BRTS – Certainly Possible & Can be Seamlessly Integrated too !

Naveen,

Some suggestions and builds.

a. Domlur to Shantinagar TTMC rather than Richmond Circle as Richmond circle does not offer any sort of commuter facilites for waiting.  I am also a bit confused about the route as you don't mention Residency Road.  I think it has to go to Mayo Hall --> Garuda Mall --> HOSMAT --> Lower Agara Road --> Domlur.

b. Shantinagar to City Station to Shantinagar  vs. Hudson Circle to Majestic. - again Corporation office has no proper waiting place.  We need to think of what type of commuter will use this.

I would add some feeder routes - Jayanagar 4th block TTMC (when it comes up) to Banashankari via 9th main, 36th cross, Kanakapura Road.  Hardly any bus goes through 36th cross.  This can become a feeder to the Metro station at RV Road/Banashankari.

Jayanagar 4th block to BTM Layout via T-Block and 9th block.

Srivathsa

We need to connect key shopping areas (Commercial Street, MG Road, Brigade Road, Jayanagar Complex, Forum, Garuda Mall) to residential areas. 

Naveen,

 Thanks for the right summarization about Indore experience and this goes with my analysis also. I would like to add that there was one more element which also played an important role, i.e. Bus Stop at right spots/location.

 Given all the shortcomings the we have in Bangalore, we should give a try on using BRTS features on stretches where ever it possible. We should definitely try on the route:

Mayo Hall to Electronic City

1. Dedicate Bus lanes where ever it is possible on streches where the road is wide. I am sure this definitely possible from Koramangala onwards.

2. Bar 2 wheelers and autorickshaw traffic on the stretch from Johnson Market till Koramangala. Divert them through alternate route to take a detour on Mico Road towards Bannerghatta Road.

3. Should have increased bus frequency of atleast every 5 minutes.

4. Supplement these corridor with connecting service from Shivaji Nagar (at MG Raod), KR Market (at Koramangala), KG Bus Station (Koramangala), Jaynagar/Banashankari (at Silk Board). 

5. Should have the bus stops at right stops and location serving large neighborhood area. If needed should be relocated/cancelled/added to teh existing ones. 

Requirements:

1. Strict Enforcer authority to clear traffic mess on the whole stretch. 

2. As many suggested, transfer of ticket feature should be also be tested so that it appeals more users. 

Feedback on this propsal is very much appreciated.

Regards,

Syed 

It should be a good strategy to deploy BRTS before the metro comes in. This is just to popularize the routes and get people out of their habit of using personal transport and getting them to use public modes. This will also help with the numbers for the metro ridership..

Besides with the construction pace of the metro, I am not sure 2011 will read  2111 soon!

Naveen/TS and others,

While a BRTS that takes up a maximum of one lane on a few of our many 1-ways to minimize discontent among other road users and increase feasability, it also diminishes its effectiveness. One way to combine the best of both- take up one lane worth of space and yet provide a bi-directional BRTS- is to go vertical. My take on the pros and cons of an elevated BRTS:

Cons

1. It's significantly more expensive than a surface BRTS
2. It could be argued that Metro/Mono would work better if investment is that high

Pros

1. Skips major intersections and the numerous side roads that often plague traffic planners in Bangalore
2. Facilitates the R in BRTS.
3. Integrates easily with a surface BRTS thus permitting only sections to be elevated.
4. Skywalks/escalators can facilitate easy access from ground level and would also encourage footpath upkeep and use.
5. Bus stops need much less room than LRT (Metro) stations.
6. Rolling stock exists or can be obtained at a fraction of the cost of the Metro/Mono.
7. Permits customers to patronize businesses on either side of the road (a problem that might arise with a BRTS along the central median in the CBD).

I've worked on a preliminary sketch (click here) of an elevated BRTS. The sketch  is based on road widths of Field Marshall Cariappa/ Residency Rd measured from Google Earth. Specifications of bus lane width, bus stop width are based of DFID-UK's design guidelines of a BRT (Support columns were drawn significantly larger than required by the guide).

Comments? Thoughts?

Narayan82,

Great input. See my stance on how the different modes match up to each other (+/- is with respect to an elevated BRTS). Actually, I am kinda split on the Elevated BRTS/MonoRail argument but I feel the investment will be higher for a Mono; I might be wrong.

Naveen/TS/silkboard I would love to hear your input on this.

Advantage of BRTS is that buses can run anywhere and it can be self feeder. From Point A to Point B, users can travel using buses without any change. Bus, in turn can take the elevated road.

Disadvantage - Dependency on the discipline with which the Bus Drivers drives the buses.

Our Political Power may one day say that cars can enter the elevated busway after undergoing severe pressure from public and some party may have it as their agenda.

Pollution level will remain the same either if the buses are Euro-ii/iii etc.. not comparable with Metro/Mono.

Platforms for people getting in will be more systematic, people will feel more safer even if the Meto is operating at 80kmph.

Major investment in Metro is the elevated corridor. Bus elevated corridor too has almost the same investment. Why not Metro then?

I would put my vote to Metro followed by Mono and then to BRTS. If the road is 3 lane, then my first vote would be BRTS at the surface level not elevated. Car users will be peenalized, but, their cry shouldn't be responded by the Government. 

Vasanth, Narayan82 and others,

1. Fuel v/s Electricity is always a good point to consider. But the kind of buses that run on an elevated BRTS depends on the bid that the Government puts out and the tenacity with which they hold their own against the automakers. A BRTS with electric lines is a good idea, but the visual clutter of wires running all over comes rushing to mind! Diesel/electric hybrids, cleaner fuels (click here) are all other options.
2. I was visualizing BRTS stations that cater to a maximum of 2 buses (which admittedly would still be comparable to a Monorail).
3. I did not look up figures for a Monorail but admittedly a BRTS is only between 7500-25000 passengers/hour
4. As Vasanth argues though, the use of an elevated BRTS for buses alone depends on the political will and can easily be subverted to personal vehicles.

I still argue that an above-grade Metro would not be feasible given the required road width, area for stations and all the land acquistion and routing issues that we've been seeing. The best way forward is a project that:

1. Uses only the existing Right-of-Way (ROW)
2. Can be built as quickly as possible (e.g. steel v/s concrete structures)
3. Uses not more than one lane at surface level on roads of insufficient width.

I've added an updated sketch (click here) with a bidirectional replication of the Osaka Monorail model (copyright Seagate) on the same road (FMC/Residency Rd). I did retain the original Elevated BRTS bus stops as a reference to the difference in size that Elevated BRTS/ MonoRail requires.

Navin and others - thanks for this wonderful post. I am glad about a few things here -

1. Bus priority now sits with BRTS - this is vital as every means possible and practicable should be considered.
2. A classic BRTS is difficult for cities not built originally for it. The fact that we have moved towards thinking creatively about one way busway systems clearly suggests that we just don't have enough road width available. In fact Mumbai probably has Western and Eastern highways as the only real BRT contenders, and here too they have appointed consultants pouring over issues such as median V peripheral. To an extent, authorities have themselves to blame. As in Pune, flyovers have been built on what roads once wide enough to consider BRT model, not as easy any more.
3. The fact thatv we are forced to look at underpasses and overpasses at junctions says a lot about why a typical BRT model will struggle. Proponents will argue for median lanes because peripheral lanes conflict with side lanes. Well, at junctions, a BRT conflicts with mixed traffic turning right. The more junctions we have in a BRT route, the slower the R within the BRT.
4. I wonder how many such junctions you are hoping to treat with under/over passes? http://www.lightrailnow.org/facts/fa_brt.htm This link showcases a debate on whether a classic BRT is really cheap or not? Add to it under/over passes and budgets will most likely spiral out of control.
5. Elevated BRT - this will offer a very fast R within BRT. But as you see in the schema below, the longer the elevated route the less likely it will benefit residents living along it. Only those at the ends of the elevated routes will ever make it to bus stops at either end of the elevation. Unless of course there is a way of getting people atop elevated routes and we plan bus stops on top of these routes - seems rather difficult given that Delhi / Pune have struggled to get people to median bus stops safely.

Now for the one way systems. I actually favour these as I have seen one in use in Mumbai. But these are easy to implement on small residentail maze like routes. When it comes to streets, carraigeways (arterial roads) its a different ball game. Public consultation / education will be vital. Below I show two possibilities. Bottom half is the one I have seen in use in Mumbai on a 1+1 lane route, so sky is the limit. Top half will most likely cause excessive detours and will make any planner very unpopular.

See image here if it does not show up below- http://better.pune.googlepages.com/FLOWsystems.jpg

Finally, I hope same mistakes are not made as in Pune. In Pune BRT is planned on routes it can considered on. It has nothing to do with maths such as passengers per hour for all modes taken together for given roads, hence BRT is being planned on roads that carry only 2-4k per hour across all modes currently - huge waste of money. So rather than having wholesale changes, look at figures, find out where the change is really needed rather than where it may be fitted.

Finally else where we have discussed why 5000 buses are not serving Bangalore properly. Whatever the cosmetic changes, its what one does with these 5k buses with regards route and frequency rationalisation which will determine overall success.

Equally, one Bogota consultant wrote to me about how poor Bogota was in comparison to our cities when it started BRT and hence every Indian city can manage to spend on such a system. My reply was how lucky that Bogota per capita was so poor that they had not the means to graduate to their 2 wheelers. Unless riding a 2 wheeler costs double the bus ticket, do not expect a shift, so no plan is complete without authorities supporting tough measures on this front.

ASJ

Admirable intents but maybe elevated right of way for buses will utilize the airspace above roads and prevent destruction of property. Having said that, trunk routes may be more appropriate for elevation and not all roads. I hope all possible options are considered and tried.

 There are so many wide roads in Cantonment and Cubbon park area to test this.

There are challenges other than width of the road which reduce the effectiveness drastically. Today elevated roads are being formed around the city to overcome those problems. BETL, Tumkur road, now Bellary road. Elevated ROW is being contemplated even inside the city. Why not look at these elevated structures for PT instead of  for private vehicles?

Exclusivity for PT is the key here, really

We are too slow, some things we should - just do it. This thread is two years old was definitely not ahead of its time, yet! Time to take it forward now.

BRT post cards from China

This last picture is all thatched huts on the right but a swanky BRT for the village

 Some nice implementations

Elevated BRT, just have to retrofit a bus station on BETL

Neighbourhood implementation in 3 lanes +

 Compare this with Hyd MMTS of 47km that cost 500 crs.

This came with railway land & tracks. We have the same costs for the commuter rail in Bangalore. As far as I know there are not railway tracks on Airport road or IRR

Not if bus bays are designed & built properly for handling articulated /double-articulated buses, & drivers are trained to stop within busbays as a routine. This can all be possible only when all of the infrastructure is planned well & is in place: sentries at bus stops to prevent parking & also to prevent pedestrians /commuters from stepping out of bus shelters, median barricades with no breaches, good facilities for crossing streets close to bus stops, with escalators at high pedestrian density points, etc. & cops monitoring buses when they halt at busbays.

Known issues and quite theoritical. So why havent we had any success with the current buses which are already on mixed mode? Shouldnt we get this right before we think of BRT at all then?

IRR already has 6 lanes & no signals (except the koramangala-madivala stretch) & is as good as a signal-free road. So, where is the need nor the justification for elevated bus lanes on top of it ?

I think we are trying to create a conflict zone by trying to share scarce mobility resources. airspace & underground are under exploited in the city. And road medians offer captive space for going elevated. We have seen NHAI exploit it for their interstate purposes in 3 directions. While I theoritically agree on this particular stretch of IRR we need to look at the details of how the bus stand will be created near EGL and how it travels further. 

FYI, flyovers or underpasses are a mere 220-350mtrs (with both, up & down ramps). 

Not if it has to go over domlur flyover and come back down with a decent gradient.

domlur flyover has no such issues, silkboard flyover is another good example.

Good examples, Do you know why? At BDA, there is a bus bay on the left most lane like your proposition and they have to merge to the center to get on the signal free magic box that was built. Whereas in Domlur there is no such issue and in Silkboard the buses stop at the foot of the bridge like in KR puram. So there is concrete proof of how bus bays are not working the way you are intending in signal free corridors or mixed traffic.

At an additional 40crs/km in addition to costs for signal-freeing, it cannot be considered cheap. 

Compared to exploiting underground and the unsolved problems on the surface. It cannot be considered expensive at all. More importantly it is implementable within the existing road sense & democratic cultural ethos of our citizens.

Quoting from the same link

 decided on two pilot routes on the Eastern and Western Express Highways, consultants are now studying the feasibility of an elevated BRT corridor

They were building the EBRT on the expressway, I am not surprised they were "skeptical". So if you took over 2 lanes from the ORR service roads & had 5 lanes each carriage way? Would you still elevate the bus corridor? Maybe at the junctions but not other wise.