[sustran] Re: "So much for green transport."

[Cheryl Deutsch]

Does anyone have a copy of the CRRI report that they could pass along?

Thanks,
Cheryl

On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 7:54 PM, Karthik Rao-Cavale <krc12353 at gmail.com>wrote:

> So essentially the argument is that since Delhi has more car traffic, the
> city cannot have dedicated bus lanes (no point going into the argument of
> whether they constitutes  BRT or not. That debate is futile and
> meaningless.)
>
> But I would like to see the weighting of bus and car trips in CRRI's study.
> Their claims to expertise have no relevance to the value judgments they
> made regarding the assignment of these weights.
>
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 9:51 PM, Alok Jain <alok.priyanka at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > The Delhi BRT Saga continues. Instead of fixing problems with BRT,
> > everybody busy pointing fingers.
> >
> >
> >
> http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/CRRI-explained-why-Ahmedabad-BRT-works/articleshow/15133172.cms?intenttarget=no
> >
> > CRRI explained why Ahmedabad BRT works
> > Rumu Banerjee, TNN | Jul 25, 2012, 03.46AM IST
> > Article
> > Comments
> >
> >
> > inShare
> >
> > Read More:CRRI|Central Road Research Institute|BRTS|Ahmedabad BRT
> > Works|Ahmedabad BRT
> >
> > 0
> >
> >
> >
> > NEW DELHI: In its desperation to save its ill-conceived and poorly
> > executed BRT project, Delhi government is now shooting the messenger. It
> > has not only questioned the study conducted by the Central Road Research
> > Institute (CRRI) but also launched a scathing attack on the institute
> > itself.
> >
> > Falling back on its worn-out argument of a rich-poor divide, it called
> car
> > owners "arrogant" and accused those who conducted the study of ignoring
> bus
> > commuters.
> >
> > But berating car owners will in no way make the public transport system
> > any better - for that governance has to improve — just as launching a
> > tirade against CRRI will not make a dent in the organisation's
> reputation.
> > CRRI director, Dr S Gangopadhyay, told TOI: "CRRI has been researching on
> > road and transport solutions for decades. If anyone has questions about
> the
> > methodology used for the study, we will be happy to answer. Our report
> has
> > used international norms employed in such studies."
> >
> > Gangopadhyay's reaction comes in the wake of the government getting stung
> > by CRRI's finding that "no BRT" was the best option. It has been promptly
> > dubbed "anti-poor" by the government. It may help to recall that the
> agency
> > had been hired by Delhi government on the suggestion of the court, which
> > had rejected the transport department's plan to hire RITES for the study.
> > Incidentally, RITES in a 2004 study of transport solutions for Delhi had
> > recommended 34 BRT corridors. Preparation of the CRRI report, which is
> > based not only on a week-long experimental trial run but also on a series
> > of field surveys, culminated with a simulation exercise. The simulation
> was
> > of the traffic scenario on the 5.8km stretch in 2015 with and without
> BRT,
> > keeping the existing traffic volume as the base, factoring in an annual
> > increase in traffic of 5-7%.
> >
> > The study found that doing away with BRT would result in a decrease of
> 48%
> > in travel time, and a substantial 61% decrease in delay on the stretch.
> > Compare this to the option of continuing with BRT, which would result in
> a
> > further increase in travel time of 13% in 2015 as well as an increase of
> > 15% in delays on the corridor.
> >
> > Sources said the surveys undertaken — including user perception,
> occupancy
> > studies, pedestrian studies, passenger flows and saturation flow studies
> —
> > show that BRT is not working at its optimum at present. Said a transport
> > department official, "There is no denying that there are traffic issues
> on
> > the stretch. Unlike the Ahmedabad BRT, the Delhi BRT is after all an open
> > corridor."
> >
> > It's a point that the CRRI report has also underlined. It observes that
> > the proportion of cars is almost 1.5 times that of Ahmedabad on the motor
> > vehicle lane of Delhi BRT, which contributes to the lower journey speeds.
> > This, says the report, is because the "width of the available MV lane is
> > only 7-8m in either direction of travel". This width is less than the 10m
> > width available for each direction of travel before BRT was conceived.
> >
> > The report adds: "Since the Ahmedabad BRTS is a closed system, the
> > commercial travel speeds are much higher. The bus composition is about 3%
> > of total traffic in both cases. The observed average speed of buses on
> > Ahmedabad BRT section varies between 22-25kmph (CEPT Ahmedabad) which is
> > much higher than that of Delhi BRTS - 13-15kmph)."
> >
> > The last fact seems to have been completely overlooked by Delhi
> > government, which has been citing the success of the Ahmedabad BRT to
> > continue with its floundering experiment.
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------
> > To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit
> > http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss
> >
> > ================================================================
> > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred,
> > equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries
> > (the 'Global South').
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------
> To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit
> http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss
>
> ================================================================
> SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred,
> equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries
> (the 'Global South').
>



-- 
Cheryl Deutsch
Department of Urban Planning
UCLA

President
UAW Local 2865