shaw Boulevard east of EDSA, Ortigas
Avenue east of EDSA.
− With regard to the proposed BRT corridors,
significant UV volumes can also be seen
in part of the northern section of EDSA
(between North Avenue and Balintawak), and
Ayala Avenue in Makati.
− In general, UV routes are less problematic in
terms of operating in BRT corridors, since
they are not supposed to pick up passengers
during the trip.
13 19 July 2015
Figure 2-4: Frequency and coverage of city and provincial bus routes, jeepneys, and UVs in Manila

Draft, ITDP-China 14 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 15 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 16 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 17 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 18 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 19 19 July 2015
2.3 Bus speed
Bus speeds are slow, in many places little faster
than walking speed. Figure 2-5 shows bus speeds
in Manila derived from peak hour surveys during
February to May 2015, with the black lines show
speeds of less than 10km/hr. Most of the surveys
and the heaviest sample coverage is from city bus
on-board surveys. These surveys were supple-
mented on roads with few buses operating by
doing jeepney speed surveys. The main purposes
of the bus speed survey are to provide inputs to
the model to enable accurate fleet requirement
estimates, and to prioritize corridor selection.
Several points emerge from the speed surveys:
In general, speeds are low throughout the
entire central area.
Along EDSA speeds are somewhat higher in
the northern section between Caloocan and
Quezon Avenue, lower in the southern and
eastern section between Quezon Avenue and
Mall of Asia.
Bus speeds along EDSA at Magallanes at the
two lane flyover are reasonably good, suggest-
ing that the BRT can operate in mixed traffic
at this point without major problems.
Bus speeds in Makati are extremely slow,
along both Gil Puyat Avenue and Ayala
Avenue. For almost the entire length of these
roads but speeds are less than 10km/hr, sug-
gesting that taking waiting time into account,
in the peak hour it is faster to walk than to
take a bus.
Speeds on SLEX, Cavitex, and NLEX are
generally high.
Speeds on Commonwealth Ave are fairly high,
mostly exceeding 35km/hr except for the area
around Fairview Center Mall.
With regard to the proposed BRT cor-
ridors, speeds on the southern part of Roxas
Boulevard between Baclaran and Padre
Burgos Avenue exceed 25km/hr. Bus speeds
on C5 exceed 35km/hr in most of the south-
ern part, and are in the 20-25km/hr range in
the area between BGC and Heritage Memorial
Park. This tends to justify the inclusion of

Figure 2-5: Various graphics of bus speed in Manila,

including bus speeds superimposed on proposed BRT
stations. The largest benefits from BRT accrue where
bus speeds are low.
Draft, ITDP-China 20 19 July 2015
these roads in phase 2 rather than phase 1.
Bus speeds on C5 in the section between
C5 and Eastwood are much slower than the
southern part of C5, suggesting that this sec-
tion should be considered for adding to either
the phase 2 or the phase 3 BRT network. Note
that in this section along C5 between BGC
and Eastwood, speeds are significantly lower
in the northern section between Ortigas
Avenue and Eastwood, and in the southern
section between BGC and Shaw Boulevard,
where speeds are mostly less than 15km/hr.
The section of C5 between Shaw Boulevard
and Ortigas Avenue has speeds primarily in
the range of 20-25km/hr.
Speeds in Quezon Avenue are much slower
Draft, ITDP-China
south of Arenata Avenue compared to north
of Arenata Avenue.
Speeds in Samson Road, the western exten-
sion of EDSA at Caloocan, are very low.
Combined with the narrow road conditions
and high number of jeepneys operating as
well as feedback from the MMDA, this led the
team to reconsider including Samson Road in
the BRT corridor. Instead, the BRT in phase
2 will extend from EDSA along Taft Avenue
for a short section to C3, and then along C3 to
the Navotas coastal corridor.
Numerous other interesting points emerge
from the speed survey, including the low
speeds along Shaw Blvd, Ortigas Ave, and
Magsaysay Blvd.
21 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 22 19 July 2015
2.4 Bus reliability
Figure 2-6 shows the poor reliability of bus ser-
vices in Manila.
On Monday 8 June 2015 ITDP did a survey to
record the arrival times each minute (the normal
frequency surveys recorded the time at five
minute intervals) at the SM Mega Mall bus bay
in Ortigas. Since buses pulled into the stopping
area and off the main thoroughfare, this provided
a reliable location to record bus arrivals. The
survey was carried out from 5pm to 7pm, during
the evening peak hour period. Figure 2-3 records
each arriving bus over the two hour period at
one-minute intervals, showing the gaps between
buses. The blue cells indicate one bus arriving.
Orange cells indicate two buses arriving during
the same one minute period, and red cells indicate
three buses of the same route arriving in the same
minute. Observations include the following:
Alabang-Malanday via EDSA McArthur is a
relatively high frequency route, averaging 6.9
buses per hour over the surveys carried out
between February and May 2015. On average,
an 8.7 minute headway or time between buses
could be expected. Assuming passengers
arrive randomly at the stop, the average
waiting time would be half of the headway;
less than 5 minutes. So a passenger arriving at
the stop would on average expect to wait for 5
minutes, if the buses were evenly distributed.
Yet a passenger arriving at 6:18pm to wait for
this bus would have had to wait 25 minutes
until the next bus arrived.
Alabang-Novaliches via EDSA NLEX is a
relatively low frequency route, with 3.6 buses
per hour and an average waiting time of 9
minutes if the buses were evenly distributed.
Yet a passenger arriving at 6:18pm to wait for
this bus would have had to wait for more than
40 minutes until 7pm, when the survey ended,
and the next bus had still not arrived.
Alabang-SM Fairview via EDSA
Commonwealth is a high frequency route,
with an average 11.5 buses per hour during
the peak hour, for an average interval of only
5.2 minutes between buses. Yet a passenger
arriving at 5.15pm would have had to wait
26 minutes for the next bus (which would
certainly have been already filled to crush
loading levels) to arrive.
Draft, ITDP-China
Angat-Leveriza via Ayala is a low frequency
route, with an average interval of 23.1 minutes
between buses, and an average waiting time
of 12 minutes. Yet between 5:25pm and 7pm,
there were no buses at all on this route. Thus
a passenger arriving at 5:30pm for this route
would have waited for 90 minutes without any
bus arriving.
Baclaran-Bagong Silang via EDSA
Commonwealth is a relatively low frequency
route, with one bus every 20 minutes. Yet
there were two periods of nearly 40 minutes
between buses with no buses arriving.
Baclaran-Grotto via EDSA Commonwealth
Ayala averages 5.3 buses per hour, with an
average interval between buses of 11.3 min-
utes. Yet a passenger arriving at 5:32pm would
have had to wait 30 minutes until the next bus
arrived.
Baclaran-Malanday via EDSA McArthur is
a moderately high frequency route, with 6.5
buses per hour and an average interval of 9.2
minutes between buses. Yet a passenger of
this route arriving at 5:17pm at the bus stop
(having just missed two buses of this route
which stopped at the stop at 5:16pm) would
have had to wait more than an hour, until
6:22pm, for the next bus to arrive.
Baclaran-Montalban via EDSA
Commonwealth Ayala is a fairly low fre-
quency route, averaging one bus every 23
minutes. Yet a passenger arriving at the stop at
5:45pm would have had to wait more than 45
minutes for the next bus to arrive.
Baclaran-Navotas via EDSA is a moderately
high frequency route, averaging 10.5 minutes
between buses. Yet a passenger arriving at
5:34pm would have had to wait 50 minutes for
the next bus to arrive.
Baclaran-Norzagaray Sapang Palay via EDSA
Commonwealth averages 10.7 minutes
between bus arrivals at the stop, but a passen-
ger arriving at the stop at 5:53pm would have
had to wait more than 40 minutes for the next
bus to arrive.
Baclaran-Novaliches via EDSA Mindanao
averages 9.5 minute intervals between buses,
but a passenger arriving at 5:46pm would have
had to wait more than an hour for the next
bus to arrive.
23 19 July 2015
 Figure 2-6: Survey of bus
departures every minute
between 5pm-7pm on 8
June 2015 at the SM Mega
Mall bus bay stopping area
at Ortigas.

Draft, ITDP-China 24 19 July 2015

Bus stops along EDSA (Guadalupe, Buendia, Estrella). Bus passengers endure highly uncertain peak hour waiting
times, which greatly reduces the appeal of public transport. Off-peak variability waiting times are even longer.

Draft, ITDP-China 25 19 July 2015

 Baclaran-SM Fairview via EDSA
Commonwealth is a high frequency route
averaging less than 5 minutes between buses.
Yet a passenger arriving at 6:14pm would have
had to wait 20 minutes for the next bus to
arrive.
Bagong Silang-NAIA via EDSA
Commonwealth is a low frequency route,
averaging 25 minute intervals between buses.
But a passenger arriving at 5pm would have
had to wait until 6:10pm - when two buses of
the same route arrived simultaneously.
The other routes feature similarly unpredict-
able waiting periods. Novaliches-Pacita via
EDSA Mindanao, for example, has an average
waiting time of 24 minutes between buses.
Yet between 5:11pm and 5:17pm 3 buses of
this route arrived. After that, there was no bus
until 6:34pm; one hour and 17 minutes later.
In short, the waiting times are so unpredict-
able that for anyone who needs to arrive at work
on time, or anywhere on time, it would be very
difficult to rely on the bus system along EDSA.
An office or call center working finishing work at
5pm and hoping to travel home, even on a high
frequency route, will have to wait for anything
from a few minutes to half an hour or more. On
lower frequency routes, the wait might exceed one
hour. Furthermore, the passenger has no way of
knowing how long the next bus will take to arrive.
In this situation of very low reliability, people
will inevitably choose other travel options when
they become available. These service gaps in the
bus system explain the growing popularity of
UVs.
2.5 Other projects
There is always significant demand uncertainty
with BRT, because demand patterns will change
after a system is implemented. In addition in
Manila a major uncertainty relates to suppressed
demand. In terms of future planned projects
and indeed regardless of future projects, the key
requirement related to the EDSA BRT design is
to be conservative in terms of the station design
and traffic impact analysis, such that the heaviest
demand possible future scenarios are accom-
modated in terms of BRT station saturation. Any
uncertainty should be resolved on the higher
Draft, ITDP-China
capacity side, so that the ‘worst case’ scenario
relating to future projects is that some stations are
bigger than actually needed.
In the case of MRT7, this new metro line
will not lead to a major increase in EDSA BRT
demand, because BRT buses are already proposed
to be operating along Commonwealth Avenue
in mixed traffic as part of the off-corridor BRT
operation. More likely is that the BRT demand
will be reduced, as some of the demand along
Commonwealth Avenue shifts from BRT to
MRT7. Thus there is no significant risk that the
EDSA BRT stations have been designed with
a capacity too low to accommodate demand
changes with the MRT7. Another example is the
Skyway, which will open at least partly in 2016.
This roadway is likely to divert some traffic from
EDSA. This study has not assumed any diver-
sion of traffic from EDSA at key locations such
as Ayala & Guadalupe, which is a conservative
approach to the traffic impact analysis.
A key consideration in the BRT station design
relating to demand uncertainty for future projects
is that the BRT stations are a high capacity design
which can accommodate 9m, 12m, and 18m BRT
buses, with 12m buses generally preferred. If for
example a later high capacity BRT is implemented
along C5, this can divert some traffic from EDSA,
and will mean that more 12m BRT buses can be
used instead of 18m BRT buses. If C5 BRT does
not proceed, the EDSA BRT will need more 18m
buses.
Table 2-1 outlines possible future projects relat-
ing to BRT, and the approach taken in this study.
26 19 July 2015
Table 2-1: Possible future projects related to BRT
Project Lead agency Taken into account Remark
Skyway DPWH No Impact mainly on car traffic
C5 BRT DOTC Yes The C5 stations have a high capacity design in
anticipation of future BRT on C5
Metro Manila DOTC No
BRT Line
1 (Quezon
Avenue to
Manila City Hall)
North Avenue DPWH Initially yes, but Told by MMDA that this project may not proceed. If
flyovers later no it does proceed, the Project 7 BRT station location
can be adjusted
MRT7 DOTC Yes. Project 7 can MRT7 will impact future demand but does not
be changed to 3 impact proposed EDSA BRT design (other than
substops if needed Project 7 station, possibly)
Santa Monica DPWH Yes, but only If project does not proceed, there is no impact on
Bridge relates to phase 2 the phase 1 BRT design
Airport roads DPWH Yes Not designed in this study because CAD files not
available and construction details not yet clear, but
stations can be located in center, where pillars are.
C5-airport SM? No Could not get information on alignment / design
connection
ITS South DOTC Yes BRT stations located at each terminal. Depots should
ITS Southwest be considered, if space is available
ITS North
C3 DPWH Yes Phase 2 alignment changed to use C3 & Rizal instead
of Samson Road
MRT3 train DOTC Yes, partially BRT analysis assumed a frequency of 5 minute
carriages intervals for MRT3, compared to current common
addition intervals of 6-7 minutes, in anticipation of additional
train carriages being added. In addition, the MRT3
frequency mostly impacts mode choice of people
traveling from one MRT station to another, which is
only a small proportion of the BRT demand.

Draft, ITDP-China 27 19 July 2015

3. BRT Modelling and Operations
3.1 Proposed phasing
The exact coverage area of the BRT scope speci-
fied in Figure 1-1 in the preceding chapter was not
strictly defined, and it was agreed and understood
that the precise scope could be varied based on
findings from the initial field observations, sur-
veys, and demand analysis.
The final BRT study area and proposed Phase 1
and Phase 2 BRT corridors were selected based on
several considerations:
Some or all of EDSA is expected to be
included in the BRT.
Quezon Avenue and Commonwealth Avenue
could not be considered because of the
planned MRT7 in Commonwealth Avenue
and the proposed bus lane corridor along
Quezon Avenue, designed by consultants for
the World Bank.
Corridors with a higher concentration of
buses are preferred to corridors with a higher
concentration of jeepneys, for the initial BRT
implementation.
Corridors enabling the implementation of
BRT while leaving sufficient space for mixed
traffic to not be adversely impacted were
preferred.
Corridors with low bus speeds and high bus
passenger demand are preferred over cor-
ridors with higher speeds and lower demand.
Policy priorities, such as the desire to serve
lower income areas, were taken into account.
BRT along EDSA should extend to areas
which are not covered by the MRT..
Consideration of these factors led to the BRT
construction phases proposed in Figure 3-1.
The inclusion of EDSA and Makati are driven
by demand considerations. The inclusion of the
airport corridor section can be considered more
‘optional’, but is desirable given that the elevated
roads connecting to the airport will be opening in
2016, opening up space at street level for BRT.
While this report is based on the BRT phases
proposed in Figure 3-1, various alternatives could
also be considered.
Draft, ITDP-China
3.2 Possible alternative
phasing
One possible alternative which arose in discus-
sions very late in the project is to include the
Ortigas to BGC busway and associated Santa
Monica Bridge in phase 1, and shift the airport
corridors to phase 2. This possible option is illus-
trated in Figure 3-2. In this case, phase 1 would
consist of 42km and 51 BRT stations.
This alternative phasing plan is included in the
costings chapter below.
This approach would take advantage of major
new infrastructure – the proposed Santa Monica
Bridge – completing a key public transport con-
nection between Ortigas, BGC and Makati with-
out needing to deal with many existing operators,
since the connection does not currently exist. This
connection could also help to reduce some of the
capacity-related pressure in the highest demand
segment of the EDSA BRT corridor between
Ortigas and Makati.
More operational and other analysis and design
is required to confirm some of the key details of
this alignment being included in phase 1 rather
than in the initially proposed phase 2, though the
analysis in this study suggests that this option is
viable. Further details can be studied during the
detailed design stage following this study.
One issue relating to the proposed BRT phases
is whether to include the southern section of
Roxas Boulevard, between the Makati and Airport
corridors, in the first phase or second phase BRT.
In general it is preferable to carry out BRT imple-
mentation in a particular roadway during the
same phase rather than as part of separate phases,
but in Roxas Blvd an exception may be preferred
due to the concentration of BRT routes along
the section of Roxas Blv between the Makati and
Airport corridors. Bus speeds along the southern
part of Roxas Blvd are good, with delays at bus
stops rather than due to congestion, and intersec-
tion improvements will ensure reasonable traffic
performance. Either option, including or exclud-
ing the southern part of Roxas Blvd in phase 1, is
workable and it is primarily a construction issue.
29 19 July 2015
Construction phases

Figure 3-1: Proposed phase 1 and phase 2 BRT corridors.

‘Other BRT’ refers to projects listed in Table 2-1.
Figure 3-2 (over page): A possible alternative BRT
phasing plan, with the Ortigas to BGC busway
replacing the Airport corridor in phase 1. This
would result in a 42km, 51 station phase 1 BRT.

Draft, ITDP-China 30 19 July 2015

Overall phases

Draft, ITDP-China 31 19 July 2015

Overall phases
BRT network option with part of Roxas Blvd included in
the first phase.
the section of Roxas Blvd between the Makati
and Airport corridors. Bus speeds along the
southern part of Roxas Blvd are good, with delays
at bus stops rather than due to congestion, and
Draft, ITDP-China
intersection improvements will ensure reasonable
traffic performance. Either option, including or
excluding the southern part of Roxas Blvd in
phase 1, is workable and it is primarily a construc-
tion issue.
32 19 July 2015
Overall phases

BRT network option with Roxas Blvd in the second

phase

Draft, ITDP-China 33 19 July 2015

3.3 Surveys and data Available3.4
Data
Methodology and
collection calibration

Draft, ITDP-China 34 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 35 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 36 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 37 19 July 2015
The percentage from different modes transferring to bus:

Self-reported trip times from

transfer survey along EDSA

(including walk time)

Average self-reported trip cost

from transfer survey along EDSA:

47 pesos per trip

Draft, ITDP-China 38 19 July 2015

 Frequency: S N
231
219 220 222 215
199 198 196
192 190
186
179 181181.5 181 177 178 181
172 174 173
166 166 168 167 168 168 168 165 161
162 160 162
157 153 151 157 160
153 156 155
152.4 148.5 150 150
148
143 142 144 139 147
144 143 146
141
133.2 137 136
129 126
Frequency: S N 118
116 115

86

All day transit frequency counts in the front of SM megamall EDSA, on 13 Jan 2015;
The frequency includes bus (8993 buses per day for both dir) and UV (1409 UV per day for both dir);
The frequency of morning peak (7:00 8:00) is 7.97% of all day (16hrs).

6:00 6:30
6:15
6:45
7:15
7:45
8:15
8:45
9:15
9:45
10:15
10:45
11:15
11:45
12:15
12:45
13:15
13:45
14:15
14:45
15:15
15:45
16:15
16:45
17:15
17:45
18:15
18:45
19:15
19:45
20:15
20:45
21:15
21:45
417 419
394 390 Frequency: two direction
385

349.5 356 357

342.4 343 345 336
323 327 327
307 313 316 316 314 315
302
291.5299 289 291 284.2
294
286
282 277

215

All day transit frequency counts in the front of SM megamall EDSA, on 13 Jan 2015;
The frequency includes bus (8993 buses per day for both dir) and UV (1409 UV per day for both dir);
The frequency of morning peak (7:00 8:00) is 7.97% of all day (16hrs).

6:00 6:30
6:15
6:45
7:15
7:45
8:15
8:45
9:15
9:45
10:15
10:45
11:15
11:45
12:15
12:45
13:15
13:45
14:15
14:45
15:15
15:45
16:15
16:45
17:15
17:45
18:15
18:45
19:15
19:45
20:15
20:45
21:15
21:45

Pax: S N 6576
6113
5663
5506
5345 5365
5135 50685066 5143 5113
4905 5009 4933
4845 4867.5 48624749
4720 4785 4710 47094822 4787
4412 4410 4422 4529
43044267 4365 4295
4244
4112
3932 38923773 3960 3861 3961
3765.6 3696 37473827 3820.5
3651 3645
3621 3553.2 3574 3668 3646
3483 3529 35153487
3296 Pax: S N 32843275 3389 3357
3187
2810

2186

All day transit occupancy counts in the front of SM megamall EDSA, on 13 Jan 2015;
The pax includes bus (259557 pxper day for both dir) and UV (12990 UV per day for both dir) .
The pax of morning peak(7:00 8:00) is 7.74% of all day.
6:00 6:30
6:15
6:45
7:15
7:45
8:15
8:45
9:15
9:45
10:15
10:45
11:15
11:45
12:15
12:45
13:15
13:45
14:15
14:45
15:15
15:45
16:15
16:45
17:15
17:45
18:15
18:45
19:15
19:45
20:15
20:45
21:15
21:45

Draft, ITDP-China 39 19 July 2015

 11248
10871
10649
Pax: two direction 10094
9750 9871 9787
9370 9351 9309
9130 9000
8728.5 8530.5 8821 8628
8359 8326 8420
8032.6 8144
7895 7707 7912
7543 7380.2
69806804 71627266

5997
5482

All day transit occupancy counts in the front of SM megamall EDSA, on 13 Jan 2015;
The pax includes bus (259557 pxper day for both dir) and UV (12990 UV per day for both dir) .
The pax of morning peak (7:00 8:00) is 7.74% of all day (16hrs).
6:15
6:45
7:15
7:45
8:15
8:45
9:15
9:45
10:15
10:45
11:15
11:45
12:15
12:45
13:15
13:45
14:15
14:45
15:15
15:45
16:15
16:45
17:15
17:45
18:15
18:45
19:15
19:45
20:15
20:45
21:15
21:45
193
180 181 Frequency: S N 179 182
168
160 163
158 157 158 157 158
149 145
143 139 143 143
137 138
132
126 123 125 127 126 123 127 126 126
118 116
114 114
112 110 109 111 111 109 112 110
104 106 107 106
101 100 99 101
93 95 93 92 93 93
Frequency: N S 87 88 87 90
81

All day transit frequency counts in EDSA Aurora Boulevard on 13 May 2015;
The frequency includes bus (6129 buses per day for both dir), provincial bus (1007 provincial buses per day for both dir)
and UV (830 UV per day for both dir) .
The frequency of morning peak (7:00 8:00) is 7.21% of all day (16hrs).

6:00 6:30
6:15
6:45
7:15
7:45
8:15
8:45
9:15
9:45
10:15
10:45
11:15
11:45
12:15
12:45
13:15
13:45
14:15
14:45
15:15
15:45
16:15
16:45
17:15
17:45
18:15
18:45
19:15
19:45
20:15
20:45
21:15
21:45

322
311
303 303 299
283
275 272 275
264 267 264 272
251 248 253 250
244 238
230 229 230 235
224 220 219
207
200 202
192 193 191
Frequency: two direction

All day transit frequency counts in EDSA Aurora Boulevard on 13 May 2015;
The frequency includes bus (6129 buses per day for both dir), provincial bus (1007 provincial buses per day for both dir)
and UV (830 UV per day for both dir) .
The frequency of morning peak (7:00 8:00) is 7.21% of all day (16hrs).
6:00 6:30
6:15
6:45
7:15
7:45
8:15
8:45
9:15
9:45
10:15
10:45
11:15
11:45
12:15
12:45
13:15
13:45
14:15
14:45
15:15
15:45
16:15
16:45
17:15
17:45
18:15
18:45
19:15
19:45
20:15
20:45
21:15
21:45

Draft, ITDP-China 40 19 July 2015

 6164

5677
5531

Pax: S N
4777
4627
4208 4293 4298
4020 4058 4022 40354084
3820 3764 3829
3695 3637 3674
35703621 3486 3590 3549
3453 3540
3410 3305 32983373
32033130 3244 31343137 3191 3249
3010 2967 2979 30683106 3073
2920 2891295428332888 2834
27702653 2760 27602740
2602 Pax: N S 25122391 25262624
22882367 2281
2103
1823
All day transit frequency counts in EDSA Aurora Boulevard on 13 May 2015;
The pax includes bus (191096 pxper day for both dir), provincial bus (17631 pxper day for both dir) and UV (6693 pxper
day for both dir) .
The pax of morning peak(7:00 8:00) is 7.03% of all day.
6:00 6:30
6:15
6:45
7:15
7:45
8:15
8:45
9:15
9:45
10:15
10:45
11:15
11:45
12:15
12:45
13:15
13:45
14:15
14:45
15:15
15:45
16:15
16:45
17:15
17:45
18:15
18:45
19:15
19:45
20:15
20:45
21:15
21:45
Pax: two direction
9712

8604 8676
8187
7671
7441 7338 72857325 7333 7367
6967 69467002 6782
6580 6581 6662 6616 6508
6404
60256091 5951 5931
56905897 5853
5569
5349
46294447

All day transit frequency counts in EDSA Aurora Boulevard on 13 May 2015;
The pax includes bus (191096 pxper day for both dir), provincial bus (17466 pxper day for both dir) and UV (6693 pxper
day for both dir) .
The pax of morning peak (7:00 8:00) is 7.03% of all day (16hrs).
6:00 6:30
6:15
6:45
7:15
7:45
8:15
8:45
9:15
9:45
10:15
10:45
11:15
11:45
12:15
12:45
13:15
13:45
14:15
14:45
15:15
15:45
16:15
16:45
17:15
17:45
18:15
18:45
19:15
19:45
20:15
20:45
21:15
21:45

184
180 Frequency: S N
166 167 166
156 159 159
146 149
143 140 144
139 139
134 135
128 130
119 119 120 119 120
118 115 116 119
117
112 111 111
107 107 106 103 106 104 103 107 107
101 101 100 100 102
99 96 102 102 100
98 98
94 94 97 97 96 93 96 94 94
90 91

Frequency: N S

All day transit frequency counts in Estrella on 14 May 2015;

The frequency includes bus (5300 buses per day for both dir), Jeepney (893 buses per day for both dir), UV (830 UV per
day for both dir), provincial bus (1146 provincial buses per day for both dir).
The frequency of morning peak (7:00 8:00) is 8.16% of all day (16hrs).
6:00 6:30
6:15
6:45
7:15
7:45
8:15
8:45
9:15
9:45
10:15
10:45
11:15
11:45
12:15
12:45
13:15
13:45
14:15
14:45
15:15
15:45
16:15
16:45
17:15
17:45
18:15
18:45
19:15
19:45
20:15
20:45
21:15
21:45

Draft, ITDP-China 41 19 July 2015

 319
302
293 298
285 279 283
274 271
267
253 250 249
236
222 220 219 226 227
215
201 207 200 201 200 205 209
Frequency: two direction 189 194 192
185
194

All day transit frequency counts in Estrella on 14 May 2015;

The frequency includes bus (5300 buses per day for both dir), Jeepney (893 buses per day for both dir), UV (830 UV per
day for both dir), provincial bus (1146 provincial buses per day for both dir).
The frequency of morning peak (7:00 8:00) is 8.16% of all day (16hrs).

6:00 6:30
6:15
6:45
7:15
7:45
8:15
8:45
9:15
9:45
10:15
10:45
11:15
11:45
12:15
12:45
13:15
13:45
14:15
14:45
15:15
15:45
16:15
16:45
17:15
17:45
18:15
18:45
19:15
19:45
20:15
20:45
21:15
21:45
5307
5054 5146
5018
4891 4894
4765
4507 4606
4480 4457
4365 4306
4180 42064273
3911 3986 40123930 4010
3860 3879 3890
36853600 3772 3699
35813541 Pax: S N 3538 3437
3215 Pax: N S 3289 3275
31413052 3082
29112854 2988
28022721 283928612823 2826
2636 2701 2684 2726 2639
25352503 2476
2416 2352
22772190
2127 2105 2057

16081518
All day transit frequency counts in Estrella on 14 May 2015;
The pax includes bus (177478 pxper day for both dir), jeepney (9471 pxper day for both dir), UV (2175 pxper day for both
dir), provincial bus (29891 pxper day for both dir).
The pax of morning peak (7:00 8:00) is 7.65% of all day (16hrs).
6:00 6:30
6:15
6:45
7:15
7:45
8:15
8:45
9:15
9:45
10:15
10:45
11:15
11:45
12:15
12:45
13:15
13:45
14:15
14:45
15:15
15:45
16:15
16:45
17:15
17:45
18:15
18:45
19:15
19:45
20:15
20:45
21:15
21:45

9234
8872 8903 8848
85568421
8378
8061
7771 786578917873 7820
7521 7491
7246 7296
6998
6519 6560
5925
Pax: two direction 5528
527052365305 5246
5038 49984874 4880
42474344

All day transit frequency counts in EDSA Aurora Boulevard on 13 May 2015;
The pax includes bus (177478 pxper day for both dir), jeepney (9471 pxper day for both dir), UV (2175 pxper day for both
dir), provincial bus (29891 pxper day for both dir).
The pax of morning peak (7:00 8:00) is 7.65% of all day (16hrs).
6:00 6:30
6:15
6:45
7:15
7:45
8:15
8:45
9:15
9:45
10:15
10:45
11:15
11:45
12:15
12:45
13:15
13:45
14:15
14:45
15:15
15:45
16:15
16:45
17:15
17:45
18:15
18:45
19:15
19:45
20:15
20:45
21:15
21:45

Draft, ITDP-China 42 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 43 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 44 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 45 19 July 2015
3.5 Results and
recommendations

3.5.1 BRT corridor selection and

phases

Create new BRT routes

based on the demand
(example of one route
along Ortigas Avenue)

Draft, ITDP-China 46 19 July 2015

 Baclaran Norzagaray
Sapang Palay via EDSA
Commonwealth

Baclaran Heritage
Homes via EDSA NLEX

Draft, ITDP-China 47 19 July 2015

SM Fairview Taguig via
Lagro Ayala Buendia EDSA

X: Observed volume of passengers

from
Y: Assignment of MUCEP
JICA ODOD matrix
Matrix
R2=0.25
Slope: 1.67

Draft, ITDP-China 48 19 July 2015

JICA Zoning

Incorporation of OD matrix obtained thru boarding & alighting survey

MUCEP

Draft, ITDP-China 49 19 July 2015

Final AM peak OD matrix

Final AM peak OD matrix – zoom central area

Draft, ITDP-China 50 19 July 2015

Phase 1 load

Phase 2 load

Draft, ITDP-China 51 19 July 2015

 3.5.2 BRT routes Overall route, fleet and demand figures are:
1,151 buses
− 100 8m buses (part of a related project)
Phase 1 BRT routes & fleet requirements
Note that these summary figures refer to a pro- − 751 12m buses
posed overall phase 1. In terms of construction − 300 18m buses
and implementation, this overall phase 1 will 1.65 million daily trips ridership
needed to be divided into several construction
phases.

al
6
8
y

AINABLE TRANSPORT

Draft, ITDP-China 52 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 53 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 54 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 55 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 56 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 57 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 58 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 59 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 60 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 61 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 62 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 63 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 64 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 65 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 66 19 July 2015
Phase 2 BRT routes & fleet requirements
The following phase 2 route and fleet require-
ments relate to an approval rather than construc-
tion phase 2 network. The actual construction and
implementation will be divided into several stages.
29 routes (including phase 1 routes).
Draft, ITDP-China
1.85 million daily trips ridership.
Phase 2 routes are very preliminary, given the
uncertainty in demand patterns over time,
and the focus of surveys on phase 1 corridors.
The phase 1 B10 route is cancelled in phase 2
because it is superseded route changes.
67 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 68 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 69 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 70 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 71 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 72 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 73 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 74 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 75 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 76 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 77 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 78 19 July 2015
3.5.3 Next steps for modelling
improvement
(1) Data collection:
More boarding and alighting survey for bus,
jeepney, UV express and provincial routes;
More transfer survey at main stations; did 14
main bus station on EDSA, need more survey
to get the real OD matrix; other option is to
obtain a matrix through onboard OD survey.
More frequency and occupancy counts for
provincial and UV routes.
(2) Zoning system:
the disaggregation to bus stops which we did
using on board surveys is a great improve-
ment, and was done according to existing
data, even though a more detailed zoning
system should be recommended for the
central area to represent precisely one BRT
station for each zone.
(3) Operation plan:
Update the modeling and optimize.
Test new possible routes to link new areas to is around US$96,000 to $144,000 for a 12m BRT
connect to the system.
Define express services.
(4) Private trips:
The private trips in MUCEP household survey standard for public transport vehicles in the
present a very poor distribution, should
incorporate more counts and speed data to get Clean Air Act (RA 8749). Note that these figures
a better demand adjustment.
(5) Future BRT extensions:
Analyze the possible BRT extensions that can
be added for a third phase implementation.
(6) Demand projection:
Actually the demand estimation is based on
existing demand plus modal split and new
areas development, and demand projections
could be taken in account for medium term
development, new development areas, based
on socio-economic data projections
Draft, ITDP-China
3.5.4 Fares
Distance-based fare rather than flat fare
Card readers at bus stops to scan after alight-
ing, rather than scanning on the bus
The current fare formula for air-conditioned
buses is 15 peso for the first 5 kilometer + 2.2
peso per additional kilometer. The proposed
fare formula is 5.6842 + 1.7444 per kilometer.
3.6 BRT Vehicles
3.6.1 12m and 18m BRT bus
specifications
Reference information from a manufacturer of
BRT vehicles was sought, based on actual vehicle
pricing from recent BRT projects implemented in
the Asia region.
According to a manufacturer’s information
provided in May 2015, the cost of these vehicles
bus, and around $216,000 to $264,000 for an 18m
BRT bus. This cost includes all shipping costs
and import duties. The cost is based on a Euro 4
emission engine, which will be the legal minimum
Philippines, beginning on 1 January 2016, per the
are simply provided as supplied by the manufac-
turer, with no attempt to negotiate or press for
lower prices or more favorable terms.
There will also be an additional cost component
for a 5-year maintenance package to be provided
by the vehicle manufacturer. During the first 5
years of vehicle operation, the manufacturer will
be responsible for all routine maintenance activi-
ties and will provide a training program to enable
capacity development of the vehicle operator to
assume maintenance responsibilities after the
five-year period.
79 19 July 2015
4. Benefits of BRT
BRT would provide many benefits in Manila. With real-time next bus arrival information, the
Some of the main benefits are discussed following. perceived waiting time for passengers will be
significantly reduced.
Passenger time savings from the phase 1 BRT,
4.1 Maintain transit as the based on the operational design concept in this
dominant mode report, are estimated to be:
The proposed EDSA BRT offers a way to achieve 9.7 minutes per trip, or around 90 million
ambitious policy goals for promoting and improv- passenger-hours per year.
ing public transport and establishing public The passenger time saving benefits are summa-
transport as a viable and attractive alternative to rized in Table 4-1. Note that regarding passenger
trips by car and motorcycle. Conversely, without time savings the figures in Table 4-1 provide only
BRT it is difficult to see how these goals can be the in-vehicle time savings. The figure of 90 mil-
achieved. lion passenger hours per year cited above includes
The current situation of public transport in station access time savings and passenger waiting
Manila is so dire, with such low speeds, poor time savings in addition to the in-vehicle time
physical conditions and unreliable service, that savings.
incremental improvements will clearly not be suf-
ficient. Increasing speeds by 5-10% with kerbside BRT phase 1 benefits
bus lanes, for example, will in many cases simply Items Value Unit
result in an increase from 10km/hr to 12km/hr. BRT passenger 9.7 mins
time savings per
trip
4.2 Time and operational BRT passenger AM 107,376 per hour
(including transfer)
savings
Transfer rate 0.09
4.2.1 Passenger time savings Peak hour factor 15.38
The main reason for implementing BRT is to for demand
provide benefits for passengers, and one of the Year factor for 320 days
main benefits is passenger time savings. The BRT demand
system will provide significant time savings for BRT passengers 1,651,931 per day
bus passengers in Manila, in several ways. daily (including
The most direct way that the BRT saves pas- transfer)
sengers time is to enable faster on-bus speeds,
BRT passengers 15.42 km
and lower waiting times due to higher frequency average trip
operation. The gains from faster speeds are distance
reflected in the trip time savings shown in the
Revenue: weighted (5.6842+ 1.7444*km)*(trips
histograms of trip time distribution below.
average per OD pair)
These benefits are based on the current situation.
As congestion continues to worsen in Manila, bus BRT fare revenue 51,375,233 pesos
speeds will continue to slow, so that by the time the per day
BRT system is operational, the time saving benefit BRT passengers 267,062 hours
for BRT passengers will be larger than the time sav- time saving per
ings based on current bus speeds. This time-saving day
benefit will continue to increase in future years, as BRT revenue per 16,440,074,403 pesos
congestion increases and traffic and bus speeds (in year
the absence of BRT) would further decline. BRT passengers 85,459,897 hours
Due to higher BRT bus frequencies, more time saving per
reliable intervals between buses, and more reliable year
passenger information systems, passengers will
typically save significant additional time per trip
through shorter and more reliable waiting times.
Draft, ITDP-China 81 19 July 2015
Figure 4-1: Bus stop congestion in Manila, and buses
occupying large portions of the roadway. These
problems can be solved with a well-designed BRT (or
worsened with a poorly designed BRT).

Draft, ITDP-China 82 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 83 19 July 2015
4.2.2 Operational savings corridor will provide major bus access improve-
ments, with a net addition of more than 40 high
Field observations and surveys suggest that the
quality pedestrian crossings. These improved road
current operations in Manila are highly inef-
crossings will benefit all pedestrians and cyclists
ficient, with large buses operating at relatively low
using the corridor and crossing the road; not only
levels of occupancy and at very low speeds.
the BRT passengers.
Indeed on EDSA the licensed city bus vehicles
By including pedestrian facility improvements
are reported to be around 3,400 based on data
and by integrating the BRT corridor with a
from DOTC from January 2014, but ITDP’s sur-
greenway network (and a proposed bike sharing
veys from February to May 2015 suggest that only
system), the BRT system will also provide a model
around 1,500 city buses are actually operating in
for station area development around BRT stations.
EDSA in the peak hour. Part of this discrepancy is
This BRT station area development will maximize
due to number plate restrictions that force around
the value of the city’s investment in the BRT
20% of the bus fleet off the road during weekdays.
system, and adjacent land values.
However, even allowing for this plate number
restriction and for a reserve fleet proportion of up
Bus industry and regulatory reform
to 10%, ITDP’s field surveys suggest that around
As outlined in the institutional chapter of this
1,000 less buses are operating in peak hours in
report, the proposed EDSA/Makati/airport phase
Manila than are actually licensed and permitted to
1 BRT system provides a mechanism for bus
operate.
industry transformation and bus sector regulatory
The BRT system will drastically improve the
reform in Manila. Previous attempts at reform-
efficiency of bus operations. Bus operational
ing the bus industry and improving regulation
savings from BRT result from faster bus speeds,
have not been successful, because they have not
which means that the same passenger demand
addressed the fundamental problem of low bus
can be met using fewer buses. The reduction in
speeds and bus stop congestion.
buses required to meet passenger demand has
BRT provides a mechanism to achieve these
direct benefits in terms of the cost of buses, which
reforms because the scope of a BRT system is
in turns feeds into savings in maintenance, fuel
limited to a particular corridor and set of routes,
consumption, costs of drivers, and so on.
meaning that reforms need not be applied
The fleet savings will roughly correspond with
simultaneously citywide. And crucially, a BRT
the proportion of each BRT route in the BRT
provides major improvements to operators, both
corridor, with greater fleet savings for routes with
in operational costs as well as working condi-
longer proportions in the slower city parts of the
tions of drivers. This provides the government
BRT corridor.
with leverage to impose conditions on operators
who want to participate in the new BRT system.
Without the leverage provided by a high quality
4.3 Other benefits and high capacity BRT system, it is much harder
for the government to achieve either meaningful
Improving traffic
bus industry reform or institutional & regulatory
As the traffic impact analysis chapter shows, the
reform.
mixed traffic speeds and roadway capacity will in
general be improved by the BRT, so car drivers
and passengers will also benefit from the BRT. Accommodating future growth
A well-designed BRT will solve the problem of Accommodating future growth in Manila requires
bus stop congestion in BRT corridors (Figure 4-1). a well designed BRT network, since rail-based
systems can at most meet only a small proportion
of the public transport demand and buses will
Station access improvements
continue to serve the large majority of transit trips
Along most of the proposed phase 1 BRT cor-
for the foreseeable future.
ridor, accessing bus stops in Manila currently
Manila’s BRT will provide a basis for transit-
requires crossing roads either through detours
oriented, low carbon development in the city. New
to the nearest intersection, or at mid-block loca-
developments can and should be integrated with
tions with poorly designed footbridges. The BRT
Draft, ITDP-China 84 19 July 2015
the BRT corridor in several ways, all of which will
maximize the benefits and development potential
of the BRT system:
High quality physical walkway connections
should be provided from new developments
to BRT stations. For existing developments
such connections can be retrofitted.
Safe and convenient bicycle access to BRT sta-
tions and bus stops used by BRT buses from
new developments should be ensured at the
design stage of new roads and new develop-
ments. Such connections can be retrofitted to
existing roads.
Secure and convenient bicycle parking facili-
ties should be a mandatory requirement at all
new developments and at BRT stations.
Bike sharing and greenways should be
implemented and linked to the BRT corridor
and stations. (ITDP has separate reports and
recommendations on these topics.)
In general, high quality public space includ-
ing plazas, seating, lighting, shade and other
amenities should be prioritized over other
land uses in BRT station forecourts.
Car parking on building setbacks should
be banned at station areas along the BRT
corridor, with bollards to prevent vehicle
encroachment on walkways.
Zoning provisions should be stipulated to
allow and encourage higher density develop-
ment along the BRT corridor.
The current off-street parking minimum
standards for new developments should be
changed to parking maximum standards, in
which the government stipulates a maximum
amount of allowed off-street parking in a new
development, and the developer is then free
to provide any amount of parking (or none at
all) up to that standard. This is a reform which
should be carried out city-wide, but can be
commenced along the BRT corridor. Where
high quality transit access is available, such
as along the BRT corridor, off-street parking
provision near BRT stations should be mini-
mized or eliminated.
All of these measures will maximize the benefit
that the city, developers and residents receive
from the investment in the BRT system.
Draft, ITDP-China
Rapid implementation
and citywide coverage
BRT planning, design and implementation can
be done in three years, and as detailed in the final
chapter of this report, a BRT system in Manila
could potentially be operating by sometime in
2018. With a direct service operational mode,
after just the first phase operation the BRT service
will reach a significant proportion of the built-up
area of the city. Figure 4-2 shows areas within
300m of the phase 1 BRT routes, showing that
the direct service operations (in which BRT buses
operate both inside and outside the BRT corridor)
allow the BRT to quickly achieve a citywide reach.
Relatively low cost
BRT is approximately an order of magnitude
cheaper than other mass transit options in Metro
Manila.
Figure 4-3 compares the cost of BRT and rail
based mass transit in Manila, with the entire
80km phase 1 and phase 2 BRT costing approxi-
mately the same as 6km of MRT.
Other benefits
As well as the direct and indirect benefits men-
tioned above, a well-designed BRT in Manila
would:
Enhance the livability and city image of
Manila.
Greatly spur economic activity, by supporting
trip demand that is currently suppressed due
to the difficulties of traveling on the main
roads in Manila.
Make it much easier and more pleasant for
tourists to travel around the city, as well as
greatly improving access to the airport.
Improve the environment, with few global
greenhouse gas emissions as well as emissions
of local pollutants.
Support economic development in the city,
including opening up areas for development
due to the higher densities made possible by
high capacity BRT.
85 19 July 2015
Figure 4-2: Areas within 300m
of a phase 1 BRT route.

Draft, ITDP-China 86 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 87 19 July 2015
Figure 4-3: Comparing the cost of BRT vs MRT in Manila
4.4 Section by section
impact & benefit analysis
A more detailed impact and benefits/disbenefits
analysis will require a section by section analysis
of the BRT corridor and the impacts on BRT pas-
sengers and mixed traffic road users. This analysis
would also take into account the proposed BRT
intersection changes.
This more detailed section by section analysis
of the BRT corridor can only be completed when
further modeling refinements, further work on
intersection phase and design changes, and addi-
tional mixed traffic speed surveys are carried out,
and is proposed as one of the follow-up measures
Draft, ITDP-China
to this study.
The proposed approach to estimating the
benefits/disbenefits of the decongesting/congest-
ing impacts of the BRT along various corridor
segments on non-BRT road users is outlined
following. For the purposes of this study, a model-
ing approach was used to estimate BRT passenger
time savings, with the modeling approach also
based on a section by section consideration of
BRT passenger flows and speeds.
88 19 July 2015
Benefits
B.ih= Dih *(Tp.ih-Tf.ih)
The basic benefit of the project is i- stretch
time savings for passengers & buses. .h= period
D.ih= passengers passing on stretch i on period h
Benefit B.ih
Tp.ih= present time to cross the stretch i on period h
.h= time periods Tf.ih= future time to cross the stretch i on period h
i= stretch of corridor
Example of passengers time savings (illustrative values)
h 5 pm to 8 pm
B.ih= Dih *(Tp.ih-Tf.ih) i
EDSA from Taft avenue to Ortigas
i- stretch Avenue- 9.4 km
.h= period variable value unit
D.ih= passengers passing on stretch i on period h D 45 000 passengers
Tp.ih= present time to cross the stretch i on period h Tp 1.5 hours
Tf.ih= future time to cross the stretch i on period h Tf 0.4 hours
Tp-Tf 1.1 hours
1 Benefit 49 500 pas* hour 2

2 2

1.8 1.8

1.6 1.6

1.4 1.4

1.2 1.2
EDSA - present EDSA - present
1 1
MRT MRT
0.8 0.8

0.6 0.6

0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2
EDSA-BRT
0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

3 4

passenger volumes by period and stretch (illustrative values)

B.ih= Dih *(Tp.ih-Tf.ih)
i- stretch period
.h= period stretch 17:00 17:15 17:30 17:45 18:00 18:15 18:30 18:45 19:00 19:15 19:30 19:45
D.ih= passengers passing on stretch i on period h
1 1910 1963 2230 2257 2501 2863 2717 3094 2634 1881 2220 2143
Tp.ih= present time to cross the stretch i on period h
Tf.ih= future time to cross the stretch i on period h 2 2266 2303 2562 2670 2964 3275 3212 3537 3080 2266 2494 2438

example of passengers time savings (illustrative values) 3 2871 2955 3388 3455 3736 4220 4067 4595 4000 2865 3243 3286
h 5 pm to 8 pm
4 3869 3873 4305 4424 5081 5713 5284 6028 5365 3749 4500 4391
EDSA from Taft avenue to Ortigas
i
Avenue- 9.4 km 5 4025 4109 4848 4771 5333 6119 5773 6543 5651 3967 4759 4736
variable value unit
6 3676 3916 4466 4399 5094 5769 5330 6145 5345 3842 4310 4380
D 45 000 passengers
7 3177 3182 3670 3785 4244 4793 4550 5064 4464 3113 3671 3627
Tp 1.5 hours
Tf 0.4 hours 8 2882 2843 3277 3417 3716 4296 3965 4699 4026 2895 3241 3186
Tp-Tf 1.1 hours 9 2585 2613 2981 3002 3311 3785 3542 4030 3451 2439 2871 2817
Benefit 49 500 pas* hour 5
6

Draft, ITDP-China 89 19 July 2015

 present travel time by period and stretch (minutes)
period
stretch 17:00 17:15 17:30 17:45 18:00 18:15 18:30 18:45 19:00 19:15 19:30 19:45
1 4.14 5.72 5.57 6.39 5.73 9.42 11.1 12.4 11.5 9.19 7.56 6.56
2 6.47 7.71 5.53 8.11 9.41 8.84 13.2 14.4 11.8 9.72 7.44 5.37 time savings by period and stretch (minutes)
3 6.9 7.24 7.3 6.95 9.4 11.7 12.7 15.9 15 10.3 8.62 9.31
4 5.3 8.69 7.67 11.1 9.73 14.9 16.8 20.1 15.8 12.4 11.6 8.59 stretch 17:00 17:15 17:30 17:45 18:00 18:15 18:30 18:45 19:00 19:15 19:30 19:45
5 9.89 8.9 10.3 10.1 12.5 16.1 19.1 21.3 20.4 14.7 12.9 9.72
1 2.36 3.9 3.69 4.46 3.75 7.39 8.99 10.3 9.28 7.06 5.48 4.58
6 5.36 9.99 7.66 10.3 12.6 11.9 16.8 16.4 18 14.9 9.73 9.31
7 7.28 8.55 9.03 6.53 8.48 12.4 12.9 14 15.3 11.1 7.81 9.24 2 4.09 5.28 3.05 5.59 6.83 6.21 10.5 11.6 9.05 6.99 4.76 2.79
8 5.09 5.96 7.69 7.65 7.98 10.5 8.99 12.9 11.4 8.66 6.6 4.11
3 4.12 4.41 4.42 4.02 6.42 8.7 9.63 12.8 11.9 7.13 5.54 6.33
9 5.62 3.77 6.32 4.55 5.42 9 8.67 10.5 10.4 6.63 4.7 5.63
4 2.93 6.26 5.19 8.56 7.15 12.3 14.2 17.4 13 9.67 8.97 6.01
future travel time by period and stretch (minutes)
stretch 17:00 17:15 17:30 17:45 18:00 18:15 18:30 18:45 19:00 19:15 19:30 19:45
5 6.91 5.87 7.25 7.02 9.33 12.9 15.9 18 17 11.4 9.59 6.54
1 1.78 1.83 1.88 1.93 1.98 2.03 2.08 2.13 2.18 2.13 2.08 1.98 6 2.88 7.46 5.08 7.69 9.92 9.19 14 13.6 15.1 12.1 6.95 6.63
2 2.38 2.43 2.48 2.53 2.58 2.63 2.68 2.73 2.78 2.73 2.68 2.58
3 2.78 2.83 2.88 2.93 2.98 3.03 3.08 3.13 3.18 3.13 3.08 2.98 7 5.4 6.62 7.05 4.5 6.4 10.2 10.7 11.8 13 8.91 5.63 7.16
4 2.38 2.43 2.48 2.53 2.58 2.63 2.68 2.73 2.78 2.73 2.68 2.58 8 2.31 3.13 4.81 4.72 5 7.43 5.91 9.77 8.19 5.53 3.53 1.13
5 2.98 3.03 3.08 3.13 3.18 3.23 3.28 3.33 3.38 3.33 3.28 3.18
6 2.48 2.53 2.58 2.63 2.68 2.73 2.78 2.83 2.88 2.83 2.78 2.68 9 3.04 1.14 3.64 1.82 2.64 6.17 5.79 7.54 7.46 3.7 1.83 2.85
7 1.88 1.93 1.98 2.03 2.08 2.13 2.18 2.23 2.28 2.23 2.18 2.08
8 2.78 2.83 2.88 2.93 2.98 3.03 3.08 3.13 3.18 3.13 3.08 2.98
9 2.58 2.63 2.68 2.73 2.78 2.83 2.88 2.93 2.98 2.93 2.88 2.78 8
7

Illustrative values only

passenger*hours savings by period and stretch (minutes) passenger*hours savings by period and stretch (minutes)
stretch 17:00 17:15 17:30 17:45 18:00 18:15 18:30 18:45 19:00 19:15 19:30 19:45 stretch 17:00 17:15 17:30 17:45 18:00 18:15 18:30 18:45 19:00 19:15 19:30 19:45
1 75 127 137 168 156 353 407 532 407 221 203 164 1 75 127 137 168 156 353 407 532 407 221 203 164
2 154 203 130 249 337 339 565 686 464 264 198 113 2 154 203 130 249 337 339 565 686 464 264 198 113
3 197 217 249 232 400 612 653 978 791 340 300 347 3 197 217 249 232 400 612 653 978 791 340 300 347
4 189 404 373 631 606 1168 1248 1744 1162 604 672 440 4 189 404 373 631 606 1168 1248 1744 1162 604 672 440
5 464 402 586 558 829 1317 1525 1964 1601 755 760 516 5 464 402 586 558 829 1317 1525 1964 1601 755 760 516
6 177 487 378 564 842 883 1245 1392 1349 773 499 484 6 177 487 378 564 842 883 1245 1392 1349 773 499 484
7 286 351 431 284 453 818 814 994 965 462 345 433 7 286 351 431 284 453 818 814 994 965 462 345 433
8 111 148 263 269 310 532 391 765 550 267 190 60 8 111 148 263 269 310 532 391 765 550 267 190 60
9 131 50 181 91 145 389 342 506 429 150 87 134 9 131 50 181 91 145 389 342 506 429 150 87 134

9
total 54,689 Pass.h 10

other correlated benefits Impacts on non-BRT road users

item relative index

The basic complaint about bus lanes & BRTs is about the space taken
operational cost reduction 35 from the road, that may imply a reduction in capacity and increase of
congestion, that increases travel time for non-BRT road users.
attraction of public transport
25
demand Alternatively the impact on mixed traffic may be positive due to the
attraction of private transport reduction or elimination of bus stop congestion, mode shift to public
demand transport, and intersection improvements.
new trips generated 20
pollution reduction 10

11 12

Draft, ITDP-China 90 19 July 2015

 =

13 14

This expression itself represents the increase of congestion in vehicle hours on an

isolated bottle neck:

Tch = extension of time when the specific bottle queue

neck and period is congested.

Tc may vary from zero to 20 hours a day. For TCh
EDSA for example these value should be around 3 time
to 4 hours each period, but may be longer (values TCh* S

can be estimated based on speed surveys)

S
15 16

Fs = factor of secondary congestion.

Eventually the queue created in a congested
point extends to other flows that do not
Fr= network factor: eventually when there are other congestion points
ahead, the reduction of volume output may reduce these congestion pass through the congested point,
points. Factor is from 1 to zero, 1 when there is no congestion ahead and
zero when all volumes go to other congested points. generating secondary congestion. This factor
varies from 1 upwards.

17 18

Draft, ITDP-China 91 19 July 2015

Fd = demand factor.
When congestion increases, some people give up the trip (or
change time, itinerary, mode, etc. and as a result the increase of
congestion is less than if demand was fixed.
This factor is always less than 1.
Om= average number of passengers per pcu, of remaining traffic.
Om may be very low around 1.2, 1.3 if the remaining traffic is
mostly cars, but much bigger if there are remaining public
transport (buses, jeepneys, UVs) vehicles in the corridor

19 20

example of traffic impact calculation

variable value unit
1000 pcu/h
example of passenger/pcu calculation 1000 pcu/h
pcu pass/ equiv. pass. tch(am) 3 hours
vehicle volume tch(pm) 4 hours
equiv. vehicle volume volume Fr 0.5
unit veh/h pcu/h pass/h Fs 3
buses 30 2.5 40 75 1200 Fd 0.6
jeepneys 80 1.5 15 120 1200 Om 2.1 pass/pcu
uv 100 1 10 100 1000 pr=(.5*1000*3^2+0.5*1000*4^2)*.5*3*0.6*2.1
cars 3000 1 1.2 3000 3600 pr=1000*.5(3^2+*4^2)*.5*3*0.6*2.1
trucks 50 2 2 100 100 Pr Om
total 3260 1.05 3395 7100
.5(3^2+*4^2) .5*3*0.6*
21 23 625 1000 12.5 0.9 2.1 22

other correlated benefits

item relative index

example of passenger/pcu calculation operational cost reduction 35

pcu pass/ equiv. pass. attraction of public transport
vehicle volume demand
25
equiv. vehicle volume volume
unit veh/h pcu/h pass/h
buses 30 2.5 40 75 1200
jeepneys 80 1.5 15 120 1200 new trips generated 20
uv 100 1 10 100 1000 pollution reduction 10
cars 3000 1 1.2 3000 3600
trucks 50 2 2 100 100
total 3260 1.05 3395 7100
Each driver attracted from private car to public transport represents a reduction on
23
24

Draft, ITDP-China 92 19 July 2015

5. BRT Stations
5.1 Station locations
Station locations were determined taking into
consideration many factors, including:
current bus stops and points of major demand
MRT stations
physical right-of-way available
current bus stops (formal and informal)
nearby intersections
Draft, ITDP-China
nearby high demand locations
desirable spacing of around 600m.
BRT station locations are shown in Figure 5-1.
5.2 Station substops
Station substops are shown in Figure 5-1.
Figure 5-1: Station locations and substops
94 19 July 2015
5.3 Station configuration
and door positions
Standard station configurations and door posi-
tions for the different types of BRT station are
shown in Figure 5-2.

Figure 5-2: Two substop, three substop, and (over page)

one substop station configuration and door positions.

Median Station Layout (2 sub stops)

Draft, ITDP-China 95 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 96 19 July 2015
5.4 Station architecture and
MRT integration
The concept design information consists generally detail station design information for BRT/MRT
of two parts –
Part A - Generic BRT station design informa- successfully design BRT stations and to integrate
tion and
Part B - MRT/BRT design integration
information.
The concept design drawings illustrate BRT
stations and a range of opportunities to integrate
BRT and MRT passenger environments using
physical connections of paid and unpaid space.
The potential of a single integrated public transit
ticket for the seamless movement of passengers
between both MRT and BRT modes are an impor-
tant consideration for the planning and design of
stations. The convenient access of passengers to
premium transit services regardless of mode is
important for the BRT and MRT transit customer.
The proposed EDSA BRT project is a demand-
ing network requiring a high level of technical
knowledge and innovative station planning and
design solutions. The BRT network Integrated
with the existing MRT network in the median
of the major roadways in Metro Manila sets this
BRT project apart from any other BRT network in
South East Asia.
The BRT project is required to achieve universal
access to premium bus rapid transit services from
‘stand-alone’ BRT stations and from BRT/MRT
integrated stations providing convenient, safe and
comfortable access to both bus and rail services.
Options applying international standards of access
for all people, which are cost-effective, is indicated
for BRT stations and applied to the integration
of the existing metro stations. New access points
to BRT stations and improved access points and
parts to MRT stations have been indicated. These
determine the possible layouts of BRT stations
and the extent of integration and possible refur-
bishment of the existing MRT stations.
Seamless integration of BRT services and MRT
services through the design of new BRT stations
with supporting civil infrastructure is a unique
opportunity for DOTC and the City Governments
to achieve effective and relevant passenger transit
services in Metro Manila. BRT and its effective
integration is essential for the future prosperity
of Filipino people living and working in Metro
Manila using the public transit network in lieu of
Draft, ITDP-China
private motor vehicles.
The preliminary concept design information
illustrated is the first stage in a process to develop
stations. Further information is required to
MRT with BRT using world’s best practise is as
follows:
All minimum clearances including widths,
heights and lengths of access structures
acceptable to DOTC (Road and Rail
Operating Authority) must be agreed.
Minimum clearances for footbridges over
BRT Lanes, general traffic lanes and the
envelop for the electrified ‘guideway’ of the
MRT must be agreed.
Minimum clearances under the MRT guide-
way to enable 3.2m high footbridges and 4.2 m
high platform structures must be agreed.
Minimum clearance over bus vehicles provid-
ing covered boarding and alighting from BRT
3.4m min. bus operating envelope indicated
on drawings must be agreed.
Integrated smartcard to enable paid to paid
and unpaid to paid, seamless integration for
passengers using BRT, MRT or a combination
of services provided by each mode must be
agreed.
Minimum access requirements are required
for BRT and MRT stations including public
space for lifts, stairs, escalators and ramps are
required. This is to ensure adequate access is
provided and any land resumptions or road-
way width reductions fully defined.
Approval for the recommended MRT
refurbishments required by BRT design that
enables universal access and operations to
BRT and MRT services must be established.
MRT Station access audit across the all MRT
networks is recommended. Many exist-
ing MRT stations do not meet acceptable
standards for access and because of this are
limited in performance of services. The study
should include how to improve the restricted
footpaths and sidewalks, sidewalk clearances,
stair widths, escalators, lifts and gradients of
new accessible ramps. Reasonable equitable
access is either not provided at all MRT
stations or is inadequate for people accessing
services from public areas.
97 19 July 2015
 Further detailed technical study is required
of each MRT station. It is recommended to
dimensionally check and technically test, in
detail each proposed station site for opportunities
and constraints to physically and operationally
integrate new BRT stations with existing MRT
stations. This detailed study will help determine
what options are achievable and the levels and
methods of seamless integration for all passengers
using premium bus and rail rapid transit services
in Metro Manila.
Draft, ITDP-China
Sheet 1
Overall 3D study models
Architectural expression of platforms using
primary functional spaces and weather protection
over boarding and alighting positions developed
Kit of parts for BRT Stations - platform structures
indicated
‘Signature’ Architectural expression for BRT
Stations on the BRT Network
1,2 and 3 Sub stops platform structures indicated
Access to platforms – on surface
98 19 July 2015
Sheet 2
Floor Plan - Platform planning layouts - 1,2 and 3 Sub stops indicated
Primary functional zones and spaces indicated
Overall minimum dimensions indicated for 12M rigid and 18M Sheet 3
Articulated buses – Doors both sides of vehicle Floor Plan - Station Planning Layout
Minimum pull in and pull out zones for vehicle indicated - 3 Sub stops indicated
Weather protection over boarding and alighting positions and buses Sidewalk access and footbridges
On surface access to platform Primary functional spaces and
overall minimum dimensions

Draft, ITDP-China 99 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China
100
19 July 2015
Sheet 4
Primary entry /exit zones at ends of platforms indicated
Right hand passenger movement in and out of station
Primary functional spaces and overall minimum dimensions
Covered passenger access, staffed security screening, IT/
communications/electrical room, single staff amenity and
staffed ticket office indicated
Minimum dimensions and gradients for universal access
purposes indicated
Queuing for smartcard and cash transaction prior to
turnstiles
In-line and off-set turnstile location options indicated
Draft, ITDP-China
101
19 July 2015
Sheet 5
Overall Elevations for 1,2 and 3 Sub stops
platforms indicated
Primary functional spaces and overall
dimensions indicated
Preliminary colour, materials and finishes
indicated
Draft, ITDP-China
102
19 July 2015
Sheet 6
Detail Elevations - Entry / Exit zones, Ticket office, transition
zones and passenger waiting zone indicated
Covered boarding and alighting area indicated
Boarding gates and glazed balustrade indicated - general
locations
Preliminary materials, finishes and colours indicated
Preliminary station signage indicated – general locations
350 high kerb indicated
Possible landscaping zones at ends of platforms indicated
Draft, ITDP-China
103
19 July 2015
Sheet 7 Boarding gates and glazed balustrade indicated – general
Detail Plan and Section - passenger waiting zone and locations
transition zone indicated Preliminary materials, finishes and colours indicated
Covered boarding and alighting area indicated generally
Preliminary locations for ceiling mounted misting fans, real Preliminary station signage indicated – general locations
time passenger Information displays and ceiling lighting 350 high kerb indicated
Draft, ITDP-China
104
Sheet 8
Detail section through passenger waiting zone on typical
platform indicated
Vehicle envelop and minimum station platform clearance
dimensions indicated

19 July 2015
Minimum dimensions for roof awning over bus for covered
boarding and alighting of passenger area indicated - sun
protection and rainwater collection
Preliminary locations for ceiling mounted misting fans, real
time passenger Information displays and ceiling lighting
Boarding gates and glazed balustrade generally indicated
Preliminary materials, finishes and colours indicated
Preliminary station signage indicated
350 high kerb indicated
In-ground platform services indicated generally
Draft, ITDP-China
105
19 July 2015
Minimum dimensions for
lift, stairs, ramps for varied
platform widths enabling
Sheet 9A universal access
Detail access options from pedestrian footbridge Minimum clearances indicated
to varied platform widths Preferred maximum footbridge
Minimum access parts determined by service heights
demand, passenger numbers and physical Platform widths – 4M / 5M / 6M
constraints and greater
 Sheet 9B
Detail access
options from
platform to
pedestrian
footbridge
Minimum type,
number and size
of access parts
determined by
service demand,
passenger volume
and numbers

Draft, ITDP-China
and physical
constraints
Minimum
gradients for
access ramps –
1:12 acceptable

106
but not preferred,
1:14 preferred
Minimum
clearances, lane
tapers required
for station parts
Preferred
maximum height
of footbridge

19 July 2015
Platform width –
4M min.
 Sheet 9C
Centralised access to
station under footbridge
‘take off’ points for lift and
stairs preferred – enables
centralised passenger
information displays
Access options to BRT
stations from sidewalks
indicated – local conditions
to be examined
Minimum dimensions for lift,
stairs, ramps and escalators

Draft, ITDP-China
for universal access
Minimum lateral and vertical
clearances for station access
parts
Minimum type, number
and size of access parts to

107
be determined by service
demand, passenger volumes
and physical constraints in
the local environment.
Minimum acceptable access
options complying with
internationally recognised
standards indicated -
includes covered lift, covered

19 July 2015
stairs and covered escalator
options (1:12 is not preferred
because of ramp lengths and
travel distances)
Minimum gradients for
accessible ramps – 1:14
preferred with rest areas
Minimum circulation
clearances
Draft, ITDP-China
108
19 July 2015
Sheet 10
Pedestrian footbridge access option from sidewalks over BRT and general
roadway lanes indicated
Minimum dimensions for lift, stairs, ramps and escalators for universal
access indicated
Minimum lateral and vertical clearances for universal access indicated
Preferred steel truss types for Pedestrian footbridges indicated
Relationship of covered access to station platform indicated
 Sheet 11
Pedestrian footbridge access option from sidewalks
over BRT stopping lane, passing lanes and general
roadway lanes
Minimum dimensions for lift, stairs, ramps and
escalators for universal access
Minimum lateral and vertical clearances for universal
access
Preferred spatial relationship of covered footbridge,
covered vertical access parts to station platform

Draft, ITDP-China
109
19 July 2015
Sheet 12
3D study model of 2 sub stop station and footbridge access from
sidewalks over BRT running lanes and general roadway.
Covered access parts, pedestrian footbridge, entry and exit zones and
median station platform
Covered access parts indicated including stairs, lift and escalators
12m and 18M buses

Sheet 13
3D study model of 2 sub stop median station platform
Covered entry and exit zones and covered boarding and
alighting zones
Transition zones for pull-in and pull-out of vehicles
1:14 ramp for on-surface access

Draft, ITDP-China 110 19 July 2015

Sheet 14
3D study model of 2 sub stop station platform

Concept Colours

Aubergine pressed metal wall

cladding and general station
signage

Burnt Orange logo Lime green logo /

/ signs signs
OR

Silver grey sheet metal roofing

Sheet 15
Preliminary concept colours, materials and
finishes indicated for station structures, parts,
signage and development of BRT Brand

Draft, ITDP-China 111 19 July 2015

 Sheet 16
Principles for physical integration
- functional areas linking the
operations of new BRT stations with
existing MRT stations. This general
study is based on defining ‘paid and
unpaid areas’ of stations each mode,
the potential of introducing and an
integrated ticket for both modes and
adequate local access to each mode.
Integration study diagram - Median
BRT Stations to existing MRT Stations
Stand alone BRT stations and stand

Draft, ITDP-China
alone MRT stations – separate entry
and exits from unpaid areas to
separately operated paid platforms
Physical connections using existing
sidewalks, new footbridges, new
access ways, shared access points

112
and the space required to achieve
universal access using a combination
of stairs, lifts, escalators and ramps.
All possible physical connections
Integrated ticket for fare collection
via touch on touch off smartcard
ticket technology for MRT and BRT
Consideration of all desirable ‘unpaid
to unpaid’ connections

19 July 2015
Consideration of all desirable ‘paid to
paid’ area connections
Integrated ticket implications for BRT
and MRT including security screening
zones, entry /exit thresholds, ticket
offices, turnstile locations, pedestrian
footbridges, kerbside space for local
access using lifts, stairs, escalators
and ramp
 Sheet 17
Guadalupe MRT station and
Otigas MRT station used to
generally explore, test and
propose possible outcomes for
the physical and operational
integration the BRT / MRT
networks for passengers
Draft, ITDP-China
113
19 July 2015
BRT / MRT station environments - the planning and
design implications of locating BRT stations under or
adjacent the existing MRT Stations and guideway.
The size, scale and physical footprint of 2 and 3 sub-
stop BRT station located adjacent a typical MRT
station.
Potential options for establishing adequate access
points to BRT stations form existing sidewalks to
satisfy minimum universal access standards.
General options for using new BRT station access
points to link MRT stations with new footbridges
General options for using existing MRT station access
such as unpaid concourses and paid platforms using
concourses and existing emergency stairs to BRT
stations
Flexible locations for local access points and elevated
footbridge connections
 Median BRT Station
and existing MRT
Station Integration
Possible paid to paid
BRT station platform
and MRT station
platform
BRT / MRT station
environments -
the planning and
design implications
of locating BRT
stations under or

Draft, ITDP-China
adjacent the existing
MRT Stations
and guideway
conceptually
studied.
The size, scale and

114
physical footprint
of 2 and 3 sub-stop
BRT station located
adjacent a typical
MRT station with
paid to paid and

unpaid to unpaid area integration.

19 July 2015
Potential options for establishing adequate access points for BRT stations from
existing sidewalks to satisfy minimum generic BRT station footprints and minimum
universal access standards.
Bus Lane tapers, build out for lifts and clearance of existing stairs required
Required bus passing lane and bus stopping lane geometry
Possible options for creating paid and unpaid areas using ticket offices and
turnstiles and to maximise bus stopping area footprint of new BRT stations studied
Linking either unpaid MRT concourses or paid platforms using new footbridges,
existing concourses, existing stairs at ends of MRT stations with BRT stations
Draft, ITDP-China
115
19 July 2015
Median BRT Station integrated with existing MRT
Station option.
The physical link of BRT station to MRT station using
the existing stairs at the end of MRT platforms
studied.
Upper drawing - Existing MRT stair access
Lower drawing - Integrated stair and lift access from
elevated MRT station platforms to on-surface BRT
station platforms
Paid to paid platform access
Installation of new lifts and access way located on
the outside face of the MRT guideway
No pedestrian footbridge across BRT running lanes
and general roadway – clearances for possible
footbridges to be investigated
Retention of paid transfer between MRT platforms
 Median BRT Station
integrated with existing
MRT Station option.
Direct paid to paid
platform access for
passengers between MRT
and BRT platforms for bus
and rail services studied
Installation of new lifts
at ends of MRT platforms
to meet universal access
requirements linking

Draft, ITDP-China
MRT platforms to BRT
platforms.
Retention of paid transfer
between the existing
MRT station platforms

116
using the existing end
of platform stairs. This
enables change in
direction of travel.
Establish ‘paid area’
footbridge
New lifts required at ends
of platforms outside face
of MRT guideway

19 July 2015
Bus lane tapers, kerb build
out for lifts and clearance
of existing stairs
BRT passing and stopping
lane geometrics
New stairs and escalators
to BRT station within
unpaid zones and linking
possible new footbridge
 Median BRT Station and
existing MRT Station
Integration option
indicated – paid to paid
station connection
studied
Guadalupe MRT station
used to study, test
and propose possible
outcomes for the
physical and operational
integration the BRT / MRT
networks for passengers
New cantilevered
access ways (walkway)

Draft, ITDP-China
connecting new lifts
located on the outside
face of the MRT guideway
and at the end of MRT
platforms
Retention of paid transfer

117
between the existing
MRT station platforms
using the existing end of
platform stairs indicated.
This enables change in
direction of travel.
New lifts required at ends
of platforms outside face

19 July 2015
of MRT guideway
Bus lane tapers, kerb build
out for lifts and clearance
of existing stairs
BRT passing and stopping
lane geometrics
New stairs and escalators
to BRT station within paid
zones and linking possible
new footbridge
 Median BRT Station and
existing MRT Station
Integration option indicated
– unpaid to unpaid station
connection studied
Otigas MRT station used to
study the potential, test and
propose possible outcomes for
the physical and operational
integration the BRT / MRT
stations for passengers
Connection of unpaid BRT
areas to unpaid external area

Draft, ITDP-China
of MRT Station - BRT unpaid
entry / exit area (and possible
pedestrian footbridge) with
MRT unpaid concourse
studied
Retention of paid transfer

118
between existing MRT station
platforms using the existing
stairs at end of MRT station
platforms indicated - enables
change in direction of travel
using MRT services.
New cantilevered access ways
(walkway) connecting lifts

19 July 2015
located on the outside of the
MRT guideway and at the end
of MRT platforms
Separate, secured unpaid and
paid BRT and MRT station
spaces
Bus Lane tapers, build out for
lifts and clearance of existing
stairs required
Required bus passing lane and
bus stopping lane geometry
5.5 Accessibility
infrastructure
Stations have all been designed to be wheelchair
accessible. Along EDSA, the physical constraints
meant that more lifts are proposed. Along C5 and
Roxas Blvd ramps are proposed. Along Makati
and the Ortigas-BGC corridors, BRT station
access is generally at street level and so does not
require lifts or ramps.

Draft, ITDP-China 119 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 120 19 July 2015
6. BRT Sections (At & Between Stations)
Current cross-sections are based on ITDP’s field
surveys and measurements, as well as Google
Earth satellite imagery, as CAD files were not
made available to the consultant team. Follow-up
is required at some locations to define the precise
location of the edge of the walkway.

Draft, ITDP-China 122 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 123 19 July 2015
EDSA CORRIDOR

Draft, ITDP-China 124 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 125 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 126 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 127 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 128 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 129 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 130 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 131 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 132 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 133 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 134 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 135 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 136 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 137 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 138 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 139 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 140 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 141 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 142 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 143 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 144 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 145 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 146 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 147 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 148 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 149 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 150 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 151 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 152 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 153 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 154 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 155 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 156 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 157 19 July 2015
MAKATI CORRIDOR

Draft, ITDP-China 158 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 159 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 160 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 161 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 162 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 163 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 164 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 165 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 166 19 July 2015
AIRPORT CORRIDOR

Draft, ITDP-China 167 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 168 19 July 2015
parking

parking

parking

Draft, ITDP-China 169 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 170 19 July 2015
 setback setback

setback setback

setback setback

Draft, ITDP-China 171 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 172 19 July 2015
ROXAS CORRIDOR

Draft, ITDP-China 173 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 174 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 175 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 176 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 177 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 178 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 179 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 180 19 July 2015
ORTIGAS-BGC CORRIDOR

Draft, ITDP-China 181 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 182 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 183 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 184 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 185 19 July 2015
 East Capitol Drive

1.5 13 1.5
Current road cross-section

2.5 4 5 4 2.5
Proposed road cross-section (at station)

2.5 1 3.5 3.5 2 1 2.5

Proposed road cross-section (between stations)

Draft, ITDP-China 186 19 July 2015

 West Capitol Drive

1.5 13 1.5
Current road cross-section

1.5 3 3 5 4 1.5
Proposed road cross-section (at station)

1.5 3 1 3.5 3.5 2 1.5

Proposed road cross-section (between stations)

Draft, ITDP-China 187 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 188 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 189 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 190 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 191 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 192 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 193 19 July 2015
 McKinley Road

4.0 12.0 6.0

22.0

Current Road Cross Section

4.0 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.0 4.0

22.0
Proposed Road Cross Section (with BRT)

Draft, ITDP-China 194 19 July 2015

7. BRT Roadways and Intersections
Draft, ITDP-China 196 19 July 2015
7.1 BRT roadways, stations,
and intersections
A major part of the work in this BRT conceptual
design was to design the roadways and intersec-
tions along the BRT corridors.
Note that CAD files of the roadways were not
provided to the consultant team, so the BRT
corridors were drawn using a Google Earth image
background combined with on-site measurements
by the project team.
The designs are organized into the following
corridors:
− EDSA
− Makati
− Airport (cross-sections included in previous
section, but designs not included due to ongo-
ing construction activity, with designs not
available to the project team).
− Roxas
− Ortigas-BGC
− C5
− Tondo & C3 (no design done as part of this
report).
The designs and associated renderings are
presented sequentially for each of these corridors,
commencing with EDSA. A concept design
for the Balintawak transfer point for provincial
bus routes is also provided, along with concept
designs for the proposed ramps at Ayala and Taft.

Draft, ITDP-China 197 19 July 2015

EDSA corridor

BRT station name code type sub-stops

Caloocan E5 island 2
East Grace Park E6 island 2
Balintawak E7 island 2
Katipunan E8 island 2
Roosevelt E9 island 2
Project 7 E10 island 2
North Avenue E11 island 2
Quezon Av. South E12 island 3
North Kamuning E13 island 3
Kamuning E14 island 3
Cubao North E15 island 3
Cubao South E16 island 3
Main Avenue E17 island 3
Santolan E18 split 3
White Plains E19 split 2
Ortigas E20 split 3
Shaw Boulevard E21 split 3
Highway Hills E22 split 3
Boni E23 split 3
Guadalupe E24 island 3
Guadalupe Nuevo E25 split 3
Estrella E26 split 3
Buendia E27 island 2
Ayala E28 island 3
Magallanes E29 split 3
Bangkal E30 split 2
Taft Avenue E31 island 3
Pasay West E32 island 2
EDSA Extension E33 island 2
MOA E34 island 2

Draft, ITDP-China 198 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 199 19 July 2015
 EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 200 19 July 2015

 EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 201 19 July 2015

 EDSA

y ra m p
s- on l
Bu
Boarding/alighting area

Balintawak
EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 202 19 July 2015

 EDSA

Balintawak

Draft, ITDP-China 203 19 July 2015

 EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 204 19 July 2015

 EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 205 19 July 2015

 North Ave
EDSA h
SM City Nort

EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 206 19 July 2015

Mindanao Ave

EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 207 19 July 2015

EDSA (Main Avenue)

Draft, ITDP-China 208 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 209 19 July 2015
 EDSA
ve Stn
Quezon A

Draft, ITDP-China 210 19 July 2015

 EDSA
NIA Rd

g Stn
Kamunin

Draft, ITDP-China 211 19 July 2015

 EDSA
Mega Q Mart

Draft, ITDP-China 212 19 July 2015

 EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 213 19 July 2015

 Arenata Ctr-Cubao

Gen.
McAr
thur Ave
EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 214 19 July 2015

 SM Hypermkt Cubao
EDS
A

Draft, ITDP-China 215 19 July 2015

 Sant
olan
Stn

EDS
A

Draft, ITDP-China 216 19 July 2015

 Sant
olan
Stn

EDS
A

Draft, ITDP-China 217 19 July 2015

 ED
SA

e
s Av
in
e Pla
hit
W

Draft, ITDP-China 218 19 July 2015

 EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 219 19 July 2015

 EDSA
Guadix Dr
Ortigas Stn

Draft, ITDP-China 220 19 July 2015

 Ortigas Stn

SM Megamall

Draft, ITDP-China 221 19 July 2015

EDSA (Ortigas)

Draft, ITDP-China 222 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 223 19 July 2015
 EDSA

Reliance

Draft, ITDP-China 224 19 July 2015

 Stn
Boni

Pionee
r St
Robinsons Pioneer
EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 225 19 July 2015

 EDSA

er
Pasig Riv
Guadalupe Stn

Draft, ITDP-China 226 19 July 2015

 EDSA

e
gsaysay Av
Ramon Ma

Draft, ITDP-China 227 19 July 2015

EDSA (Guadalupe)

Draft, ITDP-China 228 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 229 19 July 2015
Estrella
EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 230 19 July 2015

 EDSA

Kalayaan Ave Flyover

Buendia Ave Stn

Draft, ITDP-China 231 19 July 2015

 Rd
inley
McK
ED
SA
e
Av
ala
Ay

Ay
ala
St
n

Draft, ITDP-China 232 19 July 2015

ED
SA

M
ag
all
an
es
St
n

Draft, ITDP-China 233 19 July 2015

 EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 234 19 July 2015

 EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 235 19 July 2015

 Blvd
Aurora

Taft A
ve Stn

Draft, ITDP-China 236 19 July 2015

Taft Ave

EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 237 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 238 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China
Current Traffic Ramp
New BRT Ramp (6.5% slope)

10m

239
95m 60m

19 July 2015
 EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 240 19 July 2015

 EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 241 19 July 2015

Makati corridor

BRT station name code type sub-stops

WTC M1 island 1
FB Harrison St M2 island 2
Gil Puyat Ave M3 island 2
Buendia M4 island 2
Roces Avenue M5 island 2
Paseo de Roxas M6 island 2
Triangle Park M7 island 2
Makati M8 directional 2

Draft, ITDP-China 242 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 243 19 July 2015
 ve
yat A
Gil Pu

Draft, ITDP-China 244 19 July 2015

 at Ave
Gil Puy

Taft A
ve

Draft, ITDP-China 245 19 July 2015

 Gil Puyat Ave
Washington

Draft, ITDP-China 246 19 July 2015

 Gil Puyat Ave

Urban Ave

Draft, ITDP-China 247 19 July 2015

EDSA corridor

BRT station name code type sub-stops

Caloocan E5 island 2
East Grace Park E6 island 2
Balintawak E7 island 2
Katipunan E8 island 2
Roosevelt E9 island 2
Project 7 E10 island 2
North Avenue E11 island 2
Quezon Av. South E12 island 3
North Kamuning E13 island 3
Kamuning E14 island 3
Cubao North E15 island 3
Cubao South E16 island 3
Main Avenue E17 island 3
Santolan E18 split 3
White Plains E19 split 2
Ortigas E20 split 3
Shaw Boulevard E21 split 3
Highway Hills E22 split 3
Boni E23 split 3
Guadalupe E24 island 3
Guadalupe Nuevo E25 split 3
Estrella E26 split 3
Buendia E27 island 2
Ayala E28 island 3
Magallanes E29 split 3
Bangkal E30 split 2
Taft Avenue E31 island 3
Pasay West E32 island 2
EDSA Extension E33 island 2
MOA E34 island 2

Draft, ITDP-China 198 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 199 19 July 2015
 EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 200 19 July 2015

 EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 201 19 July 2015

 EDSA

y ra m p
s- on l
Bu
Boarding/alighting area

Balintawak
EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 202 19 July 2015

 EDSA

Balintawak

Draft, ITDP-China 203 19 July 2015

 EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 204 19 July 2015

 EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 205 19 July 2015

 North Ave
EDSA h
SM City Nort

EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 206 19 July 2015

Mindanao Ave

EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 207 19 July 2015

EDSA (Main Avenue)

Draft, ITDP-China 208 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 209 19 July 2015
 EDSA
ve Stn
Quezon A

Draft, ITDP-China 210 19 July 2015

 EDSA
NIA Rd

g Stn
Kamunin

Draft, ITDP-China 211 19 July 2015

 EDSA
Mega Q Mart

Draft, ITDP-China 212 19 July 2015

 EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 213 19 July 2015

 Arenata Ctr-Cubao

Gen.
McAr
thur Ave
EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 214 19 July 2015

 SM Hypermkt Cubao
EDS
A

Draft, ITDP-China 215 19 July 2015

 Sant
olan
Stn

EDS
A

Draft, ITDP-China 216 19 July 2015

 Sant
olan
Stn

EDS
A

Draft, ITDP-China 217 19 July 2015

 ED
SA

e
s Av
in
e Pla
hit
W

Draft, ITDP-China 218 19 July 2015

 EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 219 19 July 2015

 EDSA
Guadix Dr
Ortigas Stn

Draft, ITDP-China 220 19 July 2015

 Ortigas Stn

SM Megamall

Draft, ITDP-China 221 19 July 2015

EDSA (Ortigas)

Draft, ITDP-China 222 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 223 19 July 2015
 EDSA

Reliance

Draft, ITDP-China 224 19 July 2015

 Stn
Boni

Pionee
r St
Robinsons Pioneer
EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 225 19 July 2015

 EDSA

er
Pasig Riv
Guadalupe Stn

Draft, ITDP-China 226 19 July 2015

 EDSA

e
gsaysay Av
Ramon Ma

Draft, ITDP-China 227 19 July 2015

EDSA (Guadalupe)

Draft, ITDP-China 228 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 229 19 July 2015
Estrella
EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 230 19 July 2015

 EDSA

Kalayaan Ave Flyover

Buendia Ave Stn

Draft, ITDP-China 231 19 July 2015

 Rd
inley
McK
ED
SA
e
Av
ala
Ay

Ay
ala
St
n

Draft, ITDP-China 232 19 July 2015

ED
SA

M
ag
all
an
es
St
n

Draft, ITDP-China 233 19 July 2015

 EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 234 19 July 2015

 EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 235 19 July 2015

 Blvd
Aurora

Taft A
ve Stn

Draft, ITDP-China 236 19 July 2015

Taft Ave

EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 237 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 238 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China
Current Traffic Ramp
New BRT Ramp (6.5% slope)

10m

239
95m 60m

19 July 2015
 EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 240 19 July 2015

 EDSA

Draft, ITDP-China 241 19 July 2015

Makati corridor

BRT station name code type sub-stops

WTC M1 island 1
FB Harrison St M2 island 2
Gil Puyat Ave M3 island 2
Buendia M4 island 2
Roces Avenue M5 island 2
Paseo de Roxas M6 island 2
Triangle Park M7 island 2
Makati M8 directional 2

Draft, ITDP-China 242 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 243 19 July 2015
 ve
yat A
Gil Pu

Draft, ITDP-China 244 19 July 2015

 at Ave
Gil Puy

Taft A
ve

Draft, ITDP-China 245 19 July 2015

 Gil Puyat Ave
Washington

Draft, ITDP-China 246 19 July 2015

 Gil Puyat Ave

Urban Ave

Draft, ITDP-China 247 19 July 2015

 Ayala Ave
Salcedo
Gi
lP
uy
at
Av
e

Draft, ITDP-China 248 19 July 2015

 V A Rufino St

Ayala Ave

Salcedo

Draft, ITDP-China 249 19 July 2015

Triangle Park

Ayala Ave
Pa
seo
de
Ro
xa
s

Draft, ITDP-China 250 19 July 2015

 Ayala Ave
Triangle Park

Pa
seo
de
Ro
xa
s

Draft, ITDP-China 251 19 July 2015

Ayala Avenue (Triangle Park)

Draft, ITDP-China 252 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 253 19 July 2015
Ayala Avenue

Draft, ITDP-China 254 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 255 19 July 2015
Airport corridor

BRT station name code type sub-stops

Terminal 1 R1 off-street 1
Terminal 2 R2 off-street 1
Terminal 3 R3 off-street 1
Ninoy Avenue R4 island 1
NAIA Road R5 island 1
Andrews Ave R7 island 1
Aurora Blvd R8 island 1
Malibay R9 island 1

Draft, ITDP-China 256 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 257 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 258 19 July 2015
Airport road construction and design unavailability meant that BRT designs for the airport area could not be com-
pleted, though the BRT designs are relatively straightforward, with stations located in the median alongside pillars.
Draft, ITDP-China 259 19 July 2015
Ortigas-BGC corridor

BRT station name code type sub-stops

Meralco O1 island 2
Meralco South O2 island 2
San Antonio O4 island 2
Greenfield O5 one-way 2
West Capitol O6 island 1
East Capitol O7 island 1
Sta Monica Bridge O8 island 2
Cembo O9 island 2
9th Avenue O10E one-way 2
7th Avenue O10W one-way 2
32nd Street O11 directional 2
High Street W O12E one-way 2
High Street E O12W one-way 2
McKinley Road O13 directional 2

Draft, ITDP-China 260 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 261 19 July 2015
7.2 Ortigas to BGC busway
As part of this study ITDP prepared a conceptual
design for an Ortigas to Bonifagio Global City
(BGC) busway, which would use a new bridge
to be built south of Kapitolyo, called the Santa
Monica Bridge.
The following pages elaborate on the plan
to include this corridor as part of the phase 2
BRT network. The first section focuses on the
Kapitolyo area, and the second section provides
a conceptual design for BRT to pass through the
second level of the Shaw Boulevard MRT3 station.

7.2.1 Kapitolyo area and Santa

Monica Bridge
The Santa Monica Bridge with an accompanying
elevated road was originally proposed by the
DPWH, and quickly provoked intense resistance
from the Kapitolyo community located in the
vicinity of the West Capitol and East Capitol pro-
posed BRT stations in the graphic. DPWH offered
to consider a tunnel option for traversing the change traffic circulation as indicated in the
Kapitolyo community, and ITDP was requested graphic, to one-way along the northern part
to prepare a design concept for this tunnel, as well of West Capitol Drive and the western part of
as to determine the proposed location of BRT sta- United.
tions. ITDP prepared the tunnel concept, includ- ITDP also developed a conceptual design for
ing showing how the tunnel could be designed at the Santa Monica Bridge, with a BRT station
Shaw Boulevard to connect to Meralco Avenue on the top layer and bicycles & pedestrians
as well as to Shaw Boulevard and the EDSA BRT. underneath. These designs and renderings are
DPWH also agreed on a proposal for the Santa illustrated in the following pages.
Monica Bridge to be a ‘green bridge’ which would
accommodate only BRT buses, bicycles, and
pedestrians. Cars would not be permitted access
the bridge.
Subsequently, when doubts were expressed
about the viability of the tunnel option, ITDP
prepared a street-level option for the busway that
would not require any tunnels or elevated roads
in the Kapitolyo area. This street-level option also
did not require any property acquisition, a major
advantage compared to the DPWH plans which
called for substantial demolition and land acquisi-
tion. The proposed street level design includes
signal phase changes illustrated below:
change from 4 phase to 2 phase at Shaw/
Pioneer
change from unsignalized to 2 phase at
Pioneer/United, West Capitol/United, and
Shaw/West Capitol.

Draft, ITDP-China 262 19 July 2015

Intersection phase changes (red = before, blue = after).
In addition, it is proposed to make the northern part of
West Capitol Drive on way southward, and United St
one way westward, as indicated by the arrows. (Roads
without arrows are two-way.) In addition, right turns
from north along West Capitol Drive to west along
United St could be banned in order to alleviate Kapi-
tolyo community concerns about pass-through traffic
along Pioneer towards EDSA.

Draft, ITDP-China 263 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 264 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 265 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 266 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 267 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 268 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 269 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 270 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 271 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 272 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 273 19 July 2015
 Rd
inley
McK

Draft, ITDP-China 274 19 July 2015

 M cK i
nley
Rd

Draft, ITDP-China 275 19 July 2015

 5th Av
e

y Rd
inle
McK

Draft, ITDP-China 276 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China
277
8th Ave
Kalaya

19 July 2015
an Av
e

ITDP Manila BRT Conceptual Design Cembo Station Date: 20150515 No.:O9
 7th Ave

7th Avenue Station

Draft, ITDP-China
278
34th St
36th St

19 July 2015
9th Avenue Station
9th Ave

ITDP Manila BRT Conceptual Design 7th Avenue & 9th Avenue Station Date: 20150515 No.:O10E & O10W
 30th St

9th Ave
7th Ave

High Street

28th St

Draft, ITDP-China 279 19 July 2015

High Street E (BGC)

Draft, ITDP-China 280 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 281 19 July 2015
High Street W (BGC)

Draft, ITDP-China 282 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 283 19 July 2015
The BRT corridor will provide excellent access to BGC,
including the High Street, pictured above.

Draft, ITDP-China 284 19 July 2015

 5th A
ve

Draft, ITDP-China
285
19 July 2015
McKinley Rd

ITDP Manila BRT Conceptual Design McKinley Road Station Date: 20150515 No.: O13
Roxas corridor

BRT station name code type sub-stops

Tambo R6 island 1
Roxas Blvd R10 island 2
Airport Road R11 island 2
Baclaran R12 island 2
Antonio Arnais Ave R13 island 2
Diokno Blvd R14 island 2
CCP Urban Forest R15 island 2
Quirino Ave R16 island 2
Malate R17 island 2
Kalaw Ave R18 island 2
Intramuros R19 island 2
Manila City Hall R20 split 2
Navotas T0 island 1
Bangculasi T1 island 1
Cocomo Island T2 island 1
C-3 Road T3 island 1
Smokey Mountain T4 island 1
Pier 18 T5 island 1
Tondo North T6 island 2
Tondo T7 island 2
Tondo South T8 island 2
Zaragoza T9 directional 2
Roxas Bridge T10 directional 2
Fort Santiago T11 island 2
Port Area T12 island 2
Navotas River C31 island 1
Kaunlaran C32 island 1
A. Mabini St C33 island 1
5th Avenue C34 island 1
Rizal Avenue C35 island 1

Draft, ITDP-China 286 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 287 19 July 2015
 Roxas Blvd

Draft, ITDP-China
288
19 July 2015
ITDP Manila BRT Conceptual Design Roxas Blvd Station Date: 20150515 No.: R10
 Aseana Ave

Draft, ITDP-China
Roxas Blvd

289
19 July 2015
ITDP Manila BRT Conceptual Design Airport Road Station Date: 20150515 No.:R11
Draft, ITDP-China
290
Roxas Blvd

19 July 2015
Redemptorist Rd

ITDP Manila BRT Conceptual Design Baclaran Station Date: 20150515 No.: R12
Draft, ITDP-China
Roxas Blvd

291
19 July 2015
Embassy of Japan

ITDP Manila BRT Conceptual Design Antonio Arnais Ave Station Date: 20150515 No.:R13
 HK Sun Plaza

Draft, ITDP-China
Roxas
Blvd

292
19 July 2015
ITDP Manila BRT Conceptual Design Diokno Blvd Station Date: 20150515 No.:R14
 Roxas Blvd

Draft, ITDP-China
293
Pedro Gil St

19 July 2015
ITDP Manila BRT Conceptual Design Malate Station Date: 20150515 No.: R17
Baclaran

Draft, ITDP-China 294 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 295 19 July 2015
7.3 Shaw Boulevard BRT
station
ITDP developed a conceptual design for Shaw
Boulevard BRT station which involves the BRT
roadway changing from street level to elevated for
200m along EDSA on the north and south side of
Shaw Boulevard MRT station. In this elevated sec-
tion the BRT will be alongside the MRT vehicles,
and can use the support pylons already installed
for the MRT. The BRT station will be located in
the interior of the current Shaw Boulevard MRT
station, in an area currently either abandoned
or used by small scale vendors. This provides an
opportunity to revitalize a degraded and potential
prime retail location which would connect to both
the BRT and MRT as well as potentially to adja-
cent buildings including the Shangrila Mall. The
concept is illustrated in the following pages.

Draft, ITDP-China 296 19 July 2015

Shaw Boulevard BRT station

Draft, ITDP-China 297 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 298 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 299 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 300 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 301 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 302 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 303 19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 304 19 July 2015
7.4 Flooding considerations
Whether the vehicle has 350 mm floor height or
a 620 mm floor height, the impact from flooding
is the same. The engine height and tailpipe can
be placed at the same height in both cases, and
according to manufacturers, the engine compart-
ment is relatively sealed. Certainly if the water
level rises above 350 mm, water could enter
when the door is opened on a low-entry vehicle.
However, if the water level rises to that height,
it would not be possible for a 620 mm vehicle
to operate safely either. Namely, once the water
level rises above approximately 100 mm, the road
markings are no longer visible. BRT vehicles
cannot be safely operated in such conditions
regardless of the floor height.
The 10 year flood map from DOST - Project
NOAH is shown following. As part of the
follow-up to this study, after the model is further
developed and the operational design is refined
and more fixed, a route by route analysis can be
carried out, taking the flood hazards into account,
to help inform the decision about whether
particular routes need measures in the drainage
system of the roadway design to deal with possible
flooding.

Draft, ITDP-China 305 19 July 2015

 Light orange = up to 0.5m deep
Light red = 0.5m-1.5m deep
Dark red = more than 1.5m deep

Draft, ITDP-China 306 19 July 2015

8. Traffic Circulation and Impacts
8.1 General approach Four phases = 1/4 of time for each movement = 1/4
of capacity
A new BRT system always has some impact on
If intersections with four phases still existed
traffic conditions. A poorly planned design can
after BRT implementation, they would cause large
cause a negative impact on mixed traffic and
delays for not only BRT buses, but also mixed
non-BRT buses, while a good design will not only
traffic.
provide better operational conditions for the BRT
The following tables show in general terms how
buses, but also improve the mixed traffic flow
different number of signal phases and the num-
organization, mainly because:
bers of traffic signals will impact on the BRT bus
The BRT design does not reduce capacity
delay and speed.
beyond current capacity levels, so no adverse
traffic impacts will be felt along the whole BRT delay in different numbers of signal phase
corridor.
Seconds
The BRT design includes optimization of the
Phases Cycle Red BRT Delay
intersections along the corridor. Changing
from four phases into three or two phases, 2 60 30 7
simplifying the turnings movements, shorten- 3 90 60 20
ing the cycle time and giving more green time 4 120 90 34
for both BRT buses and mixed traffic on the
main straight direction will result in more
Currently the major intersections along the
efficient intersection operation.
phase 1 BRT corridor are four phases. Generally,
Actually, the most serious bottlenecks are the easiest and least expensive solution to fast
the signalized intersections. See the graphic traffic speeds along the corridor is to improve the
below, where points A, B and E are signalized efficiency of the intersections through eliminating
intersections. The capacity of the intersection the direct left turnings, reducing the traffic signals
is generally a function of the amount of green from four phases into only two phases, and using
time per lane. The amount of green time per lane other locations to make left turns.
is generally a function of the number of signal The figure below illustrates the standard two
phases. Saturation can increase up to 300 percent phase traffic signal phase when left turns are disal-
by increasing an intersection from two or three lowed. By doubling the green time given to the
phases to four phases. Point C might be a bridge BRT vehicles, the capacity and speed of the BRT
or tunnel where, for example, lanes are reduced and mixed traffic are both increased significantly
from 3 to 2, increasing saturation by 50 percent. for a very limited cost.
Point D might be a popular destination like a
shopping mall where an extra volume of vehicles
enters the road, increasing saturation. It might
also be a popular bus interchange, a street market,
or an area with regulated on-street parking.
Scenarios “A” and “B” are standard four-phase
intersections, which are currently mostly used
along the BRT corridor in Vientiane. The capacity
of the intersection per lane is very low. In scenario
“A”, left turn movements are given their own signal
phase, with two directions being able to turn left
simultaneously.
As an alternative, the configuration for option
“B” is four phases with just a single directional
approach on each phase.
Signal intersection capacity = Available width /
Number of phases
Option “C”- two phases
Draft, ITDP-China 308 19 July 2015
Mixed traffic saturation along a BRT corridor
In option “C”, a left turn for mixed traffic is
accomplished through a u-turn combined with
the station alignment and pedestrian crossing
which is proposed for most of the intersections
along the corridor, or a previous left turn which
avoids u-turning vehicles passing twice through
the intersection, especially in some cases with
higher left turn volumes.
For all the intersections with four phases, we
suggest reducing to two or three phases depend-
ing on the left turn volumes.
A left turn for mixed traffic is accomplished
through a u-turn combined with the station
alignment and pedestrian crossing which is
proposed for several of the intersections along the
corridors. When pedestrians are crossing the road
and accessing the BRT station, the mixed traffic
makes u-turn.
8.2 Methodology
Data collection
Peak hour intersection volume counts,
recording the volume of different travel
modes for each movement of each approach.
Current intersection layout - document traffic
lanes for each movement of each approach.
Document current signal phases.
Draft, ITDP-China
Calculate current intersection saturation
Calculate the saturation for each movement of
each phase (V/C), the capacity for each lane
using 1800 pcu/h.
Use the maximum saturation as the saturation
of each phase.
Add up saturation for each phase as the
intersection saturation.
Calculate intersection saturation with
dedicated BRT lane
Calculate the saturation for each movement of
each phase (V/C), using 1800 pcu/h for each
lane.
Use the maximum saturation as the saturation
of each phase.
Without changing intersection design and
signal phases, the intersection saturation will
usually be very high, and the intersection will
often be over-saturated with BRT.
Re-design intersection and signal phases
Calculate intersection saturation with new
intersection layout and signal phases
Calculate the saturation for each movement of
each phase (V/C), using 1800 pcu/h capacity.
Use maximum saturation as the saturation of
each phase.
Calculate the intersection saturation.
309 19 July 2015
Option “A”-four phases

Option “B”- four phases

Analysis can show that with the new intersec-

tion design and signal phases proposal, the
intersection saturation is dramatically decreased,
resulting in improved intersection performance.
Examples are provided in the following section.

8.3 Selected locations

Seven intersections as illustrated in the following
graphic were selected for detailed analysis.

Draft, ITDP-China 310 19 July 2015

Number of signals/kilometer and BRT delay

Number of signals/kilometer and BRT delay (seconds/km)

Phases 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

2 0 8 15 23 30 38 45 53 60 68 75

3 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

4 0 34 68 101 135 169 203 236 270 304 338

Number of signals/kilometer and BRT speed

Number of signals/kilometer and BRT speed (km/h)

Phases 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

2 25.8 24.5 23.3 22.2 21.2 20.3 19.5 18.8 18.0 17.4 16.8

3 25.8 22.6 20.1 18.0 16.4 15.0 13.9 12.9 12.0 11.3 10.6

4 25.8 20.8 17.4 15.0 13.1 11.7 10.5 9.6 8.8 8.1 7.5

26
24 BRT: traffic signals and average speed
22
20
B(R/S)T speed km/h

18
16 PHASES=2
14
12 PHASES=3
10
8 PHASES=4
6
4
2
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
NUMBER OF SIGNALAS /KILOMETER

Traffic
Trafficsignals
signalsand
and BRT speed
BRT speed

Currently the major intersections along the phase 1 BRT corridor are four phases.
Generally, the easiest and least expensive solution to fast traffic speeds along the
corridor is to improve the efficiency of the intersections through eliminating the direct
left turnings, reducing the traffic signals from four phases into only two phases, and
using other locations to make left turns.

Draft, ITDP-China 311 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 312 19 July 2015
EDSA & Ayala intersection

Before BRT:

After BRT:

Draft, ITDP-China 313 19 July 2015

Ayala and Paseo de Roxas
Intersection Ayala & Paseo de Roxas
Present three phase + BRT
Phase

Total (not including right turn) 94.3%

Before BRT:

Intersection Ayala Ave & Paseo de Roxas

Proposed u turn on east and westside + BRT
North U turn
Phase

1
2
Total 50.3%
Main Cross
Phase

Total 56.5%
Maximum saturation 56.5%

After BRT:

Draft, ITDP-China 314 19 July 2015

EDSA & Quezon Ave. intersection
Intersection EDSA & QUEZON Ave.
Current 2 u turn on North and South side
North U turn
Phase Side Volume Lanes Capacity Saturation
(pcu/h) (pcu/h)
1 Straight 1466 2 3600 40.72%
2 U turn 1510 2 3200 47.19%
Total 87.91%
South U turn
Phase Side Volume Lanes Capacity Saturation
(pcu/h) (pcu/h)
1 Straight 1620 2 3600 45.00%
2 U turn 1112 2 3200 34.75%
Total 79.75%
Maximum saturation 87.91%

Current: The left turning traffic from EDSA to Quezon Ave

has to make a turn under the ramp of the flyover along
EDSA. Saturation of the U turn at the north side is 88%,
and at the south side is 80%.

Intersection EDSA & QUEZON

Proposed 2 u turn at north and South side + 2 left turn at
intersection
North U turn
Phase Side Volume Lanes Capacity Saturation
(pcu/h) (pcu/h)
1 North 1466 2 3600 40.72%
2 U turn 750 2 3200 23.44%
Total 64.16%
Main cross
Phase Side Volume Lanes Capacity Saturation
(pcu/h) (pcu/h)
1 East 760 3 5400 14.07%
West 524 3 5400 9.70%
Maximum saturation 14.07%
2 North 1108 3 5400 20.52%
South 1164 3 5400 21.56%
Maximum saturation 21.56%
Total 43.11%
South U turn
Proposed: Through adding left turnings directly at the
Phase Side Volume Lanes Capacity Saturation
intersection, the phases can still be kept to 2, but pressure at (pcu/h) (pcu/h)
1 South 1620 2 3600 45.00%
the U turns is reduced, so the saturation will decrease to 64%,
2 U turn 588 2 3200 18.38%
which provides a much improved intersection operation. Total 63.38%
Maximum saturation 64.16%

Note: This traffic improvement is primarily for mixed traffic,

since the BRT will use the flyover above the intersection.
However, it can provide a possible improved future BRT
connection, as well.

Draft, ITDP-China 315 19 July 2015

Roxas Blvd & NAIA Rd intersection
Present four phase + BRT
Phase Side To Volumes Lanes Capacity Saturation
(pcu/h) (pcu/h)
1 Turn North left 1332 2 3600 37.0%
left South left 72 1 1800 4.0%
Total (not include turn right) 37.0%
2 Straight North 949 3 5400 17.6%
straight
North BRT 176 1 1800 9.8%
straight
South 1601 2 3600 44.5%
straight
South BRT 120 1 1800 6.7%
straight
Total (not include turn right) 44.5%
3 East Straight+Left 626 3 5400 11.6%
Total (not include turn right) 11.6%
4 West Straight+Left 609 3 5400 11.3%
Before BRT: Total (not include turn right) 11.3%
Total (not include turn right) 104.4%

Intersection Roxas Blvd & NAIA Rd

Proposed 2 u turn on north and West side + BRT
North U turn
Phase Side Volume Lanes Capacity Saturation
(pcu/h) (pcu/h)
1 North 2547 3 5400 47.2%
2 U turn 372 2 3600 10.3%
Total 57.5%
Main cross
Phase Side Volume Lanes Capacity Saturation
(pcu/h) (pcu/h)
1 North 2573 4 7200 35.7%
South 1872 2 3600 52.0%
BRT north 176 1 1800 9.8%
BRT south 120 1 1800 6.7%
Maximum saturation 52.0%
2 West 609 3 5400 11.3%
East 626 3 5400 11.6%
After BRT:
Maximum saturation 11.6%
Total 63.6%
South U turn
Phase Side Volume Lanes Capacity Saturation
(pcu/h) (pcu/h)
1 South 1845 3 5400 34.2%
2 U turn 1603 3 5400 29.7%
Total 63.9%
Maximum saturation 63.9%

Draft, ITDP-China 316 19 July 2015

Ayala and V.A. Rufino Street
Intersection Ayala Ave & V.A. Rufino Street
Present four phase + BR
Phase Side To Volume Lanes Capacity Saturation
(pcu/h)
1 North Straight+Left 902 2 3600 25.1%
+Right
2 East Straight+Right 1754 2 3600 48.7%
Left 282 2 3600 7.8%
BRT 180 1 1800 10.0%
Total 48.7%
3 East Straight+Right 1754 2 3600 48.7%
West Straight+Right 1295 3 5400 24.0%
BRT 180 1 1800 10.0%
Total (not include turn right) 48.7%
4 South Straight+Left+Right 332 2 3600 9.2%
Total (not including right turns) 83.0%

Before BRT:

Intersection Ayala Ave & V.A. Rufino Street

Proposed u turn on east side + BRT
Phase Side To Volume Lanes Capacity Saturation
(pcu/h) (pcu/h)
1 East Straight+Right 2192 4 7200 30.4%
BRT 180 1 1800 10.0%
Total 30.4%
West Straight+Right 1709 4 7200 23.7%
BRT 180 1 1800 10.0%
Total 23.7%
Maximum saturation 30.4%
2 North Straight+Right 1184 3 5400 21.9%
South Straight+Right 332 2 3600 9.2%
Maximum saturation 21.9%
Total 52.4%

After BRT:

Draft, ITDP-China 317 19 July 2015

Ayala Ave & Makati Ave intersection
Intersection Ayala Ave & Makati Ave
Present four phase + BRT
Phas Side To Volumes Lanes Capacity Saturatio
e (pcu/h) (pcu/h) n
1 North Straight+ 1159 5 9000 12.9%
Left
Total 12.9%
2 South Left 384 1 1800 21.3%
Straight 810 2 3600 22.5%
Total (not include turn right) 22.5%
3 East Left 311 1 1800 17.3%
Straight 762 2 3600 21.2%
BRT 180 1 1800 10.0%
Total (not include turn right) 21.2%
4 West Left 453 1 1800 25.2%
Straight 946 2 3600 26.3%
BRT 180 1 1800 10.0%
Before BRT: Total (not include turn right) 26.3%
Total (not including right turns) 82.8%

Intersection Ayala Ave & Makati Ave

Proposed u turn on east and west side + BRT
North U turn
Phase Side To Volume Lanes Capacity Saturation
(pcu/h) (pcu/h)
1 North Straight 2565 3 5400 47.5%
2 U turn 463 2 3600 12.9%
Total 60.4%
Main Cross
Phase Side To Volume Lanes Capacity Saturation
(pcu/h) (pcu/h)
1 North Straight 2565 4 7200 35.6%
+Right
South Straight 2337 4 7200 32.5%
+Right
Maximum saturation 35.6%
2 West Straight 2155 4 7200 29.9%
+Right
BRT 180 1 1800 10.0%
East Straight 1513 4 7200 21.0%
+Right
BRT 180 1 1800 10.0%
Maximum saturation 23.6%
Total 65.6%
South U turn
Phase Side To Volume Lanes Capacity Saturation
(pcu/h) (pcu/h)
1 South Straight 2337 3 5400 43.3%
After BRT: 2 U turn 657 2 3600 18.3%
Total 61.5%
Maximum saturation 65.6%

Draft, ITDP-China 318 19 July 2015

Roxas Blvd & Kalaw Ave intersection
Intersection Roxas Blvd & Kalaw Ave
Present four phase + BRT
Phase Side To Volumes Lane Capacity Saturation
(pcu/h) s (pcu/h)
1 North Straight 1432 2 3600 39.8%
Straight 148 1 1800 8.2%
BRT
South Straight 1502 2 3600 41.7%
Straight 121 1 1800 6.7%
BRT
Total (not include turn right) 41.7%
2 North Left 167 1 1800 9.3%
South Left 189 1 1800 10.5%
Total (not include turn right) 9.3%
3 East Straight+ 746 2 3600 20.7%
Left
Right 522 1 1800 29.0%
Before BRT: Total (not include turn right) 29.0%
4 West Straight+ 73 3 5400 1.4%
Left
Right 0 1 1800 0.0%
Total (not include turn right) 1.4%
Total (not include turn right) 81.4%

Intersection Roxas Blvd & Kalaw Ave

Proposed 2 u turn on north and south side + BRT
Phase Side To Volumes Lanes Capacity Saturation
(pcu/h) (pcu/h)
1 North Straight+ 1432 2 3600 39.8%
Right
Straight 148 1 1800 8.2%
BRT
South Straight+ 1502 2 3600 41.7%
Right
Straight 121 1 1800 6.7%
BRT
Total (not include turn right) 41.7%
2 North U turn 935 3 5400 17.3%
South U turn 240 3 5400 4.4%
Total (not include turn right) 17.3%
Total (not include turn right) 59.0%
After BRT:

Draft, ITDP-China 319 19 July 2015

Roxas Blvd and Padre Burgos Ave

Draft, ITDP-China 320 19 July 2015

8.4 Mixed traffic impacts at stations

Selected EDSA corridor stations

Station Direc- Volume Volume Current Current Re- Design Saturation
tion (include (exclude lanes (in- lanes (ex- quired lanes
bus) bus) clude bus clude bus lanes
(pcu/hr) (pcu/hr) lanes) lanes)
Project 7 EW 4300 4110 6 4 3 4 50%
WE 4888 4666 6 4 3 4 57%
North Avenue NS 4623 4377 6 4 3 3 71%
SN 4631 4413 5 3 3 3 72%
Kamuning NS 2269.6 1813.6 5 3 1 3 29%
SN 5550 5296 5 3 3 3 86%
Cubao North NS 2270 1813.6 6 4 1 3 29%
SN 5550 5296 6 4 3 3 86%
Cubao South NS 3217.6 2799.6 6 4 2 3 46%
SN 5678.8 5310.8 6 4 3 4 65%
Main Avenue NS 4814.8 4476.8 5 3 3 3 73%
SN 4474 4160 5 3 3 3 68%
Ortigas NB NS 5097 4817 5 3 3 3 78%
SN 4274 3864 5 3 2 3 63%
Guadalupe NS 5961 5635 5 3 3 3 92%
SN 4812 4482 5 3 3 3 73%
Guadalupe NS 5265 4951 5 3 3 3 81%
Neuvo SN 4549 4227 5 3 3 3 69%
Ayala (ground EW 1400 1238 6 4 1 3 20%
level) WE 1289 1081 5 3 1 3 18%
Magallanes NS 2502 2346 5 3 2 3 38%
SN 2825 2701 5 3 2 3 44%
Bangkal EW 4955 4815 5 3 3 3 78%
WE 4310 4138 5 3 3 3 67%
Taft Avenue EW 4930 4813 6 4 3 3 78%
WE 3716 3611 6 4 2 4 44%
EDSA EW 6252 6066 6 4 3 4 74%
Extension WE 3075 2991 6 4 2 4 36%
Balintawak EW 4886 4694 5 3 3 4 57%
WE 4847 4441 5 3 3 4 54%
Roosevelt EW 4832 3900 6 4 2 4 48%
WE 3080 4456 6 4 3 4 54%

Draft, ITDP-China 321 19 July 2015

Selected Makati corridor stations
Station Direc- Volume Volume Current Current Required Design Saturation
tion (include (exclude lanes (in- lanes (ex- lanes lanes
bus) bus) clude bus clude bus
(pcu/hr) (pcu/hr) lanes) lanes)
Buendia EW 2110 2044 4 mix 1 3 33%
WE 1708 1628 4 mix 1 3 26%
Paseo De EW 2282 2230 4 mix 2 3 36%
Roxas WE 1586 1522 4 mix 1 3 25%
Triangle Park EW 1013 1013 4 mix 1 3 16%
WE 2495 2431 4 mix 2 3 40%
Triangle Park EW 1570 1522 4 mix 1 3 25%
WE 2425 2369 4 mix 2 3 39%

Selected Meralco area stations

Station Direc- Volume Volume Current Current Required Design Saturation
tion (include (exclude lanes (in- lanes (ex- lanes lanes
bus) bus) clude bus clude bus
(pcu/hr) (pcu/hr) lanes) lanes)
Meralco South NS 543 543 3 mix 1 2 13%
SN 815 813 3 mix 1 2 20%
San Antonio EW 750 748 2 mix 1 1 37%
WE 485 483 2 mix 1 1 24%
Kapitolyo EW 474 474 2 mix 1 1 23%
WE 921 921 2 mix 1 1 45%

Selected Roxas corridor stations

Station Direc- Volume Volume Current Current Required Design Saturation
tion (incl. bus) (excl. bus) lanes (incl. lanes (excl. lanes lanes
(pcu/hr) (pcu/hr) bus lanes) bus lanes)
Roxas Blvd NS 2457 2365 5 mix 2 4 29%
SN 3180 3056 5 mix 2 4 37%
CCP Urban NS 3212 3190 5 mix 2 4 39%
Forest SN 2168 2168 4 mix 2 3 35%
Quirino Ave NS 3017 3001 4 mix 2 3 49%
SN 3306 3306 4 mix 2 3 54%
Kalaw Avenue NS 3412 3406 4 mix 2 3 55%
SN 1414 1414 5 mix 1 3 23%
Intramuros EW 1625 1625 4 mix 1 3 26%
WE 1257 1257 4 mix 1 3 20%
NAIA Road EW 2387 2387 5 mix 2 3 39%
WE 4002 4002 5 mix 2 3 65%
Tambo EW 1886 1858 3 mix 1 2 45%
WE 1914 1906 3 mix 1 2 46%

Draft, ITDP-China 322 19 July 2015

Selected C5 stations
Station Direction Volume Volume Current Current Required Design Saturation
(include (exclude lanes (in- lanes (ex- lanes lanes
bus) bus) clude bus clude bus
(pcu/hr) (pcu/hr) lanes) lanes)
C3 Rizal NS 5043 5033 4 mix 3 3 82%
SN 3290 3264 4 mix 2 3 53%
C4 BCDA NS 4152 4142 4 mix 3 3 67%
SN 2532 2506 4 mix 2 3 41%

8.5 Mixed traffic impacts at critical points

While the most critical locations for assessing traffic impacts are normally the stations, in EDSA there
were several other potential critical locations, as illustrated below.

Draft, ITDP-China 323 19 July 2015

Selected critical points along the EDSA BRT corridor
Location Direc- Level Volume Current Required Design Satu- Note
tion (pcu/hr) lanes lanes lanes ration
A (Quezon) NS Ramp 3120 3 2 2 76%
Ground 1417 3 1 3 23%
SN Ramp 3150 3 2 2 77%
Ground 1370 4 1 4 17%
B NS Ramp 772 3 1 2 19%
(Kamuning) Ground 1042 3 1 3 17%
SN Ramp 3736 3 2 2 91% Mix traffic can use
ground layer
Ground 1560 3 1 3 25%
C NS underground 2395 3 2 2 58%
(Magsaysay) Ground 404 2 1 2 10%
SN underground 3548 3 2 2 87% Mix traffic can use
ground layer
Ground 1762 2 1 2 43%
D (Santolan) NS Ramp 3545 3 2 2 86% Mix traffic can use
ground layer
Ground 932 3 1 3 15%
SN Ramp 3238 3 2 2 79%
Ground 922 3 1 3 15%
E (Ortigas) NS Ramp 3651 3 2 2 89% Mix traffic can use
ground layer
Ground 1166 3 1 3 19%
SN Ramp 2875 3 2 2 70%
Ground 810 3 1 3 13%
F EW Go straight 4815 4 3 3 78% Space for straight
(Magallanes) Ramp ramp on 2nd level
for mixed traffic
WE Go straight 4138 4 3 3 67%
Ramp
G (Taft Ave.) EW Ground 3425 3 3 3 56%
Ramp 2230 2 2 2 54%
Ground 4138 3 3 3 67%

The results of this analysis show that in all locations, solutions have been found which can accom-
modate the current mixed traffic volumes both at BRT stations and at critical points along the corridor,
without adversely impacting traffic.

Draft, ITDP-China 324 19 July 2015

9. Terminals, Depots and Control Center
 ‘Direct service’ operations
example - Guangzhou
‘Trunk & feeder’ operations
example - Bogota
Transfer
terminal series of transfer terminals
trunk routes
feeder routes
‘Trunk only’ operations
example - Jakarta
Terminal
trunk routes
Figure 9-1: ‘Direct service’ BRT operations are proposed
for Manila, and consequently BRT terminals are not
generally needed.
9.1 BRT terminals
The direct service operational design proposed
in this study in principle does not require BRT
terminals (Figure 9-1). However, several locations
can serve a terminal-like function in the BRT
system in Manila (Figure 9-2), including:
ITS Southwest. A BRT station is proposed
to be incorporated in the ITS Southwest
terminal development, currently in advanced
preparation for implementation, with multiple
BRT routes using this station. This can be a
natural point for transfers from some provin-
cial and other bus routes to the BRT system.
Depending on the status of the designs
and plans and any associated contracts, a
BRT depot could also be considered at ITS
Southwest.
ITS South. The ITS South terminal develop-
ment is also in advanced stages of preparation
for implementation, and is a large site with
the potential for inclusion of a BRT station.
Depending on the status of the designs and
Draft, ITDP-China 326
routes enter & leave corridor
BRT
corridors
Transfer
terminal
feeder routes
BRT
corridors
Terminal
BRT
corridors
plans and any associated contracts, a BRT
depot could also be considered at ITS South.
As noted previously, ITS South is one of two
key locations where provincial bus routes
enter EDSA, the other being Balintawak in
the north. The ITS South BRT station should
be designed in a way to make it as easy, fast
and convenient as possible for provincial
bus passengers to transfer to the BRT system
and vice versa, enabling many provincial bus
routes to terminate at this station instead of
entering EDSA.
ITS North. Some provincial bus routes can
terminate at ITS North instead of entering
EDSA. ITS North is like ITS Southwest and
ITS South in advanced stages of planning for
a terminal, and a BRT station is proposed to
be incorporated in the terminal, as well as a
depot if possible.
SM Fairview. At the north of Commonwealth
Avenue, SM Fairview BRT station will serve
multiple BRT routes and is a good ‘natural’
terminal location. Off-street bus parking
appears to be available in adjacent sites as well
as along the roadside in this area.
MOA. Like SM Fairview, MOA serves
19 July 2015
Figure 9-2: Stations with terminal-like
functions in the Manila BRT.

Draft, ITDP-China 327 19 July 2015

 multiple BRT routes and is a natural terminal
location in terms of both routes, passenger
demand, and existing terminals for UVs,
buses and jeepneys.
East Grace Park. Located at the proposed
transfer location for provincial bus routes
at Balintawak, East Grace Park BRT station
serves as a point for BRT passengers to transfer
to provincial buses and vice versa. Many pro-
vincial bus routes in this way can be terminated
at Balintawak instead of entering EDSA.
Project 7. If / when MRT7 proceeds, Project
7 station will be an important transfer station
between BRT and MRT.
Airport area. Multiple BRT routes terminate
in the airport area, so off-street parking
areas will need to be identified for BRT buses
during off-peak periods.
Figure 9-3 shows examples of BRT stations
incorporated into larger terminals in Brisbane,
Hangzhou, and Yichang; in all cases retrofitted
into existing terminal facilities. In the case of
Manila, if BRT facilities are included in the design
stage in ITS South, ITS Southwest and ITS North,
this will be easier than retrofitting them.

Figure 9-3: BRT

station and
busway retrofits
in Hangzhou
(railway station),
Yichang (railway
station; under
construction, June
2015) and Bris-
bane (Roma St rail
and bus terminal).

Draft, ITDP-China 328 19 July 2015

9.2 BRT staging areas in many cities, including even in very dense areas
in downtown Hong Kong, as illustrated in Figure
As part of the follow-up to this study, an inventory 9-4. Similarly in Guangzhou, one of the main BRT
needs to be undertaken of streets in the vicinity of routes uses the roadside for off-peak staging at the
the end of BRT routes to determine where buses eastern end of the corridor (Figure 9-5). Figure
can be parked during off-peak hours. This issue is 9-6 shows a roadside staging and basic clean-
especially important in areas where multiple BRT ing area in the Changzhou BRT system. In the
routes have ending points. The airport area is one Zhengzhou BRT, unused space beneath a roadway
such location, with several phase 1 BRT routes interchange serves a similar purpose, as in Figure
terminating there. 9-7.
Ideally the BRT operator will be responsible for Ensuring adequate toilet facilities for drivers is
providing the facilities to be used for bus parking, provided is an important consideration for the
basic cleaning and driver facilities during the BRT operators to solve, and should not be the
lower frequency off-peak hours, which would responsibility of the government. Approaches
mean the government need not provide funding used by operators in Guangzhou include:
for staging areas. Addressing the toilet issue at the end of each
The staging area requirements can be deter- trip, whenever a new route is opened.
mined following the completion of an operational Paying a nearby restaurant or other shop to
plan which also includes off-peak service. This allow the drivers to use the toilet.
report focused on peak hour requirements, which
In dense ‘urban villages’, paying a nearby
are key to the BRT infrastructure design and
residence to allow drivers to use their toilet
determination of fleet requirements.
Some general additional considerations on the For the most important, high frequency
use and location of staging areas include: routes, building small toilet facilities in a
The BRT routes can use different locations for temporary building where dispatch staff can
off-peak parking; it is not essential to concen- also be located (Figure 9-8). This may require
trate all the staging in one location. renting a space, especially if the land is not
government owned.
Toilet facilities for drivers should be available
at the end of a trip, though if public toilet
facilities are already available in nearby build-
ings, these can be used. 9.3 Depots
Cleaning staff should be on hand to do a Approximate costings were included for BRT
quick clean of buses at the end of a trip. depots, but the depots requires a preliminary
Ideally any staging areas will not be located design and more detailed costing, and the number
within close walking distance of any BRT sta- of depots will be determined after the number of
tions, unless it is along a street with very little operators (probably in the range of 3-8) is fixed.
potential for transit-oriented development or Potential depot sites could include:
pedestrian appeal. LRTA site at Santolan
Good locations for staging areas or roadside Integration with ITS South site?
terminals could be parking yards near the Integration with ITS Southwest site?
airport, along streets with continuous walls, in
Integration with ITS North site?
areas with industrial or logistics-related land
uses (which is common in the vicinity of the A fairly typical Chinese depot accommodating
airport), or underneath elevated roads. 210 buses has a construction cost of around $3.5
million (Fujian Province, Ningde City). With a
For the most important routes (determined by
recommendation of around 3-8 operators in the
bus frequency, fleet size and passenger rider-
Manila BRT, one depot per operator should be
ship), it may be necessary for the operator to
built, for a total of 3-8 depots.
build a small structure that can accommodate
dispatch staff as well as a toilet area.
‘Roadside’ bus staging areas are quite common

Draft, ITDP-China 329 19 July 2015

Figure 9-4: Roadside bus staging areas for minibuses of
a size similar to those recommended in Vientiane are
common in Hong Kong (above, and top), even in dense
downtown areas.
Figure 9-5: Roadside BRT staging area at Xiayuan BRT
station in Guangzhou (above image: Google Earth).
Draft, ITDP-China 330 19 July 2015
 Figure 9-6: Roadside
staging and basic clean-
ing of BRT buses between
trips in a BRT corridor in
Changzhou, China.

Figure 9-7: BRT staging

area beneath a roadway
interchange in Zheng-
zhou, China.

Figure 9-8: Roadside

facilities at terminal loca-
tions common for higher
demand bus and BRT
routes in Guangzhou.

Draft, ITDP-China 331 19 July 2015

9.4 BRT control center
The control center integrates the communica-
tion system, UPS system, clock synchronization
system, passenger information system, vehicle
locating system, dispatching system, sliding
door system, automated fare collection (AFC)
system, CCTV monitoring system, broadcasting
system, and others. Based on GPS, GPRS/CDMA/
WCDMA and GIS technology, real time informa-
tion for the BRT system can be collected, stored
and analyzed in the control center, the BRT buses
can be monitored in real time, and buses dis-
patched by instruction from the staff working in
the control center. Passengers at BRT stations can
get real time bus operation information sent from
the control center. The control center can help
ensure the BRT system operates efficiently, and
can help control and monitor the bus frequency.
This is a key function for systems in which BRT
operators are paid per bus-kilometer, which is
what is recommended in Manila.
With the control center, the BRT system can:
Rapidly respond to changes in passenger
demand.
Passenger demand for each station does
not generally change very much each day.
However, during holidays or special events
or when accidents happen, the control center
can monitor all the station passenger demand
through the CCTV cameras which are
installed in all BRT stations, and update the
dispatching plan according to the situation.
Rapidly respond to equipment failures and
security problems.
In the event of equipment failure, an alarm
will automatically be activated and the control
center can send the maintenance staff to the
site immediately.
Efficient spacing between vehicles.
Base on the GPS vehicle locating technology,
all the real time locations of BRT buses can be
monitored on the screen in the control center.
The staff can contact the drivers to make sure
all the buses are between the efficient spacing.
Automated system performance evaluation.
The daily performance for each bus can be
recorded by the system, and the evaluation
can be automatically generated through
system analysis and reporting functions.
Automated linkages between operations and
Draft, ITDP-China
revenue distribution.
The operational mileage for each bus and
the ticketing income for each station can be
recorded by the system, and used for revenue
distribution.
Safe environment for passengers.
In the event of a crime in a BRT station, the
control center can observe through the CCTV
cameras, broadcast an alert to the station, and
contact the police immediately.
Some requirements for the Manila BRT control
center are listed following:
Allow data from 892 buses to plug in, and for
up to 5,000 buses in future, to accommodate
future system growth.
150 m2 for an equipment room with 8 cabi-
nets and a control hall with TV wall with six
32 inch screens and 20 operational desks for
daily operational work.
High resolution (1080P, 720P) for video stor-
age, 24hrs, stored for up to 15 days.
Cabinet (800mm × 800mm × 2045mm).
The room of 250 m2 is assumed to be provided,
and only the cost for decoration is included in
the project budget. In experience elsewhere1, the
control room can often be provided from land or
buildings owned by the government, and does
not need to be separately purchased. If a separate
purchase is required, this needs to be added to the
project budget. Ideally the control room will be
located in fairly close proximity to the corridor, as
this will minimize cabling costs.
Note that the control center costs can vary a
lot depending on the functions required by the
government and the technical specifications in the
bidding.
Given the specialized functions required for the
BRT operation and management, including moni-
toring and control of BRT bus frequency both on
and off the BRT corridor, it is recommended that
there be a separate BRT control center in addi-
tion to any citywide traffic control center being
planned.
1 In Guangzhou the BRT control center space was provided by
the City Government. In Yichang and Lanzhou the BRT control
center space is provided by the municipal bus company.
332 19 July 2015
10. Stakeholder Consultation
10.1 Meetings &
presentations
During the course of the study, preliminary work
was presented to agencies including the following,
and in all cases the feedback was positive. Based
on the stakeholder consultation there appears to
be an overwhelmingly strong level of support for
measures to dramatically improve the transit and Metropolitan Manila Development
traffic situation in Metro Manila in general and
along EDSA in particular. The work was presented
to and discussed with:
Department of Transport and
Communications (DOTC)
Secretary Joseph Abaya (twice, once in April
2015 and again on 27 May 2015).
− Expressed great interest in and support for the
project.
Undersecretary Rene Limcaoco (twice)
− Strongly emphasized the need to serve and
benefit low income areas. This was a major
factor in the inclusion of the coastal corridor Department of Public Works and Highways
from the city center / Intramuros northward
past Tondo and connecting to Navotas, in the
phase 2 proposal.
− Emphasized the urgency of the government
timetable in terms of initiating the project and
carrying out some preliminary work. Agreed
that such preliminary work could include
elements such as preparatory road works,
ramp construction at Taft/Ayala, or work on
depots that could be done under an acceler-
ated schedule without jeopardizing the overall
project.
Robert Siy
− Key coordination person for ITDP’s work on
the project, arranging most of the meetings
and accompanying ITDP throughout. With
Gyeng Chul Kim, provided key input and
guidance.
National Economic and Development
Authority (NEDA)
− The main concern of NEDA was that the
project should fit into an existing policy
framework.
− It was agreed that the project should be
further investigated as a means to making
Draft, ITDP-China 334
major improvements along EDSA, though
the consultants would need to explain why
the proposed corridors were selected. From a
policy perspective there was sufficient justi-
fication for the project to be further studied
based on early proposals listing key roads
requiring transit improvements in Manila.
Authority (MMDA)
Chairman Francis Tolentino
− Suggested using C3 instead of Samson Road,
as C3 will soon connect continuously to Rizal
Avenue. The alignment was changed based on
this feedback.
− Suggested several other potential corridors
that could be considered for additional cor-
ridors for a BRT network in Manila.
− Emphasized the importance of a route along
C5 / Katipunan. A route was added in phase 2
serving this area.
(DPWH)
− Meetings were not at a very senior level, and
were focused mainly on discussing the design
options for the Kapitolyo and Santa Monica
Bridge proposals.
Light Rail Transit Authority (LRTA)
− Meeting was at a senior level, but when the
proposals were presented the LRTA did not
show a high level of interest in the designs
or proposals and there was no substantive
discussion.
Asian Development Bank (ADB)
Lloyd Wright
− Multiple meetings and guidance for ITDP’s
work on the project.
− Key guidance on corridor selection, urban
development patterns in Metro Manila,
stakeholders, designs, and many other issues.
Transport Adviser
− Strong support for further dialog about
options; main concern was not to rush the
project in a way that would compromise
quality.
− Agreed that the project, if done well, had
19 July 2015
 transformative potential for Manila.
Head of Southeast Asia Transport Division
− Agreed that the ADB should support a dialog
about options for the proposed BRT system.
Head of South Asia Transport Division
Head of Philippines Country Division.
− Expressed interest in the project, though was
wary of the challenges involved.
Developers
BGC
− Strong support expressed for the proposed
BRT as a way of connecting various CBDs in
Manila.
− Feedback on the alignment, especially to
make the BRT go one-way along 7th and 9th
Avenues in BGC.
− A major concern for them is pass-through car
traffic using BGC between C5 and EDSA.
OCLP Holdings
− Joey F. Santos, Senior Vice President and
General Manager, Real Estate Division
− Support for the project as well as for the
concept of locating a BRT station inside
Capitol Commons. (In the final design, it is
not considered necessary, though, to include
a BRT station inside Capitol Commons, since
the station on Meralco Avenue directly adja-
cent will serve passengers accessing Capitol
Commons.)
Kapitolyo community leaders
− Strong support expressed for the project.
− Suggested banning right turns from the
north to south along the north part of West
Capitol Drive into United Street, to deter
pass-through traffic from the north accessing
Pioneer and then EDSA. We agree with this
proposal.
10.2 Seminar on 29 May 2015
The basic concepts in this BRT conceptual design
were presented at a meeting of stakeholders
organized by GIZ and the DOTC on 29 May 2015. Land Transportation Franchising and
Discussions with affected bus owners indicated
broad support for the notion of a significant BRT
system on EDSA, so long as they were involved in
Draft, ITDP-China
the operations, and depending on the details as
they emerged. Most had seen earlier curb-aligned
bus lanes implemented on EDSA and there was
broad skepticism that such simple bus lanes would
make significant difference to their operations.
They raised questions about the tax treatment of
the legal entity, to which they were told that the
tax treatment was to be determined but that tax
treatment would be included by the bidders in the
estimate of their fee per kilometer offer.
The list of participants is provided below.
Department of Transportation and
Communications (DOTC)
Robert Siy, Special Advisor to the Secretary
Department of Transportation and
Communications (DOTC)
Yuri Sarmiento President 1-TEAM, Senior
Advisor Department of Transportation and
Communications (DOTC)
Gyeng Chul Kim, Special Advisor, Secretary
Department of Transportation and
Communications
Sherielysse Bonifacio Assistant Secretary for
Planning and Finance
Florencia Creus, Director III, Planning
Service
Arnel Manresa, Division Chief, Road
Transport Planning Unit
Lemar Jimenez Senior Transport
Development Officer, Road Transport
Planning Unit Ronald Cartagena ESITU,
Planning Service
Beatriz Bayudan Technical Assistant, Office of
Planning and Finance
Concepcion Garcia Technical Assistant, Office
of Planning and Finance
Light Rail Transit Authority (LRTA)
Allan Arquiza Corporate Planning Chief
Dennis Atendido Executive Assistant
A Raymond Manuel MIS Technical Staff
Nestor Flores
Odraude Perez
Regulatory Board (LTFRB)
Robert Cabrera Executive Director
335 19 July 2015
 Bobby Peig Director and OIC, Legal Division Leonido Pulido - Owner

Office of Transportation Cooperatives University of the Philippines

(OTC) Hilario Sean Palmiano Director, National
Reymundo De Guzman Executive Director Center for Transportation Studies
Rommel Efren Laurena
Liberato Bunsol Local Government Units
Concordia Bunsol Susan Samar City of Mandaluyong
Romulo Fernando Donna Gonda City of Mandaluyong
Rogelio Ignacio
German International Cooperation (GIZ)
Teresita Alarcon
Danielle Guillen Senior Advisor, TRANSfer
Project and Transport and Climate Change
Department of Justice (DOJ) (TCC) Project
Jomar Dans Economist III Cristina Villaraza Junior Advisor, TRANSfer
John Raphael Fulgar Economist III Project and Transport and Climate Change
(TCC) Project
Metro Manila Development Authority Alvin Mejia Consultant, TRANSfer Project
(MMDA) Jane Romero Consultant GIZ-TRANSfer
Emilio Llavor Chief, Planning and Design Project and Transport and Climate Change
Division of the Traffic Engineering Project

Institute for Transportation and BUS OPERATORS

Development Policy Jose Aguilo JAM Liner-Philtranco Group
Karl Fjellstrom, Regional Director for Asia Rodelio Domingo JAM Liner-Philtranco
and EDSA BRT study team leader Group
BRT Planning International, LLC Philip Abesamis JAM Liner-Philtranco Group
Dr. Walter Hook Gabriel David Linaheim Corporate Services
Jerico Castillanes Linaheim Corporate
Center Clean Air Asia Services
Mark Angelo Tacderas Transport Researcher
Michael Salalima RRCG Transport System
Co., Inc.
Development Bank of the Philippines Michael De Mesa RRCG Transport System
(DBP) Co., Inc.
Anita Salayon Senior Assistant Vice President,
Anton Flores RRCG Transport System Co.,
Financing Infrastructure, Environment and
Inc.
Logistics Development Department
Atanasio Vergantinos Mersan Snow White
Jona Kristel Luardo Manager, Environment
Transport Corporation
Unit
Homer Mercado HM Transport
De La Salle University (DLSU)
Alexis Fillone Associate Professor,
Department of Civil Engineering
Gregg Garcia Technical Expert, DLSU
Innovation and Technology Office 2

Electric Vehicle Expansion Enterprise, Inc.

(EVEE-I)
Draft, ITDP-China 336 19 July 2015
11. Implementation Cost
EDSA BRT costings were prepared initially using
PRC costs based on ITDP-China’s experience in
Guangzhou, Yichang, Lanzhou and other cities
(including regional cities such as Vientiane and
Kuala Lumpur), and then subsequently with
revisions working with a Manila-based costing
engineer to arrive at costs for Manila.
The ‘comment’ column in the budget tables
explains assumptions, uncertainties and other
factors. Costings for each corridor were prepared,
as well as summary tables. The total cost is around
$526 million for the phase 1 BRT, including buses,
though note that this includes many components
that may not need to be covered by the govern-
ment. For example, the project at Shaw Boulevard
station is an excellent potential development proj-
ect. The rollout of smart cards for the BRT system
may be covered by another project such as ongo-
ing projects to introduce MRT / LRT / bus smart
cards. The cost of the buses could be expected to
be at least partly covered by the operators, with a
possible government guarantee for the loans the
operators need to procure buses.
The costings do not include any major reloca-
tion of utilities, but this requires further analysis
during the engineering design stage. The govern-
ment may decide to combine the BRT road works
with other planned road work projects in EDSA.
The costings cover the phase 1 BRT system
in the most detail, with 36.4km and 50 stations,
including off-corridor stations at ITS North, ITS
South, ITS Southwest, and SM Fairview at the
north of Commonwealth Avenue (Figure 10-1).
Some key notes and parameters include:
1. For the costing of civil engineering, such
as road engineering, greenery, street lights,
drainage, and other infrastructure, the costing
tables have been prepared with a Filipino cost
engineer and reflect realistic local costs.
2. For the costing of the ITS systems, AFC (auto-
mated fare collection) system, automatic door
system, control center and smart card system,
since there is no precedent for such systems in
Philippine, the costings were based on refer-
ence prices from Guangzhou, Lanzhou and
Yichang BRT projects in China. The import
tax, business tax and labor tax is considered 15%.
3. The preferred BRT phase 1 includes 35.8 km of
segregated bus lanes (noting an approximately
600m long mixed traffic portion at Magallanes)
and 50 stations.
Draft, ITDP-China
4. Bus lane will be C35 reinforced concrete at
stations and asphalt between stations.
5. We mainly keep the current road pavement,
only reconstructing where the greenbelt needs
to be moved or the sidewalk needs to be
widened.
6. The existing pedestrian overpass bridges are of
very poor quality and most of them need to be
torn down and rebuilt in new locations, with
better dimensions, specifications, and with
universal access.
7. Elevated steel pedestrian sidewalk is proposed
to be the connection between MRT station and
BRT station.
8. New planted trees at 6m intervals.
9. New street lights at 20m intervals.
10. New drainage well at 30m intervals.
11. Drainage branch pipes 300mm diameter at
10m intervals.
12. For the BRT ITS, control system and control
center cost is based on the PRC BRT projects
cost. This cost varies greatly depending on the
desired system specifications, functions and
capabilities.
13. The depot cost estimate is based on a similar
case in the PRC, considering 3 to 8 depots.
14. The smart card system is based on the similar
case in the PRC, considering about 892 buses,
3,000,000 cards to be distributed, and 50
recharge stations .
15. BRT vehicle purchase is listed separately.
The price is based on a reference price from a
manufacturer in the PRC, and import tax and
shipping costs are included.
Depots
For present purposes a budget line item of $50m
is included for depots. If sites for depots can be
made available without needing to buy the land,
and assuming a cost of $5 million per depot for
the infrastructure, this amount will accommodate
up to ten depots. A typical depot in the PRC for
210 buses has an area of around 42,000 square
meters, though note depots could be smaller if the
buses are able to be parked off-site. In the Santolan
area, for example, off-site parking locations seem
to be available under the elevated roads and LRT.
The cost of the depot is also subject to whether
the land is already available as government-owned
land, since the depot will be built and owned by
the government.
338 19 July 2015
Figure 10-1: These costings cover the proposed phase 1
BRT system, with 36.4km and 50 stations.

Draft, ITDP-China 339 19 July 2015

 COSTING FOR MANILA BRT CONCEPTUAL PLAN (Phase 1)
EDSA MAKATI AIRPORT OFF-CORRIDOR STATIONS
No. Item Volume Cost Volume Cost Volume Cost Volume Cost
I Road infrastructure 24.0 20,850,662 5.3 7,485,736 7.4 5,721,647 0.2 1,304,476
II BRT station access
(A) New bridge with long ramp 17 40,887,152 0 0 1 2,405,127 1 2,405,127
(B) New bridge 25 39,951,602 0 0 0 0 1 1,598,064
(C) Current bridge connection 2 161,931 0 0 3 242,897 0 0
(D) MRT connection 11 13,139,861 0 0 0 0 0 0
(E) Tunnel connection 0 0 5 2,823,213 0 0 0 0
(F) Demolish current bridge 17 140,761 0 0 0 0 0 0
(G) Lift 37 2,984,540 5 403,316 4 322,653 0 0
III BRT station and ITS 32 71,013,378 8 8,962,871 8 6,055,918 4 4,477,271
IV Elevated sidewalk 4800 9,636,567 0 0 0 0 0 0

Draft, ITDP-China
V BRT ramp
(A) Ramp at East Grace Park 1675 1,626,585 0 0 0 0 0 0
(B) Ramp at Shaw Boulevard 16980 16,489,205 0 0 0 0 0 0
(C) Ramp at Ayala 450 436,993 0 0 0 0 0 0
(D) Ramp at Taft Avenue 820 796,298 0 0 0 0 0 0
VI Guadalupe bike/ped bridge 1 7,743,670 0 0 0 0 0 0

340
VII Depot 1 50,000,000 0 0 0 0 0 0
VIII Smart card 1 9,838,284 0 0 0 0 0 0
IX Bus 892 111,800,000 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 397,497,491 19,675,137 14,748,242 9,784,938

Without depot, smart card and bus 225,859,207

Construction Phase I 441,705,807

Project indirect cost and expenses(not include smart card and bus) 83,217,556

19 July 2015
Total 524,923,362

NOTE:
1. The cost for road infrastructure is based on Manila local price and the ITS part is based on Chinese price (15% import tax included)
2. Bus lane will be C35 reinforced concrete at stations and asphalt between stations.
3. We mainly keep the current road pavement, only reconstructing where the greenbelt needs to be moved or the sidewalk needs to be widened.
4. The existing pedestrian overpass bridges are of very poor quality and basically all need to be torn down and rebuilt in new locations, dimensions, specifications, and universal access.
5. Elevated steel pedestrian sidewalk is proposed to be the connection between MRT station and BRT station
6. The cost for smart card system is based on project in China. 3,000,000 cards and 50 recharge stations are assumed.
7. 50,000,000 USD is assumed for depot now, needs further study on it.
8. The price for BRT bus is from Kinglong in China, and import tax is included. Euro 4 need to add 20% more.
 Costing for Manila BRT conceptual design (EDSA)
Unit Cost Total Cost
EDSA
No. Item Volume Comment
(US $) (US $)
I Road engineering
Subtotal 144,646,329.82
1 AC-13C asphalt concrete (4cm) 27142.5 12.55 340,573.61
2 AC-20C asphalt concrete (6cm 13571.25 17.25 234,144.35
3 TAB-25 asphalt macadam (8cm) 13571.25 4.53 61,424.88
Including change current sidewalk to be traffic lane and just renew the current
1 Mix traffic lanes (asphalt) 4 5% cement stabilized macadam (35cm) 13571.25 8.11 110,078.25 asphalt pavement (demolish 4cm and repave 4cm asphalt).
5 4% cement stabilized macadam (15cm) 13571.25 3.47 47,132.95
6 Graded broken stone (15cm) 13571.25 1.90 25,847.10
7 Geotextiles 16170 1.50 24,274.93
1 C35 steel reinforced cement concrete (25cm) 59995 43.69 2,621,336.54
2 BRT lanes (concrete) 2 4% graded broken stone (20cm) 59995 2.58 154,591.64 At BRT station
3 Graded broken stone (15cm) 59995 1.90 114,263.39
3 BRT ramp 19925 971.10 19,349,081.34 Concrete ramp for BRT bus only

Draft, ITDP-China
1 Sidewalk brick (5cm) 18480 101.05 1,867,461.35
4 Sidewalk 2 C20 cement concrete (15cm) 9240 13.89 128,362.09 Including new sidewalk and just renew the current brick pavement.
3 Graded broken stone (10cm) 9240 1.30 12,008.07
5 Elevated sidewalk 4800 2,007.62 9,636,567.33 Steel elevated sidewalk
1 Footbridge 25 1,598,064.08 39,951,602.06 50m long and 4m wide
2 Footbridge with long ramp 17 2,405,126.60 40,887,152.14 1:20 long ramp
6 Steel foot bridge 3 Integrate with existing bridge 2 80,965.72 161,931.44 Connection from existing pedestrian bridge
4 Demolish current bridge 17 8,280.08 140,761.37

341
5 Lift 19 80,663.23 1,532,601.39
1 MRT connection 11 1,194,532.83 13,139,861.08 Including new sidewalk and just renew the current brick pavement.
7 MRT connection
2 Lift 18 80,663.23 1,451,938.16
1 Tunnel connection 0 564,642.62 - Tunnel connection from existing pedestrian tunnel
8 Tunnel connection
2 Lift 0 80,663.23 -
9 Guadalupe bike/ped bridge 1 7,743,670.18 7,743,670.18
10 Bus lane separator 48000 6.83 328,030.47 Bogota type
11 Sidewalk curb 12127.5 3.92 47,553.50
1.5m distance, long sidewalk, refudge islands and BRT access.50cm in the
12 Steel bollard 32120 141.16 4,534,080.22

19 July 2015
II Greenery
Subtotal 37,796.35
1 Newly planted trees 0 241.99 -
2 New green belt 672 8.29 5,571.14
3 Demolish the existing greenbelt 41091.75 0.78 32,225.21
III Street light
Subtotal 2,272,555.46
1 Remove exsiting lights 405 233.70 94,648.22
2 New lights 405 5,377.55 2,177,907.24
IV Water drainage
Subtotal 452,890.43
1 New drainage along road 0 322.20 -
 2 New drainage at station 8085 56.02 452,890.43
V Traffic engineering (road marking and traffic signal)
subtotal 1,491,184.41
1 Road marking 46800 13.11 613,443.87
1 Single pole 160 173.20 27,712.30 Including basement and installing
2 high 6.5m arm 4m) 50 1,579.65 78,982.75 Including basement and installing
3 high 6.5m arm 4m) 64 1,579.65 101,097.92 Including basement and installing
2 Traffic signage facility
4 Signage board (1m*1m) 128 231.23 29,598.03 Including installing
5 Signage board (2m*3m) 80 1,624.24 129,939.50 Including installing
6 Signage board (1.5m*2m) 80 654.16 52,332.51 Including installing
1 "L" pole (6m arm) 30 3,372.17 101,165.14 Including basement and installing
2 "L" pole (8m arm) 10 3,596.24 35,962.36 Including basement and installing
3 30 1,232.35 36,970.65 Including basement and installing
3 Traffic signal facility 4 160 963.48 154,156.40 Including basement and installing
5 Traffic signal 160 423.48 67,757.11 Including installing
6 Pedestrian signal 160 268.88 43,020.39 Including installing
7 Traffic signal controller (C4 area control) 10 1,904.55 19,045.49 Including Cable, well and civil engineering
VI BRT Station Architecture Structure and Decoration
subtotal 37,127,265.24

Draft, ITDP-China
1 1 substop 0 823.72 -
New station architecture,
1 2 2 substop 15432.5 823.72 12,712,108.73
structure and decoration
3 3 substop 29640 823.72 24,415,156.51
VII BRT station power supply and lighting Estimated by cost per m2
subtotal 5,806,582.78
1 BRT station power supply and lighting 45072.5 70.35 3,170,668.45
2 Voltage transformer 32 82,372.32 2,635,914.33

342
VIII BRT Station drainage and fire protection Estimated by cost per m2
subtotal 103,956.34
1 BRT station drainage and fire protection 45072.5 2.31 103,956.34
IX BRT station ventilation and air conditioning Estimated by cost per m2
subtotal 126,232.70
1 BRT station ventilation and air conditioning 45072.5 2.80 126,232.70
X On-station BRT ITS system
(A) Operation and dispatching system
Subtotal 3,127,143.00
(a) Network and communication

19 July 2015
Station industrial Ethernet 1 Host 32 7,481.20 239,398.54
1 switches (including terminal 2 SFP slot 35 727.51 25,462.93
switches) 3 10KM optical module 70 727.51 50,925.86
1 Host 32 1,153.21 36,902.80
Network cabinets on station 2 Power supply socket 32 38.94 1,246.05
2
and terminals 3 Distributor 32 329.49 10,543.66
4 Drum stand 32 17.97 575.10
1 Optical cable (36 core) 33.6 4,677.25 157,155.61
2 Optical cable (12 core) 10 3,051.67 30,516.71 Control center to the nearest station
3 Optical cable implement cost 43.6 1,497.68 65,298.79
Fibre and supporting
3 4 Optical cable unit box 32 605.89 19,388.52
equipment
5 ODF frame 6 5,772.18 34,633.10
6 Jumper 146 8.99 1,312.08
7 Welding 336 11.98 4,025.91
 4 Station cable integration 32 2,396.29 76,681.12
(b) Passenger information service
1 Industrial panel computer 32 3,459.64 110,708.40
2 Flush mounting bracket 32 123.56 3,953.87
Station passenger information
1 3 Cable 4800 0.73 3,518.95
self-enquiry system
1 25,205.93 25,205.93
4 Passenger self-inquiry system application software
32 428.34 13,706.75
1 LED screen 324 1,313.00 425,410.93
2 LED screen body shell 324 576.61 186,820.43
3 Hanger 324 120.47 39,032.13
4 LED screen control card 324 240.46 77,908.39
5 Power Module 324 74.14 24,019.77
6 Ground fault circuit interrupter (GFCI) 324 19.77 6,405.27
Station passenger information 7 Timer switch 324 19.77 6,405.27
2
display system 8 Signal cable 324 0.67 218.31
9 Power cable 48600 1.48 72,059.31
10 Host computer 32 1,617.49 51,759.76
11 Serial port card 32 329.49 10,543.66
12 WinXP pro system 32 179.72 5,751.09

Draft, ITDP-China
1 53,377.27 53,377.27
13 Passenger information display system application software
324 576.61 186,820.43
(c) Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS)
1 UPS host 5 4,481.05 22,405.27
2 Battery cabinet 5 898.61 4,493.04
Terminal 10KVA1H integration
1 3 Battery 80 374.42 29,953.61
UPS system
4 Distribution box 5 247.12 1,235.58
5 Wiring 5 314.51 1,572.56

343
1 UPS host 32 4,481.05 143,393.74
Station 10KVA1H integration 2 Battery cabinet 32 898.61 28,755.45
2
UPS system (15minutes) 3 Battery 928 118.32 109,797.54
4 Wiring 32 404.37 12,939.97
(d) CCTV video monitoring
1 HD network infrared dome camera (1080P) 64 2,665.87 170,615.57 Plus 2 for NS9&EW12
2 HD network infrared waterproof camera (720P) 388 503.22 195,249.65
3 HD network infrared dome camera (720P) 64 533.17 34,123.07
1 Station video monitoring
4 2 in 1 lightning arrester 516 62.90 32,457.85
5 RJ45 network cable 30960 0.73 22,697.20

19 July 2015
6 Power cable 30960 0.67 20,861.02
(e) The IP Digital Broadcasting
1 IP network paging microphone 32 762.02 24,384.58
2 Normal microphone 32 95.25 3,048.07
Station digital broadcast
1 3 Power amplifier 64 323.80 20,723.03
equipment
4 Embedded sound box 128 91.44 11,704.51
5 Voice cable 12800 1.59 20,328.17
1 IP network paging microphone 5 762.02 3,810.09
2 Normal microphone 5 95.25 476.26
Terminal digital broadcast
2 3 Power amplifier 5 323.80 1,618.99
equipment
4 Outdoor waterproof sound box 10 87.46 874.65
5 Voice cable 4000 1.59 6,352.55
(f) Bus operational monitoring and dispatching management system operations
1 Supporting communication and supporting locating equipment sub-system
 Station supporting Station supporting communication and supporting locating
1 32 576.61 18,451.40 2.4GHZ
1 communication and supporting equipment
locating equipment 2 Supporting cable 6400 1.20 7,665.24 RVVP4*0.5 each short-distance communication device need 100m
Terminal supporting Terminal supporting communication and supporting locating
1 5 576.61 2,883.03
2 communication and supporting equipment
locating equipment 2 Supporting cable 2000 1.86 3,713.34
2 Terminal on site dispatching sub-system
1 Standard computer 5 1,141.44 5,707.22
Dispatching computer with 2
1 2 Pu-frequency monitor 10 282.42 2,824.20
LCD screen
3 Graphics 5 200.05 1,000.24
2 Multi-function station machine 5 8,237.23 41,186.16
1 Base and outer structure 5 3,323.72 16,618.62
2 LED screen 5 3,558.48 17,792.42
3 Out-door dispatching screen 3 Electric controller 5 102.97 514.83
4 Signal control cable 1000 0.67 673.81
5 Power cable 1000 0.84 838.55
1 Base and outer structure 5 1,235.58 6,177.92
2 LED screen 5 1,853.38 9,266.89
4 In-door dispatching screen 3 Electric controller 5 102.97 514.83

Draft, ITDP-China
4 Signal control cable 1000 0.67 673.81
5 Power cable 1000 0.84 838.55
5 Terminal cabling fee 5 1,647.45 8,237.23
(B) AFC system
Subtotal 963,690.28
1 Station network switch 32 1,647.45 52,718.29
2 Turnstile 460 1,647.45 757,825.37 Normal from 5000rmb to 10000rmb
1 Equipment on station 3 Card reader 32 988.47 31,630.97
For card payment by ticketing office.

344
4 Cash collection box 32 609.56 19,505.77
5 Station communication host 32 1,317.96 42,174.63 Normal computer to communicate with center
1 Emergency control button 1 13,014.83 13,014.83
2 Distribution cable 1 6,771.00 6,771.00
2 Other 3 Network cable 1 23,986.82 23,986.82
4 Connection cable 1 2,800.66 2,800.66
5 Other supporting equipment 1 4,141.68 4,141.68
1 Backup material 1 8,329.49 8,329.49
3 Backup
2 Tools 1 790.77 790.77
(C) Automatic door
Subtotal 14,617,711.82
1 Control system on station 32 7,413.51 237,232.29

19 July 2015
Equipment power distribution cabinet (including stabilized
2 32 2,240.53 71,696.87
voltage power supply cabinet)
3 Sliding door radio frequency remote sensor device 32 691.93 22,141.68
4 Sliding doors 1804 2,471.17 4,457,990.12
1 Automatic door 5 Door control unit (DCU) 1804 823.72 1,485,996.71
6 Fixed side box 1804 1,350.91 2,437,034.60
7 Sliding door 1804 1,235.58 2,228,995.06 Stainless steel
8 Indicator light 3608 32.95 118,879.74
Bearing pedestal, supporting part, fasten part, decoration
9 1804 708.40 1,277,957.17
materials and etc.
2 Cable 32 3,923.96 125,566.85
3 Construction 1804 830.31 1,497,884.68
4 Backup 1 68,527.18 68,527.18
5 On-bus radio frequency remote sensor device and bus door open/close button 892 658.98 587,808.90
(D) Control Center
 Subtotal 8,613,612.79 Assume the room around 150m2 will be provided
1 Central service server 1 109,390.44 109,390.44
Automatic door and AFC
1 2 Ticketing central system 1 728,237.23 728,237.23
system
3 System and application software 1 862,438.22 862,438.22
1 Network and communication 1 385,534.42 385,534.42
2 Uninterruptible power supply (UPS) 1 217,277.12 217,277.12
3 CCTV video monitoring 1 1,454,574.04 1,454,574.04
4 The IP digital broadcasting 1 12,130.38 12,130.38
Operation and dispatching 5 Clock synchronization system 1 21,926.01 21,926.01
2
system
Bus operational monitoring and dispatching management
6 1 3,710,936.28 3,710,936.28
system operations
BRT operational monitoring and dispatching management
7 1 448,105.44 448,105.44
subsystem - business software
8 Other cost 1 663,063.19 663,063.19
XI Passenger Information
Subtotal 527,182.87
Including four levels of information, outside staiton on sidewalk, on bridge, in
1 Passenger Information system for 32 stations 32 14,827.02 474,464.58
front of station entrance and inside station
2 Maps print and bus routes print out 32 1,647.45 52,718.29

Draft, ITDP-China
XII Traffic organization during construction
Subtotal 823,723.23
Including the short-term traffic marking, traffic leading sign, divider, fance,
1 Traffic organization during construction 1 823,723.23 823,723.23
bus shelters and organizaiton assistant, etc.
XIII Traffic surveillance and control
Subtotal 5,121,349.26
At each intersection or T-junction, including controllers, video capture cards,
1 Traffic signal violence controller 10 5,024.71 50,247.12 capture control software, operating systems, traffic light signal detector and
etc.
2 Pole 30 2,771.00 83,130.15 "L" type, including the foundation

345
3 Digital camera 60 995.06 59,703.46
4 Video camera 30 1,408.57 42,257.00
5 Protective cover 90 148.27 13,344.32

Traffic signal violence control 6 Outdoor waterproof anti-theft stainless steel case 30 560.13 16,803.95
1 7 standard leakage protector 30 65.90 1,976.94
at intersection
8 Assisted lighting (flash) 30 311.37 9,341.02
9 Power 30 254.53 7,635.91 For UPS, video camera and digital camera
10 SPD 30 148.27 4,448.11 For power, controller and camera
11 Lightning detection 30 263.59 7,907.74
12 Communication module 30 411.86 12,355.85

19 July 2015
13 Detect loop 90 214.17 19,275.12
1 Integrated dome camera 240 2,487.64 597,034.60 At each 200m, for the vehicle running in the bus lane.
2 Pole 240 691.93 166,062.60 "L" type, including the foundation
3 Outdoor waterproof anti-theft stainless steel case 240 560.13 134,431.63
4 Standard leakage protector 240 65.90 15,815.49
5 SPD 240 148.27 35,584.84 For power, controller and camera
6 Lightning detection 240 263.59 63,261.94
7 Bi-directional video data + ethernet Fiber terminal 240 4,365.73 1,047,775.95
BRT lane enforcement
2 8 Power 240 254.53 61,087.31 For UPS, video camera and digital camera
(camera along corridor)
9 Optical fibre slot box (7 slots) 240 261.94 62,866.56
10 Video distributor (FS-16) 240 1,350.91 324,217.46
11 Code distributor (FS-C-485D) 240 1,663.92 399,341.02
12 16 DVR 240 1,565.07 375,617.79
13 Optical jumper 240 60.13 14,431.63
 BRT lane enforcement
2
(camera along corridor)

14 Fiber ends box 240 70.84 17,001.65

15 Camera supporting frame 240 411.86 98,846.79
For the vehicle running in the bus lane.including local storage 16G SD card,
3 BRT lane enforcement (camera in front of bus) 500 372.32 186,161.45
powerbox, and equipment box
1 Integrated dome camera 48 2,487.64 119,406.92 At each 500m, for the overview of the whole traffic condition.
2 Pole 48 691.93 33,212.52 "L" type, including the foundation
3 Outdoor waterproof anti-theft stainless steel case 48 560.13 26,886.33
4 Standard leakage protector 48 65.90 3,163.10

Draft, ITDP-China
5 SPD 48 148.27 7,116.97 For power, controller and camera
6 Lightning detection 48 263.59 12,652.39
7 Bi-directional video data + ethernet fiber terminal 48 4,365.73 209,555.19
4 CCTV camera system 8 Power 48 254.53 12,217.46 For UPS, video camera and digital camera
9 Optical fibre slot box (7 slots) 48 261.94 12,573.31
10 Video distributor (FS-16) 48 1,350.91 64,843.49
11 Code distributor (FS-C-485D) 48 1,663.92 79,868.20
12 16 DVR 48 1,565.07 75,123.56

346
13 Optical jumper 48 60.13 2,886.33
14 Fiber ends box 48 70.84 3,400.33
15 Camera supporting frame 48 411.86 19,769.36
Purchase the right to use fiber-optic network from the operator for 20 years,
5 Optical fibre lease 1000 148.27 148,270.18
including three years of maintenance costs
6 Server in control center 3 41,186.16 123,558.48
7 Supporting equipment in control center 1 238,879.74 238,879.74

Project direct cost and expenses 225,859,206.79

XIV Project indirect cost and expenses

19 July 2015
Subtotal
1 Including feasibility study, detailed engineering design, tendering assistance, construction management, supervision, and etc. 58,723,393.76 Normally around 26% of total project cost
Total 284,582,600.55
 Costing for Manila BRT conceptual design (Makati)
Unit Cost Total Cost
No. Item Volume Comment
(US $) (US $)
I Road engineering
Makati
Subtotal 6,072,730.34
1 AC-13C asphalt concrete (4cm) 29835 12.55 374,358.06
2 AC-20C asphalt concrete (6cm 14917.5 17.25 257,371.16
3 TAB-25 asphalt macadam (8cm) 14917.5 4.53 67,518.15
Including change current sidewalk to be traffic lane and just renew the current
1 Mix traffic lanes (asphalt) 4 5% cement stabilized macadam (35cm) 14917.5 8.11 120,997.87 asphalt pavement (demolish 4cm and repave 4cm asphalt).
5 4% cement stabilized macadam (15cm) 14917.5 3.47 51,808.48
6 Graded broken stone (15cm) 14917.5 1.90 28,411.10
7 Geotextiles 11880 1.50 17,834.64
1 C35 steel reinforced cement concrete (25cm) 13640 43.69 595,966.84
2 BRT lanes (concrete) 2 4% graded broken stone (20cm) 13640 2.58 35,146.76 At BRT station
3 Graded broken stone (15cm) 13640 1.90 25,978.04
3 BRT ramp 0 971.10 -
1 Sidewalk brick (5cm) 1350 101.05 136,421.69
4 Sidewalk 2 C20 cement concrete (15cm) 675 13.89 9,377.10 Including new sidewalk and just renew the current brick pavement.

Draft, ITDP-China
3 Graded broken stone (10cm) 675 1.30 877.21
5 Elevated sidewalk 0 2,007.62 -
1 Footbridge 0 1,598,064.08 - 50m long and 4m wide

2 Footbridge with long ramp 0 2,405,126.60 - 1:20 long ramp

6 Steel foot bridge 3 Integrate with existing bridge 0 80,965.72 - Connection from existing pedestrian bridge

4 Demolish current bridge 0 8,280.08 -

5 Lift 0 80,663.23 -

347
1 MRT connection 0 1,194,532.83 - Including new sidewalk and just renew the current brick pavement.
7 MRT connection
2 Lift 0 80,663.23 -
1 Tunnel connection 5 564,642.62 2,823,213.09 Tunnel connection from existing pedestrian tunnel
8 Tunnel connection
2 Lift 5 80,663.23 403,316.16
9 Guadalupe bike/ped bridge 0 7,743,670.18 -
10 Bus lane separator 10600 6.83 72,440.06 Bogota type
11 Sidewalk curb 3000 3.92 11,763.39
1.5m distance, long sidewalk, refudge islands and BRT access.50cm in the
12 Steel bollard 7367 141.16 1,039,930.54

II Greenery
Subtotal 19,589.40

19 July 2015
1 Newly planted trees 0 241.99 -
2 New green belt 1040 8.29 8,622.00
3 Demolish the existing greenbelt 13985 0.78 10,967.40
III Street light
Subtotal 561,124.80
1 Remove exsiting lights 100 233.70 23,369.93
2 New lights 100 5,377.55 537,754.87
IV Water drainage
Subtotal 112,032.27
1 New drainage along road 0 322.20 -
2 New drainage at station 2000 56.02 112,032.27
V Traffic engineering (road marking and traffic signal)
subtotal 1,988,140.60
 1 Road marking 10335 13.11 135,468.86
1 Single pole 400 173.20 69,280.75 Including basement and installing
2 high 6.5m arm 4m) 125 1,579.65 197,456.87 Including basement and installing
3 high 6.5m arm 4m) 16 1,579.65 25,274.48 Including basement and installing
2 Traffic signage facility
4 Signage board (1m*1m) 32 231.23 7,399.51 Including installing
5 Signage board (2m*3m) 200 1,624.24 324,848.76 Including installing
6 Signage board (1.5m*2m) 200 654.16 130,831.28 Including installing
1 "L" pole (6m arm) 40 3,372.17 134,886.85 Including basement and installing
2 "L" pole (8m arm) 60 3,596.24 215,774.14 Including basement and installing
3 30 1,232.35 36,970.65 Including basement and installing
3 Traffic signal facility 4 400 963.48 385,390.99 Including basement and installing
5 Traffic signal 400 423.48 169,392.79 Including installing
6 Pedestrian signal 400 268.88 107,550.97 Including installing
7 Traffic signal controller (C4 area control) 25 1,904.55 47,613.71 Including Cable, well and civil engineering
VI BRT Station Architecture Structure and Decoration
subtotal 4,036,243.82
1 1 substop 420 823.72 345,963.76
New station architecture,
1 2 2 substop 4480 823.72 3,690,280.07
structure and decoration

Draft, ITDP-China
3 3 substop 823.72 -
VII BRT station power supply and lighting Estimated by cost per m2
subtotal 1,003,673.81
1 BRT station power supply and lighting 4900 70.35 344,695.22
2 Voltage transformer 8 82,372.32 658,978.58
VIII BRT Station drainage and fire protection Estimated by cost per m2
subtotal 11,301.48

348
1 BRT station drainage and fire protection 4900 2.31 11,301.48
IX BRT station ventilation and air conditioning Estimated by cost per m2
subtotal 13,723.23
1 BRT station ventilation and air conditioning 4900 2.80 13,723.23
X On-station BRT ITS system
(A) Operation and dispatching system
Subtotal 868,454.44
(a) Network and communication
Station industrial Ethernet 1 Host 8 7,481.20 59,849.63
1 switches (including terminal 2 SFP slot 11 727.51 8,002.64
switches) 3 10KM optical module 22 727.51 16,005.27

19 July 2015
1 Host 8 1,153.21 9,225.70
Network cabinets on station 2 Power supply socket 8 38.94 311.51
2
and terminals 3 Distributor 8 329.49 2,635.91
4 Drum stand 8 17.97 143.78
1 Optical cable (36 core) 26.4 4,677.25 123,479.41
2 Optical cable (12 core) 5 3,051.67 15,258.35 Control center to the nearest station
3 Optical cable implement cost 31.4 1,497.68 47,027.11
Fibre and supporting
3 4 Optical cable unit box 8 605.89 4,847.13
equipment
5 ODF frame 6 5,772.18 34,633.10
6 Jumper 50 8.99 449.34
7 Welding 336 11.98 4,025.91
4 Station cable integration 8 2,396.29 19,170.28
(b) Passenger information service
 1 Industrial panel computer 8 3,459.64 27,677.10
2 Flush mounting bracket 8 123.56 988.47
Station passenger information
1 3 Cable 1200 0.73 879.74
self-enquiry system
1 25,205.93 25,205.93
4 Passenger self-inquiry system application software
8 428.34 3,426.69
1 LED screen 60 1,313.00 78,779.80
2 LED screen body shell 60 576.61 34,596.38
3 Hanger 60 120.47 7,228.17
4 LED screen control card 60 240.46 14,427.48
5 Power Module 60 74.14 4,448.11
6 Ground fault circuit interrupter (GFCI) 60 19.77 1,186.16
Station passenger information 7 Timer switch 60 19.77 1,186.16
2
display system 8 Signal cable 60 0.67 40.43
9 Power cable 9000 1.48 13,344.32
10 Host computer 8 1,617.49 12,939.94
11 Serial port card 8 329.49 2,635.91
12 WinXP pro system 8 179.72 1,437.77
1 53,377.27 53,377.27

Draft, ITDP-China
13 Passenger information display system application software
60 576.61 34,596.38
(c) Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS)
1 UPS host 0 4,481.05 -
2 Battery cabinet 0 898.61 -
Terminal 10KVA1H integration
1 3 Battery 0 374.42 -
UPS system
4 Distribution box 0 247.12 -
5 Wiring 0 314.51 -
1 UPS host 8 4,481.05 35,848.43

349
Station 10KVA1H integration 2 Battery cabinet 8 898.61 7,188.86
2
UPS system (15minutes) 3 Battery 232 118.32 27,449.38
4 Wiring 8 404.37 3,234.99
(d) CCTV video monitoring
1 HD network infrared dome camera (1080P) 16 2,665.87 42,653.89 Plus 2 for NS9&EW12
2 HD network infrared waterproof camera (720P) 75 503.22 37,741.56
3 HD network infrared dome camera (720P) 16 533.17 8,530.77
1 Station video monitoring
4 2 in 1 lightning arrester 107 62.90 6,730.60
5 RJ45 network cable 6420 0.73 4,706.59
6 Power cable 6420 0.67 4,325.83

19 July 2015
(e) The IP Digital Broadcasting
1 IP network paging microphone 8 762.02 6,096.14
2 Normal microphone 8 95.25 762.02
Station digital broadcast
1 3 Power amplifier 16 323.80 5,180.76
equipment
4 Embedded sound box 32 91.44 2,926.13
5 Voice cable 3200 1.59 5,082.04
1 IP network paging microphone 0 762.02 -
2 Normal microphone 0 95.25 -
Terminal digital broadcast
2 3 Power amplifier 0 323.80 -
equipment
4 Outdoor waterproof sound box 0 87.46 -
5 Voice cable 0 1.59 -
(f) Bus operational monitoring and dispatching management system operations -
1 Supporting communication and supporting locating equipment sub-system -
 Station supporting Station supporting communication and supporting locating
1 8 576.61 4,612.85 2.4GHZ
1 communication and supporting equipment
locating equipment 2 Supporting cable 1600 1.20 1,916.31 RVVP4*0.5 each short-distance communication device need 100m
Terminal supporting Terminal supporting communication and supporting locating
1 0 576.61 -
2 communication and supporting equipment
locating equipment 2 Supporting cable 0 1.86 -
2 Terminal on site dispatching sub-system - -
1 Standard computer 0 1,141.44 -
Dispatching computer with 2
1 2 Pu-frequency monitor 0 282.42 -
LCD screen
3 Graphics 0 200.05 -
2 Multi-function station machine 0 8,237.23 -
1 Base and outer structure 0 3,323.72 -
2 LED screen 0 3,558.48 -
3 Out-door dispatching screen 3 Electric controller 0 102.97 -
4 Signal control cable 0 0.67 -
5 Power cable 0 0.84 -
1 Base and outer structure 0 1,235.58 -
2 LED screen 0 1,853.38 -
4 In-door dispatching screen 3 Electric controller 0 102.97 -

Draft, ITDP-China
4 Signal control cable 0 0.67 -
5 Power cable 0 0.84 -
5 Terminal cabling fee 0 1,647.45 -
(B) AFC system
Subtotal 244,612.85
1 Station network switch 8 1,647.45 13,179.57
2 Turnstile 90 1,647.45 148,270.18 Normal from 5000rmb to 10000rmb
1 Equipment on station 3 Card reader 8 988.47 7,907.74

350
For card payment by ticketing office.
4 Cash collection box 8 609.56 4,876.44
5 Station communication host 8 1,317.96 10,543.66 Normal computer to communicate with center
1 Emergency control button 1 13,014.83 13,014.83
2 Distribution cable 1 6,771.00 6,771.00
2 Other 3 Network cable 1 23,986.82 23,986.82
4 Connection cable 1 2,800.66 2,800.66
5 Other supporting equipment 1 4,141.68 4,141.68
1 Backup material 1 8,329.49 8,329.49
3 Backup
2 Tools 1 790.77 790.77
(C) Automatic door
Subtotal 2,653,065.52

19 July 2015
1 Control system on station 8 7,413.51 59,308.07
Equipment power distribution cabinet (including stabilized
2 8 2,240.53 17,924.22
voltage power supply cabinet)
3 Sliding door radio frequency remote sensor device 8 691.93 5,535.42
4 Sliding doors 330 2,471.17 815,486.00
1 Automatic door 5 Door control unit (DCU) 330 823.72 271,828.67
6 Fixed side box 330 1,350.91 445,799.01
7 Sliding door 330 1,235.58 407,743.00 Stainless steel
8 Indicator light 660 32.95 21,746.29
Bearing pedestal, supporting part, fasten part, decoration
9 330 708.40 233,772.65
materials and etc.
2 Cable 8 3,923.96 31,391.71
3 Construction 330 830.31 274,003.29
4 Backup 1 68,527.18 68,527.18
5 On-bus radio frequency remote sensor device and bus door open/close button 0 658.98 -
 (D) Control Center
Subtotal Assume the room around 150m2 will be provided
1 Central service server 0 109,390.44 -
Automatic door and AFC
1 2 Ticketing central system 0 728,237.23 -
system
3 System and application software 0 862,438.22 -
1 Network and communication 0 385,534.42 -
2 Uninterruptible power supply (UPS) 0 217,277.12 -
3 CCTV video monitoring 0 1,454,574.04 -
4 The IP digital broadcasting 0 12,130.38 -
Operation and dispatching 5 Clock synchronization system 0 21,926.01 -
2
system
Bus operational monitoring and dispatching management
6 0 3,710,936.28 -
system operations
BRT operational monitoring and dispatching management
7 0 448,105.44 -
subsystem - business software
8 Other cost 0 663,063.19 -
XI Passenger Information
Subtotal 131,795.72
Including four levels of information, outside staiton on sidewalk, on bridge, in
1 Passenger Information system for 8 stations 8 14,827.02 118,616.14
front of station entrance and inside station

Draft, ITDP-China
2 Maps print and bus routes print out 8 1,647.45 13,179.57
XII Traffic organization during construction
Subtotal 197,693.57
Including the short-term traffic marking, traffic leading sign, divider, fance,
1 Traffic organization during construction 1 197,693.57 197,693.57
bus shelters and organizaiton assistant, etc.
XIII Traffic surveillance and control
Subtotal 1,760,954.70
At each intersection or T-junction, including controllers, video capture cards,

351
1 Traffic signal violence controller 25 5,024.71 125,617.79 capture control software, operating systems, traffic light signal detector and
etc.
2 Pole 75 2,771.00 207,825.37 "L" type, including the foundation
3 Digital camera 150 995.06 149,258.65
4 Video camera 75 1,408.57 105,642.50
5 Protective cover 225 148.27 33,360.79
Traffic signal violence control 6 Outdoor waterproof anti-theft stainless steel case 75 560.13 42,009.88
1
at intersection
7 standard leakage protector 75 65.90 4,942.34
8 Assisted lighting (flash) 75 311.37 23,352.55
9 Power 75 254.53 19,089.79 For UPS, video camera and digital camera
10 SPD 75 148.27 11,120.26 For power, controller and camera

19 July 2015
11 Lightning detection 75 263.59 19,769.36
12 Communication module 75 411.86 30,889.62
13 Detect loop 225 214.17 48,187.81
1 Integrated dome camera 53 2,487.64 131,845.14 At each 200m, for the vehicle running in the bus lane.
2 Pole 53 691.93 36,672.16 "L" type, including the foundation
3 Outdoor waterproof anti-theft stainless steel case 53 560.13 29,686.99
4 Standard leakage protector 53 65.90 3,492.59
5 SPD 53 148.27 7,858.32 For power, controller and camera
6 Lightning detection 53 263.59 13,970.35
7 Bi-directional video data + ethernet Fiber terminal 53 4,365.73 231,383.86
BRT lane enforcement
2 8 Power 53 254.53 13,490.12 For UPS, video camera and digital camera
(camera along corridor)
9 Optical fibre slot box (7 slots) 53 261.94 13,883.03
10 Video distributor (FS-16) 53 1,350.91 71,598.02
11 Code distributor (FS-C-485D) 53 1,663.92 88,187.81
 BRT lane enforcement
2
(camera along corridor)

12 16 DVR 53 1,565.07 82,948.93

13 Optical jumper 53 60.13 3,186.99
14 Fiber ends box 53 70.84 3,754.53
15 Camera supporting frame 53 411.86 21,828.67
For the vehicle running in the bus lane.including local storage 16G SD card,
3 BRT lane enforcement (camera in front of bus) 0 372.32 -
powerbox, and equipment box
1 Integrated dome camera 11 2,487.64 27,364.09 At each 500m, for the overview of the whole traffic condition.
2 Pole 11 691.93 7,611.20 "L" type, including the foundation
3 Outdoor waterproof anti-theft stainless steel case 11 560.13 6,161.45

Draft, ITDP-China
4 Standard leakage protector 11 65.90 724.88
5 SPD 11 148.27 1,630.97 For power, controller and camera
6 Lightning detection 11 263.59 2,899.51
7 Bi-directional video data + ethernet fiber terminal 11 4,365.73 48,023.06
4 CCTV camera system 8 Power 11 254.53 2,799.84 For UPS, video camera and digital camera
9 Optical fibre slot box (7 slots) 11 261.94 2,881.38
10 Video distributor (FS-16) 11 1,350.91 14,859.97
11 Code distributor (FS-C-485D) 11 1,663.92 18,303.13

352
12 16 DVR 11 1,565.07 17,215.82
13 Optical jumper 11 60.13 661.45
14 Fiber ends box 11 70.84 779.24
15 Camera supporting frame 11 411.86 4,530.48
Purchase the right to use fiber-optic network from the operator for 20 years,
5 Optical fibre lease 200 148.27 29,654.04
including three years of maintenance costs
6 Server in control center 0 41,186.16 -
7 Supporting equipment in control center 0 238,879.74 -

Project direct cost and expenses 19,675,136.54

19 July 2015
XIV Project indirect cost and expenses
Subtotal
1 Including feasibility study, detailed engineering design, tendering assistance, construction management, supervision, and etc. 5,115,535.50 Normally around 26% of total project cost
Total 24,790,672.04
 Costing for Manila BRT conceptual design (airport)
Unit Cost Total Cost
No. Item Volume Comment
(US $) (US $)
I Road engineering
Subtotal 5,121,558.37
1 AC-13C asphalt concrete (4cm) 9300 12.55 116,692.81
2 AC-20C asphalt concrete (6cm 4650 17.25 80,226.31
Airport area

3 TAB-25 asphalt macadam (8cm) 4650 4.53 21,046.38

Including change current sidewalk to be traffic lane and just renew the current
1 Mix traffic lanes (asphalt) 4 5% cement stabilized macadam (35cm) 4650 8.11 37,716.78 asphalt pavement (demolish 4cm and repave 4cm asphalt).
5 4% cement stabilized macadam (15cm) 4650 3.47 16,149.45
6 Graded broken stone (15cm) 4650 1.90 8,856.15
7 Geotextiles 2800 1.50 4,203.45
1 C35 steel reinforced cement concrete (25cm) 4225 43.69 184,601.17
2 BRT lanes (concrete) 2 4% graded broken stone (20cm) 4225 2.58 10,886.74 At BRT station
3 Graded broken stone (15cm) 4225 1.90 8,046.72
3 BRT ramp 0 971.10 -
1 Sidewalk brick (5cm) 600 101.05 60,631.86
4 Sidewalk C20 cement concrete (15cm) 300 13.89 4,167.60 Including new sidewalk and just renew the current brick pavement.

Draft, ITDP-China
2
3 Graded broken stone (10cm) 300 1.30 389.87
5 Elevated sidewalk 0 2,007.62 -
1 Footbridge 0 1,598,064.08 - 50m long and 4m wide

2 Footbridge with long ramp 1 2,405,126.60 2,405,126.60 1:20 long ramp

6 Steel foot bridge 3 Integrate with existing bridge 3 80,965.72 242,897.15 Connection from existing pedestrian bridge
4 Demolish current bridge 0 8,280.08 -
5 Lift 4 80,663.23 322,652.92

353
1 MRT connection 0 1,194,532.83 - Including new sidewalk and just renew the current brick pavement.
7 MRT connection
2 Lift 0 80,663.23 -
1 Tunnel connection 0 564,642.62 - Tunnel connection from existing pedestrian tunnel
8 Tunnel connection
2 Lift 0 80,663.23 -
9 Guadalupe bike/ped bridge 0 7,743,670.18 -
10 Bus lane separator 15600 6.83 106,609.90 Bogota type
11 Sidewalk curb 1440 3.92 5,646.43
1.5m distance, long sidewalk, refudge islands and BRT access.50cm in the
12 Steel bollard 10520 141.16 1,485,010.08
II Greenery
Subtotal 1,991.93

19 July 2015
1 Newly planted trees 0 241.99 -
2 New green belt 0 8.29 -
3 Demolish the existing greenbelt 2540 0.78 1,991.93
III Street light
Subtotal 269,339.91
1 Remove exsiting lights 48 233.70 11,217.57
2 New lights 48 5,377.55 258,122.34
IV Water drainage
Subtotal 53,775.49
1 New drainage along road 0 322.20 -
2 New drainage at station 960 56.02 53,775.49
V Traffic engineering (road marking and traffic signal)
subtotal 1,257,425.27
 1 Road marking 15210 13.11 199,369.26
1 Single pole 160 173.20 27,712.30 Including basement and installing
2 high 6.5m arm 4m) 50 1,579.65 78,982.75 Including basement and installing
3 high 6.5m arm 4m) 16 1,579.65 25,274.48 Including basement and installing
2 Traffic signage facility
4 Signage board (1m*1m) 32 231.23 7,399.51 Including installing
5 Signage board (2m*3m) 200 1,624.24 324,848.76 Including installing
6 Signage board (1.5m*2m) 200 654.16 130,831.28 Including installing
1 "L" pole (6m arm) 8 3,372.17 26,977.37 Including basement and installing
2 "L" pole (8m arm) 32 3,596.24 115,079.54 Including basement and installing
3 30 1,232.35 36,970.65 Including basement and installing
3 Traffic signal facility 4 160 963.48 154,156.40 Including basement and installing
5 Traffic signal 160 423.48 67,757.11 Including installing
6 Pedestrian signal 160 268.88 43,020.39 Including installing
7 Traffic signal controller (C4 area control) 10 1,904.55 19,045.49 Including Cable, well and civil engineering
VI BRT Station Architecture Structure and Decoration
subtotal 2,594,728.17
1 1 substop 3150 823.72 2,594,728.17
New station architecture,
1 2 2 substop 0 823.72 -
structure and decoration

Draft, ITDP-China
3 3 substop 0 823.72 -
VII BRT station power supply and lighting Estimated by cost per m2
subtotal 880,568.37
1 BRT station power supply and lighting 3150 70.35 221,589.79
2 Voltage transformer 8 82,372.32 658,978.58
VIII BRT Station drainage and fire protection Estimated by cost per m2
subtotal 7,265.24

354
1 BRT station drainage and fire protection 3150 2.31 7,265.24
IX BRT station ventilation and air conditioning Estimated by cost per m2
subtotal 8,822.08
1 BRT station ventilation and air conditioning 3150 2.80 8,822.08
X On-station BRT ITS system
(A) Operation and dispatching system
Subtotal 757,096.67
(a) Network and communication
Station industrial Ethernet 1 Host 8 7,481.20 59,849.63
1 switches (including terminal 2 SFP slot 11 727.51 8,002.64
switches) 3 10KM optical module 22 727.51 16,005.27

19 July 2015
1 Host 8 1,153.21 9,225.70
Network cabinets on station 2 Power supply socket 8 38.94 311.51
2
and terminals 3 Distributor 8 329.49 2,635.91
4 Drum stand 8 17.97 143.78
1 Optical cable (36 core) 26.4 4,677.25 123,479.41
2 Optical cable (12 core) 5 3,051.67 15,258.35 Control center to the nearest station
3 Optical cable implement cost 31.4 1,497.68 47,027.11
Fibre and supporting
3 4 Optical cable unit box 8 605.89 4,847.13
equipment
5 ODF frame 6 5,772.18 34,633.10
6 Jumper 50 8.99 449.34
7 Welding 336 11.98 4,025.91
4 Station cable integration 8 2,396.29 19,170.28
(b) Passenger information service
 1 Industrial panel computer 8 3,459.64 27,677.10
2 Flush mounting bracket 8 123.56 988.47
Station passenger information
1 3 Cable 1200 0.73 879.74
self-enquiry system
1 25,205.93 25,205.93
4 Passenger self-inquiry system application software
8 428.34 3,426.69
1 LED screen 32 1,313.00 42,015.89
2 LED screen body shell 32 576.61 18,451.40
3 Hanger 32 120.47 3,855.02
4 LED screen control card 32 240.46 7,694.66
5 Power Module 32 74.14 2,372.32
6 Ground fault circuit interrupter (GFCI) 32 19.77 632.62
Station passenger information 7 Timer switch 32 19.77 632.62
2
display system 8 Signal cable 32 0.67 21.56
9 Power cable 4800 1.48 7,116.97
10 Host computer 8 1,617.49 12,939.94
11 Serial port card 8 329.49 2,635.91
12 WinXP pro system 8 179.72 1,437.77
1 53,377.27 53,377.27

Draft, ITDP-China
13 Passenger information display system application software
32 576.61 18,451.40
(c) Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS)
1 UPS host 0 4,481.05 -
2 Battery cabinet 0 898.61 -
Terminal 10KVA1H integration
1 3 Battery 0 374.42 -
UPS system
4 Distribution box 0 247.12 -
5 Wiring 0 314.51 -

355
1 UPS host 8 4,481.05 35,848.43
Station 10KVA1H integration 2 Battery cabinet 8 898.61 7,188.86
2
UPS system (15minutes) 3 Battery 232 118.32 27,449.38
4 Wiring 8 404.37 3,234.99
(d) CCTV video monitoring
1 HD network infrared dome camera (1080P) 16 2,665.87 42,653.89 Plus 2 for NS9&EW12

2 HD network infrared waterproof camera (720P) 40 503.22 20,128.83

1 Station video monitoring 3 HD network infrared dome camera (720P) 16 533.17 8,530.77
4 2 in 1 lightning arrester 72 62.90 4,529.00
5 RJ45 network cable 4320 0.73 3,167.05

19 July 2015
6 Power cable 4320 0.67 2,910.84
(e) The IP Digital Broadcasting
1 IP network paging microphone 8 762.02 6,096.14
2 Normal microphone 8 95.25 762.02
Station digital broadcast
1 3 Power amplifier 16 323.80 5,180.76
equipment
4 Embedded sound box 32 91.44 2,926.13
5 Voice cable 3200 1.59 5,082.04
1 IP network paging microphone 0 762.02 -
2 Normal microphone 0 95.25 -
Terminal digital broadcast
2 3 Power amplifier 0 323.80 -
equipment
4 Outdoor waterproof sound box 0 87.46 -
5 Voice cable 0 1.59 -
(f) Bus operational monitoring and dispatching management system operations -
 1 Supporting communication and supporting locating equipment sub-system -
Station supporting Station supporting communication and supporting locating
1 8 576.61 4,612.85 2.4GHZ
1 communication and supporting equipment
locating equipment 2 Supporting cable 1600 1.20 1,916.31 RVVP4*0.5 each short-distance communication device need 100m
Terminal supporting Terminal supporting communication and supporting locating
1 0 576.61 -
2 communication and supporting equipment
locating equipment 2 Supporting cable 0 1.86 -
2 Terminal on site dispatching sub-system -
1 Standard computer 0 1,141.44 -
Dispatching computer with 2
1 2 Pu-frequency monitor 0 282.42 -
LCD screen
3 Graphics 0 200.05 -
2 Multi-function station machine 0 8,237.23 -
1 Base and outer structure 0 3,323.72 -
2 LED screen 0 3,558.48 -
3 Out-door dispatching screen 3 Electric controller 0 102.97 -
4 Signal control cable 0 0.67 -
5 Power cable 0 0.84 -
1 Base and outer structure 0 1,235.58 -
2 LED screen 0 1,853.38 -

Draft, ITDP-China
4 In-door dispatching screen 3 Electric controller 0 102.97 -
4 Signal control cable 0 0.67 -
5 Power cable 0 0.84 -
5 Terminal cabling fee 0 1,647.45 -
(B) AFC system
Subtotal 175,420.10
1 Station network switch 8 1,647.45 13,179.57
2 Turnstile 48 1,647.45 79,077.43 Normal from 5000rmb to 10000rmb

356
1 Equipment on station 3 Card reader 8 988.47 7,907.74
For card payment by ticketing office.
4 Cash collection box 8 609.56 4,876.44
5 Station communication host 8 1,317.96 10,543.66 Normal computer to communicate with center
1 Emergency control button 1 13,014.83 13,014.83
2 Distribution cable 1 6,771.00 6,771.00
2 Other 3 Network cable 1 23,986.82 23,986.82
4 Connection cable 1 2,800.66 2,800.66
5 Other supporting equipment 1 4,141.68 4,141.68
1 Backup material 1 8,329.49 8,329.49
3 Backup
2 Tools 1 790.77 790.77
(C) Automatic door
Subtotal 1,500,222.03

19 July 2015
1 Control system on station 8 7,413.51 59,308.07
Equipment power distribution cabinet (including stabilized
2 8 2,240.53 17,924.22
voltage power supply cabinet)
3 Sliding door radio frequency remote sensor device 8 691.93 5,535.42
4 Sliding doors 176 2,471.17 434,925.86
1 Automatic door 5 Door control unit (DCU) 176 823.72 144,975.29
6 Fixed side box 176 1,350.91 237,759.47
7 Sliding door 176 1,235.58 217,462.93 Stainless steel
8 Indicator light 352 32.95 11,598.02
Bearing pedestal, supporting part, fasten part, decoration
9 176 708.40 124,678.75
materials and etc.
2 Cable 8 3,923.96 31,391.71
3 Construction 176 830.31 146,135.09
4 Backup 1 68,527.18 68,527.18
5 On-bus radio frequency remote sensor device and bus door open/close button 0 658.98 -
 (D) Control Center
Subtotal - Assume the room around 150m2 will be provided
1 Central service server 0 109,390.44 -
Automatic door and AFC
1 2 Ticketing central system 0 728,237.23 -
system
3 System and application software 0 862,438.22 -
1 Network and communication 0 385,534.42 -
2 Uninterruptible power supply (UPS) 0 217,277.12 -
3 CCTV video monitoring 0 1,454,574.04 -
4 The IP digital broadcasting 0 12,130.38 -

Operation and dispatching 5 Clock synchronization system 0 21,926.01 -

2
system Bus operational monitoring and dispatching management
6 0 3,710,936.28 -
system operations

BRT operational monitoring and dispatching management

7 0 448,105.44 -
subsystem - business software

8 Other cost 0 663,063.19 -

XI Passenger Information
Subtotal 131,795.72
Including four levels of information, outside staiton on sidewalk, on bridge, in

Draft, ITDP-China
1 Passenger Information system for 8 stations 8 14,827.02 118,616.14
front of station entrance and inside station
2 Maps print and bus routes print out 8 1,647.45 13,179.57
XII Traffic organization during construction
Subtotal 263,591.43
Including the short-term traffic marking, traffic leading sign, divider, fance,
1 Traffic organization during construction 1 263,591.43 263,591.43
bus shelters and organizaiton assistant, etc.
XIII Traffic surveillance and control
Subtotal 1,724,640.86
At each intersection or T-junction, including controllers, video capture cards,

357
1 Traffic signal violence controller 10 5,024.71 50,247.12 capture control software, operating systems, traffic light signal detector and
etc.
2 Pole 30 2,771.00 83,130.15 "L" type, including the foundation
3 Digital camera 60 995.06 59,703.46
4 Video camera 30 1,408.57 42,257.00
5 Protective cover 90 148.27 13,344.32

Traffic signal violence control 6 Outdoor waterproof anti-theft stainless steel case 30 560.13 16,803.95
1 7 standard leakage protector 30 65.90 1,976.94
at intersection
8 Assisted lighting (flash) 30 311.37 9,341.02
9 Power 30 254.53 7,635.91 For UPS, video camera and digital camera
10 SPD 30 148.27 4,448.11 For power, controller and camera

19 July 2015
11 Lightning detection 30 263.59 7,907.74
12 Communication module 30 411.86 12,355.85
13 Detect loop 90 214.17 19,275.12
1 Integrated dome camera 78 2,487.64 194,036.24 At each 200m, for the vehicle running in the bus lane.
2 Pole 78 691.93 53,970.35 "L" type, including the foundation
3 Outdoor waterproof anti-theft stainless steel case 78 560.13 43,690.28
4 Standard leakage protector 78 65.90 5,140.03
5 SPD 78 148.27 11,565.07 For power, controller and camera
6 Lightning detection 78 263.59 20,560.13
7 Bi-directional video data + ethernet Fiber terminal 78 4,365.73 340,527.18
BRT lane enforcement
2 8 Power 78 254.53 19,853.38 For UPS, video camera and digital camera
(camera along corridor)
9 Optical fibre slot box (7 slots) 78 261.94 20,431.63
10 Video distributor (FS-16) 78 1,350.91 105,370.68
11 Code distributor (FS-C-485D) 78 1,663.92 129,785.83
 BRT lane enforcement
2
(camera along corridor)

12 16 DVR 78 1,565.07 122,075.78

13 Optical jumper 78 60.13 4,690.28
14 Fiber ends box 78 70.84 5,525.54
15 Camera supporting frame 78 411.86 32,125.21
For the vehicle running in the bus lane.including local storage 16G SD card,
3 BRT lane enforcement (camera in front of bus) 0 372.32 -
powerbox, and equipment box
1 Integrated dome camera 16 2,487.64 39,802.31 At each 500m, for the overview of the whole traffic condition.
2 Pole 16 691.93 11,070.84 "L" type, including the foundation
3 Outdoor waterproof anti-theft stainless steel case 16 560.13 8,962.11

Draft, ITDP-China
4 Standard leakage protector 16 65.90 1,054.37
5 SPD 16 148.27 2,372.32 For power, controller and camera
6 Lightning detection 16 263.59 4,217.46
7 Bi-directional video data + ethernet fiber terminal 16 4,365.73 69,851.73
4 CCTV camera system 8 Power 16 254.53 4,072.49 For UPS, video camera and digital camera
9 Optical fibre slot box (7 slots) 16 261.94 4,191.10
10 Video distributor (FS-16) 16 1,350.91 21,614.50
11 Code distributor (FS-C-485D) 16 1,663.92 26,622.73

358
12 16 DVR 16 1,565.07 25,041.19
13 Optical jumper 16 60.13 962.11
14 Fiber ends box 16 70.84 1,133.44
15 Camera supporting frame 16 411.86 6,589.79
Purchase the right to use fiber-optic network from the operator for 20 years,
400 148.27 59,308.07
5 Optical fibre lease including three years of maintenance costs
6 Server in control center 0 41,186.16 -
7 Supporting equipment in control center 0 238,879.74 -

Project direct cost and expenses 14,748,241.63

19 July 2015
XIV Project indirect cost and expenses
Subtotal
1 Including feasibility study, detailed engineering design, tendering assistance, construction management, supervision, and etc. 3,834,542.82 Normally around 26% of total project cost
Total 18,582,784.45
 Costing for Manila BRT conceptual design (off-corridor station)
Unit Cost Total Cost
No. Item Volume Comment
(US $) (US $)
I Road engineering
Subtotal 4,572,338.34
1 AC-13C asphalt concrete (4cm) 5550 12.55 69,639.26
2 AC-20C asphalt concrete (6cm 2775 17.25 47,876.99
Off-corridor

3 TAB-25 asphalt macadam (8cm) 2775 4.53 12,559.94

Including change current sidewalk to be traffic lane and just renew the current
1 Mix traffic lanes (asphalt) 4 5% cement stabilized macadam (35cm) 2775 8.11 22,508.40 asphalt pavement (demolish 4cm and repave 4cm asphalt).
5 4% cement stabilized macadam (15cm) 2775 3.47 9,637.58
6 Graded broken stone (15cm) 2775 1.90 5,285.12
7 Geotextiles 1480 1.50 2,221.82
1 C35 steel reinforced cement concrete (25cm) 3640 43.69 159,041.00
2 BRT lanes (concrete) 2 4% graded broken stone (20cm) 3640 2.58 9,379.34 At BRT station
3 Graded broken stone (15cm) 3640 1.90 6,932.56
3 BRT ramp 0 971.10 -
1 Sidewalk brick (5cm) 600 101.05 60,631.86
4 Sidewalk 2 C20 cement concrete (15cm) 300 13.89 4,167.60 Including new sidewalk and just renew the current brick pavement.

Draft, ITDP-China
3 Graded broken stone (10cm) 300 1.30 389.87
5 Elevated sidewalk 0 2,007.62 -
1 Footbridge 1 1,598,064.08 1,598,064.08 50m long and 4m wide
2 Footbridge with long ramp 1 2,405,126.60 2,405,126.60 1:20 long ramp
6 Steel foot bridge 3 Integrate with existing bridge 0 80,965.72 - Connection from existing pedestrian bridge

4 Demolish current bridge 0 8,280.08 -

5 Lift 0 80,663.23 -

359
1 MRT connection 0 1,194,532.83 - Including new sidewalk and just renew the current brick pavement.
7 MRT connection
2 Lift 0 80,663.23 -
1 Tunnel connection 0 564,642.62 - Tunnel connection from existing pedestrian tunnel
8 Tunnel connection
2 Lift 0 80,663.23 -
9 Guadalupe bike/ped bridge 0 7,743,670.18 -
10 Bus lane separator 840 6.83 5,740.53 Bogota type
11 Sidewalk curb 1110 3.92 4,352.45
1.5m distance, long sidewalk, refudge islands and BRT access.50cm in the
12 Steel bollard 1054 141.16 148,783.33

II Greenery
Subtotal 9,225.70

19 July 2015
1 Newly planted trees 0 241.99 -
2 New green belt 0 8.29 -
3 Demolish the existing greenbelt 700 0.78 9,225.70
III Street light
Subtotal 118,863.26
1 Remove exsiting lights 37 233.70 9,143.33
2 New lights 37 5,377.55 109,719.93
IV Water drainage
Subtotal 182,866.56
1 New drainage along road 0 322.20 -
2 New drainage at station 740 56.02 182,866.56
V Traffic engineering (road marking and traffic signal)
subtotal 205,928.34
 1 Road marking 1365 13.11 10,119.44
1 Single pole 8 173.20 1,581.55 Including basement and installing
2 high 6.5m arm 4m) 16 1,579.65 17,133.44 Including basement and installing
3 high 6.5m arm 4m) 8 1,579.65 11,202.64 Including basement and installing
2 Traffic signage facility
4 Signage board (1m*1m) 32 231.23 4,533.77 Including installing
5 Signage board (2m*3m) 16 1,624.24 13,601.32 Including installing
6 Signage board (1.5m*2m) 16 654.16 6,800.66 Including installing
1 "L" pole (6m arm) 0 3,372.17 - Including basement and installing
2 "L" pole (8m arm) 6 3,596.24 20,757.83 Including basement and installing
3 6 1,232.35 2,075.78 Including basement and installing
3 Traffic signal facility 4 60 963.48 17,792.42 Including basement and installing
5 Traffic signal 30 423.48 17,298.19 Including installing
6 Pedestrian signal 60 268.88 23,723.23 Including installing
7 Traffic signal controller (C4 area control) 3 1,904.55 59,308.07 Including Cable, well and civil engineering
VI BRT Station Architecture Structure and Decoration
subtotal 1,960,461.29
1 1 substop 700 823.72 576,606.26
New station architecture,
1 2 2 substop 1680 823.72 1,383,855.02

Draft, ITDP-China
structure and decoration
3 3 substop 0 823.72 -
VII BRT station power supply and lighting Estimated by cost per m2
subtotal 496,912.69
1 BRT station power supply and lighting 2380 70.35 167,423.39
2 Voltage transformer 4 82,372.32 329,489.29
VIII BRT Station drainage and fire protection Estimated by cost per m2
subtotal 5,489.29

360
1 BRT station drainage and fire protection 2380 2.31 5,489.29
IX BRT station ventilation and air conditioning Estimated by cost per m2
subtotal 6,665.57
1 BRT station ventilation and air conditioning 2380 2.80 6,665.57
X On-station BRT ITS system
(A) Operation and dispatching system
Subtotal 525,996.65
(a) Network and communication
Station industrial Ethernet 1 Host 4 7,481.20 29,924.82
1 switches (including terminal 2 SFP slot 7 727.51 5,092.59
switches)

19 July 2015
3 10KM optical module 14 727.51 10,185.17
1 Host 4 1,153.21 4,612.85
Network cabinets on station 2 Power supply socket 4 38.94 155.76
2
and terminals 3 Distributor 4 329.49 1,317.96
4 Drum stand 4 17.97 71.89
1 Optical cable (36 core) 25.2 4,677.25 117,866.71
2 Optical cable (12 core) 5 3,051.67 15,258.35 Control center to the nearest station
3 Optical cable implement cost 30.2 1,497.68 45,229.90
Fibre and supporting
3 4 Optical cable unit box 4 605.89 2,423.57
equipment
5 ODF frame 6 5,772.18 34,633.10
6 Jumper 34 8.99 305.55
7 Welding 336 11.98 4,025.91
4 Station cable integration 4 2,396.29 9,585.14
 (b) Passenger information service
1 Industrial panel computer 4 3,459.64 13,838.55
2 Flush mounting bracket 4 123.56 494.23
Station passenger information
1 3 Cable 600 0.73 439.87
self-enquiry system
1 25,205.93 25,205.93
4 Passenger self-inquiry system application software
4 428.34 1,713.34
1 LED screen 16 1,313.00 21,007.95
2 LED screen body shell 16 576.61 9,225.70
3 Hanger 16 120.47 1,927.51
4 LED screen control card 16 240.46 3,847.33
5 Power Module 16 74.14 1,186.16
6 Ground fault circuit interrupter (GFCI) 16 19.77 316.31
Station passenger information 7 Timer switch 16 19.77 316.31
2
display system 8 Signal cable 16 0.67 10.78
9 Power cable 2400 1.48 3,558.48
10 Host computer 4 1,617.49 6,469.97
11 Serial port card 4 329.49 1,317.96

Draft, ITDP-China
12 WinXP pro system 4 179.72 718.89
Passenger information display system application 1 53,377.27 53,377.27
13
software 16 576.61 9,225.70
(c) Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS)
1 UPS host 0 4,481.05 -
2 Battery cabinet 0 898.61 -
Terminal 10KVA1H integration
1 3 Battery 0 374.42 -
UPS system
4 Distribution box 0 247.12 -

361
5 Wiring 0 314.51 -
1 UPS host 4 4,481.05 17,924.22
Station 10KVA1H integration 2 Battery cabinet 4 898.61 3,594.43
2
UPS system (15minutes) 3 Battery 116 118.32 13,724.69
4 Wiring 4 404.37 1,617.50
(d) CCTV video monitoring
1 HD network infrared dome camera (1080P) 8 2,665.87 21,326.95 Plus 2 for NS9&EW12
2 HD network infrared waterproof camera (720P) 20 503.22 10,064.42
3 HD network infrared dome camera (720P) 8 533.17 4,265.38
1 Station video monitoring
4 2 in 1 lightning arrester 36 62.90 2,264.50
5 RJ45 network cable 2160 0.73 1,583.53

19 July 2015
6 Power cable 2160 0.67 1,455.42
(e) The IP Digital Broadcasting
1 IP network paging microphone 4 762.02 3,048.07
2 Normal microphone 4 95.25 381.01
Station digital broadcast
1 3 Power amplifier 8 323.80 2,590.38
equipment
4 Embedded sound box 16 91.44 1,463.06
5 Voice cable 1600 1.59 2,541.02
1 IP network paging microphone 0 762.02 -
2 Normal microphone 0 95.25 -
Terminal digital broadcast
2 3 Power amplifier 0 323.80 -
equipment
4 Outdoor waterproof sound box 0 87.46 -
5 Voice cable 0 1.59 -
 (f) Bus operational monitoring and dispatching management system operations -
1 Supporting communication and supporting locating equipment sub-system -
Station supporting Station supporting communication and supporting
1 4 576.61 2,306.43 2.4GHZ
1 communication and supporting locating equipment
locating equipment 2 Supporting cable 800 1.20 958.15 RVVP4*0.5 each short-distance communication device need 100m
Terminal supporting Terminal supporting communication and supporting
1 0 576.61 -
2 communication and supporting locating equipment
locating equipment 2 Supporting cable 0 1.86 -
2 Terminal on site dispatching sub-system - -
1 Standard computer 0 1,141.44 -
Dispatching computer with 2
1 2 Pu-frequency monitor 0 282.42 -
LCD screen
3 Graphics 0 200.05 -
2 Multi-function station machine 0 8,237.23 -
1 Base and outer structure 0 3,323.72 -
2 LED screen 0 3,558.48 -
3 Out-door dispatching screen 3 Electric controller 0 102.97 -
4 Signal control cable 0 0.67 -
5 Power cable 0 0.84 -
1 Base and outer structure 0 1,235.58 -
2 LED screen 0 1,853.38 -
4 In-door dispatching screen 3 Electric controller 0 102.97 -

Draft, ITDP-China
4 Signal control cable 0 0.67 -
5 Power cable 0 0.84 -
5 Terminal cabling fee 0 1,647.45 -
(B) AFC system
Subtotal 137,397.03
1 Station network switch 4 1,647.45 6,589.79
2 Turnstile 36 1,647.45 59,308.07 Normal from 5000rmb to 10000rmb
1 Equipment on station 3 Card reader 4 988.47 3,953.87
For card payment by ticketing office.

362
4 Cash collection box 4 609.56 2,438.22
5 Station communication host 4 1,317.96 5,271.83 Normal computer to communicate with center
1 Emergency control button 1 13,014.83 13,014.83
2 Distribution cable 1 6,771.00 6,771.00
2 Other 3 Network cable 1 23,986.82 23,986.82
4 Connection cable 1 2,800.66 2,800.66
5 Other supporting equipment 1 4,141.68 4,141.68
1 Backup material 1 8,329.49 8,329.49
3 Backup
2 Tools 1 790.77 790.77
(C) Automatic door
Subtotal 1,278,450.39
1 Control system on station 4 7,413.51 29,654.04
Equipment power distribution cabinet (including

19 July 2015
2 4 2,240.53 8,962.11
stabilized voltage power supply cabinet)
3 Sliding door radio frequency remote sensor device 4 691.93 2,767.71
4 Sliding doors 154 2,471.17 380,560.13
1 Automatic door 5 Door control unit (DCU) 154 823.72 126,853.38
6 Fixed side box 154 1,350.91 208,039.54
7 Sliding door 154 1,235.58 190,280.07 Stainless steel
8 Indicator light 308 32.95 10,148.27
Bearing pedestal, supporting part, fasten part,
9 154 708.40 109,093.90
decoration materials and etc.
2 Cable 4 3,923.96 15,695.86
3 Construction 154 830.31 127,868.20
4 Backup 1 68,527.18 68,527.18
5 On-bus radio frequency remote sensor device and bus door open/close button 0 658.98 -
 (D) Control Center
Subtotal - Assume the room around 150m2 will be provided
1 Central service server 0 109,390.44 -
Automatic door and AFC
1 2 Ticketing central system 0 728,237.23 -
system
3 System and application software 0 862,438.22 -
1 Network and communication 0 385,534.42 -
2 Uninterruptible power supply (UPS) 0 217,277.12 -
3 CCTV video monitoring 0 1,454,574.04 -
4 The IP digital broadcasting 0 12,130.38 -
Operation and dispatching 5 Clock synchronization system 0 21,926.01 -
2
system
Bus operational monitoring and dispatching
6 0 3,710,936.28 -
management system operations
BRT operational monitoring and dispatching
7 0 448,105.44 -
management subsystem - business software
8 Other cost 0 663,063.19 -
XI Passenger Information
Subtotal 65,897.86
Including four levels of information, outside staiton on sidewalk, on bridge, in
1 Passenger Information system for 4 stations 4 14,827.02 59,308.07
front of station entrance and inside station
2 Maps print and bus routes print out 4 1,647.45 6,589.79

Draft, ITDP-China
XII Traffic organization during construction
Subtotal 32,948.93
Including the short-term traffic marking, traffic leading sign, divider, fance,
1 Traffic organization during construction 1 32,948.93 32,948.93
bus shelters and organizaiton assistant, etc.
XIII Traffic surveillance and control
Subtotal 185,495.88
At each intersection or T-junction, including controllers, video capture cards,
1 Traffic signal violence controller 0 5,024.71 - capture control software, operating systems, traffic light signal detector and
etc.

363
2 Pole 0 2,771.00 - "L" type, including the foundation
3 Digital camera 0 995.06 -
4 Video camera 0 1,408.57 -
5 Protective cover 0 148.27 -

Traffic signal violence control 6 Outdoor waterproof anti-theft stainless steel case 0 560.13 -
1 7 standard leakage protector 0 65.90 -
at intersection
8 Assisted lighting (flash) 0 311.37 -
9 Power 0 254.53 - For UPS, video camera and digital camera
10 SPD 0 148.27 - For power, controller and camera
11 Lightning detection 0 263.59 -
12 Communication module 0 411.86 -

19 July 2015
13 Detect loop 0 214.17 -
1 Integrated dome camera 8 2,487.64 19,901.15 At each 200m, for the vehicle running in the bus lane.
2 Pole 8 691.93 5,535.42 "L" type, including the foundation
3 Outdoor waterproof anti-theft stainless steel case 8 560.13 4,481.05
4 Standard leakage protector 8 65.90 527.18
5 SPD 8 148.27 1,186.16 For power, controller and camera
6 Lightning detection 8 263.59 2,108.73
7 Bi-directional video data + ethernet Fiber terminal 8 4,365.73 34,925.86
BRT lane enforcement
2 8 Power 8 254.53 2,036.24 For UPS, video camera and digital camera
(camera along corridor)
9 Optical fibre slot box (7 slots) 8 261.94 2,095.55
10 Video distributor (FS-16) 8 1,350.91 10,807.25
11 Code distributor (FS-C-485D) 8 1,663.92 13,311.37
12 16 DVR 8 1,565.07 12,520.59
13 Optical jumper 8 60.13 481.05
 BRT lane enforcement
2
(camera along corridor)

14 Fiber ends box 8 70.84 566.72

15 Camera supporting frame 8 411.86 3,294.89
For the vehicle running in the bus lane.including local storage 16G SD card,
3 BRT lane enforcement (camera in front of bus) 0 372.32 -
powerbox, and equipment box
1 Integrated dome camera 4 2,487.64 9,950.58 At each 500m, for the overview of the whole traffic condition.
2 Pole 4 691.93 2,767.71 "L" type, including the foundation
3 Outdoor waterproof anti-theft stainless steel case 4 560.13 2,240.53
4 Standard leakage protector 4 65.90 263.59
5 SPD 4 148.27 593.08 For power, controller and camera
6 Lightning detection 4 263.59 1,054.37

Draft, ITDP-China
7 Bi-directional video data + ethernet fiber terminal 4 4,365.73 17,462.93
4 CCTV camera system 8 Power 4 254.53 1,018.12 For UPS, video camera and digital camera
9 Optical fibre slot box (7 slots) 4 261.94 1,047.78
10 Video distributor (FS-16) 4 1,350.91 5,403.62
11 Code distributor (FS-C-485D) 4 1,663.92 6,655.68
12 16 DVR 4 1,565.07 6,260.30
13 Optical jumper 4 60.13 240.53
14 Fiber ends box 4 70.84 283.36

364
15 Camera supporting frame 4 411.86 1,647.45
Purchase the right to use fiber-optic network from the operator for 20 years,
100 148.27 14,827.02
5 Optical fibre lease including three years of maintenance costs
6 Server in control center 0 41,186.16 -
7 Supporting equipment in control center 0 238,879.74 -

Project direct cost and expenses 9,784,937.76

XIV Project indirect cost and expenses

Subtotal
1 Including feasibility study, detailed engineering design, tendering assistance, construction management, supervision, and etc. 2,544,083.82 Normally around 26% of total project cost

19 July 2015
Total 12,329,021.58
 COSTING FOR MANILA BRT CONCEPTUAL PLAN (Phase1)
No. ITEM EDSA MAKATI AIRPORT OFF-CORRIDOR
I Road engineering
(A) Mix traffic lanes (asphalt) 843,476 918,299 284,891 169,729
(B) BRT lanes (concrete) 2,890,192 657,092 203,535 175,353
(C) BRT ramp 20,320,177 0 0 0
(D) Sidewalk 2,007,832 146,676 65,189 65,189
(E) Elevated sidewalk 9,636,567 0 0 0
(F) Steel foot bridge 82,674,048 0 2,970,677 4,003,191
(G) MRT connection 14,591,799 0 0 0
(H) Tunnel connection 0 3,226,529 0 0
(I) Guadalupe bike/ped bridge 7,743,670 0 0 0
(J) Bus lane separator 328,030 72,440 106,610 5,741
(K) Sidewalk curb 47,553 11,763 5,646 4,352
(L) Steel bollard 4,534,080 1,039,931 1,485,010 148,783
II Greenery 37,796 19,589 1,992 9,226
III Street light 2,272,555 561,125 269,340 118,863
IV Water drainage 452,890 112,032 53,775 182,867
V Traffic engineering 1,491,184 1,988,141 1,257,425 205,928
VI BRT station architecture 37,127,265 4,036,244 2,594,728 1,960,461
VII BRT station power supply and lighting 5,806,583 1,003,674 880,568 496,913
VIII BRT station drainage and fire protection 103,956 11,301 7,265 5,489
IX BRT station ventilation and air conditioning 126,233 13,723 8,822 6,666
X On-station BRT ITS system
(A) Operation and dispatching system 3,127,143 868,454 757,097 525,997
(B) AFC system 963,690 244,613 175,420 137,397
(C) Automatic door 14,617,712 2,653,066 1,500,222 1,278,450
(D) Control center 8,613,613 0 0 0
XI Passenger information 527,183 131,796 131,796 65,898
XII Traffic organization during construction 823,723 197,694 263,591 32,949
XIII Traffic surveillance and control 5,121,349 1,760,955 1,724,641 185,496
XIV Depot 50,000,000 0 0 0
XV Smart card
(A) Recharge station 140,264 0 0 0
(B) Card reader 288,779 0 0 0
(C) IC card 8,514,851 0 0 0
(D) Installing fee 894,389 0 0 0
XVI Bus 111,800,000 0 0 0
Project direct cost and expenses 398,468,586 19,675,137 14,748,242 9,784,938
Without depot, smart card and bus 226,830,302
Direct cost for phase I 442,676,902
Project indirect cost and expenses (not include smart card and bus) 83,470,041
Total 526,146,943

NOTE:
1. The cost for road infrastructure is based on Manila local price and the ITS part is based on Chinese price (15% import tax included)
2. Bus lane will be C35 reinforced concrete at stations and asphalt between stations.
3. We mainly keep the current road pavement, only reconstructing where the greenbelt needs to be moved or the sidewalk needs to be widened.
4. The existing pedestrian overpass bridges are of very poor quality and basically all need to be torn down and rebuilt in new locations, dimensions, specifications, and universal access
5. Elevated steel pedestrian sidewalk is proposed to be the connection between MRT station and BRT station
6. The cost for smart card system is based on project in China. 3,000,000 cards and 50 recharge stations are assumed.
7. 50,000,000 USD is assumed for depot now, needs further study on it.
8. The price for BRT bus is from Kinglong in China, and import tax is included. Euro 4 need to add 20% more.

Draft, ITDP-China 365 19 July 2015

Draft, ITDP-China 366 19 July 2015
 COSTING FOR MANILA BRT CONCEPTUAL PLAN (Phase2)
No. ITEM OTIGAS-BGC C5 Roxas Boulevard**
I Road engineering
(A) Mix traffic lanes (asphalt) 1,456,030 577,594 3,035,787
(B) BRT lanes (concrete) 1,453,671 684,551 816,306
(C) BRT ramp 0 1,942,191 0
(D) Sidewalk 50,527 101,053 80,842
(E) Elevated sidewalk 0 0 0
(F) Steel foot bridge 0 30,516,707 20,193,946
(G) MRT connection 0 0 0
(H) Tunnel connection 0 0 0
(I) Guadalupe bike/ped bridge 0 0 0
(J) Bus lane separator 121,645 86,108 129,845
(K) Sidewalk curb 43,701 15,822 21,998
(L) Steel bollard 1,697,175 1,185,749 1,813,491
II Greenery 53,443 70,115 230,643
III Street light 1,195,058 433,690 600,741
IV Water drainage 1,836,079 664,745 924,217
V Traffic engineering 1,674,942 269,546 1,047,609
VI BRT station architecture 6,285,008 5,766,063 8,360,791
VII BRT station power supply and lighting 1,607,580 1,233,773 1,702,479
VIII BRT station drainage and fire protection 17,598 16,145 23,410
IX BRT station ventilation and air conditioning 21,369 19,605 28,427
X On-station BRT ITS system
(A) Operation and dispatching system 1,174,232 1,036,817 1,284,124
(B) AFC system 356,392 278,830 341,944
(C) Automatic door 3,383,183 3,161,411 4,027,681
(D) Control center 0 0 0
XI Passenger information 214,168 148,270 197,694
XII Traffic organization during construction 247,117 164,745 296,540
XIII Traffic surveillance and control 2,208,305 1,176,242 2,143,648
XIV Sta Monica bike/ped bridge* 21,762,796 0 0
Project direct cost and expenses 25,097,221 49,549,772 47,302,163
Direct cost for phase I
Project indirect cost and expenses 6,525,278 12,882,941 12,298,562
Total 31,622,499 62,432,713 59,600,725
Total for phase II 153,655,936

NOTE:
* The cost for Sta Monica bike/ped bridge is not included.
** Including R6-Tambo

Draft, ITDP-China 367 19 July 2015

Ortigas-BGC
COSTING FOR MANILA BRT CONCEPTUAL PLAN (Phase2)
No. ITEM OTIGAS-BGC
I Road engineering
(A) Mix traffic lanes (asphalt) 1,456,030
(B) BRT lanes (concrete) 1,453,671
(C) BRT ramp 0
(D) Sidewalk 50,527
(E) Elevated sidewalk 0
(F) Steel foot bridge 0
(G) MRT connection 0
(H) Tunnel connection 0
(I) Guadalupe bike/ped bridge 0
(J) Bus lane separator 121,645
(K) Sidewalk curb 43,701
(L) Steel bollard 1,697,175
II Greenery 53,443
III Street light 1,195,058
IV Water drainage 1,836,079
V Traffic engineering 1,674,942
VI BRT station architecture 6,285,008
VII BRT station power supply and lighting 1,607,580
VIII BRT station drainage and fire protection 17,598
IX BRT station ventilation and air conditioning 21,369
X On-station BRT ITS system
(A) Operation and dispatching system 1,174,232
(B) AFC system 356,392
(C) Automatic door 3,383,183
(D) Control center 0
XI Passenger information 214,168
XII Traffic organization during construction 247,117
XIII Traffic surveillance and control 2,208,305
XIV Sta Monica bike/ped bridge* 21,762,796
Project direct cost and expenses 25,097,221
Direct cost for phase I
Project indirect cost and expenses 6,525,278
Total 31,622,499
NOTE:
* The cost for Sta Monica bike/ped bridge is not included.

Draft, ITDP-China 368 19 July 2015

 Costing for Manila BRT conceptual design (Otigas-BGC)
Unit Cost Total Cost
Foreign Foreign
No. Item Volume Comment
Currency Currency
(US $) (US $)
I Road engineering
Subtotal 4,822,747.54
1 AC-13C asphalt concrete (4cm) 45367.5 12.55 569,253.87
2 AC-20C asphalt concrete (6cm 22683.75 17.25 391,362.03
3 TAB-25 asphalt macadam (8cm) 22683.75 4.53 102,669.00
Including change current sidewalk to be traffic lane and just renew the current
1 Mix traffic lanes (asphalt) 4 5% cement stabilized macadam (35cm) 22683.75 8.11 183,990.98 asphalt pavement (demolish 4cm and repave 4cm asphalt).
5 4% cement stabilized macadam (15cm) 22683.75 3.47 78,780.67
6 Graded broken stone (15cm) 22683.75 1.90 43,202.30
7 Geotextiles 57800 1.50 86,771.23
1 C35 steel reinforced cement concrete (25cm) 30175.5 43.69 1,318,445.55
2 BRT lanes (concrete) 2 4% graded broken stone (20cm) 30175.5 2.58 77,754.48 At BRT station
3 Graded broken stone (15cm) 30175.5 1.90 57,470.70
3 BRT ramp 0 971.10 -

Draft, ITDP-China
1 Sidewalk brick (5cm) 500 101.05 50,526.55
4 Sidewalk 2 C20 cement concrete (15cm) 0 13.89 - Including new sidewalk and just renew the current brick pavement.

3 Graded broken stone (10cm) 0 1.30 -

5 Elevated sidewalk 0 2,007.62 -
1 Footbridge 0 1,598,064.08 - 50m long and 4m wide

2 Footbridge with long ramp 0 2,405,126.60 - 1:20 long ramp

6 Steel foot bridge 3 Integrate with existing bridge 0 80,965.72 - Connection from existing pedestrian bridge

369
4 Demolish current bridge 0 8,280.08 -
5 Lift 0 80,663.23 -
1 MRT connection 0 1,194,532.83 - Including new sidewalk and just renew the current brick pavement.
7 MRT connection
2 Lift 0 80,663.23 -
1 Tunnel connection 0 564,642.62 - Tunnel connection from existing pedestrian tunnel
8 Tunnel connection
2 Lift 0 80,663.23 -
9 Guadalupe bike/ped bridge 0 7,743,670.18 -
10 Bus lane separator 17800 6.83 121,644.63 Bogota type
11 Sidewalk curb 11145 3.92 43,700.99
1.5m distance, long sidewalk, refudge islands and BRT access.50cm in the
12 Steel bollard 12023 141.16 1,697,174.55

19 July 2015
II Greenery
Subtotal 53,443.16
1 Newly planted trees 0 241.99 -
2 New green belt 0 8.29 -
3 Demolish the existing greenbelt 4055 0.78 53,443.16
III Street light
Subtotal 1,195,057.66
1 Remove exsiting lights 372 233.70 91,927.51
2 New lights 372 5,377.55 1,103,130.15
IV Water drainage
Subtotal 1,836,079.08
1 New drainage along road 0 322.20 -
2 New drainage at station 7430 56.02 1,836,079.08
 V Traffic engineering (road marking and traffic signal)
subtotal 1,674,941.52
1 Road marking 11375 13.11 84,328.67
1 Single pole 240 173.20 47,446.46 Including basement and installing
2 high 6.5m arm 4m) 75 1,579.65 80,313.01 Including basement and installing
3 high 6.5m arm 4m) 26 1,579.65 36,408.57 Including basement and installing
2 Traffic signage facility
4 Signage board (1m*1m) 52 231.23 7,367.38 Including installing
5 Signage board (2m*3m) 120 1,624.24 102,009.88 Including installing
6 Signage board (1.5m*2m) 120 654.16 51,004.94 Including installing
1 "L" pole (6m arm) 40 3,372.17 108,731.47 Including basement and installing
2 "L" pole (8m arm) 40 3,596.24 138,385.50 Including basement and installing
3 50 1,232.35 17,298.19 Including basement and installing
3 Traffic signal facility 4 400 963.48 118,616.14 Including basement and installing
5 Traffic signal 400 423.48 230,642.50 Including installing
6 Pedestrian signal 400 268.88 158,154.86 Including installing
7 Traffic signal controller (C4 area control) 25 1,904.55 494,233.94 Including Cable, well and civil engineering
VI BRT Station Architecture Structure and Decoration
subtotal 6,285,008.24
1 1 substop 700 823.72 576,606.26

Draft, ITDP-China
New station architecture,
1 2 2 substop 6930 823.72 5,708,401.98
structure and decoration
3 3 substop 0 823.72 -
VII BRT station power supply and lighting Estimated by cost per m2
subtotal 1,607,579.90
1 BRT station power supply and lighting 7630 70.35 536,739.70
2 Voltage transformer 13 82,372.32 1,070,840.20
VIII BRT Station drainage and fire protection Estimated by cost per m2

370
subtotal 17,598.02
1 BRT station drainage and fire protection 7630 2.31 17,598.02
IX BRT station ventilation and air conditioning Estimated by cost per m2
subtotal 21,369.03
1 BRT station ventilation and air conditioning 7630 2.80 21,369.03
X On-station BRT ITS system
(A) Operation and dispatching system
Subtotal 1,174,232.37
(a) Network and communication
Station industrial Ethernet 1 Host 13 7,481.20 97,255.66

19 July 2015
1 switches (including terminal 2 SFP slot 16 727.51 11,640.20
switches) 3 10KM optical module 32 727.51 23,280.40
1 Host 13 1,153.21 14,991.76
Network cabinets on station 2 Power supply socket 13 38.94 506.21
2
and terminals 3 Distributor 13 329.49 4,283.36
4 Drum stand 13 17.97 233.64
1 Optical cable (36 core) 27.9 4,677.25 130,495.29
2 Optical cable (12 core) 5 3,051.67 15,258.35 Control center to the nearest station
3 Optical cable implement cost 32.9 1,497.68 49,273.63
Fibre and supporting
3 4 Optical cable unit box 13 605.89 7,876.59
equipment
5 ODF frame 6 5,772.18 34,633.10
6 Jumper 70 8.99 629.08
7 Welding 336 11.98 4,025.91
4 Station cable integration 13 2,396.29 31,151.71
 (b) Passenger information service
1 Industrial panel computer 13 3,459.64 44,975.29
2 Flush mounting bracket 13 123.56 1,606.26
Station passenger information
1 3 Cable 1950 0.73 1,429.57
self-enquiry system
1 25,205.93 25,205.93
4 Passenger self-inquiry system application software
13 428.34 5,568.37
1 LED screen 104 1,313.00 136,551.66
2 LED screen body shell 104 576.61 59,967.05
3 Hanger 104 120.47 12,528.83
4 LED screen control card 104 240.46 25,007.63
5 Power Module 104 74.14 7,710.05
6 Ground fault circuit interrupter (GFCI) 104 19.77 2,056.01
Station passenger information 7 Timer switch 104 19.77 2,056.01
2
display system 8 Signal cable 104 0.67 70.08
9 Power cable 15600 1.48 23,130.15
10 Host computer 13 1,617.49 21,027.40
11 Serial port card 13 329.49 4,283.36
12 WinXP pro system 13 179.72 2,336.38

Draft, ITDP-China
Passenger information display system application 1 53,377.27 53,377.27
13
software 104 576.61 59,967.05
(c) Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS)
1 UPS host 0 4,481.05 -
2 Battery cabinet 0 898.61 -
Terminal 10KVA1H integration
1 3 Battery 0 374.42 -
UPS system
4 Distribution box 0 247.12 -
5 Wiring 0 314.51 -

371
1 UPS host 13 4,481.05 58,253.71
Station 10KVA1H integration 2 Battery cabinet 13 898.61 11,681.90
2
UPS system (15minutes) 3 Battery 377 118.32 44,605.25
4 Wiring 13 404.37 5,256.86
(d) CCTV video monitoring
1 HD network infrared dome camera (1080P) 24 2,665.87 63,980.84 Plus 2 for NS9&EW12
2 HD network infrared waterproof camera (720P) 20 503.22 10,064.42
3 HD network infrared dome camera (720P) 24 533.17 12,796.15
1 Station video monitoring
4 2 in 1 lightning arrester 68 62.90 4,277.39
5 RJ45 network cable 4080 0.73 2,991.10
6 Power cable 4080 0.67 2,749.13

19 July 2015
(e) The IP Digital Broadcasting
1 IP network paging microphone 13 762.02 9,906.24
2 Normal microphone 13 95.25 1,238.28
Station digital broadcast
1 3 Power amplifier 26 323.80 8,418.73
equipment
4 Embedded sound box 52 91.44 4,754.96
5 Voice cable 5200 1.59 8,258.32
1 IP network paging microphone 0 762.02 -
2 Normal microphone 0 95.25 -
Terminal digital broadcast
2 3 Power amplifier 0 323.80 -
equipment
4 Outdoor waterproof sound box 0 87.46 -
5 Voice cable 0 1.59 -
(f) Bus operational monitoring and dispatching management system operations -
1 Supporting communication and supporting locating equipment sub-system -
 Station supporting Station supporting communication and supporting
1 13 576.61 7,495.88 2.4GHZ
1 communication and supporting locating equipment
locating equipment 2 Supporting cable 2600 1.20 3,114.00 RVVP4*0.5 each short-distance communication device need 100m
Terminal supporting Terminal supporting communication and supporting
1 0 576.61 -
2 communication and supporting locating equipment
locating equipment 2 Supporting cable 0 1.86 -
2 Terminal on site dispatching sub-system - -
1 Standard computer 0 1,141.44 -
Dispatching computer with 2
1 2 Pu-frequency monitor 0 282.42 -
LCD screen
3 Graphics 0 200.05 -
2 Multi-function station machine 0 8,237.23 -
1 Base and outer structure 0 3,323.72 -
2 LED screen 0 3,558.48 -
3 Out-door dispatching screen 3 Electric controller 0 102.97 -
4 Signal control cable 0 0.67 -
5 Power cable 0 0.84 -
1 Base and outer structure 0 1,235.58 -
2 LED screen 0 1,853.38 -
4 In-door dispatching screen 3 Electric controller 0 102.97 -

Draft, ITDP-China
4 Signal control cable 0 0.67 -
5 Power cable 0 0.84 -
5 Terminal cabling fee 0 1,647.45 -
(B) AFC system
Subtotal 356,392.09
1 Station network switch 13 1,647.45 21,416.80
2 Turnstile 144 1,647.45 237,232.29 Normal from 5000rmb to 10000rmb
1 Equipment on station 3 Card reader 13 988.47 12,850.08
For card payment by ticketing office.

372
4 Cash collection box 13 609.56 7,924.22
5 Station communication host 13 1,317.96 17,133.44 Normal computer to communicate with center
1 Emergency control button 1 13,014.83 13,014.83
2 Distribution cable 1 6,771.00 6,771.00
2 Other 3 Network cable 1 23,986.82 23,986.82
4 Connection cable 1 2,800.66 2,800.66
5 Other supporting equipment 1 4,141.68 4,141.68
1 Backup material 1 8,329.49 8,329.49
3 Backup
2 Tools 1 790.77 790.77
(C) Automatic door
Subtotal 3,383,182.87
1 Control system on station 13 7,413.51 96,375.62

19 July 2015
Equipment power distribution cabinet (including
2 13 2,240.53 29,126.85
stabilized voltage power supply cabinet)
3 Sliding door radio frequency remote sensor device 13 691.93 8,995.06
4 Sliding doors 418 2,471.17 1,032,948.93
1 Automatic door 5 Door control unit (DCU) 418 823.72 344,316.31
6 Fixed side box 418 1,350.91 564,678.75
7 Sliding door 418 1,235.58 516,474.46 Stainless steel
8 Indicator light 836 32.95 27,545.30
Bearing pedestal, supporting part, fasten part,
9 418 708.40 296,112.03
decoration materials and etc.
2 Cable 13 3,923.96 51,011.53
3 Construction 418 830.31 347,070.84
4 Backup 1 68,527.18 68,527.18
5 On-bus radio frequency remote sensor device and bus door open/close button 0 658.98 -
(D) Control Center
 Subtotal - Assume the room around 150m2 will be provided
1 Central service server 0 109,390.44 -
Automatic door and AFC
1 2 Ticketing central system 0 728,237.23 -
system
3 System and application software 0 862,438.22 -
1 Network and communication 0 385,534.42 -
2 Uninterruptible power supply (UPS) 0 217,277.12 -
3 CCTV video monitoring 0 1,454,574.04 -
4 The IP digital broadcasting 0 12,130.38 -
Operation and dispatching 5 Clock synchronization system 0 21,926.01 -
2
system
Bus operational monitoring and dispatching
6 0 3,710,936.28 -
management system operations
BRT operational monitoring and dispatching
7 0 448,105.44 -
management subsystem - business software
8 Other cost 0 663,063.19 -
XI Passenger Information
Subtotal 214,168.04
Including four levels of information, outside staiton on sidewalk, on bridge, in
1 Passenger Information system for 4 stations 13 14,827.02 192,751.24
front of station entrance and inside station
2 Maps print and bus routes print out 13 1,647.45 21,416.80

Draft, ITDP-China
XII Traffic organization during construction
Subtotal 247,116.97
Including the short-term traffic marking, traffic leading sign, divider, fance,
1 Traffic organization during construction 1 247,116.97 247,116.97
bus shelters and organizaiton assistant, etc.
XIII Traffic surveillance and control
Subtotal 2,208,304.78
At each intersection or T-junction, including controllers, video capture cards,
1 Traffic signal violence controller 20 5,024.71 100,494.23 capture control software, operating systems, traffic light signal detector and
etc.
2 Pole 60 2,771.00 166,260.30 "L" type, including the foundation

373
3 Digital camera 120 995.06 119,406.92
4 Video camera 60 1,408.57 84,514.00
5 Protective cover 180 148.27 26,688.63

Traffic signal violence control 6 Outdoor waterproof anti-theft stainless steel case 60 560.13 33,607.91
1 7 standard leakage protector 60 65.90 3,953.87
at intersection
8 Assisted lighting (flash) 60 311.37 18,682.04
9 Power 60 254.53 15,271.83 For UPS, video camera and digital camera
10 SPD 60 148.27 8,896.21 For power, controller and camera
11 Lightning detection 60 263.59 15,815.49
12 Communication module 60 411.86 24,711.70

19 July 2015
13 Detect loop 180 214.17 38,550.25
1 Integrated dome camera 89 2,487.64 221,400.33 At each 200m, for the vehicle running in the bus lane.
2 Pole 89 691.93 61,581.55 "L" type, including the foundation
3 Outdoor waterproof anti-theft stainless steel case 89 560.13 49,851.73
4 Standard leakage protector 89 65.90 5,864.91
5 SPD 89 148.27 13,196.05 For power, controller and camera
6 Lightning detection 89 263.59 23,459.64
7 Bi-directional video data + ethernet Fiber terminal 89 4,365.73 388,550.25
BRT lane enforcement
2 8 Power 89 254.53 22,653.21 For UPS, video camera and digital camera
(camera along corridor)
9 Optical fibre slot box (7 slots) 89 261.94 23,313.01
10 Video distributor (FS-16) 89 1,350.91 120,230.64
11 Code distributor (FS-C-485D) 89 1,663.92 148,088.96
12 16 DVR 89 1,565.07 139,291.60
13 Optical jumper 89 60.13 5,351.73
 BRT lane enforcement
2
(camera along corridor)

14 Fiber ends box 89 70.84 6,304.78

15 Camera supporting frame 89 411.86 36,655.68
For the vehicle running in the bus lane.including local storage 16G SD card,
3 BRT lane enforcement (camera in front of bus) 0 372.32 -
powerbox, and equipment box
1 Integrated dome camera 18 2,487.64 44,777.59 At each 500m, for the overview of the whole traffic condition.
2 Pole 18 691.93 12,454.70 "L" type, including the foundation
3 Outdoor waterproof anti-theft stainless steel case 18 560.13 10,082.37
4 Standard leakage protector 18 65.90 1,186.16

Draft, ITDP-China
5 SPD 18 148.27 2,668.86 For power, controller and camera
6 Lightning detection 18 263.59 4,744.65
7 Bi-directional video data + ethernet fiber terminal 18 4,365.73 78,583.20
4 CCTV camera system 8 Power 18 254.53 4,581.55 For UPS, video camera and digital camera
9 Optical fibre slot box (7 slots) 18 261.94 4,714.99
10 Video distributor (FS-16) 18 1,350.91 24,316.31
11 Code distributor (FS-C-485D) 18 1,663.92 29,950.58
12 16 DVR 18 1,565.07 28,171.33

374
13 Optical jumper 18 60.13 1,082.37
14 Fiber ends box 18 70.84 1,275.12
15 Camera supporting frame 18 411.86 7,413.51
Purchase the right to use fiber-optic network from the operator for 20 years,
200 148.27 29,654.04
5 Optical fibre lease including three years of maintenance costs
6 Server in control center 0 41,186.16 -
7 Supporting equipment in control center 0 238,879.74 -

Project direct cost and expenses 25,097,221.25

XIV Project indirect cost and expenses

19 July 2015
Subtotal
1 Including feasibility study, detailed engineering design, tendering assistance, construction management, supervision, and etc. 6,525,277.53 Normally around 26% of total project cost
Total 31,622,498.78
C5 (including 32nd St in BGC)

COSTING FOR MANILA BRT CONCEPTUAL PLAN (C5)

No. ITEM C5
I Road engineering
(A) Mix traffic lanes (asphalt) 577,594
(B) BRT lanes (concrete) 684,551
(C) BRT ramp 1,942,191
(D) Sidewalk 101,053
(E) Elevated sidewalk 0
(F) Steel foot bridge 30,516,707
(G) MRT connection 0
(H) Tunnel connection 0
(I) Guadalupe bike/ped bridge 0
(J) Bus lane separator 86,108
(K) Sidewalk curb 15,822
(L) Steel bollard 1,185,749
II Greenery 70,115
III Street light 433,690
IV Water drainage 664,745
V Traffic engineering 269,546
VI BRT station architecture 5,766,063
VII BRT station power supply and lighting 1,233,773
VIII BRT station drainage and fire protection 16,145
IX BRT station ventilation and air conditioning 19,605
X On-station BRT ITS system
(A) Operation and dispatching system 1,036,817
(B) AFC system 278,830
(C) Automatic door 3,161,411
(D) Control center 0
XI Passenger information 148,270
XII Traffic organization during construction 164,745
XIII Traffic surveillance and control 1,176,242
XIV Sta Monica bike/ped bridge* 0
Project direct cost and expenses 49,549,772
Direct cost for phase I
Project indirect cost and expenses 12,882,941
Total 62,432,713

Draft, ITDP-China 375 19 July 2015

 Costing for Manila BRT conceptual design (C5)
Unit Cost Total Cost
Foreign Foreign
No. Item Volume Comment
Currency Currency
(US $) (US $)
I Road engineering
Subtotal 35,109,775.38
1 AC-13C asphalt concrete (4cm) 18630 12.55 233,762.04
2 AC-20C asphalt concrete (6cm 9315 17.25 160,711.40
3 TAB-25 asphalt macadam (8cm) 9315 4.53 42,160.65
Including change current sidewalk to be traffic lane and just renew the current
1 Mix traffic lanes (asphalt) 4 5% cement stabilized macadam (35cm) 9315 8.11 75,555.23 asphalt pavement (demolish 4cm and repave 4cm asphalt).
5 4% cement stabilized macadam (15cm) 9315 3.47 32,351.00
6 Graded broken stone (15cm) 9315 1.90 17,740.87
7 Geotextiles 10200 1.50 15,312.57
1 C35 steel reinforced cement concrete (25cm) 14210 43.69 620,871.61
2 BRT lanes (concrete) 2 4% graded broken stone (20cm) 14210 2.58 36,615.51 At BRT station
3 Graded broken stone (15cm) 14210 1.90 27,063.63
3 BRT ramp 2000 971.10 1,942,191.35

Draft, ITDP-China
1 Sidewalk brick (5cm) 1000 101.05 101,053.10
4 Sidewalk 2 C20 cement concrete (15cm) 0 13.89 - Including new sidewalk and just renew the current brick pavement.

3 Graded broken stone (10cm) 0 1.30 -

5 Elevated sidewalk 0 2,007.62 -
1 Footbridge 7 1,598,064.08 11,186,448.58 50m long and 4m wide
2 Footbridge with long ramp 8 2,405,126.60 19,241,012.77 1:20 long ramp
6 Steel foot bridge 3 Integrate with existing bridge 1 80,965.72 80,965.72 Connection from existing pedestrian bridge

376
4 Demolish current bridge 1 8,280.08 8,280.08
5 Lift 0 80,663.23 -
1 MRT connection 0 1,194,532.83 - Including new sidewalk and just renew the current brick pavement.
7 MRT connection
2 Lift 0 80,663.23 -
1 Tunnel connection 0 564,642.62 - Tunnel connection from existing pedestrian tunnel
8 Tunnel connection
2 Lift 0 80,663.23 -
9 Guadalupe bike/ped bridge 0 7,743,670.18 -
10 Bus lane separator 12600 6.83 86,108.00 Bogota type
11 Sidewalk curb 4035 3.92 15,821.76
1.5m distance, long sidewalk, refudge islands and BRT access.50cm in the
12 Steel bollard 8400 141.16 1,185,749.50

19 July 2015
II Greenery
Subtotal 70,115.32
1 Newly planted trees 0 241.99 -
2 New green belt 0 8.29 -
3 Demolish the existing greenbelt 5320 0.78 70,115.32
III Street light
Subtotal 433,690.28
1 Remove exsiting lights 135 233.70 33,360.79
2 New lights 135 5,377.55 400,329.49
IV Water drainage
Subtotal 664,744.65
1 New drainage along road 0 322.20 -
2 New drainage at station 2690 56.02 664,744.65
 V Traffic engineering (road marking and traffic signal)
subtotal 269,546.13
1 Road marking 12925 13.11 95,819.60
1 Single pole 32 173.20 6,326.19 Including basement and installing
2 high 6.5m arm 4m) 10 1,579.65 10,708.40 Including basement and installing
3 high 6.5m arm 4m) 4 1,579.65 5,601.32 Including basement and installing
2 Traffic signage facility
4 Signage board (1m*1m) 8 231.23 1,133.44 Including installing
5 Signage board (2m*3m) 16 1,624.24 13,601.32 Including installing
6 Signage board (1.5m*2m) 16 654.16 6,800.66 Including installing
1 "L" pole (6m arm) 8 3,372.17 21,746.29 Including basement and installing
2 "L" pole (8m arm) 8 3,596.24 27,677.10 Including basement and installing
3 0 1,232.35 - Including basement and installing
3 Traffic signal facility 4 32 963.48 9,489.29 Including basement and installing
5 Traffic signal 32 423.48 18,451.40 Including installing
6 Pedestrian signal 32 268.88 12,652.39 Including installing
7 Traffic signal controller (C4 area control) 2 1,904.55 39,538.71 Including Cable, well and civil engineering
VI BRT Station Architecture Structure and Decoration
subtotal 5,766,062.60
1 1 substop 0 823.72 -

Draft, ITDP-China
New station architecture,
1 2 2 substop 7000 823.72 5,766,062.60
structure and decoration
3 3 substop 0 823.72 -
VII BRT station power supply and lighting Estimated by cost per m2
subtotal 1,233,772.65
1 BRT station power supply and lighting 7000 70.35 492,421.75
2 Voltage transformer 9 82,372.32 741,350.91
VIII BRT Station drainage and fire protection Estimated by cost per m2

377
subtotal 16,144.98
1 BRT station drainage and fire protection 7000 2.31 16,144.98
IX BRT station ventilation and air conditioning Estimated by cost per m2
subtotal 19,604.61
1 BRT station ventilation and air conditioning 7000 2.80 19,604.61
X On-station BRT ITS system
(A) Operation and dispatching system
Subtotal 1,036,816.88
(a) Network and communication
Station industrial Ethernet 1 Host 9 7,481.20 67,330.84

19 July 2015
1 switches (including terminal 2 SFP slot 12 727.51 8,730.15
switches) 3 10KM optical module 24 727.51 17,460.30
1 Host 9 1,153.21 10,378.91
Network cabinets on station 2 Power supply socket 9 38.94 350.45
2
and terminals 3 Distributor 9 329.49 2,965.40
4 Drum stand 9 17.97 161.75
1 Optical cable (36 core) 26.7 4,677.25 124,882.59
2 Optical cable (12 core) 5 3,051.67 15,258.35 Control center to the nearest station
3 Optical cable implement cost 31.7 1,497.68 47,476.42
Fibre and supporting
3 4 Optical cable unit box 9 605.89 5,453.02
equipment
5 ODF frame 6 5,772.18 34,633.10
6 Jumper 54 8.99 485.29
7 Welding 336 11.98 4,025.91
4 Station cable integration 9 2,396.29 21,566.57
 (b) Passenger information service
1 Industrial panel computer 9 3,459.64 31,136.74
2 Flush mounting bracket 9 123.56 1,112.03
Station passenger information
1 3 Cable 1350 0.73 989.70
self-enquiry system
1 25,205.93 25,205.93
4 Passenger self-inquiry system application software
9 428.34 3,855.02
1 LED screen 108 1,313.00 141,803.64
2 LED screen body shell 108 576.61 62,273.48
3 Hanger 108 120.47 13,010.71
4 LED screen control card 108 240.46 25,969.46
5 Power Module 108 74.14 8,006.59
6 Ground fault circuit interrupter (GFCI) 108 19.77 2,135.09
Station passenger information 7 Timer switch 108 19.77 2,135.09
2
display system 8 Signal cable 108 0.67 72.77
9 Power cable 16200 1.48 24,019.77
10 Host computer 9 1,617.49 14,557.43
11 Serial port card 9 329.49 2,965.40
12 WinXP pro system 9 179.72 1,617.49
Passenger information display system application 1 53,377.27 53,377.27

Draft, ITDP-China
13
software 108 576.61 62,273.48
(c) Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS)
1 UPS host 0 4,481.05 -
2 Battery cabinet 0 898.61 -
Terminal 10KVA1H integration
1 3 Battery 0 374.42 -
UPS system
4 Distribution box 0 247.12 -
5 Wiring 0 314.51 -
1 UPS host 9 4,481.05 40,329.49

378
Station 10KVA1H integration 2 Battery cabinet 9 898.61 8,087.47
2
UPS system (15minutes) 3 Battery 261 118.32 30,880.56
4 Wiring 9 404.37 3,639.37
(d) CCTV video monitoring
1 HD network infrared dome camera (1080P) 18 2,665.87 47,985.63 Plus 2 for NS9&EW12
2 HD network infrared waterproof camera (720P) 36 503.22 18,115.95
3 HD network infrared dome camera (720P) 18 533.17 9,597.11
1 Station video monitoring
4 2 in 1 lightning arrester 72 62.90 4,529.00
5 RJ45 network cable 4320 0.73 3,167.05
6 Power cable 4320 0.67 2,910.84

19 July 2015
(e) The IP Digital Broadcasting
1 IP network paging microphone 9 762.02 6,858.16
2 Normal microphone 9 95.25 857.27
Station digital broadcast
1 3 Power amplifier 18 323.80 5,828.35
equipment
4 Embedded sound box 36 91.44 3,291.89
5 Voice cable 3600 1.59 5,717.30
1 IP network paging microphone 0 762.02 -
2 Normal microphone 0 95.25 -
Terminal digital broadcast
2 3 Power amplifier 0 323.80 -
equipment
4 Outdoor waterproof sound box 0 87.46 -
5 Voice cable 0 1.59 -
(f) Bus operational monitoring and dispatching management system operations -
1 Supporting communication and supporting locating equipment sub-system -
 Station supporting Station supporting communication and supporting
1 9 576.61 5,189.46 2.4GHZ
1 communication and supporting locating equipment
locating equipment 2 Supporting cable 1800 1.20 2,155.85 RVVP4*0.5 each short-distance communication device need 100m
Terminal supporting Terminal supporting communication and supporting
1 0 576.61 -
2 communication and supporting locating equipment
locating equipment 2 Supporting cable 0 1.86 -
2 Terminal on site dispatching sub-system - -
1 Standard computer 0 1,141.44 -
Dispatching computer with 2
1 2 Pu-frequency monitor 0 282.42 -
LCD screen
3 Graphics 0 200.05 -
2 Multi-function station machine 0 8,237.23 -
1 Base and outer structure 0 3,323.72 -
2 LED screen 0 3,558.48 -
3 Out-door dispatching screen 3 Electric controller 0 102.97 -
4 Signal control cable 0 0.67 -
5 Power cable 0 0.84 -
1 Base and outer structure 0 1,235.58 -
2 LED screen 0 1,853.38 -
4 In-door dispatching screen 3 Electric controller 0 102.97 -

Draft, ITDP-China
4 Signal control cable 0 0.67 -
5 Power cable 0 0.84 -
5 Terminal cabling fee 0 1,647.45 -
(B) AFC system
Subtotal 278,830.31
1 Station network switch 9 1,647.45 14,827.02
2 Turnstile 108 1,647.45 177,924.22 Normal from 5000rmb to 10000rmb
1 Equipment on station 3 Card reader 9 988.47 8,896.21
For card payment by ticketing office.
609.56 5,486.00

379
4 Cash collection box 9
5 Station communication host 9 1,317.96 11,861.61 Normal computer to communicate with center
1 Emergency control button 1 13,014.83 13,014.83
2 Distribution cable 1 6,771.00 6,771.00
2 Other 3 Network cable 1 23,986.82 23,986.82
4 Connection cable 1 2,800.66 2,800.66
5 Other supporting equipment 1 4,141.68 4,141.68
1 Backup material 1 8,329.49 8,329.49
3 Backup
2 Tools 1 790.77 790.77
(C) Automatic door
Subtotal 3,161,411.23
1 Control system on station 9 7,413.51 66,721.58

19 July 2015
Equipment power distribution cabinet (including
2 9 2,240.53 20,164.74
stabilized voltage power supply cabinet)
3 Sliding door radio frequency remote sensor device 9 691.93 6,227.35
4 Sliding doors 396 2,471.17 978,583.20
1 Automatic door 5 Door control unit (DCU) 396 823.72 326,194.40
6 Fixed side box 396 1,350.91 534,958.81
7 Sliding door 396 1,235.58 489,291.60 Stainless steel
8 Indicator light 792 32.95 26,095.55
Bearing pedestal, supporting part, fasten part,
9 396 708.40 280,527.18
decoration materials and etc.
2 Cable 9 3,923.96 35,315.68
3 Construction 396 830.31 328,803.95
4 Backup 1 68,527.18 68,527.18
5 On-bus radio frequency remote sensor device and bus door open/close button 0 658.98 -
(D) Control Center
 Subtotal - Assume the room around 150m2 will be provided
1 Central service server 0 109,390.44 -
Automatic door and AFC
1 2 Ticketing central system 0 728,237.23 -
system
3 System and application software 0 862,438.22 -
1 Network and communication 0 385,534.42 -
2 Uninterruptible power supply (UPS) 0 217,277.12 -
3 CCTV video monitoring 0 1,454,574.04 -
4 The IP digital broadcasting 0 12,130.38 -
Operation and dispatching 5 Clock synchronization system 0 21,926.01 -
2
system
Bus operational monitoring and dispatching
6 0 3,710,936.28 -
management system operations
BRT operational monitoring and dispatching
7 0 448,105.44 -
management subsystem - business software
8 Other cost 0 663,063.19 -
XI Passenger Information
Subtotal 148,270.18
Including four levels of information, outside staiton on sidewalk, on bridge, in
1 Passenger Information system for 4 stations 9 14,827.02 133,443.16
front of station entrance and inside station
2 Maps print and bus routes print out 9 1,647.45 14,827.02

Draft, ITDP-China
XII Traffic organization during construction
Subtotal 164,744.65
Including the short-term traffic marking, traffic leading sign, divider, fance,
1 Traffic organization during construction 1 164,744.65 164,744.65
bus shelters and organizaiton assistant, etc.
XIII Traffic surveillance and control
Subtotal 1,176,242.17
At each intersection or T-junction, including controllers, video capture cards,
1 Traffic signal violence controller 2 5,024.71 10,049.42 capture control software, operating systems, traffic light signal detector and
etc.

380
2 Pole 6 2,771.00 16,626.03 "L" type, including the foundation
3 Digital camera 12 995.06 11,940.69
4 Video camera 6 1,408.57 8,451.40
5 Protective cover 18 148.27 2,668.86

Traffic signal violence control 6 Outdoor waterproof anti-theft stainless steel case 6 560.13 3,360.79
1 7 standard leakage protector 6 65.90 395.39
at intersection
8 Assisted lighting (flash) 6 311.37 1,868.20
9 Power 6 254.53 1,527.18 For UPS, video camera and digital camera
10 SPD 6 148.27 889.62 For power, controller and camera
11 Lightning detection 6 263.59 1,581.55
12 Communication module 6 411.86 2,471.17

19 July 2015
13 Detect loop 18 214.17 3,855.02
1 Integrated dome camera 63 2,487.64 156,721.58 At each 200m, for the vehicle running in the bus lane.
2 Pole 63 691.93 43,591.43 "L" type, including the foundation
3 Outdoor waterproof anti-theft stainless steel case 63 560.13 35,288.30
4 Standard leakage protector 63 65.90 4,151.57
5 SPD 63 148.27 9,341.02 For power, controller and camera
6 Lightning detection 63 263.59 16,606.26
7 Bi-directional video data + ethernet Fiber terminal 63 4,365.73 275,041.19
BRT lane enforcement
2 8 Power 63 254.53 16,035.42 For UPS, video camera and digital camera
(camera along corridor)
9 Optical fibre slot box (7 slots) 63 261.94 16,502.47
10 Video distributor (FS-16) 63 1,350.91 85,107.08
11 Code distributor (FS-C-485D) 63 1,663.92 104,827.02
12 16 DVR 63 1,565.07 98,599.67
13 Optical jumper 63 60.13 3,788.30
 14 Fiber ends box 63 70.84 4,462.93
15 Camera supporting frame 63 411.86 25,947.28
For the vehicle running in the bus lane.including local storage 16G SD card,
3 BRT lane enforcement (camera in front of bus) 0 372.32 -
powerbox, and equipment box
1 Integrated dome camera 13 2,487.64 32,339.37 At each 500m, for the overview of the whole traffic condition.
2 Pole 13 691.93 8,995.06 "L" type, including the foundation
3 Outdoor waterproof anti-theft stainless steel case 13 560.13 7,281.71
4 Standard leakage protector 13 65.90 856.67
5 SPD 13 148.27 1,927.51 For power, controller and camera
6 Lightning detection 13 263.59 3,426.69
7 Bi-directional video data + ethernet fiber terminal 13 4,365.73 56,754.53
4 CCTV camera system 8 Power 13 254.53 3,308.90 For UPS, video camera and digital camera
9 Optical fibre slot box (7 slots) 13 261.94 3,405.27
10 Video distributor (FS-16) 13 1,350.91 17,561.78
11 Code distributor (FS-C-485D) 13 1,663.92 21,630.97
12 16 DVR 13 1,565.07 20,345.96
13 Optical jumper 13 60.13 781.71
14 Fiber ends box 13 70.84 920.92
15 Camera supporting frame 13 411.86 5,354.20

Draft, ITDP-China
Purchase the right to use fiber-optic network from the operator for 20 years,
200 148.27 29,654.04
5 Optical fibre lease including three years of maintenance costs
6 Server in control center 0 41,186.16 -
7 Supporting equipment in control center 0 238,879.74 -

Project direct cost and expenses 49,549,772.02

XIV Project indirect cost and expenses

381
Subtotal
1 Including feasibility study, detailed engineering design, tendering assistance, construction management, supervision, and etc. 12,882,940.72 Normally around 26% of total project cost
Total 62,432,712.74

19 July 2015
Roxas Boulevard (Manila City Hall ITS
South)
COSTING FOR MANILA BRT CONCEPTUAL PLAN (Roxas Boulevard)
No. ITEM Roxas Boulevard**
I Road engineering
(A) Mix traffic lanes (asphalt) 3,035,787
(B) BRT lanes (concrete) 816,306
(C) BRT ramp 0
(D) Sidewalk 80,842
(E) Elevated sidewalk 0
(F) Steel foot bridge 20,193,946
(G) MRT connection 0
(H) Tunnel connection 0
(I) Guadalupe bike/ped bridge 0
(J) Bus lane separator 129,845
(K) Sidewalk curb 21,998
(L) Steel bollard 1,813,491
II Greenery 230,643
III Street light 600,741
IV Water drainage 924,217
V Traffic engineering 1,047,609
VI BRT station architecture 8,360,791
VII BRT station power supply and lighting 1,702,479
VIII BRT station drainage and fire protection 23,410
IX BRT station ventilation and air conditioning 28,427
X On-station BRT ITS system
(A) Operation and dispatching system 1,284,124
(B) AFC system 341,944
(C) Automatic door 4,027,681
(D) Control center 0
XI Passenger information 197,694
XII Traffic organization during construction 296,540
XIII Traffic surveillance and control 2,143,648
XIV Sta Monica bike/ped bridge* 0
Project direct cost and expenses 47,302,163
Direct cost for phase I
Project indirect cost and expenses 12,298,562
Total 59,600,725

NOTE:
* The cost for Sta Monica bike/ped bridge is not included.
** Including R6-Tambo

Draft, ITDP-China 382 19 July 2015

 Costing for Manila BRT conceptual design (Roxas Boulevard)
Unit Cost Total Cost
Foreign Foreign
No. Item Volume Comment
Currency Currency
(US $) (US $)
I Road engineering
Subtotal 26,092,214.99
1 AC-13C asphalt concrete (4cm) 97785 12.55 1,226,968.41
2 AC-20C asphalt concrete (6cm 48892.5 17.25 843,540.78
3 TAB-25 asphalt macadam (8cm) 48892.5 4.53 221,292.52
Including change current sidewalk to be traffic lane and just renew the current
1 Mix traffic lanes (asphalt) 4 5% cement stabilized macadam (35cm) 48892.5 8.11 396,573.72 asphalt pavement (demolish 4cm and repave 4cm asphalt).
5 4% cement stabilized macadam (15cm) 48892.5 3.47 169,803.66
6 Graded broken stone (15cm) 48892.5 1.90 93,118.14
7 Geotextiles 56280 1.50 84,489.36
1 C35 steel reinforced cement concrete (25cm) 16945 43.69 740,370.83
2 BRT lanes (concrete) 2 4% graded broken stone (20cm) 16945 2.58 43,662.89 At BRT station
3 Graded broken stone (15cm) 16945 1.90 32,272.57
3 BRT ramp 0 971.10 -

Draft, ITDP-China
1 Sidewalk brick (5cm) 800 101.05 80,842.48
4 Sidewalk 2 C20 cement concrete (15cm) 0 13.89 - Including new sidewalk and just renew the current brick pavement.

3 Graded broken stone (10cm) 0 1.30 -

5 Elevated sidewalk 0 2,007.62 -
1 Footbridge 2 1,598,064.08 3,196,128.16 50m long and 4m wide
2 Footbridge with long ramp 7 2,405,126.60 16,835,886.18 1:20 long ramp
6 Steel foot bridge 3 Integrate with existing bridge 2 80,965.72 161,931.44 Connection from existing pedestrian bridge
8,280.08 -

383
4 Demolish current bridge 0
5 Lift 0 80,663.23 -
1 MRT connection 0 1,194,532.83 - Including new sidewalk and just renew the current brick pavement.
7 MRT connection
2 Lift 0 80,663.23 -
1 Tunnel connection 0 564,642.62 - Tunnel connection from existing pedestrian tunnel
8 Tunnel connection
2 Lift 0 80,663.23 -
9 Guadalupe bike/ped bridge 0 7,743,670.18 -
10 Bus lane separator 19000 6.83 129,845.40 Bogota type
11 Sidewalk curb 5610 3.92 21,997.54
1.5m distance, long sidewalk, refudge islands and BRT access.50cm in the
12 Steel bollard 12847 141.16 1,813,490.93

19 July 2015
II Greenery
Subtotal 230,642.50
1 Newly planted trees 0 241.99 -
2 New green belt 0 8.29 -
3 Demolish the existing greenbelt 17500 0.78 230,642.50
III Street light
Subtotal 600,741.35
1 Remove exsiting lights 187 233.70 46,210.87
2 New lights 187 5,377.55 554,530.48
IV Water drainage
Subtotal 924,217.46
1 New drainage along road 0 322.20 -
2 New drainage at station 3740 56.02 924,217.46
 V Traffic engineering (road marking and traffic signal)
subtotal 1,047,608.73
1 Road marking 19725 13.11 146,231.47
1 Single pole 52 173.20 10,280.07 Including basement and installing
2 high 6.5m arm 4m) 26 1,579.65 27,841.85 Including basement and installing
3 high 6.5m arm 4m) 26 1,579.65 36,408.57 Including basement and installing
2 Traffic signage facility
4 Signage board (1m*1m) 52 231.23 7,367.38 Including installing
5 Signage board (2m*3m) 26 1,624.24 22,102.14 Including installing
6 Signage board (1.5m*2m) 26 654.16 11,051.07 Including installing
1 "L" pole (6m arm) 30 3,372.17 81,548.60 Including basement and installing
2 "L" pole (8m arm) 30 3,596.24 103,789.13 Including basement and installing
3 0 1,232.35 - Including basement and installing
3 Traffic signal facility 4 240 963.48 71,169.69 Including basement and installing
5 Traffic signal 240 423.48 138,385.50 Including installing
6 Pedestrian signal 240 268.88 94,892.92 Including installing
7 Traffic signal controller (C4 area control) 15 1,904.55 296,540.36 Including Cable, well and civil engineering
VI BRT Station Architecture Structure and Decoration
subtotal 8,360,790.77
1 1 substop 0 823.72 -

Draft, ITDP-China
New station architecture,
1 2 2 substop 10150 823.72 8,360,790.77
structure and decoration
3 3 substop 0 823.72 -
VII BRT station power supply and lighting Estimated by cost per m2
subtotal 1,702,479.41
1 BRT station power supply and lighting 10150 70.35 714,011.53
2 Voltage transformer 12 82,372.32 988,467.87
VIII BRT Station drainage and fire protection Estimated by cost per m2

384
subtotal 23,410.21
1 BRT station drainage and fire protection 10150 2.31 23,410.21
IX BRT station ventilation and air conditioning Estimated by cost per m2
subtotal 28,426.69
1 BRT station ventilation and air conditioning 10150 2.80 28,426.69
X On-station BRT ITS system
(A) Operation and dispatching system
Subtotal 1,284,123.63
(a) Network and communication
Station industrial Ethernet 1 Host 12 7,481.20 89,774.45

19 July 2015
1 switches (including terminal 2 SFP slot 15 727.51 10,912.69
switches) 3 10KM optical module 30 727.51 21,825.37
1 Host 12 1,153.21 13,838.55
Network cabinets on station 2 Power supply socket 12 38.94 467.27
2
and terminals 3 Distributor 12 329.49 3,953.87
4 Drum stand 12 17.97 215.66
1 Optical cable (36 core) 27.6 4,677.25 129,092.11
2 Optical cable (12 core) 5 3,051.67 15,258.35 Control center to the nearest station
3 Optical cable implement cost 32.6 1,497.68 48,824.33
Fibre and supporting
3 4 Optical cable unit box 12 605.89 7,270.70
equipment
5 ODF frame 6 5,772.18 34,633.10
6 Jumper 66 8.99 593.13
7 Welding 336 11.98 4,025.91
4 Station cable integration 12 2,396.29 28,755.42
 (b) Passenger information service
1 Industrial panel computer 12 3,459.64 41,515.65
2 Flush mounting bracket 12 123.56 1,482.70
Station passenger information
1 3 Cable 1800 0.73 1,319.60
self-enquiry system
1 25,205.93 25,205.93
4 Passenger self-inquiry system application software
12 428.34 5,140.03
1 LED screen 144 1,313.00 189,071.53
2 LED screen body shell 144 576.61 83,031.30
3 Hanger 144 120.47 17,347.61
4 LED screen control card 144 240.46 34,625.95
5 Power Module 144 74.14 10,675.45
6 Ground fault circuit interrupter (GFCI) 144 19.77 2,846.79
Station passenger information 7 Timer switch 144 19.77 2,846.79
2
display system 8 Signal cable 144 0.67 97.03
9 Power cable 21600 1.48 32,026.36
10 Host computer 12 1,617.49 19,409.91
11 Serial port card 12 329.49 3,953.87
12 WinXP pro system 12 179.72 2,156.66
Passenger information display system application 1 53,377.27 53,377.27

Draft, ITDP-China
13
software 144 576.61 83,031.30
(c) Uninterruptible Power Supply (UPS)
1 UPS host 0 4,481.05 -
2 Battery cabinet 0 898.61 -
Terminal 10KVA1H integration
1 3 Battery 0 374.42 -
UPS system
4 Distribution box 0 247.12 -
5 Wiring 0 314.51 -
1 UPS host 12 4,481.05 53,772.65

385
Station 10KVA1H integration 2 Battery cabinet 12 898.61 10,783.29
2
UPS system (15minutes) 3 Battery 348 118.32 41,174.08
4 Wiring 12 404.37 4,852.49
(d) CCTV video monitoring
1 HD network infrared dome camera (1080P) 24 2,665.87 63,980.84 Plus 2 for NS9&EW12
2 HD network infrared waterproof camera (720P) 48 503.22 24,154.60
3 HD network infrared dome camera (720P) 24 533.17 12,796.15
1 Station video monitoring
4 2 in 1 lightning arrester 96 62.90 6,038.67
5 RJ45 network cable 5760 0.73 4,222.73
6 Power cable 5760 0.67 3,881.12

19 July 2015
(e) The IP Digital Broadcasting
1 IP network paging microphone 12 762.02 9,144.22
2 Normal microphone 12 95.25 1,143.02
Station digital broadcast
1 3 Power amplifier 24 323.80 7,771.14
equipment
4 Embedded sound box 48 91.44 4,389.19
5 Voice cable 4800 1.59 7,623.06
1 IP network paging microphone 0 762.02 -
2 Normal microphone 0 95.25 -
Terminal digital broadcast
2 3 Power amplifier 0 323.80 -
equipment
4 Outdoor waterproof sound box 0 87.46 -
5 Voice cable 0 1.59 -
(f) Bus operational monitoring and dispatching management system operations -
1 Supporting communication and supporting locating equipment sub-system -
 Station supporting Station supporting communication and supporting
1 12 576.61 6,919.28 2.4GHZ
1 communication and supporting locating equipment
locating equipment 2 Supporting cable 2400 1.20 2,874.46 RVVP4*0.5 each short-distance communication device need 100m
Terminal supporting Terminal supporting communication and supporting
1 0 576.61 -
2 communication and supporting locating equipment
locating equipment 2 Supporting cable 0 1.86 -
2 Terminal on site dispatching sub-system - -
1 Standard computer 0 1,141.44 -
Dispatching computer with 2
1 2 Pu-frequency monitor 0 282.42 -
LCD screen
3 Graphics 0 200.05 -
2 Multi-function station machine 0 8,237.23 -
1 Base and outer structure 0 3,323.72 -
2 LED screen 0 3,558.48 -
3 Out-door dispatching screen 3 Electric controller 0 102.97 -
4 Signal control cable 0 0.67 -
5 Power cable 0 0.84 -
1 Base and outer structure 0 1,235.58 -
2 LED screen 0 1,853.38 -
4 In-door dispatching screen 3 Electric controller 0 102.97 -

Draft, ITDP-China
4 Signal control cable 0 0.67 -
5 Power cable 0 0.84 -
5 Terminal cabling fee 0 1,647.45 -
(B) AFC system
Subtotal 341,943.99
1 Station network switch 12 1,647.45 19,769.36
2 Turnstile 138 1,647.45 227,347.61 Normal from 5000rmb to 10000rmb
1 Equipment on station 3 Card reader 12 988.47 11,861.61
For card payment by ticketing office.

386
4 Cash collection box 12 609.56 7,314.66
5 Station communication host 12 1,317.96 15,815.49 Normal computer to communicate with center
1 Emergency control button 1 13,014.83 13,014.83
2 Distribution cable 1 6,771.00 6,771.00
2 Other 3 Network cable 1 23,986.82 23,986.82
4 Connection cable 1 2,800.66 2,800.66
5 Other supporting equipment 1 4,141.68 4,141.68
1 Backup material 1 8,329.49 8,329.49
3 Backup
2 Tools 1 790.77 790.77
(C) Automatic door
Subtotal 4,027,680.65
1 Control system on station 12 7,413.51 88,962.11

19 July 2015
Equipment power distribution cabinet (including
2 12 2,240.53 26,886.33
stabilized voltage power supply cabinet)
3 Sliding door radio frequency remote sensor device 12 691.93 8,303.13
4 Sliding doors 506 2,471.17 1,250,411.86
1 Automatic door 5 Door control unit (DCU) 506 823.72 416,803.95
6 Fixed side box 506 1,350.91 683,558.48
7 Sliding door 506 1,235.58 625,205.93 Stainless steel
8 Indicator light 1012 32.95 33,344.32
Bearing pedestal, supporting part, fasten part,
9 506 708.40 358,451.40
decoration materials and etc.
2 Cable 12 3,923.96 47,087.57
3 Construction 506 830.31 420,138.39
4 Backup 1 68,527.18 68,527.18
5 On-bus radio frequency remote sensor device and bus door open/close button 0 658.98 -
(D) Control Center
 Subtotal - Assume the room around 150m2 will be provided
1 Central service server 0 109,390.44 -
Automatic door and AFC
1 2 Ticketing central system 0 728,237.23 -
system
3 System and application software 0 862,438.22 -
1 Network and communication 0 385,534.42 -
2 Uninterruptible power supply (UPS) 0 217,277.12 -
3 CCTV video monitoring 0 1,454,574.04 -
4 The IP digital broadcasting 0 12,130.38 -
Operation and dispatching 5 Clock synchronization system 0 21,926.01 -
2
system
Bus operational monitoring and dispatching
6 0 3,710,936.28 -
management system operations
BRT operational monitoring and dispatching
7 0 448,105.44 -
management subsystem - business software
8 Other cost 0 663,063.19 -
XI Passenger Information
Subtotal 197,693.57
Including four levels of information, outside staiton on sidewalk, on bridge, in
1 Passenger Information system for 4 stations 12 14,827.02 177,924.22
front of station entrance and inside station
2 Maps print and bus routes print out 12 1,647.45 19,769.36

Draft, ITDP-China
XII Traffic organization during construction
Subtotal 296,540.36
Including the short-term traffic marking, traffic leading sign, divider, fance,
1 Traffic organization during construction 1 296,540.36 296,540.36
bus shelters and organizaiton assistant, etc.
XIII Traffic surveillance and control
Subtotal 2,143,648.27
At each intersection or T-junction, including controllers, video capture cards,
1 Traffic signal violence controller 15 5,024.71 75,370.68 capture control software, operating systems, traffic light signal detector and
etc.
2 Pole 45 2,771.00 124,695.22 "L" type, including the foundation

387
3 Digital camera 90 995.06 89,555.19
4 Video camera 45 1,408.57 63,385.50
5 Protective cover 135 148.27 20,016.47

Traffic signal violence control 6 Outdoor waterproof anti-theft stainless steel case 45 560.13 25,205.93
1 7 standard leakage protector 45 65.90 2,965.40
at intersection
8 Assisted lighting (flash) 45 311.37 14,011.53
9 Power 45 254.53 11,453.87 For UPS, video camera and digital camera
10 SPD 45 148.27 6,672.16 For power, controller and camera
11 Lightning detection 45 263.59 11,861.61
12 Communication module 45 411.86 18,533.77

19 July 2015
13 Detect loop 135 214.17 28,912.69
1 Integrated dome camera 95 2,487.64 236,326.19 At each 200m, for the vehicle running in the bus lane.
2 Pole 95 691.93 65,733.11 "L" type, including the foundation
3 Outdoor waterproof anti-theft stainless steel case 95 560.13 53,212.52
4 Standard leakage protector 95 65.90 6,260.30
5 SPD 95 148.27 14,085.67 For power, controller and camera
6 Lightning detection 95 263.59 25,041.19
7 Bi-directional video data + ethernet Fiber terminal 95 4,365.73 414,744.65
BRT lane enforcement
2 8 Power 95 254.53 24,180.40 For UPS, video camera and digital camera
(camera along corridor)
9 Optical fibre slot box (7 slots) 95 261.94 24,884.68
10 Video distributor (FS-16) 95 1,350.91 128,336.08
11 Code distributor (FS-C-485D) 95 1,663.92 158,072.49
12 16 DVR 95 1,565.07 148,682.04
13 Optical jumper 95 60.13 5,712.52
 BRT lane enforcement
2
(camera along corridor)

14 Fiber ends box 95 70.84 6,729.82

15 Camera supporting frame 95 411.86 39,126.85
For the vehicle running in the bus lane.including local storage 16G SD card,
3 BRT lane enforcement (camera in front of bus) 0 372.32 -
powerbox, and equipment box
1 Integrated dome camera 19 2,487.64 47,265.24 At each 500m, for the overview of the whole traffic condition.
2 Pole 19 691.93 13,146.62 "L" type, including the foundation
3 Outdoor waterproof anti-theft stainless steel case 19 560.13 10,642.50
4 Standard leakage protector 19 65.90 1,252.06
5 SPD 19 148.27 2,817.13 For power, controller and camera
6 Lightning detection 19 263.59 5,008.24
7 Bi-directional video data + ethernet fiber terminal 19 4,365.73 82,948.93
4 CCTV camera system 8 Power 19 254.53 4,836.08 For UPS, video camera and digital camera
9 Optical fibre slot box (7 slots) 19 261.94 4,976.94
10 Video distributor (FS-16) 19 1,350.91 25,667.22
11 Code distributor (FS-C-485D) 19 1,663.92 31,614.50
12 16 DVR 19 1,565.07 29,736.41
13 Optical jumper 19 60.13 1,142.50

Draft, ITDP-China
14 Fiber ends box 19 70.84 1,345.96
15 Camera supporting frame 19 411.86 7,825.37
Purchase the right to use fiber-optic network from the operator for 20 years,
200 148.27 29,654.04
5 Optical fibre lease including three years of maintenance costs
6 Server in control center 0 41,186.16 -
7 Supporting equipment in control center 0 238,879.74 -

Project direct cost and expenses 47,302,162.60

388
XIV Project indirect cost and expenses
Subtotal
1 Including feasibility study, detailed engineering design, tendering assistance, construction management, supervision, and etc. 12,298,562.28 Normally around 26% of total project cost
Total 59,600,724.88

19 July 2015
Draft, ITDP-China 389 19 July 2015
 ALTERNATIVE PHASING OPTION
As referred to in Chapter 3 above, an alternative
phasing plan involves including Ortigas-BGC in
phase 1, and the airport corridors in phase 2. The
detailed costings for the individual airport and
Ortigas-BGC corridors are provided above (see
‘Airport’ and ‘Ortigas-BGC’ tables). The follow-
ing tables provide summary figures for the cost
breakdown in this alternative scenario.
The BRT vehicle fleet is assumed to be the same
in each option. This is approximately correct and
does not largely influence the overall costing,
though more detailed analysis is required to
adjust the operational design to this new scenario,
if this alternative is preferred.

COSTING FOR MANILA BRT CONCEPTUAL PLAN (Phase1-alternative option)

No. ITEM EDSA MAKATI OTIGAS-BGC OFF-CORRIDOR
I Road engineering
(A) Mix traffic lanes (asphalt) 843,476 918,299 1,456,030 169,729
(B) BRT lanes (concrete) 2,890,192 657,092 1,453,671 175,353
(C) BRT ramp 19,349,081 0 0 0
(D) Sidewalk 2,007,832 146,676 50,527 65,189
(E) Elevated sidewalk 9,636,567 0 0 0
(F) Steel foot bridge 82,674,048 0 0 4,003,191
(G) MRT connection 14,591,799 0 0 0
(H) Tunnel connection 0 3,226,529 0 0
(I) Guadalupe bike/ped bridge 7,743,670 0 0 0
(J) Bus lane separator 328,030 72,440 121,645 5,741
(K) Sidewalk curb 47,553 11,763 43,701 4,352
(L) Steel bollard 4,534,080 1,039,931 1,697,175 148,783
II Greenery 37,796 19,589 53,443 9,226
III Street light 2,272,555 561,125 1,195,058 118,863
IV Water drainage 452,890 112,032 1,836,079 182,867
V Traffic engineering 1,491,184 1,988,141 1,674,942 205,928
VI BRT station architecture 37,127,265 4,036,244 6,285,008 1,960,461
VII BRT station power supply and lighting 5,806,583 1,003,674 1,607,580 496,913
VIII BRT station drainage and fire protection 103,956 11,301 17,598 5,489
IX BRT station ventilation and air conditioning 126,233 13,723 21,369 6,666
X On-station BRT ITS system
(A) Operation and dispatching system 3,127,143 868,454 1,174,232 525,997
(B) AFC system 963,690 244,613 356,392 137,397
(C) Automatic door 14,617,712 2,653,066 3,383,183 1,278,450
(D) Control center 8,613,613 0 0 0
XI Passenger information 527,183 131,796 214,168 65,898
XII Traffic organization during construction 823,723 197,694 247,117 32,949
XIII Traffic surveillance and control 5,121,349 1,760,955 2,208,305 185,496
XIV Depot 50,000,000 0 0 0
XV Smart card
(A) Recharge station 140,264 0 0 0
(B) Card reader 288,779 0 0 0
(C) IC card 8,514,851 0 0 0
(D) Installing fee 894,389 0 0 0
XVI Bus 111,800,000 0 0 0
XVII Sta. Monica bridge* 0 0 21,762,796 0
Project direct cost and expenses 397,497,491 19,675,137 25,097,221 9,784,938
Without depot, smart card and bus 225,859,207
Direct cost for phase I 452,054,786
Project indirect cost and expenses (not include smart card and bus) 85,908,291
Total 537,963,077

NOTE:
1. The cost for road infrastructure is based on Manila local price and the ITS part is based on Chinese price (15% import tax included)
2. Bus lane will be C35 reinforced concrete at stations and asphalt between stations.
3. We mainly keep the current road pavement, only reconstructing where the greenbelt needs to be moved or the sidewalk needs to be widened.
4. The existing pedestrian overpass bridges are of very poor quality and basically all need to be torn down and rebuilt in new locations, dimensions, specifications
and universal access.
5. Elevated steel pedestrian sidewalk is proposed to be the connection between MRT station and BRT station
6. The cost for smart card system is based on project in China. 3,000,000 cards and 50 recharge stations are assumed.
7. 50,000,000 USD is assumed for depot now, needs further study on it.
8. The price for BRT bus is from Kinglong in China, and import tax is included. Euro 4 need to add 20% more.
* Cost for Sta. Monica bridge is not included.

Draft, ITDP-China 390 19 July 2015

 COSTING FOR MANILA BRT CONCEPTUAL PLAN (Phase2-alternative option)
No. ITEM AIRPORT C5 ROXAS BOULEVARD*
I Road engineering
(A) Mix traffic lanes (asphalt) 284,891 577,594 3,035,787
(B) BRT lanes (concrete) 203,535 684,551 816,306
(C) BRT ramp 0 1,942,191 0
(D) Sidewalk 65,189 101,053 80,842
(E) Elevated sidewalk 0 0 0
(F) Steel foot bridge 2,970,677 30,516,707 20,193,946
(G) MRT connection 0 0 0
(H) Tunnel connection 0 0 0
(I) Guadalupe bike/ped bridge 0 0 0
(J) Bus lane separator 106,610 86,108 129,845
(K) Sidewalk curb 5,646 15,822 21,998
(L) Steel bollard 1,485,010 1,185,749 1,813,491
II Greenery 1,992 70,115 230,643
III Street light 269,340 433,690 600,741
IV Water drainage 53,775 664,745 924,217
V Traffic engineering 1,257,425 269,546 1,047,609
VI BRT station architecture 2,594,728 5,766,063 8,360,791
VII BRT station power supply and lighting 880,568 1,233,773 1,702,479
VIII BRT station drainage and fire protection 7,265 16,145 23,410
IX BRT station ventilation and air conditioning 8,822 19,605 28,427
X On-station BRT ITS system 0
(A) Operation and dispatching system 757,097 1,036,817 1,284,124
(B) AFC system 175,420 278,830 341,944
(C) Automatic door 1,500,222 3,161,411 4,027,681
(D) Control center 0 0 0
XI Passenger information 131,796 148,270 197,694
XII Traffic organization during construction 263,591 164,745 296,540
XIII Traffic surveillance and control 1,724,641 1,176,242 2,143,648
Project direct cost and expenses 14,748,242 49,549,772 47,302,163
Direct cost for phase I 111,600,176
Project indirect cost and expenses 29,016,046
Total 140,616,222

NOTE:
1. The cost for road infrastructure is based on Manila local price and the ITS part is based on Chinese price (15% import tax included)
2. Bus lane will be C35 reinforced concrete at stations and asphalt between stations.
3. We mainly keep the current road pavement, only reconstructing where the greenbelt needs to be moved or the sidewalk needs to be widened.
4. The existing pedestrian overpass bridges are of very poor quality and basically all need to be torn down and rebuilt in new locations,
dimensions, specifications, and universal access.
* Including R6-Tambo

Draft, ITDP-China 391 19 July 2015

12. Conceptual Institutional Strategy
It has yet to be decided which administrative unit
should be responsible for managing and imple-
menting the proposed EDSA BRT for Manila.
This section provides recommendations based on
international best practice.
12.1 Establishing a project
office
Normally, when deciding which administrative
body to assign various critical tasks in a project
as complex and multi-faceted as a BRT project,
the important thing is to identify the existing
administrative body with the legal mandate and
administrative competence to complete the task,
and to ensure that any necessary inter-agency
coordination is managed by the most senior
political official presiding over all relevant bodies.
Most BRT projects begin with a project office,
usually housed in the office of the political leader-
ship in charge of the project. Alternatively, the
project office could be placed inside one of the
more competent and motivated existing agen-
cies of the government, such as a department
of transportation of a municipal government.
Such a high profile project needs direct access to
senior government officials to whom the project
team can constantly refer to get clear decisions.
Normally it initially has a small staff hand-picked
from the best people already at other government
agencies, supported by foreign and local expert
consultants. The project office normally has about
five or six staff. They are:
1. A general manager: a business oriented man-
agement expert who deals with the political
leadership and the non-technical, business-
oriented side of the project (contracts prepara-
tion, tendering documents, etc);
2. An engineer that oversees the contractors
responsible for designing the infrastructure
and supervises the works done by the relevant
department of public works;
3. A planning director who oversees the consul-
tants responsible for the initial service plan-
ning and design on any new corridor and plans
next phases;
4. An operations director who helps draft the
operating contracts, establishes operational
protocols, supervises the operating tenders,
and then supervises compliance with the
Draft, ITDP-China
operating contracts, and finally manages the
contract for the operational control system;
5. A communications and customer relations
manager who deals with external communica-
tions and coordination with the affected bus
franchises;
6. A finance and administration manager.
At first it is likely that each person will be
responsible for more than one of these tasks, and
later as the institution becomes more established,
roles can be divided among more people. In the
table below the staff positions and their functions
are listed for two BRT systems: TransMilenio
in Bogota and Rea Vaya in Johannesburg. For
TransMilenio, these positions are housed in a
standalone agency, and for Rea Vaya they are
managed by the staff of the City of Johannesburg’s
Department of Transportation.
In the case of Manila, following on suggestions
made by previous consulting teams and the
project leadership so far, the project management
unit should be housed at the DOTC Department
of Planning, as so far they have taken the lead.
However, it would be good to second to the
project team one or more persons from the Metro
Manila Development Authority (MMDA) and
possibly one or more persons from the LRTA and
DPWH, to ensure coordination with these critical
bodies.
The LRTA has been discussed above. The
MMDA is the administrative body that represents
the collectivity of local government units (LGUs)
that make up Metropolitan Manila. As they
control access to the streets, traffic intersections,
and road designs, they need to be fully supportive
of any plans to move forward.
393 19 July 2015
Figure 12-1: Staffing for BRT projects in Bogotá and Johannesburg
12.2 International experience
with alternative
administrative
structures
Designing and operating a BRT system is more
complicated than operating a bus system or
building a road. It requires that specially designed
infrastructure be built and operated, traffic
signals and traffic patterns changed, all at roughly
the same time as new buses are purchased and
new operating companies are hired and become
operational. It requires the installation of new
operational control systems, ticketing systems,
modal integration with rail systems, and pas-
senger information systems. Few of these skills are
generally available locally at the beginning.
While urban transportation systems are man-
aged in many different ways in different cities,
successful BRT systems have characteristics which
have tended towards certain organizational forms.
Draft, ITDP-China
In the table below, a sample of the better BRT
systems shows the following institutional forms to
be typical:
Specialized BRT Authority (BRT only): A
public authority responsible only for manag-
ing the BRT system. Typical in most Latin
American BRT systems, and also used in
Guangzhou.
Bus Transit Authority (BRT and buses):
A public authority responsible for manag-
ing both the BRT system and the rest of the
bus municipal bus system. Typical of some
Brazilian systems (URBS in Curitiba, SP Trans
in Sao Paulo).
Public bus operator (BRT and buses): A
public sector bus operator that manages the
BRT system. This is typical of BRT operations
in most Chinese cities except Guangzhou.
Transit Authority (BRT, bus and rail tran-
sit): A public authority that manages BRT,
normal bus, and rail systems. Typical in the
394 19 July 2015
 BRT Management Authority Options
Transportation BRT and
Authority Transit Other Buses Special
(transit and Authority and Purpose BRT Public Bus Transport
traffic) (rail also) Minibuses Agency operator Department
TransMilenio, Bogota X
GBRT, Guangzhou X
BRT, Curitiba X
Guadalajara, Mexico X
Lima BRT X
Perreira, Colombia X
Mio, Cali, Colombia X
Jan Marg, Ahmedabad X
Rea Vaya, Johannesburg X
Metrobus, Mexico City X
HealthLine, Cleveland X
Lanzhou, BRT X
TransJakarta, Jakarta X
LAMTA (Orange Line) X
Cleveland RTA X
London (No BRT in London) X
LiteBRT, Lagos X

Gold Standard BRT

Silver Standard BRT
Bronze Standard BRT
Basic BRT or Below

Figure 12-2: Administrative authorities responsible for BRT systems

US and Europe.
Transportation Department (BRT, bus,
road): A department of the city government
responsible for direct management of a BRT
system. Typical of South African systems,
and applicable for higher level planning and
definition of BRT routes in Guangzhou.
Transportation Authority (BRT, bus, rail,
and road): A public authority responsible for
all public transit and also private road trans-
port. Typical of London, San Francisco, Lagos,
and a few other US and US and European
systems.
The vast majority of the best BRT systems are
in Latin America, and almost all of them are
managed by standalone BRT authorities that
are similar in structure and purpose to metro
companies.
In most of Latin America, and in Jakarta,
Ahmedabad, Guangzhou (for daily operational
management) and Dar es Salaam, BRT systems
are managed by a specialized BRT agency. The
reason this form emerged in Latin America and
other parts of the world was first that manage-
ment consultants looked at how successful metro
projects were managed, and noticed that most of
them were run by standalone corporatized agen-
cies or government companies, and they wanted
BRT systems to enjoy the same benefits as metro
companies.
Further, the transportation departments of
municipal governments tended to regulate infor-
mal bus operators in a way that earned both licit
and illicit revenue for the department. As such,
these departments’ revenue streams were threat-
ened by the BRT projects, and hence they were
sometimes bad advocates for BRT. This also some-
times led to problems, however, as departments
of transportation sometimes did not support the
projects and mayoral intervention was required
to keep them participating constructively (Mayor
Penalosa, who implemented the TransMilenio
BRT system in Bogota, fired five department of
transportation heads in his three year term).
Furthermore, as part of municipal government,
they were also encumbered by civil service hiring
and firing practices which tend to make it hard

Draft, ITDP-China 395 19 July 2015

to hire highly trained, customer-oriented staff,
hard to replace unqualified staff, and hard to resist
political interference in both the mandate of the
organization and the hiring and firing process.
The relative independence of TransMilenio in
Bogota was driven by the recommendation of
leading management consultant McKinsey in
an effort to ensure more customer-responsive,
corporate-type governance and avoid bureaucratic
inefficiency, though arguably TransMilenio
remains insufficiently insulated from politi-
cal interference. Another interesting model
in Guayaquil, Ecuador has placed the BRT
system under the control of a non-profit quasi-
governmental body, the Fundacion Municipal de
Transporte Massivo Urbano de Guayaquil, that has
representation of a wider group of stakeholders on
its Board of Directors and thus has slightly greater
political independence.
A further concern frequently leads to the
development of a single-purpose entity. It was
believed that a municipal or national government
department, pulled in many directions by political
pressure, with many administrative duties, would
be unable to focus sufficient attention on such an
ambitious project to ensure success.
Figure 12-3 shows a fairly typical Latin
Figure 12-3: Typical administrative structure under a BRT authority
Draft, ITDP-China
American institutional structure. The BRT author-
ity manages only the BRT, a metro company
manages the metro, the transport department
manages traffic and non-BRT bus licensing, and a
public works department manages infrastructure.
In most cases, on corridors where there is a new
BRT, the regulatory authority for routes affected
by the BRT is taken away from the Department
of Transportation for those routes, and given to
the BRT authority. This is governed by an inter-
Agency agreement (designated by the dashed line)
between the BRT authority and the department
responsible for issuing transit route licenses.
Similarly, the BRT Authority is given oversight of
the design and construction of all BRT infrastruc-
ture. Though this work is done by a department
of public works or equivalent, the designs need
to be approved by the BRT Authority before they
can be tendered, again based on an inter-agency
agreement. Responsibility for traffic and signals
remains with the department of transportation.
Security at the stations is the responsibility of the
police, who sometimes also control the traffic
signals.
The main downside of this approach is that the
non-BRT buses sometimes end up competing
for BRT passengers, and the services are not well
396 19 July 2015
Figure 12-4: Typical administrative structure under a
bus authority Paolo, similarly, all bus services, whether on
BRT infrastructure or operating in mixed traffic
coordinated with the BRT system, or between are regulated by SP Trans. This did allow for the
the BRT system and any metro systems. Further, integration of the ticketing system in 2000, and
passengers often complain that nothing has been while this fare integration cost the Municipality
done to improve the quality of their transit on a lot of money, it led to a significant increase in
the remainder of the bus services in the city, and transit ridership. The point is that this broadening
of the lack of integrated ticketing systems and pas- administrative reach was achieved over time since
senger information. the 1960s; it did not happen all at once.
In response to this, TransMilenio was given an In many cities in China and India, bus services
expanded mandate to also tender bus services are controlled by monopoly public bus compa-
with quality of service contracting as was imple- nies. This form can yield better or worse quality
mented on the BRT corridors; in other words of service depending on local circumstances, but
using the contractual forms of TransMilenio in general has tended to lead to less responsive
without the BRT infrastructure. The effort, called governance of these transit systems and a resis-
SITP (systema integrada de transport public) has tance to making changes to the system, even when
been only partially successful. After almost five the changes would result in greater ridership or
years of efforts, only a few corridors have been lower costs.
brought under the new contracts, and most of the In South Africa, the Department of
services remain unimplemented. Transportation of the City of Cape Town and the
The direction that TransMilenio is moving City of Johannesburg both manage their BRT
towards, with a single authority in the city manag- systems directly. In Cape Town the department
ing all bus-based transit, has been the norm in combines transport (transit and traffic manage-
several Brazilian cities for some time. Curitiba’s ment), roads, and stormwater all into one depart-
URBS was created back in the 1960s, before the ment of the Municipal Government. Both cities
BRT there was introduced, to bring in an inte- have built good quality BRT systems, but manage-
grated ticketing system among zone-based private ment of these systems has been less impressive.
companies. It first only covered bus services on Management by the department of a municipal
key ‘trunk’ routes. Its mandate then broadened government has less autonomy from political
to controlling fare collection on all trunk, feeder, interference than a public authority might have,
and inter-zone bus routes, taking by today control and staff are encumbered by civil service regula-
of virtually all bus services in Curitiba. In Sao tions. The initial staff of the Rea Vaya project was
Draft, ITDP-China 397 19 July 2015
Figure 12-5: Accountability problems resulting from
Johannesburg Rea Vaya administrative structure as a
project office in a municipal department of transporta-
tion (later partially resolved)
highly talented, but most of them were brought
in as outside consultants as they were unwilling
to work for civil service wages, and the remain-
ing staff that did work for such wages became
disgruntled. The result has been the loss of a
number of key talented staff, and problems taking
a very long time to resolve. The leadership of the
municipal department of transportation also has
numerous other non-BRT responsibilities which
are continually taking their attention away from
the BRT-specific problems, leaving the system
with a management vacuum.
Furthermore, responsibilities for key compo-
nents of the system were divided up between
three quasi-independent public agencies that did
not report to the Director of the Transportation
Department, so coordination to resolve problems
often required elevating problems all the way to
the Mayor, and some of the problems were the
result of corruption or incompetence of people
protected for political reasons. Additionally, while
the Department of Transportation is supposed
to inherit responsibility for the regulation of the
non-BRT transit services, to date they remain de
facto unregulated or regulated by the Provincial
Government. This means that competition for
Draft, ITDP-China
passengers in the BRT corridors with informal
minibus taxi operators has continued, costing the
BRT system passengers and revenue that have
compromised its financial performance.
A similar administrative structure works rea-
sonably well in China, where municipal govern-
ment jobs are considered desirable, have a lot of
side benefits, and quality staff tend to be retained
at least in the wealthier East Coast cities.
Some cities have transportation authorities with
broad powers to work on road traffic manage-
ment, transit system regulation and management,
and all transit from bus to metro to commuter
rail. These are listed in Figure 12-6 under
Transportation Authority. Most of these grew out
of the consolidation of pre-existing transportation
agencies and institutions.
Transport for London (TfL), created in 2000,
is the most famous and successful example of
combining these functions. It took over the func-
tions of the previous London Regional Transport
Authority which was created in 1984 out of
the Transit Department of the Greater London
Council, which had run transit services in London
since 1964, and which also managed the street
network. The LRT also controlled the London
Underground, a wholly-owned subsidiary of LRT
called the London Underground Ltd, established
in 1985. Thus, TfL is not a multifaceted integrated
agency that was created from nothing; it was
398 19 July 2015

Figure 12-6: BRT operations under a transportation
authority
created from a long series of previously functional
and successful institutions.
San Francisco’s Municipal Transportation
Authority is another example of where these
functions are combined into one agency. It was
created in 1999 by consolidating the Department
of Parking and Traffic of the city of San Francisco
and the Public Transport Commission which
managed the Muni. Both manage large aging rail
transit properties, bus systems, and traffic man-
agement including parking, and are examples of
sophisticated and mature government institutions.
Most similar examples of traffic and transit system
management integration under a single adminis-
trative unit are in the developed world.
None of the metropolitan areas with transporta-
tion authorities are operating BRT systems rated
Bronze or better under the BRT Standard.
The theoretical advantage of combining these
often inter-related functions under a single
management structure is better coordination
between related projects, possibilities for financial
integration of services and cross subsidization
of less profitable services, and possible integra-
tion of fare technologies. If staff working on one
area is unwilling to coordinate with staff work-
ing in another area, the issue can theoretically
be elevated to a single manager with decision
making authority without having to be further
elevated to the political level. The lower the level
Draft, ITDP-China
of government that minor coordination problems
need to be elevated to, usually the better the
outcome. With a transportation agency structure,
issues need only be elevated to the Transit Agency
head. Thus, it is worth considering whether met-
ropolitan areas in the early stages of developing
their urban governance institutions, should set up
Figure 12-7: BRT administration under a transit authority
authorities such as TfL.
These theoretical benefits need to be weighed
against the risk of over-encumbering a fledgling
institution with more tasks and responsibilities
than it can handle. Most large agencies emerged
over time, consolidating functions already mas-
tered by their staff.
Other metropolitan areas have institutions that
combine all the transit functions into a transit
authority, whether road or rail-based, while
responsibility for roads is kept separate. This is
the typical structure of BRT projects in the US
and Europe. Of those cities that have BRT systems
that rank bronze or silver using the BRT Standard,
three of them combine all transit functions
into one transit authority that does not have
responsibility for roads and traffic: Pittsburgh’s
Port Authority of Allegheny County, Greater
Cleveland’s Rapid Transit Authority (RTA), and
Los Angeles Metropolitan Transit Authority
(LAMTA). In the US, this shared responsibility
operates relatively unproblematically, so long as
399 19 July 2015
there is a shared goal between both parties, and
good inter-agency coordination. There are occa-
sionally conflicts between the transit authorities
and state highway departments on state roads in
metropolitan areas, but often these are resolved
through reasonable inter-agency collaboration.
There is no clear results difference between the
two types of institutional structures.
12.3 Administrative
considerations
for Manila
ITDP generally recommends using BRT infra-
structure investments to leverage regulatory
changes, providing a significant ‘carrot’ to bus
operators in the form of much more profitable
and less risky operations in exchange for the ‘stick’ be able to gradually develop the skills necessary
of required investments in new buses and agree-
ing to follow more rigorously enforced quality of
service contracts. We have seen limited evidence
of successful gradual implementation of quality of 1. It should be exempt from traditional civil
service contracts in the absence of significant BRT
infrastructure investments.
Given experience in other countries, we
recommend that a BRT project management
unit be created inside the DOTC Office of the
Undersecretary of Planning, with some staff
seconded from MMDA, DPWH and LRTA. We
Figure 12-8: Manila BRT administrative structure, option 1
Draft, ITDP-China
further recommend that a BRT Agency be created
under DOTC but with an independent Board of
Directors consisting of representatives of MMDA,
LRTA, technical professionals, and civil society
in a manner that gives the Agency some politi-
cal independence from the DOTC. This agency
should gradually expand its mandate to encom-
pass the current activities of the LTFRB, but only
after it has successfully implemented the BRT on
EDSA and built up its staff and administrative
competence. The BRT Agency would have inter-
agency agreements with the Department of Public
Works and the LTFRB, giving the BRT Agency
precedence over the regulation of any routes that
use EDSA, and giving it formal sign-off authority
on the detailed designs of the BRT infrastructure.
This administrative structure has the advantage
that its staff would be ensured to have a full time
focus on the needs of the BRT system and would
to manage the system from the international and
national consulting teams. The Agency should
have the following special features:
service hiring and firing practices and rules,
including the ability to hire and fire at will and
the ability to set staff ’s salaries. The more flex-
ible the Agency can be in this regard, the more
likely the Agency will be to hire and retain the
most qualified staff.
400 19 July 2015
2. Until the BRT system is operational, the
Agency will be without revenue. To the extent
possible, the Agency’s operational costs for
the first two or three years prior to system
operation should initially be funded by project
preparation loans or grants, ideally from a
development bank. This will help ensure that
the system administration is as insulated as
possible from non-technical influences and
considerations.
3. After the system becomes operational its
operations could under one approach be
funded entirely from a fixed share of the
farebox revenue from the BRT system itself.
This would help to ensure that the system
Draft, ITDP-China
administration Agency is as insulated as
possible from non-technical influences and
considerations and will also help ensure that
the farebox revenue does not get diverted to
other projects or interests at the expense of the
BRT system and its contractors.
The alternative option for managing the BRT
system, much discussed in Manila, is to have the
LRTA administer the BRT system. This could be
done as shown in Figure 12-9.
In this alternative (Figure 12-9), the LRTA
would oversee the creation of a BRT Authority
under its auspices. This BRT Authority might have
an independent board, with representation from
the MMDA and civil society. This authority under
Figure 12-9: Manila
BRT administrative
structure, option 2
Figure 12-10:
Manila BRT admin-
istrative structure,
option 3
401 19 July 2015
the LRTA in turn would contract out the bus
operations, fare collection system, station services,
etc.
In a third variant, the LRTA would directly con-
tract the bus operators, the fare collection system,
and other BRT operators without creating a
sub-agency specialized on the BRT system (Figure
12-10). The main advantage of having the LRTA
manage the BRT system is that arguably it might
enhance coordination with the LRT and MRT
systems, particularly with respect to the ticketing
system. In addition, the LRTA already exists, so it
could begin work and signing contracts immedi-
ately without having to go through the slow and
cumbersome political process of creating a new
government agency.
The main concerns with Option Two and Three
are as follows:
1. The legal mandate of LRTA is limited to
activities related to the LRT system. As such,
its legal mandate to operate bus services could
be subject to legal challenge. It could also result
in subordinating the needs of the BRT system
to that of the LRT system. For example, if a
new BRT route were to draw passengers away
from the MRT or LRT, it might not be imple-
mented, though there would be significant
customer benefits. Arguably, its by-laws could
be changed, but this would entail much the
same cumbersome political and administra-
tive procedures as creating a new government
entity.
2. Its skill base, and the focus of its staff, is limited
to activities related to the LRT system. The staff
currently do not have the skills required to
manage a BRT system which are quite different
from the skills required for an LRT system. As
a result, at the staffing level, the capacity build-
ing requirements would be no different from
creating a new government entity dedicated to
BRT.
3. LRTA took on the capital deficits of the LRT
Figure 12-11: Manila BRT administrative structure,
option 4
Draft, ITDP-China
system and as such is encumbered with about
a PP23 billion capital deficiency (C5 Bus
Transit Development Project, Preliminary
Note Presentation, CPCS, 2014). The LRTA is
encumbered with this debt which could nega-
tively impact the ability of the new BRT agency
to fund its activity, ring-fence its contracts,
and raise financing. As described in Option 1
above, Ideally, a BRT system can potentially
fund its entire operations out of the farebox
revenue. If the BRT operating agency owes
debts to third parties for its rail operations, it is
not impossible that creditors might try to claim
operating revenues from the BRT. Thus, a con-
dition for the LRTA to assume control of the
BRT system is that its current debt obligations
be forgiven or discharged by the government
or else a new BRT Agency entity under the
LRTA must be legally sufficiently independent
from the LRTA that it is not responsible for the
debts of the LRTA.
4. If the LRTA manages the BRT system, there
is a risk that staff will be drawn away to focus
on other competing non-BRT responsibilities,
distracting their attention from critical BRT
system needs. In Johannesburg, for instance,
the Department of Transportation staff are
frequently re-directed to focus their energies
on other mayoral priorities, and many severe
operational issues have been left unaddressed
for months.
The theoretical advantage of having LRTA
manage the system, i.e., greater coordination
between transit systems in particular with
respect to the ticketing system, may not in fact be
resolved by placing both entities under a single
public authority. If the LRTA has already signed
the operating contracts for the new ticketing
system operator, and the TOR for the contract
does not include the ticketing system on the BRT
system, the ticketing system operations for the
BRT would anyway need to be re-tendered.
Another possibility (Figure 12-11) is that
the MMDA could create and manage the BRT
402 19 July 2015
Authority, but with a board that has representa-
tion from the DOTC. This would be closer to the
structure of BRT Authorities in Latin America
which tend to be under Municipal control. As a
general rule, it is preferable to devolve respon-
sibility for urban public transit down to the
metropolitan or municipal level of government
that also oversees the municipal road network and
is politically more directly accountable to metro-
politan voters.
However, in the case of Manila, historically the
effectiveness of the MMDA as an executive agency
has been hampered by the fact that many of the
executive powers rest with the local government
units (LGUs) rather than with the MMDA itself,
and the EDSA BRT will affect a minimum of six
LGUs in Manila (Caloocan, Quezon City, San
Juan, Mandaluyong, Makati, and Pasay), creating
considerable coordination challenges. Further
discussions with the MMDA and DOTC would
be necessary before determining if there is any Figure 12-12: Manila BRT administrative structure,
viability in this option. under an UPTU
The preferred alternative is to have the BRT
project initially operate under a special admin-
something other than that which was intended
istrative unit of the Undersecretary of Planning
by the BRT Authority. It is further recommended
in the DOTC. If the DOTC moves forward with
that the road works be separated from the station
the creation of an Urban Public Transport Unit
design. Station design is a highly specialized craft
(UPTU), the project could be administratively
and higher architectural merit is required, and
housed there to assure better coordination with
this competence rarely exists in firms that are the
BRT efforts moving forward in Cebu (Figure
best at road works.
12-12). As the project progresses, DOTC would
eventually create a new independent Bus Rapid
Transit Authority that would have a Board domi-
nated by DOTC but with minority representation 12.4 Options for Contracting
by MMDA, civil society and technical experts. of Critical Functions
The administrative powers and responsibilities
of this body might eventually be expanded to All BRT systems have basic functions that need
include the regulation of the remaining bus to be handled by either private companies under
system, jeepneys, and UVs. If the DOTC and contract to a governmental authority or by a
MMDA ever move forward with the proposal to department or branch of the government itself.
create a Metro Manila Transit Authority, then this The critical functions include:
would become an administrative unit within the Bus operations
MMTA. Fare Collection
Infrastructure design and construction would Station management
be managed by the Department of Public Works Trust Fund Management
and Housing, under an inter-agency agreement
Control Center management
that gives the BRT authority the right to approve
the designs and supervise consistency of the Scheduling
construction with these designs. There have Figure 12-13 shows whether each of those func-
frequently been problems of poor construction tions is managed by private companies or by the
oversight or a public works department building government in a variety of BRT systems.
The precise degree of privatization of these
Draft, ITDP-China 403 19 July 2015
 Private Versus Public Operations

Santiago Private Private Private Private Private Private

Rio Private Private Private Private Private Private
Bogota Private Private Private Private Public Public
Pereira Private Private Private Private Public Public
Cali Private Private Private Private Public Public
Mexico City 2/3 Private 2/3 Private Private Private Public Public
Johannesburg Private Private Private Public Public Public
Curitiba Private Private Public Public Public Public
Sao Paulo Private Private Public Public Public Public
Ahmedabad Private Private Public Public Public Public
Quito Lines 2 & 3 Private Private Public Public Public Public
Guangzhou Private Private Public Public Public Public
Cape Town Public Private Private Public Public Public
Jakarta Public Private Private Public Public Public
Lanzhou Public Public Public Public Public Public
Cleveland Public Public Public Public Public Public
Quito Trolebus Public Public Public Public Public Public

Figure 12-13: Private versus public operations

Figure 12-14: Private operations in Bogota’s TransMilenio

functions is in part a function of the capacity of
the governmental authority tasked with managing
the BRT system. The tendency is to increase the
amount of contracting out of critical functions
to private companies in order to avoid bloated
administrations subject to political influence,
cumbersome civil service rules and low salaries.
In systems where most of the functions are
contracted out, the typical structure looks Figure
12-14.
In Manila, there is no government agency which
Draft, ITDP-China
currently has experience in managing any of these
functions in house, but there is experience in
managing contractors. As such, following emerg-
ing best practice, it is recommended that the
BRT Agency contract out the following through
competitive tendering:
Bus operations
Station management (security, cleaning,
routine maintenance)
Fare collection (equipment procurement and
404 19 July 2015
 operation) and control center (can be one
contract or split into two)
Trust fund management.
There is a reasonable desire in Manila to have
an integrated fare system with the MRT and
LRT, and recently there was a tender awarded to
integrate the MRT and LRT fare systems. More
exploration is required to determine the best way
to do this. Whether a separate firm can be con-
tracted to run a ticketing system which is compat-
ible with the LRT and MRT but can also be run on 5. It increases the likelihood that the companies
the BRT by a third party vendor depends on the
nature of the contract between the LRTA and that 6. From the perspective of company formation,
the eventual ticketing system provider allows for
this. If this contract has not been signed yet, it is a
good idea to seek the advice of a ticketing system
expert who can advise on language that can be
put in the contract that can ensure that whatever
the technology format used would be compatible
with tickets procured for the BRT by a third party
vendor.
In Manila, the body that is empowered to take
decisions with respect to the EDSA BRT will need
to make critical decisions about the following
matters:
Competitive tendering
Single or multiple operators per corridor
Kilometer or passenger based contracts
Quality of service contracts or cost plus
contracts
Separate private or public fare collection
system.
12.4.1 Competitive Bidding
In the case of Manila, each of these contracts will
need to be awarded through a process of ‘managed’
competitive bidding consistent with public sector in the city.’
procurement law in the Philippines. This is consis-
tent with best practice. There are several reasons
to make the awarding of BRT operating contracts
subject to international competitive bidding:
1. It is a requirement of most development bank
loans, and the option of development bank
loan financing for both vehicle procurement
and infrastructure should be left open as a
possibility.
2. The city is likely to pay up to 40% less for the
service if the contract was awarded competi-
tively than if it were handed over to a company.
Draft, ITDP-China
3. It gives the government more leverage over the
contract in the negotiations, allowing the city’s
interests and those of the passengers to take
precedence over the interests of the operators.
4. It allows the government to stay in control
of the timeline. In other cities where operat-
ing contracts were negotiated, negotiations
dragged on, significantly delaying the start
of operations, as the city had no obvious
and simple way to compel a closure to the
negotiations.
that operate the system are the best possible.
the competitive tender approach allows the
city to establish, in the TOR for the tender,
the minimum qualification criteria for eligible
companies. These minimum qualification
requirements force the bidders to create
companies that are sufficiently capitalized,
that have a clear governance structure, and
qualified staff. It gives these cities much greater
leverage over the negotiating process to ensure
that companies were formed following a
government-established timeline, and helps
ensure that the contracts are awarded to the
best possible companies.
However, the ‘managed’ tender also needs
to create either incentives or the imperative to
involve the affected operators in the operating
contracts.
Bogota’s TransMilenio, Jakarta’s Phase III,
Pereira, and Ahmedabad’s Jan Marg BRT systems
all awarded their operating contracts based on
a managed competitive tender. In each of these
contracts, the tender was based both on ‘quality’
and ‘price.’ The ‘quality’ scoring included signifi-
cant points for ‘experience operating a bus in the
affected corridor’, and ‘experience operating a bus
In the case of Manila, it may or may not be
possible to issue a similar ‘managed’ competitive
tender based on both ‘quality’ and ‘price’ depend-
ing on whether the tender is done as a standard
public procurement or under the PPP law. If it can
be done with both quality and cost criteria, then
extra points should be awarded for consortiums
with ownership shares that include affected
operators. If it must be done only on cost, then the
minimum qualification criteria should include the
requirement that a certain minimum percentage
405 19 July 2015
of the shares be held by the holders of licenses
that are ‘affected operators.’
12.4.2 Multiple BRT bus operators
International experience with multiple BRT
operators on a single corridor
In the best international BRT systems, the key
to ensuring good quality bus services is for
the government to have ongoing and constant
leverage over the bus operators. Having multiple
operators on each BRT corridor significantly
increases the leverage that the government has over
the bus operators.
Most fundamentally, the ultimate leverage
the government has is ‘step-in’ rights, when the
government throws out a company performing
poorly, seizes control of its assets, and replaces it
with an alternative. In practice, this is only pos-
sible if there are multiple BRT bus operators in
the city ready to take over the operations of their
competitor in case of a breach of contract. Hence,
having alternative companies ready and able to
provide the BRT service considerably strengthens
the government’s hand when negotiating with the
bus operator to provide better service.
At the same time, government step-in is likely
to cause a major disruption in service and consid-
erable administrative chaos, so it is far preferable
for the government to intervene immediately
when there is a problem rather than waiting until
things come to a crisis.
As will be discussed later, the best BRT operat-
ing contracts include a system of rewards and
penalties for good or bad quality of service. Such a
system tends to be most effective when payments
of penalties are placed in an escrow account and
given monthly to the operator that incurs the
fewest penalties, rather than for the BRT author-
ity to simply collect and keep the penalties, as it
provides a system of both incentives and penal-
ties and ensures that the BRT Authority does
not abuse its penalty authority to simply raise
revenues. This can only be done in the context of
multiple operators.
However, while multiple operating companies
generally result in higher service quality, each
company has overheads, and if fleets are signifi-
cantly smaller than 100 vehicles, returns to scale
cannot be fully achieved.
The table below shows the number of bus
Draft, ITDP-China
BRT System Phase I Phase II
Bogota 6 8
Pereira 7
Leon 6 13
Guangzhou 3
Cape Town 3
Curitiba 2 4
Mexico City 2 3
Rea Vaya 1 2
Ahmedabad 1 1
TransJakarta 1 2
Quito 1 2
Cleveland 1
Guayaquil 1
operating companies operating per corridor on a
selection of gold, silver, and bronze-standard BRT
systems internationally.
In the best cases, such as in Bogota, Cali, Lima,
and Guangzhou, there was sufficient demand in
Phase I to justify more than one company, and
municipal authorities were able to issue contracts
for 3 or more operating companies, giving them
significant leverage over the operating companies
in case of poor performance. (See http://worldbrt.
net/en/cities/param-qual.aspx?param=20 for a list of
cities with more than one BRT operator.)
In Curitiba, the BRT system opened on a
corridor where two bus operators already had
long-term concessions that could not easily be
modified. Mexico City had a corridor where a
single association controlled 70% of the vehicles,
and a public operator, RTP, controlled the remain-
ing 30% of the vehicles. The public company gave
the municipal authorities leverage over the private
operator. Ahmedabad’s BRT opened on a corridor
that did not have pre-existing bus services, and
the demand was initially not high enough to jus-
tify the use of more than one company to provide
the service. Many cities opened a single corridor
BRT route with relatively modest demand, where
the initial fleet sizes were too small to justify
multiple companies. As those systems expand, it
is likely that additional companies will be added.
In Johannesburg, the affected operators formed
themselves into a single corporate entity that
negotiated with the government to take over the
BRT Phase I operations. This monopoly weakened
the leverage the municipal authorities had over
the operator. As a result the municipality pays a
406 19 July 2015
premium for the services, and there have been
continuing operational weaknesses. Quito Phase
I opened with a government company which
displaced former private operators, and this led to
a week-long strike of impacted operators that was
only ended with the intervention of the National
Guard. In the US, BRT operations are managed by
public transit authorities that operate with heavy
operating subsidies from taxpayers and tend to be
dominated by public sector unions. Operations
are generally of reasonable quality but at a signifi-
cant cost to taxpayers.
Recommended number of BRT bus
operators on EDSA
Metro Manila has in total about 5000 12-meter
buses registered to about 140 small and medium
enterprises, of which about 3400 use EDSA for a
part of their journey. These 3400 buses are oper-
ated by about 110 of the bus franchises. These bus
franchises are registered with the Land Transport
Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB), a
division of the DOTC. These franchises have route
licenses which must be approved on the basis of a
finding that there was sufficient demand to sup-
port economically viable operations, and that the
operators have some basic business requirements.
The franchise license specifies both the route and
the number of vehicles the franchise is allowed to
operate along that route. The maximum duration
of a license is 5 years, but the license is generally
renewed without question, so owners of route fran-
chises treat the license almost as a property right.
The bus operators operating these companies
have fleets ranging in size from 2 to 151 vehicles,
though some franchise holders, particularly the
regional bus operators, are consortiums with fleets
greater than 1000 vehicles. The largest companies
already have depots and integrated fleet manage-
ment, with some corporate management systems,
while the smallest operators perhaps rent a park-
ing space for their one or two buses.
Manila is fortunate in that there are already
multiple bus operators of reasonable size operat-
ing in parallel on the same routes that use EDSA,
and the BRT service plan calls for an initial fleet of
over 800 buses. As such, Phase I should be able
to accommodate from 3 to 8 companies.
Additional considerations are the number
of depots needed for efficient operations. Each
private operator needs control of its own depot
Draft, ITDP-China
to protect its asset and maintain its own vehicles.
The service plan being developed calls for
three significant destinations in the north, (SM
Fairview, Navotas, Montalban and Sta. Maria) and
two major destinations in the south (Airport area,
Baclaran, and several other destinations farther
from the city). The impact area of the EDSA BRT
is so large that a relatively large number of depots
would be reasonable. This could be assisted by the
fact that several of the private operators already
own depots. This fact also indicates that the
project could probably accommodate six or more
companies all operating on EDSA. The details of
this need to be worked out when the service plan
is finalized and the availability of land for depots
is clarified.
12.4.3 Quality of service penalties
and bonuses
The BRT systems with the highest quality of
service all have private operators that have con-
tracts which force the operator to pay a penalty
if they do not deliver a good quality of service.
These penalties should be simple, and have clear
mechanisms for determining compliance, or else
the penalties will constantly end up in arbitration.
Furthermore, the penalties cannot be so large
that they threaten the economic viability of the
company.
In most cases, these penalties are payment
deductions – i.e., each violation results in a
specific deduction. Each month, the total pot of
deductions is paid out to the company that paid
the smallest amount that month.
In the case of Bogota, because bus operators
are paid by the bus kilometer, these penalties are
contractually written as the reduction of kilome-
ters assigned to one company and the increase in
kilometers performed by a competing company.
Typically, penalties are imposed if the buses
are poorly maintained or cleaned, if the buses are
unable to maintain the schedule, if the drivers
are not properly dressed, are not sober, have poor
hygiene, or if the drivers are frequently speeding,
or otherwise providing a poor quality of service.
Examples of these criteria from Colombia, South
Africa and Guangzhou can be obtained upon
request.
Bus operating contracts in Manila should
also include rewards and penalties. As in other
407 19 July 2015
countries, any payments of penalties should be
placed in an escrow account and used to pay the
rewards for the operators providing the best ser-
vice. This structure also allows for the creation of
an arbitration panel that includes representation
of the bus operators. This is more likely to secure
the support of operators during negotiations than
a flat payment of penalties to the BRT Authority
and decided upon by the BRT Authority alone,
which most private operators are likely to resist
for fear that the system might be abused. And
the added bonus of a potential payout for good
performance can be even more enticing.
12.4.4 Private versus public bus
procurement
Best practice in BRT systems is for the private
bus operators to buy their own buses. The normal
reason that the best BRT systems expect the pri-
vate bus operator to procure the buses is that the
government is not generally a bus operator and
hence does not really know how best to procure
an appropriate bus. All too often, public procure-
ment decisions are made based on non-technical
criteria ranging from political influence, overzeal-
ous efforts to achieve multiple social objectives, or
in the worst cases, graft. Government purchases
of buses are one of the most common sources of
graft in the urban transit field (the others being
the awarding of the construction contracts and
the awarding of route licenses). It also opens up
the risk that the operator will blame the govern-
ment for any problem with the buses, should
problems emerge, blurring lines of accountability
and financial responsibility that frequently end
up in litigation. In addition, private procurement
of buses is also more likely to result in better bus
maintenance and less pilferage of spare parts.
As such, most countries now believe it better to
have the private bus operator procure the buses,
even if they are compensated for this cost by the
government.
There are, however, circumstances in which
this may not hold. If it is not possible for the BRT
system to cover its operating costs from fare and
other BRT-related revenue, it is usually advisable
to have the government first subsidize the bus
procurement prior to considering any form of
open-ended operating subsidy.
In the case of Manila, private bus operations
Draft, ITDP-China
on EDSA are currently at best moderately
profitable (since ITDP’s surveys indicate that
a significant proportion of the licensed fleet is
not actually operating), but the high demand on
EDSA indicates that there is no reason that BRT
operations would not be profitable enough for the
operators to cover the bus procurement costs out
of the future fare revenue and other BRT-related
revenue. This can only be fully determined by the
construction of a financial model that replicates
all critical decisions with respect to the business
structure of the BRT operations and the tax treat-
ment of these operations.
If, in the unlikely event that the financial
estimate for the system’s operations indicate a
potential operating loss, it is generally better to
have the government subsidize the bus procure-
ment but to still allow the purchase to be carried
out by the private operator. Some legal systems,
however, do not allow this. In the case where the
financial estimates indicate an operational loss,
and where the law prohibits public subsidy for a
capital investment to be turned over to a private
operator, the government should use a competi-
tive bidding process to procure the buses, where
the details of the bus specification involve several
likely bus operators or the operators that win
the tender (should timing allow), as well as the
design team (the bus will also have to conform to
the requirements of the BRT infrastructure). The
government can then lease the buses to the opera-
tor. If the lease contract is properly designed and
executed, and the procurement done as above,
most of the problems of public bus procurement
can be mitigated.
12.4.5 Separating the fare collection
system from the bus operator
In most of the gold-standard BRT systems of Latin
America and China, fare collection is managed by
an entity other than the bus operator. Separating
fare collection from the bus operator is a key way
to take control from the bus operator and enhance
the government’s ability to regulate the quality
of service. If the bus operator collects the money
directly, and then fails to comply with the quality
of service obligations, the government cannot
withhold their payment, because they don’t have
it. If the government collects the money, either
directly or through a proxy, they can refuse to pay
408 19 July 2015
the bus operator when necessary.
It is possible to both have the fare collected
directly by the BRT Agency or by a private con-
tractor to the BRT Agency. If the BRT Agency
is widely seen as transparent, well managed, has
talented staff, and is generally trusted by the bus
operators, then many transit systems elect to have
fare collection managed in-house. On the other
hand, fare collection is often a complex technol-
ogy and better contracted out. Further, if there
is any suspicion of graft, it may be more easily
controlled and transparent if fare collection is
contracted out to a private company, so long as
the government has a full transaction record that
can be verified. For the EDSA BRT, then, fare col-
lection should be done by a third party contractor
to the BRT Authority rather than by the bus
operators or directly by the government.
12.4.6 Payment by bus kilometer
rather than by passenger
Separating fare collection from the bus operator
also allows the bus operator to be paid by the
kilometer rather than by the passenger on the
trunk route. In normal mixed traffic operations,
buses in much of the world do not follow a sched-
ule but move only once they are full of passengers
and then no longer stop. If they are paid by the
bus kilometer, they no longer have any reason to
wait until the bus is full to depart and will instead
depart on schedule. When paid by the passenger,
they also compete for passengers at curb-side, the
number one cause of pedestrian fatalities on bus
corridors. Again, if the operator is paid by the bus
kilometer, they have no incentive to compete for
passengers at the bus stop.
For these reasons, best practice is to pay by the
kilometer on trunk corridors. Because EDSA is
being planned as a ‘direct service’ BRT with pas-
sengers boarding BRT buses both at BRT stations
along EDSA, and also from normal curb-side
bus stops off EDSA, the buses will need to be
equipped with GPS and their location monitored
by the company contracted to provide the opera-
tional control system.
Draft, ITDP-China
12.5 Managing the transition
of the bus and jeepney
industry
When deciding how to relate to the bus and
jeepney operations already operating on EDSA,
it is best if the Government of the Philippines
develop a clear policy with respect to what they
want. In most cases, governments want to end
up with good quality, internationally competitive
modern bus operating companies that provide a
high quality of service for many years. They also
want to minimize any loss of employment and
they want to make sure that most of companies
and businesses in the old bus business are able to
become part of the new BRT businesses.
This requires a careful balance in terms of how
much the government guarantees to affected
parties. Guaranteeing too much weakens the
government’s leverage in negotiating the best deal
possible for taxpayers and passengers and risks
compromising the quality of service provided
by the companies; not guaranteeing enough
risks adversely impacting the existing industry
and causing social disharmony. The government
therefore remembers that it is entering into a
new relationship with the existing bus industry,
and this relationship has to be negotiated, with
the government having to protect the interest of
passengers. As in any negotiation, the government
should be careful about what information it shares
when, and it should enter into negotiations with
more information than the people with whom it is
negotiating.
Furthermore, the first phase is extremely impor-
tant to get right, as it will establish a precedent for
the remaining corridors, which if done incorrectly
will prove extremely difficult to rectify.
12.5.1 International best practice on
bus industry transition
Most of the BRT systems, and all of the best BRT
systems, have involved former bus or minibus
owners and operators in the ownership and
operation of the new BRT bus operating compa-
nies. There are two reasons why cities have either
given the entire new BRT business over to the
impacted owners and drivers of existing informal
transit services through negotiated contracts, or
409 19 July 2015
created competitive tenders which gave strong
incentives to include the impacted operators as
shareholders and employees of new BRT operat-
ing companies. These reasons are legal, financial,
and political.
Legally, many cities have already awarded route
licenses, some of them open-ended in terms
of duration, to private companies. These route
licenses might award exclusive rights to operate
a particular corridor for an unlimited period or
for a long period (say 12 years). These contracts
are sometimes legally enforceable. To take them
away would require compensation, significantly
increasing project cost. In other cities, companies
have been operating quasi monopolies in particu-
lar locations without any particular legal sanction
but with long term ‘customary’ rights. Where
these legal and quasi legal rights exist, these
existing operators may have to be compensated
or else the courts could stop the project, and it is
not always clear that the government has the right
to expropriate their licenses. In such a context it
requires less up front capital to give them shares
in the new company (equity does not impose
operating costs) than to pay them compensation.
In cities where the rights are not legal but
mainly customary, as is more common, aside from
the legal issue the operators may have political
power. They are frequently organized into power-
ful, politically connected associations or compa-
nies that protect their customary rights and award
TransMilenio, Bogota X X
GBRT, Guangzhou
BRT, Curitiba
Guadalajara, Mexico X X
Lima BRT X X
Perreira, Colombia X X
Mio, Cali, Colombia X X
Jan Marg, Ahmedabad
Rea Vaya, Johannesburg X
Metrobus, Mexico City X X
TransJakarta, Jakarta X X
HealthLine, Cleveland
Lanzhou, BRT
LAMTA (Orange Line)
MiCity, Cape Town X X
LiteBRT, Lagos
Porto Alegre Basic BRT
Draft, ITDP-China 410
route licenses to their members, earning a fee
for this. Such associations are common in Latin
America. They often have close relations with
regulatory authorities which offer route licenses.
This gives them political power. This power
derives from their ability to congregate their
buses, blocking roads, and suspending transit
services throughout the city, bringing the city to
a halt economically. Bus blockades and strikes are
the main worry. In Quito, when a new trolleybus
service was introduced as a municipal company
and former collectivo routes were cancelled, the
impacted operators called a strike where the
collectivo buses blocked the new BRT system for
more than one week and could only be removed
by the intervention of the National Guard. They
also have other forms of power. Sometimes they
have powerful hidden political connections
because the owners are sometimes government
officials. These forms of power can delay the
project in more insidious ways. Sometimes they
simply refuse to cooperate with new route licenses
and route cancellations, and siphon passengers
from the new BRT system. Including the impacted
industry in the new BRT operating companies has
proven to be the best way to mitigate this political
risk.
BRT systems are best operated by modern
bus corporations with integrated fleet manage-
ment. Integrated fleet management requires a
depot where maintenance regimes are carefully
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
19 July 2015
 Former Foreign
Former bus Former bus Individual Domestic Non Transport Government
City Company 'enterprise' company owners bus company Company Company
Bogota Si99 55% 44%
Bogota Connexion Movil 40% 40% 20%
Mexico City RTP 100%
Mexico City CISA 100%
Mexico City Corr. 5 Operator 60% 40%
Johannesburg Piotrans 100%
Cape Town PTA 100%
Cape Town Golden Arrow 80% 20%
Lagos 100%
Guayaquil 100%
Quito Phase I UOST 100%
Quito Phase II & III Central Norte 100%
Leon, Mexico 100%
Curitiba 100%
Sao Paulo Himalaya 100%

optimized, and where economies of scale can be
earned from the mass purchase of spare parts
and the deployment of talented managers and
mechanics.
In some cities, modern bus companies existed
prior to the introduction of BRT, and in others
the BRT systems were used to create modern
bus companies. In Bogota, the bus industry was
highly fragmented prior to the opening of the
BRT system, and none of the bus enterprises were
actual bus operating companies with integrated
fleet management. The industry was controlled by
a few large bus ‘enterprises’ that did not actually
own or operate buses; they only controlled route
licenses allocated to them as ‘members’. These
enterprises became the core of the new BRT
operating companies, with the former individual
owners becoming the other part of the sharehold-
ers. Some of these enterprises managed things on
their own, while others partnered with outside
firms to bring management expertise. One com-
pany was joined by a former trucking company,
another two had foreign transit companies (Veolia
and RTP) as minority shareholders to bring
management expertise to the companies. This
pattern has been typical in Colombia.
In Mexico, Ecuador, and Johannesburg, the
former operators retained full ownership and con-
trol over the new BRT operating companies, and
they hired outside experts to help them manage
the companies and supervise fleet maintenance.
These companies have been somewhat less suc-
cessful at growing beyond their original business,
but they provide adequate services.
In the cities of Brazil, there were already large
bus operating companies that controlled zone-
based monopolies. These companies were already
operating as modern bus corporations, and they
took over the services in the BRT corridors once
implemented. In Jakarta, before TransJakarta,
most buses operating in the TransJakarta cor-
ridor were bus leasing companies that leased the
buses to individuals and gave them operating
licenses. When TransJakarta was created, at
first the Governor created a consortium of the
impacted bus leasing companies, a taxi company,
and a former national government owned bus
operator. Then in Phase II operations were
headed by companies composed of the former
bus leasing companies. These companies did
not fully complete the process of corporatiza-
tion. Later, some corridors were tendered, and a
private intercity bus operator won one of them.
This operator had its own depot, and much more
sophisticated management systems in place, and
was able to offer a much higher quality of service
at a much lower price. Politically, however, once
the principle of giving control of corridors to the
traditional operations with limited requirements
for corporate formation, it became difficult to
later move away from this.
There are two ways to involve the affected
industry in the new BRT operations: competi-
tive tenders which award extra points or require
as a minimum qualification requirement firms
composed at least in part of affected operators and

Draft, ITDP-China 411 19 July 2015

owners, and negotiated contracts where the BRT
authority negotiates a new operating contract with
the affected former owners and operators.
There is a big difference between the BRT
systems with negotiated contracts and monopoly
operators and competitively tendered contracts
managed to ensure many affected operators are
brought into the new system. Systems with negoti-
ated rather than competitively tendered operating
contracts faced the following problems:
Higher operating costs, as much as a 40%
higher fee per kilometre.
Significant implementation delays as govern-
ment lost control over the project timetable.
Incomplete corporate formation
Requires much greater intervention into
company formation on the part of the
government.
Once the government decides to negotiate only
with the impacted operator, their ability to control
what happens is significantly compromised. First,
it undermines their negotiating position on the
fee per kilometre. Most systems with negotiated
contracts are paying much more per bus kilo-
metre than systems with competitively awarded
contracts.
Secondly, the negotiations can drag on and
there is very little that the government can do
about it. Guayaquil developed an interesting
phased negotiated contract, where if the govern-
ment and the impacted industry’s consortium
could not reach agreement within a certain date,
they would then turn to a competitive tender. This
leverage worked well, and kept control over the
project timetable.
Thirdly, in a competitive tender, the government
can require as minimum qualification criteria
the type of management the firm has, and it can
require the company comply with ISO 9000 and
other indicators of good corporate governance.
This can help to make the companies successful
companies in the long run.
Finally, negotiated contracts often require much
more intervention on the part of the govern-
ment in terms of how the companies are formed.
In Bogota, once the tender requirements were
established, it was up to the affected bus operators
to figure out how best to comply with the tender
requirements. In the case of a negotiated contract,
there is a risk that the industry will be so disor-
ganized that it is unable to organize itself into a
Draft, ITDP-China 412
modern company with a clear shareholding struc-
ture, and the government may need to intervene
and dictate the ownership structure just to resolve
conflicts within the industry.
Best practice is therefore clear: competitive
tender for bus operations with either incentives
or a requirement that at least part of the owner-
ship of the bidding companies be represented by
affected owners and operators.
This, of course, requires carefully determining
who is in fact an ‘affected owner.’
12.5.2 Bus and jeepney industry
transition for the EDSA BRT
The first step in determining how to relate to the
affected industry for the EDSA BRT system is to
decide on a government policy about this. If the
government decides to give some sort of prefer-
ence to companies that include affected operators
among their shareholders in a competitive bid-
ding process, as this report recommends, then
precisely who an affected operator is needs to be
carefully defined.
Which routes are ‘affected’ depends on the final
service plan for the future BRT system, which
routes will be cut, which routes will continue but
face a loss of ridership, and which routes will
be unaffected. As the service plan is likely to be
changed frequently and the project timetable is
condensed, it is advisable to take the following
approach.
The LTFRB has since 2010 kept records of bus
licenses divided into two categories (EDSA and
Non-EDSA) due to a Ministerial decree requir-
ing them to collect this information in this way.
Though the detailed service plans being devel-
oped by ITDP call for a more refined analysis of
which existing bus routes are affected and to what
degree, as service plans are likely to change several
times before the project is completed, for the time
being ‘affected’ and ‘non-affected’ routes should
follow the LTFRB determination of ‘EDSA’ and
‘Non-EDSA’ routes and franchises.
As noted earlier in this report, however, ITDP-
China’s surveys in 2015 suggest that during the
peak hour only around 1,500 out of the 3,400
buses licensed to use EDSA are actually operating.
As part of the follow-up to this report, frequency
counts for each route which record the operator
will need to be carried out. The ‘affected’ operators
19 July 2015
 Manila Top Affected Operators *
Companies Affected Fleet Size Main Area
PASCUAL LINER INC 151 Novaliches Alabang
CHER TRANSPORT CORPORATION 132 Pacita Navotas
BACLARAN METRO LINK BUS 93 Baclaran Navotas
MALANDAY METRO LINK BUS 86 Malanday NAIA
DELA ROSA TRANSIT CORP 85 Pacita Novaliches
JAYROSS LS TOURS BUS CO INC 84 Baclaran to SM Fairview, Lagro via Ayala
SANTRANS INC 84 Norzagaray Baclaran
NUESTRA SEÑORA DEL CARMEN 78
ROVAL TRANSPORT CORP 72 Marilao (Bulacan) Muntinlupa via EDSA
FERMINA EXPRESS CORP 69
RRCG TRANSPORT SYSTEM CO INC 69
CARATING ALBERTO 66 Baclaran Malanday
NOVA AUTO TRANSPORT INC 66
VIL 5000 INC 65 Baclaran Novaliches
ALABANG METRO LINK BUS 61
KELLEN TRANSPORT INC 60
MARIKINA AUTO LINE TRANSPORT CORP(MALTC) 60
JASPER JEAN SERVICES INC 56 PalaPala Navo Term
JOAQUIN GRACE M 55
ADMIRAL TRANSPORT CORP 54
LAGUNA STARBUS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM INC 51
PHIL TOURISTERS INCORPORATED 50
SAINT ROSE TRANSIT INC 50
* Follow-up route frequency surveys are needed to
determine which of these licensed operators are larger modern bus companies around these
actually operating in EDSA. core companies, as the corporate structures are
already in place for many of the companies, and
should be defined in a way which places much the smaller impacted operators can easily join
more importance on those operators which are with larger companies as shareholders in the new
actually operating compared to those which have venture.
route licenses but are not operating. As most of the bus franchises are organized
The companies operating in EDSA range in size into companies with some sort of relatively clear
from over 150 buses to 2 buses. They also vary corporate governance, the legal representation
considerably in the degree of corporate formation. of these companies should also be relatively
Some of them are owned by consortiums owning clear. There do not appear to be associations of
as many as 2000 buses, operating out of modern bus owners or bus enterprises that either hold
depots and using relatively up to date integrated place-based monopolies (access to key terminals
fleet management techniques. Other companies or parking areas) or own route licences but not
may simply consist of an individual that lets a buses, as is frequently the case in Latin America.
relative operate a bus and rents a parking space to As such, the structure of the bus industry in
house the bus overnight. Manila appears to be relatively transparent, and
The maximum length of a bus franchise in the owners of the larger companies appear to be
Manila is five years. As soon as there is a govern- the clear power in the bus industry.
ment decision to proceed with the EDSA BRT, The jeepney industry, however, is structured
any new operating licenses issued to an EDSA bus differently than the bus industry in Manila. Most
franchise should bear the caveat that the license of them are individually owned, often by their
becomes null and void as soon as the EDSA BRT driver. As such, the industry is not fully corpora-
begins operations. As it will take several years for tized but largely informal. They also operate with
the system to become operational, it should be a route licenses. Jeepneys are mostly organized into
relatively simple matter to minimize the number associations. The heads of these associations do
of legally valid franchise licenses by the time the not generally own jeepneys. As it is very difficult
system is ready to begin operation. to negotiate with hundreds of individual owners
It should be relatively easy in Manila to form and operators of varying degrees of education, it
Draft, ITDP-China 413 19 July 2015
is often better to negotiate with their association
heads. However, the governance of such associa-
tions is often unclear, and unless the governance
of these associations is made transparent and their
legitimacy somehow certified by their members,
negotiating only with association heads can
potentially lead to strife internal to the jeepney
industry. Normally these associations control
parking locations where jeepneys wait to pick up
passengers. Along EDSA, these locations are quite
clear. Each association controls its own parking
areas, but there are generally more than one
association active on each corridor. They charge a
fee to access the parking location, and they regu-
late which jeepneys are allowed to load passengers
when. Concentration of jeepney routes in EDSA
can be seen in Figure 12-15.
Draft, ITDP-China
When the service plan is completed, the jeepney
ranks that will need to be relocated or closed need
to be identified, and the jeepney associations and
jeepney owners operating out of those ranks need
to be classified as ‘affected’ owners or operators.
The jeepney association heads should be included
in the process of identifying the affected owners
and operators, and as with the buses, frequency
counts should be used to confirm how many
jeepneys are actually operating, rather than
relying on issued route licenses. They can be given
the opportunity to be officially designated by
the affected owners and operators as their legal
representatives, or they can get their associa-
tion certified as the legal representative of their
members, and association minutes and bylaws
can be used to certify their leadership positions.
In this way, the associations though not directly
‘affected’ owners, can usually secure a stake in the
new businesses, or they can buy the licenses and
jeepneys from affected owners when it becomes
known that this is the ticket into the new BRT
company.
It would be advisable for Manila to structure
the tender for BRT operations in such a way
that a majority of these existing affected owners
and operators of both buses and jeepneys would
become shareholders in one of the new BRT oper-
ating companies, but not necessarily all of them.
Minimum qualification criteria should stipulate
things like for the owner/operator to be recog-
nized as ‘affected owner and license holder’ they
need to pass a drug test (many jeepney drivers are
unable to pass a drug test), they need to not have
any outstanding traffic violations or otherwise be
wanted by the police, etc.
The government should use the competitive
tender to force these companies to form, sort
out their shareholding structure, establish clear
management structures, and collect the neces-
sary minimum capital requirements to meet the
minimum bidding criteria. The bidders also need
to demonstrate that they have brought on board a
competent management team, complete with their
Figure 12-15: A relatively small number of jeepney
routes (15 in total) have a frequency of more than
3 buses per hour (one bus every 20 minutes) and
overlap for more than 30% of their route length with
the proposed phase 1 BRT corridors. These routes are
concentrated in 3 areas: Makati, Taft/NAIA, and the
north-western part of EDSA in Caloocan.
414 19 July 2015
CVs, by either hiring individuals from abroad
with experience, or partnering with firms with
experience operating BRT companies in other
countries, or at least with experience operating
other logistics-related enterprises with integrated
fleet management. The bidding documents would
also provide the technical specifications for the
buses that would properly interface with the BRT
trunk infrastructure.
By placing all these conditions into a competi-
tive bid, rather than simply requiring it and trying
to get these things implemented through negotia-
tion, the government can be far less involved
in micromanaging exactly how this process is
handled, and can be more sure that it has been
properly completed.
Once the minimum criteria are met, it is typical
that the bidding criteria would award extra points
for consortiums that include as owners ‘impacted’
bus owners or jeepney owners. Some, yet fewer
points, could be awarded to bidders involving
these ‘unimpacted’ owners on routes that are not
affected, or are affected by BRT routes operating
outside the BRT corridors. If this proves inconsis-
tent with public procurement rules, then having
a minimum percentage of the ownership shares
held by ‘affected’ bus owners and jeepney owners
can achieve much the same purpose.
12.5.3 Corporate formation of the
BRT operating companies and
tendering process
Normally, a ‘managed’ competitive tender to
award BRT bus operating contracts includes
the requirement that the winning bidders must
turn over the required minimum number of
affected route licenses and the affected buses to
the BRT Authority. This is done in part to ensure
the removal of competing routes from the BRT
corridor, and in part to ensure that the bidders,
who may not directly be the original owners and
license holders, offer shares or compensation to
the current owners of buses and licenses.
Normally the affected buses and route licenses
are only turned over when the contract is signed,
to make sure they are taken out of circulation
only once the new BRT service is ready to become
operational. Otherwise there will be no transit
service in the interim. This is generally handled
by the following mechanism: until the date of
Draft, ITDP-China
contract signing the holders of the current fran-
chise licenses and affected buses sign an affidavit
that they are willing to turn over their vehicles
and licenses to the head of the consortium upon
signing, as the transaction cannot actually take
place until the bidding process is complete.
The buses in Latin America are generally turned
over to scrap. The scrapping requirement is gener-
ally a ratio of the number of old buses operating
on the corridor to the number of new buses
needed to operate the new system. In Manila, as
of now, the ratio is 2.3 to 1, though this number
needs to be revised when the operational design
is further refined. The decision to scrap the buses
tends to be based on how old the vehicle fleet is.
In most Latin American cases where there was
competitive bidding, the owners bidding on the
contracts, at their own initiative, bought the oldest
buses from their owners and turned those in for
scrap, while relocating the newest buses to other
unaffected routes, or selling them to the operators
of unaffected routes, without much involvement
of the BRT Authority. In this way, the tender
process naturally tended to remove only the oldest
buses from the streets, and many of these buses
were very old and polluting.
In the case of Johannesburg, the scrapping was
handled differently. A leasing company was hired
by the city, and each affected owner had to turn
over their vehicle and their license to the leasing
company. If the vehicle was old, they turned the
vehicle over to provincial authorities in exchange
for a flat scrapping fee that had been offered by
the national government and administered by the
provincial government authorities. If the vehicle
was newer, it was sold to a third party (usually
someone operating an unaffected route or a route
in a different city), and the value was credited to
the owner who turned it in.
The scrapping allowance and requirement to
turn over the licenses has also tended to relate
closely to the valuation of shares within the new
BRT operating companies. In Bogota, where
there was a managed competitive tender, the way
the bus scrapping and licenses were valued and
translated into shares in the new BRT operating
company was done through private negotiation,
and it differed from case to case. This tended to
drive the valuation down to their market price,
and factors such as the age of the bus, the value
of the route, the length of the license, could all be
415 19 July 2015
factored into the valuation.
In the case of Mexico and Johannesburg, the
decision was made by the bus owners associa-
tion to value the shares at one bus, one license,
one share. In the case of Mexico City, this was
relatively unproblematic, as all of the buses were
of similar age, and all of them operated on the
Insurgentes corridor, (hence the name of the
company the Insurgentes Company).
In the case of Johannesburg, as the contract
was negotiated, it proved difficult to get accord
on the valuation of the shares in the new Piotrans
company among the affected owners, so the city
had to impose a method for valuing the vehicles
and licenses. This was made complicated by the
fact that the routes varied by a factor of five in
profitability, and the licenses were of varying
degrees of expiration and legitimacy. To simplify
the protracted negotiations, they simply decided
to give one share for each vehicle turned in with
a license. While this made an agreement possible,
it also drove up the share price to the value of the
most profitable route, significantly increasing the
operating costs of the system.
For this reason, in the case of Manila, we rec-
ommend that a competitive ‘managed’ tender be
used, with a scrapping requirement of 2.3 vehicles
and 2.3 licenses turned in for every new bus
offered by the bidder (subject to modification as
the service plan is finalized), and to let the indus-
try sort out the valuation of shares in relation to
this requirement internally.
The tender then would work as follows. Each
consortium that has managed to accumulate the
required number of affected bus and jeepney
owners as shareholders would offer to provide for
service a certain number of the buses required
in the tender, say over 100 and less than 300. The
lowest bidder (the lowest price per bus kilometer
offered) would be awarded the tender at the
price they offered for the total number of buses
they offer, the second lowest price would be
awarded the tender at the price they offered for
the number of buses they offered, and so on until
all the services required have been filled. This
“Dutch Auction” approach ensures that the BRT
Authority pays the lowest price for the services
overall. It needs to be checked for compliance
with Philippine procurement law.
Draft, ITDP-China
12.5.4 Can Jeepneys serve as feeders
to the EDSA BRT?
This subject has not yet been raised in Manila but
seems to come up in most BRT projects; namely
whether existing informal operators can be made
to serve as ‘feeders’ to the formal BRT system.
This is just a note of clarification. If a jeepney
service is operated under a route license by an
informal corporate entity, it cannot be considered
in any way to be a formal part of the BRT system’s
operations, though such services may physically
bring passengers to the BRT system. A ‘feeder’
route to a BRT system is a service formally
contracted out by the BRT Authority to a legally
constituted corporate entity under a service
contract.
The type of vehicle used to provide that service
is not the basis of determining whether or not the
service is a ‘feeder’ or not; the determining factor
is the contracting structure.
As of now, the preliminary service plan does
not include any ‘feeder’ routes, and as of now
there is no indication that the service plan will
include any feeders. However, there are many
trips between EDSA and the center of Manila that
are currently served primarily by jeepneys. Some
of these routes are on very narrow roads and
turns from EDSA onto these streets are difficult
to negotiate. It may be that in the evolution of the
service plan it could be decided that some of these
routes are incompatible with direct service bus
routes, but could be included into the EDSA BRT
service plan as a ‘feeder’. Should this occur, these
routes would then be contracted out through
competitive bidding to companies under a service
contract to the BRT Authority. It is also theoreti-
cally possible that the technical specifications for
the vehicles used to provide such services could
allow for the possibility that a vehicle similar to
a jeepney could be used, so long as it meets the
necessary safety and environmental standards and
capacity requirements. Were this eventuality to
occur, a ‘jeepney’ vehicle might be used to provide
a ‘feeder’ service. This would not, however, imply
that jeepneys in their current organizational form
will provide formal feeder services. In the current
operational design there is no indication that any
such service is intended.
416 19 July 2015
12.6 Conclusion
The following key considerations for the establish- can be combined into a single contract. In the
ment of a business plan for the proposed EDSA
BRT need to be discussed with the Government
of the Philippines and relevant stakeholders, and
decisions should be made as quickly as possible.
Each time that the project team decides on any of operators won a bid to collect cash in the stations.
the below listed questions, this information can
then be disclosed to stakeholders. Any of these
questions that have yet to be fully endorsed by
the government should be presented as such to
stakeholders.
I. Where will the project office be established,
who will staff it, and when will it become
operational?
Our recommendation is to set it up immediately
under the Undersecretary of Planning at DOTC
with staff seconded from DOTC, LRTA, MMDA
and DPWH, with the full team being allowed to
work full time on the project.
II. Where should the BRT Authority that signs the
contracts with operators be housed.
Our recommendation is that a new BRT
Authority be created under DOTC with a semi-
independent board including representation from
LRTA, MMDA, DPW, civil society, and technical
experts.
III. Which functions should be contracted out to
private companies?
Our recommendation is that the BRT Authority
(and the DOTC acting in its stead until the
Agency can be legally created) sign separate
contracts for the following BRT related services:
Bus operations
Fare collection
Trust fund / clearinghouse management
Station management
Control center management
Scheduling.
Some of these functions may be merged into
single contracts. Station management, control
center management and scheduling can all poten-
tially be carried out by a single BRT management
company. Fare collection includes several com-
ponents, including operation of fare collection
technology in stations and on buses, collection
Draft, ITDP-China
of cash in stations and on buses, and operation
of a clearinghouse. Some of these functions
Guangzhou BRT, for example, the Smart Card
Company operates and maintains the fare collec-
tion equipment in stations and on buses, and also
runs the clearinghouse / trust fund. One of the
IV. How should these contracts be awarded?
Our recommendation is that all of these con-
tracts be awarded through competitive bidding.
The contract for the bus operations should be
a ‘managed’ competitive bid which includes a
requirement or a strong incentive that the bidders
include among their owners ‘affected owners’.
V. How many bus operators should there be?
Our recommendation is that from 4 to 10 compa-
nies should be used to provide the BRT bus opera-
tions, with the final number to be determined by
the service plan, the number of depots to be used,
and the ultimate size of the bus fleet.
VI. Should the operating contracts include rewards
and penalties for good or poor service?
Our recommendation is that the operating
contracts include rewards and penalties for good
or bad service, and that the funds raised through
penalties should be used entirely as rewards and
held in escrow independent from government
accounts, or the punishment should be the
elimination of bus kilometers operated by one
operator and the awarding of these bus kilometers
to another operator. These rewards and penalties
should cover, as a minimum, the maintenance and
cleanliness of the vehicle, the performance of the
drivers (no speeding, proper hygiene, drivers not
inebriated or using illegal substances).
VII. Should the fare collection be managed by the
bus operators, the BRT Authority, or a third
party contractor to the government?
Our recommendation is that the fare collection
system be managed by an independent third party
private contractor to the BRT Authority, rather
than by one of the bus operators. Given the direct
service contracts being discussed, this will also
require electronic ticketing systems or personnel
on board the buses to service the off trunk parts
of the route. Alternatively, one option that may be
417 19 July 2015
favoured is to install card readers at each of the
stops used by BRT buses in off-corridor seg-
ments, so that passengers can scan cards (for the
distance-based fares) only after alighting.

VIII. Should the bus operators be paid by the

bus kilometer or by the passenger or some
combination?
The bus operators should be paid by the bus
kilometer, and their operation of these kilometers
should be tracked using GPS or an equivalent
technology by an independent operational control
system operator, which should also be contracted
out to a company.

IX. Should the affected bus operators be included

in the operations of the BRT buses?
The affected bus and jeepney operators should
be given an opportunity to bid on the operating
contracts for the EDSA BRT bus operations.
The tender should give them credit for having
experience on the corridor and in Metro Manila.
Including affected owners of buses and jeepneys
should be a minimum qualification requirement
or strongly incentivized in the tendering process.
However, these bus operators and jeepney opera-
tors will not be allowed to operate in their current
form and will need to form consortiums meeting
the minimum qualification criteria.

X. Should jeepneys provide feeder services?

Jeepney operators in their current form will not
provide feeder services. Affected jeepney owners
will be eligible to join with bidding consortiums
to become partial owners of the BRT bus operat-
ing companies. The routes and technical specifica-
tions for the vehicle types to be used to provide
the full range of BRT services on EDSA are still to
be finalized.

Draft, ITDP-China 418 19 July 2015

13. Next Steps and Time Frame
13.1 Next steps 13.2 Project timeline
If the government decides to proceed, BRT imple- A very rapid time frame for project implementa-
mentation could commence immediately, with tion could be:
additional work on some aspects of this concep- Additional studies: 6 months
tual plan followed closely by commencement of Engineering design: 12 months
the detailed engineering design. Assuming a rapid Construction: 12-18 months.
project timeline, operation of the Phase 1 BRT
corridor could conceivably commence in three
years, by mid-2018.
This study needs to be followed up with detailed
engineering design, additional operational
analysis and modelling, traffic impact analysis,
intersection design, surveys and data collection,
BRT station architecture, communications and
outreach, fare system studies and design, investi-
gation of BRT vehicle options, modal integration
planning, and institutional and regulatory plan-
ning and capacity building. Plans should also be
carried out for BRT station area development in
order to maximize the land development benefits
from the BRT investment.
Many other aspects of the work would proceed
in parallel with the engineering design and con-
struction, including institutional issues, business
planning and contracting, operational design,
depot design and construction, communications
and outreach, fare collection systems, bus pro-
curement and other aspects.
The government should set a date for the com-
mencement of BRT operation, e.g. 31 December
2018, which then becomes the target date for all of
the related systems and arrangements to reach an
operational stage.
During the project planning the government
expressed interest in commencing some aspects
of the work on an accelerated schedule. Aspects
which could be commenced earlier than others
without compromising the overall project might
include:
Preparatory road works, including temporary
road widening at some locations
Construction of the proposed ramps at Ayala
or Taft
Construction of the proposed bicycle &
pedestrian bridge at Guadalupe
Depot-related tasks.

Draft, ITDP-China 420 19 July 2015