[sustran] Urban Transport in Mumbai
Anupam Gupta, CLSA
anupam.gupta at clsa.com
Wed Sep 13 15:40:11 JST 2006
Hi - I'm new to this group and am mailing for the first time, so do forgive
me if I break any protocol.
Eric Britton said
>>Erp! I would be most eager to have comments on this article from last
week's Indian Express. It sends shivers down by back (Wilbur Smith??), but
what do I know, eh?
I find it interesting that the Govt chose the very same people who'd advised
Bombay in 1962. The implementations of M/S Smith's recommendations are still
being carried out. Actually only one to be specific, viz. Bandra Worli Sea
Link Project (BWSL). In fact, the BWSL has come under fire from
environmentalists as well as architects (like Mr. Chandrashekhar Prabhu - a
big critic of this project).
Eric Britton - are your shivers to do with Wilbur Smith or with the idea of
a transport study for cities? I'd appreciate your thoughts.
Alan Howes - Given your familiarity with Mumbai I'd also appreciate your
thoughts on the BWSL as well as the grand designs that the Govt has for
Mumbai's transport problems. In specific - the Metro (is Skybus a cheaper
and better technology).
Thanks all.
Anupam Gupta
(http://doesmumbaimatter.blogspot.com)
-----Original Message-----
From: sustran-discuss-request at list.jca.apc.org
[mailto:sustran-discuss-request at list.jca.apc.org]
Sent: 13 September, 2006 8:31 AM
To: sustran-discuss at list.jca.apc.org
Subject: Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 37, Issue 10
Send Sustran-discuss mailing list submissions to
sustran-discuss at list.jca.apc.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
sustran-discuss-request at list.jca.apc.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
sustran-discuss-owner at list.jca.apc.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
"Re: Contents of Sustran-discuss digest..."
########################################################################
Sustran-discuss Mailing List Digest
IMPORTANT NOTE: When replying please do not include the whole digest in your
reply - just include the relevant part of the specific message that you are
responding to. Many thanks.
About this mailing list see:
http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss
########################################################################
Today's Topics:
1. Roads are only for Cars + Plan Bus Routes through Town
Centres (Su-Lin Chee)
2. Motorcycles in cities (Eric Britton)
3. Re: Busway Operation (Alan Howes)
4. Motorcycles in cities (Eric Britton)
5. To decongest 30 cities, Urban Development Ministry asks
American firm for roadmap (Eric Britton)
6. Re: To decongest 30 cities, Urban Development Ministry asks
American firm for roadmap (Alan Howes)
7. Motorcycles in cities (Eric Britton)
8. Re: Busway Operation (Gmenckhoff at worldbank.org)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 00:15:14 -0400
From: "Su-Lin Chee" <sulin at vectordesigns.org>
Subject: [sustran] Roads are only for Cars + Plan Bus Routes through
Town Centres
To: msia-plan-transp at yahoogroups.com, <Sustran-discuss at jca.apc.org>
Message-ID: <E1GMzg2-0006dX-3P at dime31.dizinc.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Dear all,
I have just written 2 articles on 2 recent experiences and based on a
recent public dialogue with RapidKL. Please do read what I have to say
and comment if you will:
- Roads Are Only for Cars http://transit.vectordesigns.org/index.php?
option=com_content&task=view&id=18&Itemid=29
- Plan Bus Routes Through Town Centres:
http://transit.vectordesigns.org/index.php?
option=com_content&task=view&id=17&Itemid=27
Thanks!!
Best wishes,
Su-Lin Chee
project manager
klang valley public transportation information system
vector designs
www.vectordesigns.org
54a jalan kemuja
bangsar utama
59000 kuala lumpur
tel/fax +603.22826363
mobile +6016.2183363
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 08:56:03 +0200
From: "Eric Britton" <eric.britton at ecoplan.org>
Subject: [sustran] Motorcycles in cities
To: <Sustran-discuss at jca.apc.org>, <LotsLessCars at yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <036a01c6d638$865ad450$6501a8c0 at Home>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Uganda
Not fit for a queen
Sep 7th 2006 | KAMPALA
>From The Economist print edition
http://www.economist.com/world/africa/displaystory.cfm?story_id=E1_SRJTNRQ
The end of the road for Kampala's signature taxis
LONDON has black cabs, New York its yellow ones. Bangkok has tuk-tuks and
Hanoi has rickshaws. In Kampala, the boda-boda motorcycle taxi is the
Ugandan capital's defining symbol. In the 1960s, entrepreneurial cyclists
found that travellers would pay a few shillings to have themselves and their
goods transported across the no-man's-land between the borders of Uganda and
Kenya.
>From border to border, the boda-boda was born.
Please, your majesty, let us drive you around
Since then the bikes have become motorised. For the locals, rates are fixed,
but foreigners can expect to bargain hard and still pay far too much. But it
is worth it: weaving between cars, dodging potholes and riding along the
pavement to avoid Kampala's jams is as exhilarating as any fairground ride.
And you arrive on time, if a bit dusty.
But now boda-bodas are under threat-from the Commonwealth. To prepare for
hosting next year's summit of the organisation in Uganda, the capital is
having a makeover. A senior foreign-ministry official boasts that $300m has
already been invested in ventures to spruce things up. Pitted roads are
being relaid; smart new hotels will house an expected influx of 5,000
delegates.
But the boda-boda is likely to be a casualty of this vast civic
spring-clean. For the government says they have become a "menace and a
problem to the city traffic" and wants them off the streets by January. The
drivers-wont to lounge in packs on street corners, attired in a random
assortment of jackets and helmets, dozing between fares and whistling at
girls-say the government thinks they are too unkempt and anarchic for the
image that Uganda is hoping to project.
Bad news for Kampala's estimated 10,500 boda-boda drivers. They can earn up
to $5 a day, whereas most rural workers earn less than a fifth of that.
"This Commonwealth will throw us out," says one. "Please, you will pray for
us!" he shouts as he speeds away, black smoke spewing from the exhaust of
his invaluable bike of burden.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060912/5edc2890
/attachment-0001.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 25754 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060912/5edc2890
/attachment-0001.jpe
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 09:08:43 +0100
From: "Alan Howes" <Alan.Howes at cbuchanan.co.uk>
Subject: [sustran] Re: Busway Operation
To: "Global 'South' Sustainable Transport"
<sustran-discuss at list.jca.apc.org>
Message-ID:
<324DCD7680954F468CF306EE5404F00102930E3F at mail01.cbuchanan.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Forwarding this post to transit-prof which amplifies re. Ottawa Transitway
--
Alan Howes
Associate Transport Planner
Colin Buchanan
4 St Colme Street
Edinburgh EH3 6AA
Scotland
email: alan.howes at cbuchanan.co.uk
tel: (0)131 226 4693 (switchboard)
(0)7952 464335 (mobile)
fax: (0)131 220 0232
www: http:/www.cbuchanan.co.uk/
-----Original Message-----
From: Transit-Prof at yahoogroups.com [mailto:Transit-Prof at yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Leech, Colin
Sent: 12 September 2006 05:52
To: Transit-Prof at yahoogroups.com
Cc: Peter Lutman; richmond at alum.mit.edu; whook at itdp.org
Subject: RE: [Transit-Prof] RE: [sustran] Re: Busway Operation
Hi everybody,
(Alan or Jonathan: Feel free to repost my replies to sustran-discuss, if you
wish. I'm not a member of that list.)
And hello again, Jonathan. It's always interesting to see what part of the
world you will pop up from. :-)
As always, I speak only for myself, not officially for my employer. That
said, my employer has one of the best-developed busway networks in the
world, so we have lots of experience with these types of operations.
Alan is correct that our critical capacity constraint is in the downtown
core where buses operate in reserved lanes, but still have to content with
traffic signals at cross streets and longer dwell times at stations due to
high passenger volumes. We've still managed to pump through 180-200
buses/hour/direction with 9-10,000 passengers in the peak hour in the peak
direction. Once on exclusive grade-separated r-o-w the capacity issues
pretty much disappear unless station space is constrained at high volume
locations. It has been postulated that grade-separating the downtown section
could increase the capacity to 15-20,000 pphpd. If you need more capacity
than that, perhaps you should be starting to look at heavy rail subway
systems rather than busways or LRT.
While the bus volumes are exceedingly high for a bus lane with online
stops*, it's actually not overly busy when compared to normal arterial
streets which can easily carry 600-800 vph per lane depending on how much
green time the lane receives at major intersections of cross streets. At
places where busway traffic crosses itself (eg. entrance and exit ramps, and
island-platform stations where opposing traffic streams cross over each
other to circulate "wrong way" around the island), we only have stop signs
not traffic signals. Signals are only used where the busway crosses other
city streets at grade. The flow of through traffic is not disrupted by
vehicles entering and exiting the system, nor are vehicles entering/existing
unduly delayed waiting for gaps in the traffic. We have entrance/exit
possibilities at numerous locations along each Transitway corridor.
* The bus lane in the Lincoln Tunnel leading from New Jersey into the Port
Authority Bus Terminal in New York City carries bus volumes many times
higher than this. However, it is a dedicated freeway lane that does not have
online passenger stops. The buses are distributed to over 200 individual
gates inside PABT.
All of the buses we use are standard urban transit buses, both high floor
(older buses) and low floor buses, with doors only on the right-hand side.
There are also private companies which serve outlying towns and intercity
buses (Greyhound) which use various sections of the busway using their
standard intercity coaches. There are no specialty vehicles dedicated solely
to service on the Transitway (busway).
Off-board ticketing would help reduce dwell times for passengers at the
critical downtown stops, and we have looked at this (but not yet implemented
it). As it is, about 70% of monthly passengers use monthly passes and we do
allow boarding by all doors on articulated buses with a Proof of Payment
system and roving fare inspectors. All passengers must board by the front
door on standard 40 foot/12 m buses although the high pass usage rate does
help speed up boarding on these buses. I haven't calculated recently what
percentage of the buses travelling through downtown are artics but at a
guess it's probably in the 25-35% range during peak periods.
One feature worth mentioning is that most stations have passing lanes so
that express and deadheading (out of service) buses can pass vehicles that
do pull in to stop at the station. Lack of passing lanes would mean that
the average speed of every vehicle becomes the same (lowest common
denominator), whereas the average speed of our express buses is higher than
the average speed of the mainline buses since the expresses typically don't
stop at the smaller stations, and typically have shorter dwell times at
outlying stations when they do stop for passengers. Another footnote is that
the express routes do have a fare premium which discourages short-distance
travel close to downtown, but even in corridors with regular fare routes the
average speed does get raised by "leap frog" operation - i.e. the first bus
of a platoon stops to pick up passengers, while subsequent buses in the
platoon don't stop unless a passenger wishes to disembark.
Looking at Walter's middle paragraph and doing a little "reading between
the lines", I am reminded of horror stories from deregulated environments
such as the U.K. of private bus drivers racing down city streets in order to
arrive at the next stop ahead of their competitor's bus. Conceivably these
sorts of things could also happen on a busway. However, that would really be
a "political" problem of who is allowed to use the busway and enforcing
normal driving etiquette, rather than a technical issue. Sometimes
engineers wind up having to implement technical solutions (eg. closing the
system entirely, or requiring buses to use a specific guidance system to
access the busway) in order solve problems that are really inherently
non-technical. Coming back to the OC Transpo example, the Transitway is
private property which is owned by the City of Ottawa and City-owned buses
(a.k.a. OC Transpo) operate on it. Other companies are allowed to operate on
it, although their drivers do h ave to undergo a bit of training. The
training isn't a huge burden because standard traffic rules apply along the
length of the Transitway. The only item that is out of the ordinary is the
"wrong-way" circulation around island-platform stations, but even this can
be pretty much explained through standard traffic signage, although it may
catch a driver off-guard the first time he encounters it.
Quoting Walter:
> It is quite possible to design a busway with buses entering and
> leaving the busway which has as high a capacity as a closed busway.
As discussed above, I do not foresee the entrances and exits being the
limiting factor in terms of the capacity of the facility.
> However, it requires a bus with doors on both sides of the bus,
I don't see why this would be a requirement, and I don't see any correlation
between it and the issue of whether vehicles circulate both inside and
outside the busway.
> it requires still having off board ticket collection along the
> corridor, (which implies some duplication of ticketing systems) and
platform level boarding.
Both of these items would certainly speed up service and increase the
capacity of the system. They would be required only for systems with
extremely high passenger volumes.
> It also requires that the streets where the normal buses operate can
> handle larger buses (if they are required).
If you are using larger buses on the busway (eg. artics or double deckers),
they may cause problems on small city streets in older cities. It hasn't
been a major issue for us in the North American context.
> By the way, no system like this has yet been designed, to my
> knowledge,
What you describe sounds suspiciously like Curitiba Brazil, unless I'm
misreading something.
See, among others:
http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp90v1_cs/Curitiba.pdf
> but we are working on just such a system in Guangzhou.
Given where you're working, I'm wondering if you have passenger volumes that
should really be handled by high capacity heavy rail rather than busways or
LRT?
Quoting Alan:
> one of the merits of BRT is that it is a flexible concept, not "one
> size fits all".
Absolutely correct. Ottawa is at one end of the North American extreme -
with exclusive r-o-w and nearly 100% grade separation of the original system
outside of the downtown core (with subsequent extensions that aren't quite
so "gold plated"). Quebec City is perhaps the other extreme, where their
"Metrobus" service has done wonders to revitalize their system using only a
bit of paint and a few signs to create reserved lanes on city streets (I'm
not even sure if they have any significant traffic signal priority measures
yet). In Curitiba they have on-street reserved lanes and double-articulated
buses but also with levels of traffic signal priority unheard of in North
America, and the specialized stations that improve boarding efficiency
beyond the levels that we achieve here.
> If you want max capacity then you need mega-buses that will have
> problems on ordinary roads - but if you are prepared to sacrifice some
> capacity then a mix of bus sizes is fine.
One tradeoff being that you're probably running a feeder-linehaul service
with the large vehicles dedicated to the busway, which then loses you one of
the 'flexibility' advantages of being able to reduce transfers for
passengers by using the same buses to circulate within neighbourhoods and
then enter the busway. I would point out that in addition to this type of
service, both Ottawa and Pittsburgh operate different types of mainline
routes that operate along certain sections of the busway without necessarily
travelling the full length of the busway (eg. in Ottawa routes 4, 118, and
101 (formerly 99), and the EBO line in Pittsburgh which operates along part
of the East Busway but then exits to serve the Oakland area rather than
continuing along the busway to downtown).
All opinions are my own, not my employer's.
--------------
Colin R. Leech - Transit Planner
Planificateur du transport en commun
OC Transpo - Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
613-842-3636 ext./poste 2354
Colin.Leech at Ottawa.ca
-----Original Message-----
From: Transit-Prof at yahoogroups.com on behalf of Alan Howes
Sent: Mon 2006-09-11 10:58
To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport
Cc: Transit-Prof at yahoogroups.com; Peter Lutman
Subject: [Transit-Prof] RE: [sustran] Re: Busway Operation
Must have a look at that website, Walter -
But is your statement that "it requires a bus with doors on both sides of
the bus" based on the premise that buses captive to the system will have
high floors and platform-level loading on the off-side, while the
"intruders" will have low-level boarding on the nearside? This is one way
of doing it, but not the only way. All buses could have low floors and
nearside boarding - the Ottawa Transitway is not closed, and AFAIK the buses
have doors on one side only. (Not sure it has any captive buses though, and
you may not consider it BRT.)
In general, I see what you are driving at and agree - but one of the merits
of BRT is that it is a flexible concept, not "one size fits all". If you
want max capacity then you need mega-buses that will have problems on
ordinary roads - but if you are prepared to sacrifice some capacity then a
mix of bus sizes is fine.
>From my [armchair] experience, I have concluded that the main
>constraint on capacity is actually the stations, particularly in a CBD
>or the like where large proportions of the pax on a bus are getting on
>or off.
Alan
--
Alan Howes
Associate Transport Planner
Colin Buchanan
4 St Colme Street
Edinburgh EH3 6AA
Scotland
email: alan.howes at cbuchanan.co.uk
tel: (0)131 226 4693 (switchboard)
(0)7952 464335 (mobile)
fax: (0)131 220 0232
www: http:/www.cbuchanan.co.uk/
-----Original Message-----
From:
sustran-discuss-bounces+alan.howes=cbuchanan.co.uk at list.jca.apc.org
[mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+alan.howes=cbuchanan.co.uk at list.jca.apc.
org] On Behalf Of Walter Hook
Sent: 11 September 2006 15:27
To: 'Global 'South' Sustainable Transport'
Subject: [sustran] Re: Busway Operation
Dear Jonathan,
It is quite possible to design a busway with buses entering and leaving the
busway which has as high a capacity as a closed busway. However, it
requires a bus with doors on both sides of the bus, it requires still having
off board ticket collection along the corridor, (which implies some
duplication of ticketing systems) and platform level boarding. It also
requires that the streets where the normal buses operate can handle larger
buses (if they are required). The problem is that this requires replacing a
very large bus fleet, which is very expensive. By the way, no system like
this has yet been designed, to my knowledge, but we are working on just such
a system in Guangzhou.
However, it is important that the system is 'closed' in the sense that not
any bus can use the system, only buses conforming to a required technical
specification and under a specific management authority. By this
definition, this is still a 'closed' system, even if the routes involve some
that operate both on trunk lines and some in mixed traffic.
If you need to see the details for calculating capacity, you can for now go
to a non-linked part of the itdp web site, and check the to operations
chapters, at www.itdp.org/brt_guide.html. I hope to have the fully
formatted new version up in a few weeks, but this will probably have the
information you need.
Walter
-----Original Message-----
From: sustran-discuss-bounces+whook=itdp.org at list.jca.apc.org
[mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+whook=itdp.org at list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf
Of Jonathan E. D. Richmond
Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2006 3:32 AM
To: Sustran List
Subject: [sustran] Busway Operation
If anyone is an expert in busway implementation and operation and can help
with the following question, could they please be in touch with me. The
specific question I am trying to answer is "What is the difference in
capacity and operational viability and efficiency of an open as against a
closed busway." On an open busway, buses may enter and leave at various
points. With a closed busway, buses are isolated on the busway itself, and
do not enter or leave for distribution at teh residential or city centre
end. Thanks! --Jonathan!
-----
Jonathan Richmond
Transport Adviser to the Government of Mauritius Ministry of Public
Infrastructure, Land Transport and Shipping Level 4 New Government Centre
Port Louis Mauritius
1 (617) 395-4360 (for voicemail)
e-mail: richmond at alum.mit.edu http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/
--------------------------------------------------------
IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via
YAHOOGROUPS.
Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join
the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The yahoogroups
version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the real
sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can).
Apologies for the confusing arrangement.
================================================================
SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred,
equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries
(the 'Global South').
--------------------------------------------------------
IMPORTANT NOTE to everyone who gets sustran-discuss messages via
YAHOOGROUPS.
Please go to http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join
the real sustran-discuss and get full membership rights. The yahoogroups
version is only a mirror and 'members' there cannot post to the real
sustran-discuss (even if the yahoogroups site makes it seem like you can).
Apologies for the confusing arrangement.
================================================================
SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred,
equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries
(the 'Global South').
............................................................................
............................................................................
............................................................................
............................................................................
............................................................................
............................................................................
............................................................................
....................................................
DISCLAIMER
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed.
Unless you are the named addressee, or authorised to receive it for the
addressee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you
have received this email in error please contact the sender by replying to
this email.
Any views expressed by an individual within this email which do not
constitute or record professional advice relating to the business of Colin
Buchanan, do not necessarily reflect the views of the company. Any
professional advice or opinion contained within this email is subject to our
terms and conditions of business.
We have taken precautions to minimise the risk of transmitting software
viruses. We do not accept liability for any loss or damage caused by
software viruses.
------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
This e-mail originates from the City of Ottawa e-mail
system. Any distribution, use or copying of this e-mail or
the information it contains by other than the intended
recipient(s) is unauthorized. If you are not the intended
recipient, please notify me at the telephone number shown
above or by return e-mail and delete this communication and
any copy immediately. Thank you.
Le pr?sent courriel a ?t? exp?di? par le syst?me de
courriels de la Ville d'Ottawa. Toute distribution,
utilisation ou reproduction du courriel ou des
renseignements qui s'y trouvent par une personne autre que
son destinataire pr?vu est interdite. Si vous avez re?u le
message par erreur, veuillez m'en aviser par t?l?phone (au
num?ro pr?cit?) ou par courriel, puis supprimer sans d?lai
la version originale de la communication ainsi que toutes
ses copies. Je vous remercie de votre collaboration.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Transit-Prof/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Transit-Prof/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:Transit-Prof-digest at yahoogroups.com
mailto:Transit-Prof-fullfeatured at yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Transit-Prof-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
............................................................................
............................................................................
............................................................................
............................................................................
............................................................................
............................................................................
............................................................................
....................................................
DISCLAIMER
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed.
Unless you are the named addressee, or authorised to receive it for the
addressee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you
have received this email in error please contact the sender by replying to
this email.
Any views expressed by an individual within this email which do not
constitute or record professional advice relating to the business of Colin
Buchanan, do not necessarily reflect the views of the company. Any
professional advice or opinion contained within this email is subject to our
terms and conditions of business.
We have taken precautions to minimise the risk of transmitting software
viruses. We do not accept liability for any loss or damage caused by
software viruses.
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 11:31:54 +0200
From: "Eric Britton" <eric.britton at ecoplan.org>
Subject: [sustran] Motorcycles in cities
To: "'Eric Bruun'" <ericbruun at earthlink.net>, "'Global 'South'
Sustainable Transport'" <sustran-discuss at list.jca.apc.org>
Message-ID: <046901c6d64e$49d24cf0$6501a8c0 at Home>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Dear Eric Bruun and others,
I take your point Eric. But still as an observer, what I am seeing here is
in fact an entirely 'new phenomenon': its newness being a function of the
explosive growth and performance of these vehicles in the traffic stream. I
am by no means trying to suggest that we give up as you say modeling their
performance with the planner's ample and absolutely vital technical toolkit.
But no, I very much believe that in light of the evidence motorized two and
three wheelers do need to be singled out for special attention given our
significant ignorance and demonstrated inability to cope. To my mind we are
right in the middle here of the politics of transport, behind which there
must be a sound vision and understanding. Which by all indications is
greatly lacking today.
Eric Britton
PS. As in all these exchanges Eric, I do not want me to be right. I want US
to be right.
-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Bruun [mailto:ericbruun at earthlink.net]
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 11:23 PM
To: eric.britton at ecoplan.org; Global 'South' Sustainable Transport
Subject: Re: Motorcycles as separate studies
Eric Britton
I don't agree with the approach of segregating motorcycles from other urban
transport issues, unless
they have to do with technology or some specific aspect. Motorcycles should
be analyzed
as part of the transportation network. They have to be modeled along with
autos, bicycles and public
transport to see how mode choice and mode split are influenced by changes in
circumstances. Historically
they have been treated only as a safety problem not as a transportation
mode.
Eric Bruun
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060912/fb88e524
/attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 11:53:10 +0200
From: "Eric Britton" <eric.britton at ecoplan.org>
Subject: [sustran] To decongest 30 cities, Urban Development Ministry
asks American firm for roadmap
To: <Sustran-discuss at jca.apc.org>
Message-ID: <048c01c6d651$4251f400$6501a8c0 at Home>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Erp! I would be most eager to have comments on this article from last week's
Indian Express. It sends shivers down by back (Wilbur Smith??), but what do
I know, eh?
Eric Britton
PS. When Sigmund Freud was trying to exit Vienna for England in the late
thirties, the German officials insisted that he write a letter exonerating
the SS from any bad behaviour in his case. His reply was very short, reading
more or
less: "Letter to anyone who might happen to require the good services of the
SS. They are indeed very good at what they do." (End rough quote)
To decongest 30 cities, Centre asks American firm for roadmap
Maitreyee Handique - http://www.indianexpress.com/story/11223.html
NEW DELHI, August 22:
To decongest the traffic chaos and improve mobility in India's city roads,
the Urban Development Ministry is initiating a study to develop an
infrastructure model to ease traffic congestion.
Wilbur Smith Associates Private Ltd (WSAPL), a subsidiary of the US-based
traffic and transportation planning company, Wilbur Smith Associates, has
been selected to conduct sample surveys in 30 cities, including metros like
Delhi, Mumbai, Bangalore, Hyderabad, Chennai and Kolkata.
The other cities, which were finalised yesterday, include Jaipur, Gangtok,
Shimla, Ahmedabad and Surat.
The report, which will be ready within a year, will cost Rs 1.32 crore. The
company presented its inception report to the ministry this week.
WSPL was selected among at least six bidders through a tender process four
months ago, sources said. The study called Traffic Engineering &
Transportation Planning will focus on creating an infrastructure model based
on its research of different cities and suggest methods of traffic dispersal
and creation of new corridors. The survey will become a base model for
replicating in other cities in the future, sources said.
The methodology will be based on traffic surveys, household interviews, as
well as secondary data and sample interviews of more than 4,000 people in
big cities.
It will consider several parameters such as the shape of the city,
population, the available public transport and per capita income. The study
will also offer suggestions relating to public transportation requirement of
cities.
At present, dependence on public transport system in cities like Mumbai is
over 70 per cent while in Delhi it's about 30-35 per cent. In Chennai, it's
about 40 per cent whereas in towns like Kanpur it's as low as 5 per cent.
The ministry had last conducted a study of India's traffic situation in
1998. This is the first time that the focus is being laid on infrastructure
modelling to address the issue of traffic snarl-ups.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060912/37ecb695
/attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 11:20:44 +0100
From: "Alan Howes" <Alan.Howes at cbuchanan.co.uk>
Subject: [sustran] Re: To decongest 30 cities, Urban Development
Ministry asks American firm for roadmap
To: "Global 'South' Sustainable Transport"
<sustran-discuss at list.jca.apc.org>
Message-ID:
<324DCD7680954F468CF306EE5404F00102930EDD at mail01.cbuchanan.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Eric says Erp, I say Aaagh! Shivery indeed.
I was just thinking on the plane back from Mumbai, the basic trouble with
India wrt transport planning (and plenty other developing
countries) is that it's done by engineers (and I speak as one of those)
whose first reaction to a problem is "what can we build?" (which is where I
part company!).
And this "infrastructure modelling" project seems to be exactly that.
Instead of "how do we manage our way out of this problem?". Which might
include building something - but not necessarily.
And what is "traffic dispersal"? Equals Urban Sprawl? Does not sound like
a TDM strategy.
Though I can't see 1.32 crore getting them far spread over 30 cities.
I hope WB is not paying for this. Though of course, it could be an
excellent study, badly reported ...
Alan
--
Alan Howes
Associate Transport Planner
Colin Buchanan
4 St Colme Street
Edinburgh EH3 6AA
Scotland
email: alan.howes at cbuchanan.co.uk <mailto:alan.howes at cbuchanan.co.uk>
tel: (0)131 226 4693 (switchboard)
(0)7952 464335 (mobile)
fax: (0)131 220 0232
www: http:/www.cbuchanan.co.uk/
________________________________
From:
sustran-discuss-bounces+alan.howes=cbuchanan.co.uk at list.jca.apc.org
[mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+alan.howes=cbuchanan.co.uk at list.jca.apc.
org] On Behalf Of Eric Britton
Sent: 12 September 2006 10:53
To: Sustran-discuss at jca.apc.org
Subject: [sustran] To decongest 30 cities,Urban Development Ministry asks
American firm for roadmap
Erp! I would be most eager to have comments on this article from last week's
Indian Express. It sends shivers down by back (Wilbur Smith??), but what do
I know, eh?
Eric Britton
PS. When Sigmund Freud was trying to exit Vienna for England in the late
thirties, the German officials insisted that he write a letter exonerating
the SS from any bad behaviour in his case. His reply was very short, reading
more or less: "Letter to anyone who might happen to require the good
services of the SS. They are indeed very good at what they do." (End rough
quote)
To decongest 30 cities, Centre asks American firm for roadmap
Maitreyee Handique - http://www.indianexpress.com/story/11223.html
NEW DELHI, August 22:
To decongest the traffic chaos and improve mobility in India's city roads,
the Urban Development Ministry is initiating a study to develop an
infrastructure model to ease traffic congestion.
Wilbur Smith Associates Private Ltd (WSAPL), a subsidiary of the US-based
traffic and transportation planning company, Wilbur Smith Associates, has
been selected to conduct sample surveys in 30 cities, including metros like
Delhi, Mumbai, Bangalore, Hyderabad, Chennai and Kolkata.
The other cities, which were finalised yesterday, include Jaipur, Gangtok,
Shimla, Ahmedabad and Surat.
The report, which will be ready within a year, will cost Rs 1.32 crore. The
company presented its inception report to the ministry this week.
WSPL was selected among at least six bidders through a tender process four
months ago, sources said. The study called Traffic Engineering &
Transportation Planning will focus on creating an infrastructure model based
on its research of different cities and suggest methods of traffic dispersal
and creation of new corridors. The survey will become a base model for
replicating in other cities in the future, sources said.
The methodology will be based on traffic surveys, household interviews, as
well as secondary data and sample interviews of more than 4,000 people in
big cities.
It will consider several parameters such as the shape of the city,
population, the available public transport and per capita income. The study
will also offer suggestions relating to public transportation requirement of
cities.
At present, dependence on public transport system in cities like Mumbai is
over 70 per cent while in Delhi it's about 30-35 per cent. In Chennai, it's
about 40 per cent whereas in towns like Kanpur it's as low as 5 per cent.
The ministry had last conducted a study of India's traffic situation in
1998. This is the first time that the focus is being laid on infrastructure
modelling to address the issue of traffic snarl-ups.
............................................................................
............................................................................
............................................................................
............................................................................
............................................................................
............................................................................
............................................................................
....................................................
DISCLAIMER
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed.
Unless you are the named addressee, or authorised to receive it for the
addressee, you may not copy or use it, or disclose it to anyone else. If you
have received this email in error please contact the sender by replying to
this email.
Any views expressed by an individual within this email which do not
constitute or record professional advice relating to the business of Colin
Buchanan, do not necessarily reflect the views of the company. Any
professional advice or opinion contained within this email is subject to our
terms and conditions of business.
We have taken precautions to minimise the risk of transmitting software
viruses. We do not accept liability for any loss or damage caused by
software viruses.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060912/50baacc7
/attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 14:07:59 +0200
From: "Eric Britton" <eric.britton at ecoplan.org>
Subject: [sustran] Motorcycles in cities
To: <Sustran-discuss at jca.apc.org>, <LotsLessCars at yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <00a601c6d664$1899bcc0$6501a8c0 at Home>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Eric:
These continuous-flow intersections of "global south"
are food for thought. What seems to make them work are
dynamic pathways. Please notice that whenever a rank of traffic forms, the
continuous flow breaks down. Columns of traffic, on the other hand, seems
beneficial. Looks like even a four-wheeled vehicle presents too much of a
rank of traffic to permit continuous flow -- therefore, the preference for
bicycles.
Some research needs to be done to determine if a master-mind is required to
make the process work -- or whether just an individually- decided rule of
behavior is sufficient. I can see from the video that one individual rule
of behavior is to avoid the formation of ranks.
There is probably also the detriment of a vehicle too long. Eight feet is
probably too long. (Three feet is probably too wide.) To increase capacity
per vehicle, looks like the only way to go is up; I would think no higher
than six feet without some sort of retro-jet braking/accelerating system
above the ground system.
To me , the question is : "Can this continuous flow be reduced to
technology?"
best wishes,
Howard Finch
hhowderd at yahoo.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060912/30342623
/attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 19:23:47 -0400
From: Gmenckhoff at worldbank.org
Subject: [sustran] Re: Busway Operation
To: whook at itdp.org
Cc: Transit-Prof at yahoogroups.com, Global 'South' Sustainable Transport
<sustran-discuss at list.jca.apc.org>
Message-ID:
<OF845E8A97.239BC55E-ON852571E6.005F9D45-852571E7.0080855F at worldbank.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
This has been an interesting exchange on busway operations, especially (to
me) this morning's contribution on Ottawa.
Perhaps it is worthwhile differentiating between the systems in North
America, Europe and Australia on one side, and those in developing
countries
on the other. With the latter, (a) passenger volumes are much higher,
(b)
financial resources are more constrained, and (c) bus services are often
provided by private operators without strong Government control. At this
stage, most developing-country experience comes from Latin America. Here
are
some observations from that Region regarding the "open" versus "closed"
operations. In some cases, these complement the points already made by
Walter Hook.
Experience with traditional "open" busways in Brazil, Bogot? (pre-2000)
and
Lima has demonstrated that it is difficult to control trunk-line
operations
under an open system, with bunching of vehicles occurring along the
busway,
which can severely reduce commercial speeds. In the planning of most
recent
BRTs, it was thus concluded that the transfer time penalty incurred under
the
closed system would be more than offset by the higher commercial speed
along
the busways. Even in Santiago and S?o Paulo?s passa-r?pido system, which
operate under an open system, most trunk line buses terminate at outlying
terminals where passengers can transfer to local bus services
(interestingly,
S?o Paulo has central busway platforms, and therefore had to install
doors on
both sides of many buses; Santiago has all platforms on the right side).
In the Latin American context, restricting access to a limited number of
bus
companies has been as much a technical as a political issue. Without a
deliberate control on the number of buses, busways will congest just like
regular streets do when there are too many cars. Bus bunching will
drastically affect commercial speeds and operating efficiency. GPS-aided
operation would be impossible if bus access were not controlled. There
is
little doubt that the high speeds and passenger volumes observed in Latin
American BRTs (over 40,000 pphpd on a 2+2 lane busway in Bogot?, 14,000 -
20,000 pphpd on 1+1 lane busways in Bogot? and elsewhere) could not have
been
reached with open systems.
I agree with Walter that some open operation makes sense, especially with
high-level platforms in the center of the busway, and normal operation in
regular streets. As he and Alan say, this requires buses with high-level
doors on the left, and normal step-down doors on the right. Such systems
are
now being implemented in two Colombian cities, Cartagena and Bucaramanga.
In
both cases, some of the trunk-line buses will go beyond the busway to
serve
corridors with a relatively low passenger demand.
As somebody said: BRT is a flexible concept, not "one size fits all".
Gerhard
"Walter Hook"
<whook at itdp.org>
Sent by:
To
sustran-discuss-bou "'Global 'South' Sustainable
nces+gmenckhoff=wor Transport'"
ldbank.org at list.jca <sustran-discuss at list.jca.apc.org>
.apc.org
cc
Transit-Prof at yahoogroups.com,
'Peter
Lutman' <lutman at globalnet.co.uk>
09/11/2006 11:35 AM
Subject
[sustran] Re: Busway Operation
Please respond to
Global 'South'
Sustainable
Transport
<sustran-discuss at li
st.jca.apc.org>
Your interpretation is correct.
Of course, it depends...
Many of the capacity constraint issues do not become problems until you are
trying to reach capacity levels that developed country cities will rarely
need to reach. Low floor buses tend to hold fewer passengers because the
wheel wells occupy a lot of space inside the bus. The buses also tend to be
more expensive. These issues are not so important in first world cities
like Ottawa. What is the capacity in Ottawa?
You can have pre-paid curb-side boarding stations like in Curitiba, and low
platforms meeting low floor buses, but that means you need two stations
instead of one for each station stop, which generally consumes more right of
way or ends up with very narrow stations, and hence more difficulties in
finding the right of way to put in a passing lane. The lower platform
height constitutes less of a barrier to illegal entry to the station. It is
only marginally more expensive to put doors on both sides of the bus, and
the operational advantages of having the bus stop in the central median
shared by both directions of traffic generally justify the additional bus
expense, but of course there will be exceptions, like if the buses operate
in mixed traffic only on one way streets, or conformity with ADA regs is an
issue, etc.
-----Original Message-----
From: sustran-discuss-bounces+whook=itdp.org at list.jca.apc.org
[mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+whook=itdp.org at list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf
Of Alan Howes
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 10:59 AM
To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport
Cc: Transit-Prof at yahoogroups.com; Peter Lutman
Subject: [sustran] Re: Busway Operation
Must have a look at that website, Walter -
But is your statement that "it requires a bus with doors on both sides of
the bus" based on the premise that buses captive to the system will have
high floors and platform-level loading on the off-side, while the
"intruders" will have low-level boarding on the nearside? This is one way
of doing it, but not the only way. All buses could have low floors and
nearside boarding - the Ottawa Transitway is not closed, and AFAIK the buses
have doors on one side only. (Not sure it has any captive buses though, and
you may not consider it BRT.)
In general, I see what you are driving at and agree - but one of the merits
of BRT is that it is a flexible concept, not "one size fits all". If you
want max capacity then you need mega-buses that will have problems on
ordinary roads - but if you are prepared to sacrifice some capacity then a
mix of bus sizes is fine.
>From my [armchair] experience, I have concluded that the main
>constraint
on capacity is actually the stations, particularly in a CBD or the like
where large proportions of the pax on a bus are getting on or off.
Alan
--
Alan Howes
Associate Transport Planner
Colin Buchanan
4 St Colme Street
Edinburgh EH3 6AA
Scotland
email: alan.howes at cbuchanan.co.uk
tel: (0)131 226 4693 (switchboard)
(0)7952 464335 (mobile)
fax: (0)131 220 0232
www: http:/www.cbuchanan.co.uk/
-----Original Message-----
From:
sustran-discuss-bounces+alan.howes=cbuchanan.co.uk at list.jca.apc.org
[mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+alan.howes=cbuchanan.co.uk at list.jca.apc.
org] On Behalf Of Walter Hook
Sent: 11 September 2006 15:27
To: 'Global 'South' Sustainable Transport'
Subject: [sustran] Re: Busway Operation
Dear Jonathan,
It is quite possible to design a busway with buses entering and leaving the
busway which has as high a capacity as a closed busway. However, it
requires a bus with doors on both sides of the bus, it requires still having
off board ticket collection along the corridor, (which implies some
duplication of ticketing systems) and platform level boarding. It also
requires that the streets where the normal buses operate can handle larger
buses (if they are required). The problem is that this requires replacing a
very large bus fleet, which is very expensive. By the way, no system like
this has yet been designed, to my knowledge, but we are working on just such
a system in Guangzhou.
However, it is important that the system is 'closed' in the sense that not
any bus can use the system, only buses conforming to a required technical
specification and under a specific management authority. By this
definition, this is still a 'closed' system, even if the routes involve some
that operate both on trunk lines and some in mixed traffic.
If you need to see the details for calculating capacity, you can for now go
to a non-linked part of the itdp web site, and check the to operations
chapters, at www.itdp.org/brt_guide.html. I hope to have the fully
formatted new version up in a few weeks, but this will probably have the
information you need.
Walter
-----Original Message-----
From: sustran-discuss-bounces+whook=itdp.org at list.jca.apc.org
[mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+whook=itdp.org at list.jca.apc.org] On Behalf
Of Jonathan E. D. Richmond
Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2006 3:32 AM
To: Sustran List
Subject: [sustran] Busway Operation
If anyone is an expert in busway implementation and operation and can help
with the following question, could they please be in touch with me. The
specific question I am trying to answer is "What is the difference in
capacity and operational viability and efficiency of an open as against a
closed busway." On an open busway, buses may enter and leave at various
points. With a closed busway, buses are isolated on the busway itself, and
do not enter or leave for distribution at teh residential or city centre
end. Thanks! --Jonathan!
-----
Jonathan Richmond
Transport Adviser to the Government of Mauritius Ministry of Public
Infrastructure, Land Transport and Shipping Level 4 New Government Centre
Port Louis Mauritius
1 (617) 395-4360 (for voicemail)
e-mail: richmond at alum.mit.edu http://the-tech.mit.edu/~richmond/
--------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
================================================================
SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred,
equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries
(the 'Global South').
End of Sustran-discuss Digest, Vol 37, Issue 10
***********************************************
-------------------------------------------------------------
The content of this communication is subject to CLSA Legal and Regulatory Notices, which can be viewed at https://www.clsa.com/disclaimer.html or sent to you upon request.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20060913/21ba71cc/attachment.html
More information about the Sustran-discuss
mailing list