"Thoughts on BRTS in India, especially Pune" blog post by Jaideep Deodhar

[Amit Paranjape]

"Thoughts on BRTS in India, especially Pune" blog post by Jaideep Deodhar

http://jsdeodhar.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/my-thoughts-on-brts-in-india-especially-pune/

[Harshad Abhyankar]

I haven't read it fully yet, but as I was going through it I expected the author to mention the "you have to cross road to get to the stop" thing - and there it was!

Anyone who has a concern with crossing the road to get to the BRT stop is requested to draw a sketch of a round trip with our regular bus.  It is easy to understand that in both cases (BRT vs regular) you have to cross the whole road width twice in a round trip.  In case of BRT, you cross the road near a signal, thus are helped by a zebra and a signal (for what it is worth in India/ Pune).  In case of regular bus, you cross mid-block.

Which one is better?

- Harshad.

---

From: Amit Paranjape <apara...@gmail.com>
To: ptt...@googlegroups.com
Cc: Jaideep Deodhar <jai...@simulytics.net>
Sent: Friday, 24 May 2013 12:29 PM
Subject: [pttfgen:4584] "Thoughts on BRTS in India, especially Pune" blog post by Jaideep Deodhar

"Thoughts on BRTS in India, especially Pune" blog post by Jaideep Deodhar

http://jsdeodhar.wordpress.com/2013/05/23/my-thoughts-on-brts-in-india-especially-pune/ --
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PTTF" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to pttfgen+u...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to ptt...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/pttfgen?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

[Ranjit Gadgil]

Not being able to cross a road safely in Pune has nothing to do with BRT. Try crossing Sinhagad road, Ganeshkhind road, . . . 

A centre lane BRT makes it imperative for designers to ensure safe crossing.

Jaideep and others may want to see some of these panels produced by Parisar which address these common issues.

http://www.parisar.org/activities/public-outreach/131-brt-exhibition.html

-- Ranjit

[Sujit Patwardhan]

I have also not yet read the whole article, but would like to ask how easy it is to cross University Road, Nagar Road or even Jangli Maharaj or Fergusson Road to name only a few roads on which there is no BRT. 

It is a totally a wrong belief that BRT makes roads dangerous that otherwise are safe. In any case I think people who list all the ills of the BRT may be more productive and useful to society if they do a comparison between all the "car oriented projects" and the BRT and draw a balance sheet to show what contributes to carrying more commuters, what causes more road accidents, and what needs to be encouraged and what needs to be severely curtailed. 

By exclusively focusing on BRT  aren't we doing a dis-service to the hapless majority commuter who is being driven off of the road by the ever growing number of personal auto vehicles. 

Saying that certainly does not mean we should tolerate a shabby BRT but let's not lose focus and ignore the biggest culprit who is unfortunately being enthusiastically supported, subsidized and given priority by our decision makers and "leaders".

At least the public spirited individuals and NGOs should avoid playing into the hands of those who have no real public interest in mind and splurge our money on useless projects and worse who pocket a large chunk of the money spent on the city's so called "development".

I will say more on the article after reading it. 

--

Sujit

 

On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 2:37 PM, Harshad Abhyankar <a_ha...@yahoo.com> wrote:

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.

- J. Krishnamurti

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sujit Patwardhan
patwardh...@gmail.com
su...@parisar.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yamuna, ICS Colony, Ganeshkhind Road, Pune 411 007, India
Tel: +91 20 25537955
Cell: +91 98220 26627
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blog: http://motif.posterous.com/

Parisar: www.parisar.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Harshad Abhyankar]

Hi Jaideep,

For #1:  have you actually drawn a sketch for a round trip for regular and BRT, and counted the no of road widths one has to cross?

For other points:  There is this concept of "traffic calming", according to which there are several advantages if urban traffic pauses, stops once in a while, slows down.  Providing traffic signals is one of the several traffic calming measures.  Signals at about 500-700m, with one or two additional mid-block road crossing points with pedestrian refuges increases not only pedestrians' safety, but also vehicles' - because it is good for vehicles too if pedestrians are encouraged to cross at designated points that are visibly safer and convenient.

Also, the whole idea behind a BRT is "a metro on roads".  Ideally traffic signals should sense BRT buses so that BRT buses seldom need to stop anywhere apart from bus stops - one more reason why stops are near signals.  Having stops at ~500-700m also increases ridership as people don't need to walk long distances for bus stops.

And BRT & rest of the traffic need not share the signal phase.  There can and should be separate phases for bus lanes and rest of the traffic.  Of course, bus phases should get priority.  All this is possible if one has the objective of enticing people to take the bus.

The sole question a city's transport planner should be asking people is, "tell me why you do not walk or take a bus or cycle, and I will address your problem!"  Then the bus can be made the most attractive travel option and anyone who still does not want to take the bus can continue to use the car.

- Harshad.

---

From: Jaideep Deodhar <jai...@simulytics.net>
To: Harshad Abhyankar <a_ha...@yahoo.com>; ptt...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Sunday, 26 May 2013 3:14 PM
Subject: Re: [pttfgen:4584] "Thoughts on BRTS in India, especially Pune" blog post by Jaideep Deodhar

1.    Valid point, just that in case of regular bus, perhaps 100% passengers cross the road 50% of the time.  In case of BRTS, 100% passengers cross 100%  of the time.

2.    If the signals are as close to each other (say 300 to 500 mts apart), as the bus stops, then yes, its possible to position the stops just before the signals.  However in this case, as physics tells you, BRTS is no more effective than a regular bus service.  Infact it is worse in many respects when you consider the throughput capacity of the road network, which includes the BRTS lanes.  Frequent signals negate the benefits of a rapid lane.

3.    If the signals are far apart, then BRTS forces new signals where none existed.  These new signals apply to non-BRTS lanes only.  Considering that the rest of the traffic has a lesser share of the road (which by itself is not a crime because public transport is getting priority over personal transport), the additional signals lead to gridlock.

4.   If signals and cross-roads gridlock, then it eventually hurts BRTS lanes also.  Again, it negates the benefits of a dedicated lane because the dedicated lane and other lanes share the traffic signal.  This is because BRTS in India is not truly 100% isolated from the rest of the traffic.  Therefore, the efficiency of BRTS is only as good as its weakest link – the cross-roads.

5.    There are only two options to make mass transit work:

    -    Take it elevated or underground – 100% isolation is the only way to make it work (though at a steep cost). OR

    -    Road based rapid transit will work IF AND ONLY IF there is a foolproof mechanism to restrict ownership (like Singapore) and to make the use of personal transport prohibitively expensive (like many other cities).  Technology allows this point to be realistic and achievable even in India.  However, the political and administrative machinery is not capable of it.

6.    Admittedly elevated or underground options are expensive – up to 4 times the cost or maybe more. However, it is better to spend 4X the amount if it delivers the goods than to spend X when it is designed to fail.

7.    For any other option of road-surface based public transport (which includes BRTS, trams and anything which plies on the surface), we are only pretending to improve public transport.  The current design of BRTS is trying to defy laws of physics and mathematics, besides defying common sense.

8.    The only thing public about public transport in Pune is that the public suffers.  BRTS will be no different, because physics and mathematics are not aligned to success.

9.    I will be the happiest person if I am proven wrong.

 

Regards,

Jaideep

[Jayant Joshi]

I wrote an entire blog post - my very first blog ever!!! - in response to Jaideep's as I had too many things to say! Please read at https://joshijayant.wordpress.com/ and feel free to poke as many holes as you can!

One more thing I'll add is that in addition to physics and mathematics, psychology, sociology, political science and project management are also at play here!!!

- Jayant

[Rajendra Sidhaye]

Excellent post Jayant! I was about to start writing my thoughts on many points from Jaideep's blog & mail.. Your blog post addresses most of them. 

I will just like to add some thoughts regarding few of Jaideep's points here:

< If the left lanes are bad, then the solution is to fix the left lane, not to move the buses out of the left lane.>

Left lane is unsuitable or bad not only due to many obstructions, but also because many private vehicles need to turn into or from by-lanes and properties. This is not something which one can 'fix'!!

< There can’t be a more ridiculous situation where passengers reach the destination “rapidly” only to walk into a death trap called “crossing the road”.  So what’s the remedy?  Create one more wrong – that takes the tally to 3 wrongs – have pedestrian crossings to allow the passengers to reach the safety of the sidewalk.  Now we have created one more signal for the other vehicles where none existed. >

That is why the BRT stations are typically located near the intersections so that the pedestrian crossing (which was/is anyway necessary at the signal) is designed in for safely reaching the BRT station. 

< This means that we had to slow down other vehicles to make the buses appear faster and justify the word “rapid”.  Since we can’t run faster, we slow the other guy down.  That’s the Indian way to prove success – by pointing to others failure. >

Slowing down of other vehicles is anyway going to happen as the private vehicles increased by leaps and bounds, how-much-so-ever increasingly broader roads and flyovers you feed to them. Long term and sustainable solution is only to make private vehicle option unattractive by all means possible, but of course at the same time, make the PT option very and increasingly attractive by all possible means (even by implementing the icings on the cake which you term as non-critical to BRT). 

Lastly, I agree with you that the 'Rapid' is not going to be so 'rapid' in Indian context because of the ground realities you have pointed..including the stops which are not so distant. But, even if it is ensured that the dedicated lane makes sure that you don't get stuck in private vehicle jams (NOT created due to BRT but by themselves), you are better off using BRT.

And finally, it is easy to say that it is better to take PT above or below the ground. But that is where the economics come in and how many crores per km you want to spend for how many PPHPD you project and you plan to support for that road.

Regards,

Rajendra

[Dr Adhiraj Joglekar]

I wont go over my stated views from the years gone by. The fact however is that a kerb side bus transit does not require every one to cross the road, a median BRT does.

Secondly, if a previously circulated SB road bus priority proposal is gone through, it is without doubt possible to negate and / or reduce the impact of vehicles turning left (a median BRT affects those turning right, in Delhi they had to stop numerous right turns, so why not the left turns).

Thirdly, PT improvements can be incremental. Its easier to consider priority rather than grade separated movement of a closed BRT, which clearly Pune is not.

Fourth, re speed, even the best of metro trains average ultimately only 30KPH or so.

Fifth, a BRT like a metro can't be implemented everywhere, this means, people walk more and overall benefit compared to a slower bus PT which is door to door is not always cost-effective.

Finally, where it is implemented depends on degree of saturation on road. A first class Mumbai style bus PT could change our understanding of this concept and hence need for dramatic measures.

End of the day, very few have actually put their head on the parapet, Uday stands out as the only one who consistently has said, no PT is enough if population of a city is allowed to grow at the relentless pace it does - its futile, even 500 km of underground metro will be drowned out in 10 years if FSI increases are allowed to find the funds to build such a system.

A

[Ranjit Gadgil]

Let's do this once and for all.

No BRT / Kerb Side Bus lanes

Case 1:

You and your office are on the same side of the road

In the morning you get a bus on your side and get to the office without crossing the road. In the evening you have to cross the entire road to catch the bus and cross it again to get home. Total crossing - 2 x road width

Case 2:

You and your office are on the opposite side of the road

In the morning you cross the entire road to catch the bus, but not at the office. In the evening, you cross the entire road to catch the bus but not when you get home.. Total crossing - 2 x road width

BRT with median lanes

Case 1:

You and your office are on the same side of the road

In the morning you cross half the road to catch the bus at home and do the same again at the office. In the evening you cross half the road to get to the brt station and do the same when you get home. Total road crossing - 4 x 1/2 road width = 2 x road width

Case 2:

You and your office are on the opposite side of the road

ditto as Case 1

Our little Gedanken shows that no matter what you do you HAVE TO CROSS THE BLOODY ROAD TWICE!!!

On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Dr Adhiraj Joglekar <adhiraj....@googlemail.com> wrote:

The fact however is that a kerb side bus transit does not require every one to cross the road, a median BRT does.

-- Ranjit

[Ranjit Gadgil]

It's not left turns at a junction, its ALL left turns, that is those coming in and out of properties, small lanes etc. These will have to come straight in and out of the kerb side bus lane. There are no right turns in and out of properties!!

Just check out the small cycle track from Athavale chowk to Nal stop. Its integrity is severely compromised by the dozen in and outs.

Gosh, 6 years after having these debates, I'd have thought most people at least on this mailing list would know these basics!

On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Dr Adhiraj Joglekar <adhiraj....@googlemail.com> wrote:

Secondly, if a previously circulated SB road bus priority proposal is gone through, it is without doubt possible to negate and / or reduce the impact of vehicles turning left (a median BRT affects those turning right, in Delhi they had to stop numerous right turns, so why not the left turns).

-- Ranjit

[adhiraj....@googlemail.com]

6 years of living in la la land more like of theorists with no pragmatic or real knowledge more like. 

A

Sent from my iPod

--

[ashok datar]

ranjit, adhiraj and others 

the logic for center lane is basic and self evident. 

however, there are some situations where kerb lane also merit.

when there are no parking on the kerb and when zero door openings for shops and homes and when there is service lane such as at WEH in Mumbai and when every single junction which generates max traffic is covered by a long flyover 

then kerb lane deserves cool, objective and comparative analysis .

after all, isnt the basic principle of BRTS that it is flexible and not rigid like rail ?

looking for serious flaws for any of u to correct in my logic. 

this road i have been using for commuting and otherwise for over last 30 years. ( that still doesnt mean whether I can make right suggestions ) but does give me some adv 

ashok datar

--

Ashok R. Datar

Mumbai Environmental Social Network (MESN) &
 Mumbai Transport Forum (MTF)

20 Madhavi, Makarand Society, S.V.S.Marg, Mahim-400 016
98676 65107/0222 444 9212 see our website : www.mesn.org

A city is developed not when poor ride or aspire for cars, but where the rich use public transport

[Jayant Joshi]

The logic provided in my blog mainly talks about two-way Pune roads under consideration for BRT corridors. On one-ways like JM Road / FC Road, for example, centre lane won't work. But what works there is 2-way BRT on JM Road on the left side of the road. In general, on roads with service lanes and zero openings on the left, one would assume that left lane and center lane placements are equal, but level-boarding tips the scales in favor of centre lanes. If the BRT lane is part of the service road, then it's a different discussion, but then the "rapid" part of the equation reduces. On WEH specifically, I'd put BRT in middle lanes, have it run on top of the flyovers and give it bus stops on the left side of the flyover - something like a metro station. This is the only way it will be faster than rest of the traffic. If I was constructing those flyovers from scratch, then I'd have the buses run in centre throughout with a hole in the middle of the flyover for people to get up and down the station. Please don't think that I am talking crazy. This is done all over the world for light rail and metro lines as seen in attached pictures.

On roads that are not wide enough, like Tilak Road for example, left lane would be the only choice, but then that lane can't be cordoned off.

So to your question, yes, there are situations where centre lane is not the best placement, but I think that's more of an exception.

- Jayant

[Ranjit Gadgil]

Jayant, what you have described are the split flyovers, which exist both in Ahmedabad and more recently in Indore.

-- Ranjit