G1/Old Airport Road - corridor detail, files

up
193 users have liked.
BusPublic Transport

See leading note (below) from earlier discussion, and also the attached files on corridor detailing, and signal cycle times.

-----

Exclusive bus lanes might not be necessary on old Airport rd because :

a) A large initial section (from Command hosp to Domlur) is without intersections & is also devoid of commercial activities (almost negligible number of pedestrians); &

b) The stretch almost upto Marathalli is free of parked vehciles.

A DPR has already been ready to make the road "signal free", but since it involves lot of land that has to be acquired at almost all signal intersections, it might never get done or be done in patches.

Bus priorities would be far more easier to build since it would require minimal land & also, not cause too much disruption. Features necessary are (being reproduced from previous blog) :

a) 4.5m uni-directional bus only underpasses (i/o 2 lane, 7.5m) at Hosmat hospital jn, ASC centre jn, Command hospital jn & Namjoshi rd.

b) 7.5m bi-directional bus only underpasses (i/o 4 lane, 15.0m) at Manipal hospital jn, Wind tunnel rd jn & Suranjandas rd jn.

c) At Lower Agaram rd jn, the proposed all-traffic underpass /flyovers may be built as planned & will not effect bus movement as the jn will become signal free for all traffic.

d) At Domlur bus stand, a 2-lane, 7.5m bi-directional flyover can be built (i/o 4-lane 15.0m flyover).

e) At Kundalahalli gate, a 4.5m uni-directional bus only overpass would be required (i/o 4 lane, 15.0m underpass) for buses headed towards city from ITPB.

To facilitate safe /unhindered entry & exit of buses from underpasses /overpasses, barricades over a short length would be necessary both ways. Misuse can be prevented with sensors fitted on buses that open boom barriers at entry.

Additionally, a 1 km long two-lane (7.5m) overpass to bypass the congestion at Marathalli (incldg the intersection signal) is necessary here since the signal delay is considerable.

AttachmentSize
Old Airport Road - Signal Free DPR.pdf549.98 KB
Signal cycle time peak hours.xls62 KB

Comments

Old Airport Rd - Bus Priority

up
103 users have liked.

WiIl need to run thru the list and provide max time lost at signals and extrapolate opportunity cost

Signal cycle times can only be a rough indicator - the number of such signals is a better indicator for approximation. In peak hours, traffic might have to wait for 2, 3 or more signal changes at some signals due to traffic pileups, whilst at the same time, they may be 'lucky' to arrive at others that are green /clear. Thus, they are unpredictable.

Three ways can be prioritized on one side by having a separate signal phase for buses.

Not clear what this means - a separate signal phase would cause more delay at signals to all traffic, incldg buses.

On the side away from where the street joins up, bus passage can be on priority through a short stretch of a single dedicated slip lane even if passage to other through vehicles is blocked by red signal to allow traffic turning in from the adjoining street. The bus lane (4.5m lane width) would need to be barricaded & some land acquisition /road widening would be involved.

For buses on the other side (same side as road junction), a bus underpass is necessary for buses to escape the traffic signal.

Priority @3way jns

up
105 users have liked.

 For buses on the other side (same side as road junction), a bus underpass is necessary for buses to escape the traffic signal.

For 3 way jns, I was hoping priority can be achieved thru a dedicated signal for the bus instead. But I will take an underpass/overpass anyday. 

Needs too much area

up
109 users have liked.

For arrangements similar to shown in the picture above, a lot of area is necessary, which we probably can never have. Even the extent of land acquisition as indicated in the DPR seems somewhat unrealistic as some of the areas are very large.

If land acquisition is minimized just only to the extent required for offering free pass to buses at traffic signals (with under /overpasses /slip lanes), it might have far more chances of succeeding.

DPR - Chptrs 12 /13

up
111 users have liked.

SB,

Any chance of getting chapter nos.12 & 13 (Photos /Dwgs) of the DPR from Vinay ? We will need these to work on bus priorities.

paging Vinay S, will call you

up
113 users have liked.

Vinay - not sure if Rithesh had picked up the drawings (which were too large to be scanned) from you. Will have to figure a way of scanning it in parts and upload here for all to see and detail.

cutting it into 3 sections

up
139 users have liked.

May be divide and conquer can help, can see G1 route as 3 distinct sections.

  • G1a: CBD to Domlur - 7 choke points?
  • G1b: Domlur to Marathahalli - 7 again?
  • G1c: Marathahalli to Kadugodi depot - 5 points?

So total 19 candidates for bus priority?

Javascript is required to view this map.

3 way once more

up
97 users have liked.

 For arrangements similar to shown in the picture above, a lot of area is necessary, which we probably can never have

Ignore the 3 lanes on the left of the pic. Only the 4th lane from the left is needed to be done for a 3 way bus priority to cross the signal. The same done on both sides can serve a 4 way signal jump for buses. Steel bridges can bring the cost down even further.

If somebody uses G1 they can

up
107 users have liked.

If somebody uses G1 they can clock the travel time and time at junctions for us. else we make a trip soon during peak hours. 

SB-> Your CDB to domlur segment has one ways. A route marking will be more appropriate to identify the junctions. I know the junctions but dont know the route G1 takes

Bus priority route

up
103 users have liked.

SB: it's better to suggest priorities along the route past Kundalahalli gate towards Hoodi rather than continue towards Varthur because traffic /buses are excessive along that route (going towards ITPL).

IDS: at T-junctions, in addition to a 4.5m over /underpass on one side, an additional (slip) lane for buses is also necessary on the other side for buses to skip signals & to allow sufficient room for general /mixed traffic.

agree about taking Brookfields road

up
96 users have liked.

Sure Naveen, just drew out G1 route there, but I think we should take

  • Brookfield road from Marathalli onwards (335 E route)
  • On the ohter end, stretch beyond Brigade road to Corporation circle

G1 is the rough route, after field trip to see road widths, and data on real measured traffic, we may suggest changes.

Bus Priority

up
139 users have liked.

Most of the time, private vehicles are seen on the road as we do not have better last mile connectivity to the main road where these public transport system plies. Hence while we make efforts for the city to be PT favourable, parallely we need to work for better feeder services or else this will also become another project among the umpteen unsuccesful we have in the city. Better feeder services/ last mile connectivity will sustain the PT projects.

Manju George

  Better feeder services/

up
126 users have liked.

  Better feeder services/ last mile connectivity will sustain the PT projects.

Yes we all know. But we have to take examples and draw solutions so we can take it to the authorities. Otherwise we will continue to make generic statements. We have to be prepared to walk upto 500mtrs on both O & D side though.

feeder services

up
96 users have liked.

@ Manju G - For discussions on feeder services, check here

Muralidhar Rao

Brigade rd /Corpn circle

up
103 users have liked.

stretch beyond Brigade road to Corporation circle --- I think bus priorities here will be very difficult within built up /CBD areas.

Due to one ways, the route to Corpn from Brigade rd (Vellara jn) is via Richmond.rd-RRMRoy.rd. On return, it can either be via Kasturba.rd-Mallya.rd-Residency.rd-Magrath.rd or Kasturba.rd-MG rd-Trinity.rd..

I think the DPR has also left out Vellara Jn, Mother Teresa /D'Souza Circle without improvements for the same reason. Further, Metro (in ph.2) is proposed to be routed past Vellara jn.

It should suffice to start bus priorities only from ASC centre onwards.

About last mile options...

up
97 users have liked.

Manju George: everything is inter-linked ... [moved out, see here]

Back to the topic, how about a test ride on G1?

up
130 users have liked.

To get some real feel for the project, and to attract more volunteers on it, how about a test ride on G1?

If 20-30 of us can sign up for a test ride to evaluate the corridor, we can try request BMTC for a minibus on G1 route for the meeting - so that we can stop and evaluate a few junctions in detail.

I strongly agree that all

up
82 users have liked.

[mods - no off topic comments please, may be deleted. moved here]

Manju George

BPS at 3-way jn

up
94 users have liked.

Here's one suggestion for BPS at a 3-way (or for that matter even a 4-way) jn. This suggestion assumes a 4-lane road (2 in each direction) built to IRC specifications or more (as seen on sections of Old Airport Road).

This suggestion conceptualizes a steel overpass at major intersections that will perform the dual task of providing priority at signals while serving as an aboveground BRT/BPS station. The USP though lies in it's use of a single (shared) central bus lane to access the overpass which could be achieved as under:

  1. Reduce width of all travel lanes creating a 1-lane wide median. For non-BPS sections, this median will be similar to the section of ORR adjoining HRBR layout (i.e. vehicle free).
  2. At a design-appopriate distance from the intersection, the median would permit entry by BPS buses (using any access controlling device; RFID gates, boom barriers etc.) to 'climb' to the station (See Fig 1; northbound lanes). This bus gate/barrier could also use a vehicle-sensor to determine priority for ascending/descending buses.
  3. Once abovegound, buses can access stations (Fig 2.). To exit the station, bus barriers (gates) would ensure a single bus (at a time) on the lane-wide ramp. As the bus descends, appropriate lane-striping and merge signs (Fig 1: thick arrows indicate direction that sign faces) can be used to merge bus back into traffic (Fig 1; southbound lanes).  In addition to functioning as 'stations' this structure could function as a ped-skywalk over Old-Airport Rd (Fig 2.).
  4. At ground level (Fig 3.), the area under the station could be used to create turning refuges for right-turning traffic (Fig 3.).

Other design considerations could include differently coloured lanes (as seen on operational BRT/BRTS worldwide), hard medians to separate BPS from traffic lanes) etc.

Advantages

  • Does not require buses with right-hand side doors
  • More square-footage available for stations and an easy interface with feeder buses.

Constraints

  • The success of this system depends strongly on reducing the number of intersections (i.e. by closing junctions that do not function as stations)
  • Conflicts with street traffic while merging back in.

----

 

TM

BPS at 3-way jn (v2)

up
102 users have liked.

Or it can be done using a variant of the Leeds Superbus way (more here)

---

TM

 stretch beyond Brigade road

up
129 users have liked.

 stretch beyond Brigade road to Corporation circle

I actually agree with this. I travelled from Vellara along Richmond road & return along residency road and this is very much possible, with vehicle actuated bus priority signals for left turns all along. at least 3 small roads leading into shantinagar can be closed. Magrath road is undergoing junction modification. The island jn there can be used but the bus lane will have to cross over to left lane magrath road. 

Contra-flow lane: RRM Roy Rd

up
96 users have liked.

On return, it can either be via Kasturba.rd-Mallya.rd-Residency.rd-Magrath.rd or Kasturba.rd-MG rd-Trinity.rd.

Or a contra-flow lane on RRM Roy Rd? Adding one to Richmond Rd too would be awesome but harder to conceptualize with businesses on either side?

Javascript is required to view this map.

---

TM

started a project wiki

up
97 users have liked.

Transmog, IDS, Naveen - note a project wiki. Can keep copying summary/conclusions from project posts to it.

http://praja.in/en/gyan/b...

Vellara along Richmond road

up
119 users have liked.

this is very much possible, with vehicle actuated bus priority signals for left turns all along.

Not clear - this is a straight, one-way stretch. Where are the left turns for buses along this road ?

at least 3 small roads leading into shantinagar can be closed. Magrath road is undergoing junction modification. The island jn there can be used but the bus lane will have to cross over to left lane magrath road

Let's not be too sure of this. The area has many schools, offices, etc. & since the roads are one ways, access will become too difficult if small roads are closed.

Two addnl lanes reqd at all Jns

up
98 users have liked.

TM - single-lane ramps at signals for buses in both directions will result in frequent conflicts between buses in opposite directions (the volume of buses is very high along this route). This can possibly be resolved with boom barriers /signals to stop ascent of a bus when the lane is in use by bus traffic from the opposite direction as mentioned by you, but then, the junction will again become "signalized" for buses & will result in delays to the flow of buses. Thus, two lanes would be necessary.

For T-junctions, a single lane under /overpass on one side & a separate slip lane on the other side would be necessary as shown on the sketch above. Both can be planned on the kerb side to help with merging /demerging after & before the traffic junction, particularly since bus stops are normally located just before or immediately after a junction.


For a '+' (4-way) junction, a two-lane bi-directional under /overpass would be necessary if built at the median, or two single lane under /overpasses can be built separately at kerb sides, as shown on the sketch above - this option is much better since buses can flow more easily from bus stops directly to the ramps without changing lanes.

Some roads will need closure

up
103 users have liked.

 Where are the left turns for buses along this road ?

Left for other vehicles not buses. It is perfectly feasible to dedicate left lane on richmond road for buses, this will mean either overpass or signals for all vehicles taking a turn into lanes like the road next to silver wok etc. Some of these are closeable and others like the one near Baldwin girls will need a vehicle actuated signal to stop left turning traffic when buses arrive at the junction. Vehicle actuated signals can be used for most 3 ways.

Let's not be too sure of this.

I am very sure, allow me to demonstrate when we do the field trip, and then we talk

Bus lane on richmond rd

up
125 users have liked.

It is perfectly feasible to dedicate left lane on richmond road for buses -- I am very sure

A bus lane can be carved on any road, no doubt. One also needs to weigh & check if there are substantial benefits, whilst also considering the possible inconveniences. This apart, there are future plans -- Metro ph.2 is scheduled to go past Vellara jn & during the construction, it is likely that the intersection/s will become better streamlined with perhaps a flyover that is likely to span past some of the turn offs to right & left (an earlier attempt to build a flyover had been abandonned due to possibility of Metro).

Buses move in different directions when approaching the existing Richmond circle flyover. They either take the left lanes to turn left towards Lalbagh rd or take the right lanes when proceeding straight towards corporation or turning right on to Residency rd. Some take the flyover. Hence, placing a bus lane on the left (or anywhere, for that matter) does not fit in as buses will have to exit out from the lane well in advance & cross traffic lanes, thus disrupting traffic on the moving lanes.

Even if a bus lane is placed on the left for only left turrning buses, how much time will closing these points save for buses when traffic from these lanes turn left anyway ? What about various commercial establishments along the left which have entry gates facing the rd ? What about traffic that has to turn into these roads from Richmond rd - will they also not need vehicle actuated signals ? Is there really a need for a bus lane along a one-way that has no traffic signals at these turn offs ?

Let us concentrate on old airport rd for the present (from Trinity jn onwards), since there are no plans for this rd.

Little more richmond rd

up
98 users have liked.

 What about various commercial establishments along the left which have entry gates facing the rd ?

This is one main reason for choosing to have barricaded corridors in the middle and not on the side of the road. Even if we dont barricade left lane physically it would still be good to have left turn lanes marked adjacent to the bus lanes and put up signals for left turning traffic so they learn to leave the bus lane alone and give priority as we intend. This would apply where we have bandwidth for dedicated lanes & other traffic doesnt need to share.

Typically non sharable lanes can be colored red, while sharable bus lanes can carry a BUS LANE sign or some such symbol. We should propose that the bus lane allow HOV/carpool vehicles, except they dont take the bus signal bypass and wait like rest of the private vehicles at the signals. Camera based enforcement has to be made compulsory.

There are 4 lanes on richmond road. Extreme left can be marked for bus and the number of bus stops increased from 1 along the entire stretch to 2. 2nd left lane can be for the left turns into these streets. 

Buses move in different directions when approaching the existing Richmond circle flyover.

The only reason for that is because they can. There is no physical barricade to prevent the left most lane from turning into Residency road. One only needs to install a separate signal for the bus lane to turn right. 2 left slip lanes near the flyover can be used for buses going left to KH road, straight to corporation & right to residency. KH road private vehicles should be asked to take the flyover, straight thru & right turning private traffic can use the right slip lane under the flyover

Is there really a need for a bus lane along a one-way that has no traffic signals at these turn offs ?

It about asking other traffic to leave this lane alone as the name bus priority suggests. This is enhanced when traffic turning left need to wait for the approaching bus in the adjacent lane to pass by before they can turn left. The left stops being free for private vehicles when bus is around.

Let us concentrate on old airport rd for the present (from Trinity jn onwards)

Yes, but if richmond road can work we can ask G1 to take this detour. It will serve a good connect to certain other direction buses as well. These roads are wide enough to complete the priority and also services a little bit more of the CBD.

Some 3 ways I know

up
122 users have liked.

I thinks, there is enough land at Command hospital, Wind tunnel, Suranjan Das, Yamalur, T junctions to do the below 3 way with median adjustments. With vehicle actuated signals we can suggest the option of doing this on the surface as well.

Koschan

up
132 users have liked.

Should G1/Bus priority go via Trinity circle metro stop from Mayo hall instead of taking Commissariat road & lower agaram road towards airport road? Its a trade off between connecting the Garuda mall/Home stop & a captive metro station.

Better to take up one at a time

up
118 users have liked.

We should propose that the bus lane allow HOV/carpool vehicles, except they dont take the bus signal bypass and wait like rest of the private vehicles at the signals....Left can be marked for bus.....2nd left lane can be for the left turns into these streets.

First of all, we are not sure if bus priorities at signals on old airport rd will be bought by the authorities as a pilot project & whether it can be made to work beneficially. I suggest we go one step at a time as I mentioned, & not conclude what needs to be proposed for Richmond rd right away. For now, let us limit ourselves to old airport rd, which we know does not have pending proposals (other than signal-free project). We do not know what the Metro's ph-2 DPR proposes for Vellara jn. With developments slated there, I don't think we are in any position to propose what can be done.

Vehicle flow patterns (on Richmond rd) are also complex & assigning a second lane for left turning traffic may not work since the lane will have to be used initially by vehicles emerging from the smaller rds on the left before they turn right (or head straight). Since Langford & Residency rds are one ways in the opposite direction, vehicles turn into the smaller rds from these rds & join Richmond rd for short lengths before turning off again (to either right or left). This is particularly true during school rush hour times & during peak hours. This was why I had suggested median bus lanes on Residency /Richmond rd with exclusive use of the richmond circle flyover for buses since it offers possibilities for better solutions, but Mr Subramanya (BBMP commisioner then) had doubts if even this would work as the lane, if left open, would be transgressed too frequently with criss-crossing traffic. If closed or provided with boom barriers, it would immediately lead to pile ups behind stopped vehicles.

I thinks, there is enough land at Command hospital, Wind tunnel, Suranjan Das, Yamalur, T junctions

Wind tunnel & Suranjandas rd T-jns have very long traffic pile ups during rush hours. The signal-free DPR has thus recommended bi-directional underpasses, even though these are T-jns since traffic volumes are really huge. Further, there is LBS nagar rd immediately past Suranjandas rd - both will need to be addressed & land acquisition is inevitable.

Bob the builder

up
128 users have liked.

 we are not sure if bus priorities at signals on old airport rd will be bought by the authorities as a pilot project & whether it can be made to work beneficially

You will never finish a report like this :) Of course it will work beneficially. We just have to say how.

With developments slated there, I don't think we are in any position to propose what can be done.

We can! Its called options. Surface options with vehicle actuated signalling, overpass/underpass options for jumping the signals.

but Mr Subramanya (BBMP commisioner then) had doubts if even this would work as the lane, if left open, would be transgressed too frequently with criss-crossing traffic.

Of course, and I am sure you knew that. There are a hundred ways of making this work, you just tried one.

Aim for what may work

up
90 users have liked.

Of course it will work beneficially. We just have to say how.

Like I said earlier, do not be so sure when no testing has been done - it's called "theory", with no practice. Road dividers, barricades & traffic cameras were being broken even on old airport rd & IRR. For traffic cameras, they found a solution by placing them out of reach high on lamp-posts, but road dividers are still being tampered with & are being rebuilt by BBMP /traffic cops every now & then. In Pune, bicycle lanes adjacent BRT routes have turned to parking lots !

Pls re-read what I stated (whether it can be made to work beneficially). Can we be sure that boom barriers will not be broken /damaged or removed at night ? If & where they remain, can they be made to work unattended ? Are we sure other vehicles will not follow buses to use the under /over passes or bypass lanes ? Are we sure no one will steal the sensors from buses & fit it to their own vehicles ? Are we sure bus drivers won't sell them & claim that they were stolen ?

It's better to make a start with suggestions that have some chance of implementation & follow up later for possible success eventually rather than make lofty proposals without regard to realities since they are likely to be ignored by the authorities. Practically making them work can be real hard since numerous unforeseen problems are likely to crop up, some of which are quoted above.

We can! Its called options. Surface options with vehicle actuated signalling, overpass/underpass options for jumping the signals.

I suggest you re-read my earlier post/s again. Metro is proposed to ramp down to UG on hosur rd before Vellara jn & a traffic flyover will most likely be planned for Vellara jn. Flyover ramps would thus span some 200mtrs past the jn on Richmond rd, negating the need for bus priority for the jn since the signal will not stop through traffic along Richmond rd. The remaining length wud be some 500mtrs upto the next flyover (Richmond circle). So, where is the need for vehicle actuated signalling, overpass/underpass options for jumping signals along this short distance when there are no traffic signals there to begin with ? In any case, the authorities are going to maintain status quo for Vellara jn & Richmond rd since the metro is to be routed past it, for sure.

There are a hundred ways of making this work

Having worked on this before, I can say that there are very limited options & not a hundred as you claim. In fact, Richmond rd is perhaps one of the most difficult stretches in the city due to the presence of so many schools. Traffic police efforts some years ago to get children to use school buses more also came to nought, though it had been well supported by school principals. I had also looked at a complete re-routing of traffic (changing the direction of one-ways), but they threw up even more issues everywhere.

Should G1/Bus priority go via Trinity circle metro stop from Mayo hall instead of taking Commissariat road & lower agaram road towards airport road?

To begin with, I think we should concentrate on bus priorities for all city buses only on the old airport rd & not include CBD or the complete G1 bus route, since we risk the proposal getting ignored if we recommend bus lanes & priorities within CBD without fully understanding traffic flows & implications of changes. It is less difficult to make the selected pilot route a success with priorities only at signals. If this succeeds, then we can proceed further with less risk & better acceptance due to success.

 a traffic flyover will most

up
95 users have liked.

 a traffic flyover will most likely be planned for Vellara jn. 

So, you intend for the bus priority roll out at vellara to wait for this flyover to complete? Or would you rather they build future plans around the bus priority?

I can say that there are very limited options & not a hundred as you claim

It was a figure of speech, I gave you one more option. 

To begin with, I think we should concentrate on bus priorities for all city buses only on the old airport rd & not include CBD or the complete G1 bus route, since we risk the proposal getting ignored if we recommend 

Ok! I am going to let it be. But your pessimism is killing really.

Flow with the tide

up
139 users have liked.

So, you intend for the bus priority roll out at vellara to wait for this flyover to complete? Or would you rather they build future plans around the bus priority?

Whatever is suggested must be in sync with what plans are already in the pipeline, else it will most certainly be discarded. Why did we choose old airport rd for bus priority ? Precisely for this reason, though there are many other rds that could have been used.

Let's be realistic. They are not going to plan the Metro route based on bus priority that we propose, they have postponed a flyover at Vellara for the Metro, they are not going to build under /overpasses only to break them up later for metro construction. Given these, how can we imagine that they will change their plans because we propose bus priority ?

It's better to work on congestion pricing within CBDs, for now. Everything will not work as well as Commuter rail did (CR was long overdue anyway). We can work on bus priority within CBDs & elsewhere once it has been demonstrated successfuly on a pilot corridor. This way, the risk of rejection /failure is a lot lesser.

 Given these, how can we

up
91 users have liked.

 Given these, how can we imagine that they will change their plans because we propose bus priority ?

But if you put a vehicle actuated signal instead its easier to dismantle no?

Only sensors how ?

up
98 users have liked.

But if you put a vehicle actuated signal instead its easier to dismantle no?

Can you describe in more detail how you propose to use only sensors without grade separation to accord bus priority at vellara jn ? Long strips of land will also need to be acquired on the southern sides (both east & west) for bus lanes. And then you would add a signal phase for only buses, right ? Well, I didn't buy this earlier because adding a phase means more delay to all traffic, incldg buses, not to mention that the signal cycle time there is already one of the longest in the city (245 seconds, or over 4 minutes).

 Well, I didn't buy this

up
128 users have liked.

 Well, I didn't buy this earlier because adding a phase means more delay to all traffic

As you mention the IIMB-Nagwara line passes from Dairy circle thru Vellara circle to MG road & Shivajinagar. So it would come along the widened Hosur-Lashkar road, elevated. The Hosur lashkar road widening also was proposed to have underpasses including one at vellara jn. Regardless of these development there are only the following options for the richmond road traffic going across vellara towards richmond circle

1) it would not be a flyover since metro will pass above and even if it was a flyover the bus can use it to bypass the signal

2) It goes below as an underpass: In this case we dont have to worry about signals like the above

3) It goes on the surface while hosur lashkar is made as an underpass in which case since richmond road is one way the signals will go and you can put a selective vehicle detection signal (SCOOT/MOVA) to stop the left turning traffic when the bus comes along.

Cut it into 3 stretches

up
112 users have liked.

It is best to cut this into 3 sub-projects, because of the distinct types of lobbying/convincing/arguing required:

  • G1a - CBD to Domlur/IRR. Challenges - things may be getting planned for some junctions, so govt/babus/agencies may be touchy about things.
  • G1b - IRR to ORR - Routing options are limited as we know radial corridors (Old Airport Road) have limited options in this section. Should be the easiest stretch to bat for.
  • G1c - beyond ORR - you will have multiple route options to debate and contend with. Like for G1, there are two ways to reach Hope Farm from Kundalahalli.

When two people on the project can argue this much, imagine things with govt/agencies/babus. If the focus is too much on the route and "the one best" suggestion, risks of strong disagreements are higher (now you know why BRT or Bus priority has not happened yet). But

  1. if the focus is on "these are the options", here are 1 or 2 patterns possible for 3-way signals, here are for 4 way signals and so on,
  2. and G1 route is used more as an example (G1b seems best suited to convince people for experiments)

... we can expect better progress. Remember, public lobbying is about selling the concept, not the finished product :)

Bottomline

  • BPS is more important than routing talk.
  • Divide G1 into 3 parts, and conquer each separately to anticipate the different type of arguments for each.
  • And last, we require a sponsor who can get some experts to vouch for BPS, or simply guide us with their knowledge. We may not have all of the best ideas.

I will go looking for sponsors. Naveen, IDS, Transmog - suggest you divide G1 a/b/c amongst yourself for detailing.

And others watching and reading this 50th or so comment, you do have the interest, please join in. Don't be spooked by tech talk or arguments here. Just join in and enrich. Analysis requires first principles based thinking. There are no published books or degrees or courses on the subject of Bus Priority for Indian-condition roads, so you or any other "certified" expert is more or less on the same footing.

To members of the project - let us meet soon. Was hoping for some Metro bashers and BRTS backers to join the project. But so far, looks like they aren't the project type.

Example proposal

up
97 users have liked.

Read this for ASJ's bus priority proposal for pune. So a similar document with G1 as an example addressing all 3 segments need to be put forward. Which segment administrators will implement and wether they will choose a different corridor is upto them. The treatment of interestcions need to be similar.

Had almost forgotten about this thread. Refresher link

Here is another proposition for a short stretch in NZ

Bus lane infringements

up
100 users have liked.

Apart from static cameras along the route at strategic points the G1 buses can also carry bus mounted cameras to note infringement and ticketing. This can be integrated with the current TMC systems.

Here is one such solution

London recognized that manual enforcement of bus-only lanes is costly and only partially effective, as it would be prohibitively expensive to employ the number of enforcement officers necessary to patrol the extensive bus-only lane network. Instead, the London turned to video enforcement.

The initial video enforcement technology utilizes bus cameras and cameras mounted along bus-only lanes. The buses have twin video cameras. One records general roadway conditions, to establish circumstances relating to an offense. A second clearly records the license plates of the cars in the lane. Each image is recorded to a single VHS tape where time and date are added, along with vehicle location. In addition to the bus mounted cameras, there are more than 110 cameras along the bus-only network

Source

List of stations (incomplete)

up
97 users have liked.

How does this sound for a preliminary list of stations for G1a and G1b (not too familiar with the G1c segment)?

  1. Mayo Hall
  2. Trinity Circle
  3. Cambridge Rd/ O. Airpt Rd jn (move from: Command Hospital)
  4. Domlur (needs interface with TTMC)
  5. Kodihalli Main Rd
  6. Murugeshpalya
  7. Suranjan Das Rd (or Namjoshi Rd or both)
  8. O. Airpt Rd/ORR jn
  9. Kundalahalli Gate

Remember, public lobbying is about selling the concept, not the finished product :)

spot on... it might take a little more work, but routing and proposed BPS technique can always include different options... including a "no-build".

----

TM

TM - Complete list of Stns

up
125 users have liked.

TM - The complete list of stops along the chosen priority route (Brigade rd to ITPL) is quoted below. This route is neither the G1 route nor the 335E route, but a track that has a very large volume of buses, particularly during peak hours : 

  1. St.Patricks Complex (Brigade rd /terminus)
  2. Mayo Hall
  3. Trinity Circle (near Metro Stn)
  4. Command Hospital
  5. Domlur
  6. Kodihalli (Manipal Hosp)
  7. Murugeshpalya (ISRO)
  8. Konena Agrahara
  9. HAL Main Gate (Suranjan Das Rd)
  10. HAL Kalyan Mantap
  11. Borewell
  12. Marathalli PO
  13. Marathalli Jn (ORR)
  14. Spice Garden
  15. Kundalahalli Gate
  16. BEML Layout
  17. AECS Layout
  18. CMRIT College
  19. Kundalahalli Colony
  20. Graphite India
  21. SAP Labs
  22. IGate (Perot systems)
  23. KTPO
  24. Vaidehi (Depot 18)
  25. Satya Sai Hosp
  26. ITPL Back Gate
  27. Palandua Agrahar Gate
  28. ITPL Main Gate

 Myself Naveen & Ritesh did a

up
105 users have liked.

 Myself Naveen & Ritesh did a quick tour of the western part of G1a segment.

Click on photo below to view entire set

Supporting Laws for BPS

up
117 users have liked.

Section 115 provides legal cover to the authorities to provision a bus lane and restrict movement on it. Since this restriction will be for more than a month a gazzete notification will be necessary. 

For enforcement on infringement, If appropriate signboards are provided along the route at the right places then Section 119 can be used in conjunction with towing charges under 122/127(ii) + fine under 201.

Section 115: In the interest of public safety or convenience or because of the nature of any road or bridge, movement of certain types of vehicles can be restricted or prohibited. If the period of restriction is less than one month, no notification is necessary.
Section 119: Every driver shall drive the vehicle in conformity with the traffic sign boards and shall comply with all the directions given to him by any Police Officer for the time being engaged in the regulation of traffic.
Section 122: Leaving a vehicle at rest on any public place in such a way as to cause or likely to cause danger, obstruction or undue inconvenience to other road users is an offence. Such vehicles can be towed away by Police and charged for towing as well as this offence.
Section 127:
i) If a vehicle is left unattended on a public place for more than 10 hours or found parked in a No Parking Zone, it can be ordered to be towed away by a jurisdictional Police Officer in uniform
ii) If a vehicle is parked unattended in such a manner as to create a traffic hazard, it can be immediately removed by towing as ordered by any jurisdictional Police Officer
iii) The charges of towing away have to be paid by the owner besides any other penalty
Section 201: Whoever keeps a disabled vehicle on any public place in such a manner so as to cause impediment to the free flow of traffic, shall be liable for penalty upto to fifty rupees per hour so long as it remains in that position.

Reference implementation

up
114 users have liked.

Nice reference implementation here

Fundamental Qs

up
106 users have liked.

Couple of fundamental things that I had a question about that we should probably think through now (projected members and others):

  • Do we visualize our proposed BPS facilities (especially wrt lanes and priority) as BPS-bus specific (i.e. G1) or would they be used by all BMTC buses on the same route (e.g. 335E in shared sections)?
  • On a related topic are the number of stations going to match the number of stops on a 'regular' bus?

----

TM

 BPS-bus specific (i.e. G1)

up
98 users have liked.

 BPS-bus specific (i.e. G1) or would they be used by all BMTC buses on the same route

Would be used by all BMTC buses on the route.

On a related topic are the number of stations going to match the number of stops on a 'regular' bus?

We can take this opportunity to propose additional stops if need be or relocate existing stops a little if it gets in the way of BPS. But we woulldnt necessarily focus on doing a survey to justify or mandate those stops. 

Signal bypasses can be for all buses

up
106 users have liked.

TM :

BRT (with continuous physically separated lanes) does not work efficiently if all buses start using the busways due to pileup of buses, but if painted lanes are used (without physical separation from other lanes), all buses can use the same since they can exit the lanes as necessary to avoid pile ups. Painted lanes are in use extensively in London, though intrusion by other vehicles does take place despite all the supervision, sometimes.

What we are proposing are mostly bypasses at traffic signals (wherever possible) since most of the delay for bus transit occurs here - painted or dedicated lanes will possibly be only in CBDs (G1a above). Bus-exclusive infrastructure (at signals) will typically be a few hundred metres long, thus allowing use for all buses since the possibility of pileups is minimal, though it may happen, sometimes.

I think most of the bus stops are clear of signals, except for a few (Domlur-towards Marathalli, HAL Main Gate, Kundalahalli Gate, etc). Such bus stops may will have to be moved, or as suggested by you, could even be on bus flyovers. I think we may have to resort to this at HAL Main gate & at Marathalli since bus flyovers will need to span over long distances.

335E

up
106 users have liked.

 I think 335E is a very popular route extensively used since it connects to Majestic and further connections are easy as compared to G1 which does 3/4 th of  335E. Connectivity to  starting point is  poor compared to 335E.

Earlier Big 10 frequencies used to be very high. Not so now. 335E frequency is high due due to demand. Bus priority should be for all the buses to make it fruitful.

 The busways of Almere

up
95 users have liked.

 The busways of Almere makes good reading

Holland & India - poles apart

up
95 users have liked.

IDS,

Nice writeup /videos & excellent techniques used to ensure free flow with green lights for buses.

Actually, any technology can work well for bus priority if traffic & pedestrian discipline is good. It's so terrible (& sad) that in India, such excellent depictions can just only be reference material, unfortunately!

BPS for 6-lane roads...

up
117 users have liked.

On sections of G1 where 6-lanes are available (...are there any?) one way to get BPS could be by:

  1. Designating the last 200m or so (before a signal) of the left-most lane as a combined BPS/left-turn only lane.
  2. Borrowing an idea from the earlier discussion on the BDA junction, this lane could then split into a left-turn only and a barrier-protected (thick black line in figure below) BPS lane permitting buses to continue straight on.
  3. On completing passenger un/loading BPS buses stop at a vehicle-actuated signal. This signal could be pre-programmed to interrupt the regular cycle of lights and give priority access to buses.
  4. BPS passengers use the BPS station (red box) and the regular ped-xing to get across.
  5. The southbound lanes achieve BPS simply by designating the last 200m as a (barrier-protected) BPS lane.

One advantage of this system, is that the requirement of land for widening is anistropic. In the figure below, when the northbound lanes (south of the intersection) need additional land, the southbound lanes maintain existing width. By mirroring the shared-lane solution (illustrated here for northbound lanes) at a 4-way junction, when the southbound lanes (north of the intersection) need additional land the northbound lanes maintain existing width.

----

TM

...and BPS for 4-lane roads

up
111 users have liked.

Revisiting an earlier suggestion by Naveen for BPS on 4-lane roads...What if we were to combine this idea (of an extended at-grade bus bay) with a sort-of prestaging of signals and achieve BPS by:

  1. Moving signals back by about 20m (see comparison of Current vs Proposed arrangement below) and;
  2. Creating an extended bus-bay (potentially 100-150m long) that serves as an access-controlled ( (thick black line in figure below)) BPS lane. This bus-bay would terminate right after the repositioned signal allowing buses to bypass backed-up traffic at the signal.
  3. As with the 6-lane BPS suggestion above, after un/loading passengersa at bus stops (red dots in figure below) , buses stop at a specialized vehicle-actuated BPS-only signal that accords priority by interrupting the regular cycle of lights. With a little fussing over the details of signal-timing, buses would be able to re-enter the flow of traffic unhindered and continue through the intersection.  

As with the 6-lane BPS suggestion above, this situation too benefits from a reduced requirement of land. Additionally, at 4-way junctions, right turns across the flow of traffic can be made since no other traffic is in the intersection. Conflicts between buses making right-turns and those going straight through the intersection can easily be minimized with simple driver training. Straightforward "Yield to straight traffic" rules that a lot of us are familiar with (but are sadly un-enforceable in Indian driving conditions) are much easier to teach to (and enforce) with the limited number of bus-drivers driving these routes. This also applies to the 6-lane BPS suggestion.

The one drawback that I see though is a further backing-up of traffic by moving signals back. Also, 'bus-bay' length needs to be designed keeping in mind peak traffic loads.

----

TM

TM, Yr proposals above noted.

up
113 users have liked.

TM,

Yr proposals above noted. The issue of subjecting bus movement to priority signals would remain, & the traffic being what it is, is sure to obstruct free flow of buses. Thus, there is the risk of bus pile ups along the bus lane/s besides traffic conflicts with frequent signal changes when buses arrive (& their numbers are very large now !).

Hence, grade separation (though more cumbersome than surface solutions) might work best.

 Better may not be as good as best

up
99 users have liked.

My 2 rupees. Better may not be as good as best, but better than status quo. And the better option may be a step towards the best option some point in the future because it allows incremental results and opportunity to stabilize/improve behaviour for wider benefits

BPS by 17th Jan!

up
97 users have liked.

Govt is finally working on testing BPS from KBS to ASC college on HAL airport road..more here

http://expressbuzz.com/cities/bangalore/Bus-priority-system-to-go-online/353647.html

But thought BPS would work better if implemented all the way till the airport..but lets see if this helps at all..hope they do it right!!

Finally some action from Govt agencies on ground

up
106 users have liked.

Nice to see that BPS has coming to reality and  good for PT in bangalore. With METRO and BPS,  other modes of PT,   Bangalore citizens should  use PT in large.