COMMENTS

.. as it was pointed out that attachments are seldom read through as evidenced by poor participation here. Also, book is editable better by all praja. Awaiting promised fixing of gyan :-). The title stayed the same as the original author (strangely silent) is blrpraj. Agree that public transportation themselves are a sustainable mode of transportation among the different modes; however, the goal is to ensure that they stay sustainable and provide decent service for an ever-increasing population. Some of your issues have been indicated in the doc (with a little different verbiage).

Maybe all road public transportation threads (this one, bus boards, routing, BIG10, geometry/alignment, BMTC website etc.) can be rolled into one main category called Road Transportation (under broader Transportation category) with appropriate subcategories for each of the topics discussed. Metro (Phase I tracking, Phase II etc. as subcategories), monorail (alignment), HSRL (requirement, cost), traffic violations (problems, enforcement), railways (density, routing) can be 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th broad categories under Transportation. The "high" level goals of seamless connectivity, public convenience (shelters, disabled-friendly etc.), safety and sustainability can be gradually added to the doc for all public modes. Needs a little more consensus / admin guidance. *end of off-topic digression ;-) *

• thumb_up 40 Likes
• · login or register to post comments

@srivathsa

Good points in your post. I am yet to take a complete look at your additions in the attached document. But, a respone to one of your comments -

Your comment -

"Two persons should find it cheaper to take a bus than share a                       motorbike.  3 persons should //find it cheaper to take a bus than a car.        Else why would I leave my car behind.  Now congestion charges are one  way of making sure of this."

My Answer -

One should not evaluate only in terms of monetary operating costs, let's say if it costs 3 persons 100Rs for an office commute by sharing a private car (fuel+maintenance+driver cost etc)but costs Rs 120 or 130 for the same 3 people for the same commute; those 3 persons will take public transport if it can provide significant time savings to the order of reducing the commute time by let's say 50% in airconditioned premium comfort. It is acually equivalent to being driven around in an air conditioned chauffer driven car, only difference being that there are 30 or 35 other people travelling in the same vehicle. Now imagine the wonders that could be done if this premimum bus is moving along at 100kmph on dedicated busways as outlined in the document, segrefated from the local non-PT traffic plying on clogged roads. I am sure there would be an overwhelming majority who would abandon their cars voluntarily in favour of faster transport provided that it is comfortable (and that is where the dependable&predictable  tailor made custom transport services provided on a common underlying infrastructure comes into play as  outlined in the document).

The current problem of  the approach in development is that private vehicle owners are encouraged by widening of roads, building high speed roadways like the NICE road, building flyovers  etc. only to land up with clogged roads in a few months with private as well as PT ending up suffering on the same clogged roads.

• thumb_up 50 Likes
• · login or register to post comments

Was just trying to put some parameters by which we should measure public transport.  Once we have these measures or parameters we then try to get to the how of it, which is what your document lays out.

I lived 6 years in Singapore and did not own a car.  Public transport was quick, accessible, safe, inexpensive and had seamless transfers from bus to train and train to bus.  Pedestrian facilities are out of this world - one can walk in peace inspite of that tropical heat.   Why would I bother to own a car and pay insurance, parking, congestion charges.  If I badly needed one I could take a taxi or rent a car for the weekend.

Srivathsa

• thumb_up 30 Likes
• · login or register to post comments

this premimum bus is moving along at 100kmph on dedicated busways

I think you are right - however, BRT appears to have been abandonned by the authorities for bangalore since they cite insufficient street widths. For this reason, they have embarked on exclusive track rail systems, which become additions to already existing street based systems. Further, weaning people away from private transport requires more than just provision of fast PTs such as BRT. Market dynamics come into play - strong disincentives such as much higher cost/s and longer transit times are vital. The last mile question is also difficult to address when fast PTs are designed. Metro, with feeder bus services is the chosen way by the authorities.

• thumb_up 37 Likes
• · login or register to post comments

My own thinking is that only public transportation systems are sustainable given our growing cities.  So sustainable public transport might be a redundant phrase :)

For me the goals of a good public transport system would be as follows

a. Accessibility - a person should have to walk/cycle/use private transport for no more than X m to reach a public transport facility.  X can be 500m or whatever

b. Cost - should be competitive end to end with a motorbike.  Two persons should find it cheaper to take a bus than share a motorbike.  3 persons should find it cheaper to take a bus than a car.  Else why would I leave my car behind.  Now congestion charges are one way of making sure of this.

c. Speed - we should be able to average 20-22 kmph end to end (combination of walk, bus, Metro)

d. Safety - both users and non-users should not fear risk to life and limb.  We could also include protection from the elements in this.

e. Seamless transfer from one mode to another.  Walk to bus, bus to bus, bus to Metro.  Means good interchange facilities around big Metro stations, good pavements.

Srivathsa

• thumb_up 33 Likes
• · login or register to post comments