ABIDe: Transportation plan

So the "blue prints" are out. I for one see the value of successful businessmen adding value via ABIDe on the "execution" side. After all, there is little dearth for plans and idas to solve the city's woes. And if a quality plan is to be prepared yet again, why get it done by volunteers (even if its quality minds like Ashwin Mahesh and RK Misra)? If the city really needs the skills, it needs to pay for them. Activists and enthusiasts are to act as watchdogs, not drivers.

Regardless, the transportation report looks good. All routine stuff that we discuss and breathe here on Praja is in, impressive indeed. Here are things I find worth calling out:

Positives

• Bus priority lanes. Finally.
• Hop on Hop off circular bus services in CBD. Similar to Naveen's idea of single lane looping BRTS like systems.
• Ditches the Core Ring Road idea. Justification given is it will kill aesthetics of CBD.
• Talk of making 10 radial corridors signal free till ORR. Expect lot of magic boxes I guess, Bellary Road work done for BIAL has provided encouragement here. Perhaps the North-South and East West elevated corridor ideas is dead by now.
• Talk of centralized databses of vehicle registration and driving licenses.
• Traffic impact assesment of new developments, good show. This needs to get in BDA's Masterplan more directly.
• Talk of strengthening BMLTA. :) :)
• The idea of giving high FSI in exchange of getting Bus-bays on private land. Good beginning on the lines of "plaza bonus".
• Talk of data lead planning (slide 5)
• Idea of retaining corner plots in new layouts so that city has more options to work on road mouths at signals in the future (slide 17)

Negatives

• Making 10 corridors junction free needs a corresponding plan to reduce access/merge points so that short haul traffic doesn't mix up with through traffic. Bus priority lanes have not been defined well - left to traffic police for enforcement is it? Lets see. Unless you make them dedicated, you would be encouraging car junta via signal elimination.
• Talk of yet another byelaw amendment to provide for adequate parking facilities when there is little enforcement happening on the ground. On the whole, there are no "execution" side suggestions. BBMP is short staffed and crippled for authority due to overlaps. Addressing that would do it, don't need more byelaw tuning.
• No talk of extending catchment areas of BMTC bus stands via investment in local area transportation (shuttles, locally bound autos, anything similar). Big 10 bus service etc will fail unless we all can get a way to reach the bus stands.
• Suggestion of more gadgetry for Traffic Police, no talk of getting into their operations. Are 1800 cops enough? What targets are set each of them? How is their performance measured?
• At one place, RK and Prof Mahesh say Road widening will be discouraged (slide 6), but then slide 28 talks of asking Defence, St John's etc for land to widen roads.
• Slide 12 is confusing - It first says ORR to be made signal free. And then, there is talk of elevated ORR on the median. Why not just go elevated if thats thought of as the way forward, why waste money on signal elimination? Unless I am not reading it right, this section of the report is a bit rushed.
• No backing data for the ten identified corridors. An exmaple from my area makes me say this. Why pick Varthur Road when the road going towards ITPL sees five times more traffic than the road going towards Varthur Lake? That one example tells me that other corridors too may not have been picked in data-backed or scientific way. Prof Ashwin Mahesh has all the data on vehicle movements, hope that was an input to this report.

Alright. Likely that I have not read something right so a criticism here would be unjustified. Will keep correcting myself as I read the report a third or fourth time.

Anyway, Hope ABIDe ignores criticism etc for some of the points here, thats part of the game, neither are they paid experts, nor us. Execute well and in standards-driven fashion on half of the things in this report, and we will be home. Look forward to the followups :)

• In theory, the Big 10 is a good idea. Case in point, OMR is an excellent candidate when it comes to elimination of a few junctions. The terrifying part is this, let's assume it all works out....traffic from the outer edges can now come flying in from all directions.... and go where?!! MG Road....KG Road, KR Market!! On the plus side though, this might be an excellent chance to implement a congestion charge (The car junta has great access to the CBD but you have to pay for it....heftily!). Combine it with the proposed bus-priority (although as SB suggests ideally bus-exclusive is better) lane even for a just a couple of hours in the morning and evening and that could spur the paradigm shift in use of public trans. We've done enough carrots (underpasses, overpasses, bypasses et al.) and it's not  working...it's time to introduce some sticks too.
• Slide 23 talks about Namma metro providing adequate pedestrian infrastucture and (the proverbial) seamless integration with bus facilities. Great! Not so great... the clause that NM should provide sufficient parking for two wheelers, 4 wheelers etc. For end-of-the-line stations maybe, for all others not just is this hard to implement, but implies that I do end up taking my personal mode of transporation out of my house defeating the the whole premise of public transportation.
• The idea of a Public Address System on each traffic junction (Slide 25) ...umm... thanks but no thanks! There is no pressing need to create any more noise than we already have on our roads!  By the way, did anyone notice that the clockwise and anti-clockwise HOHO labels were switched (Slide 22).

I thought there is fair bit of talk of pedestrians in there, lot lot better than what has been in the past.

Metro chief understands the value of ped facilties, I am sure he would have sold the value to ABIDe and everyone else by now. How much distance will people be willing to walk, hos much discomfort will it involve in walking that distance - these aspects will make or break BMRCL's numbers. BMTC doesn't get it, simple investments in ped facilities so that ppl can walk 500-600 meters to get to bus stops or change buses can do a lot. We have tons of examples to prove the point, but this is not the thread.

Can someone started a separate thread to describe the other "blueprints" they have uploaded on the ABIDe website?

The comment is moved here

comment shifted to

http://bangalore.praja.in/blog/kbsyed61/2009/01/25/is-there-official-flag-representing-karanataka#comment-10666

editor

comment shifted to

http://bangalore.praja.in/blog/kbsyed61/2009/01/25/is-there-official-flag-representing-karanataka#comment-10666

editor

 Murali Sir,

 Thanks for your eloborate thoughts on making Bus Service to be one big piece of bigger schemes of ABIDE. I will incorporate your suggestions into my presentation. Some have been already added. Some will be added now. I did a small analysis to see if the Naryanan's post on BMTC Zones & Routes make sense. Along with I also did tried to put the various customer/passenger/entity needs for transport and matching the needed fixes. It stands out that Little overhaul of Public transport can mitigate 40-60% of the Bangalore's daily commute needs. As I can not include files/charts to comment, I will make separate post to include those analysis data.

Syed

transmogrifier,

 Very well said about Autos. They should be part of the public transport system along with Cabs/Taxis/Mine-vans instead of competing with it. We need to make use of each and every existing PT assets that fits the larger interests. In that scheme, Auto, Taxis, Cabs/MinVans can supplement the Bus service for last mile/feeder connectivity. ONE FARE could also include the last mile connectivity. I think it is already done in BIA VV service.

 Syed

Bus Lane Marking on Big 10 roads will never workout in Bangalore. It works only in countries with disciplined traffic like London. I believe that the ABIDe authors are afraid of Delhi like situation if they implement BRT, so is BMTC. If transport planners and service providers are afraid of failures, our city will never come out of this Chaotic situation.

It was a bold move Delhi took and it is being even better planned just like Bogota & Curitiba in Ahmeadabad under JNNURM. Big 10 roads should essentially have BRT if the roads are widened or Metro/Mono. Ahmeadabad is even implementing elevated BRT which earlier we disscussed here on Praja.

Last evening, I was at the BCIC infrastructure committee meeting chaired by Devesh. Prof Ashwin Mahesh made a short prsentation on ABIDe's proposals on traffic and transport issues. My earlier posting was largely a response to that (I have sent it to him separately - whatever, he accesses PRAJA fairly regularly, on his own, also).

Subsequently, there was a presentation by Mr Akhil Agarwal, Divl Rly Manager, which covered Commuter Rail connectivity to BIAL, amongst other things.

The irony of it all is that none of any of the high profile lot present there, including Mr R Jaiprasad, adviser to BBMP, seemed to have even an inkling of the simultaneous action being taken by the state cabinet, meeting in Belgaum, to pass the Rs 6,000 cr HSRL link to the airport (reported in the press today). There is absolutely no indication of it in the ABIDe proposal either.

The question that arises then is whether the government is at all serious about ABIDe. Or, does it look at it as just one more committee whose report can be left to gather dust after making all the suitable kind of noises? The presence of people like Prof Ashwin Mahesh on it had lend it a certain credibility. But, when even he is not taken into confidence by the government, what is one to make of this whole exercise?

Besides, it was thought that the hare-brained idea was long given up as totally unviable. Perhaps the government lot involved couldn't resist the temptation of the kickbacks on such a juicy project!

Any body has any answers?    

Muralidhar Rao

 A city like Bangalore, in its CBD, majority of the roads are narrow and there is hardly any provision for road widening without damaging/uprooting the trees, demolishing private structures etc. In this conditions, better would be to not widen the roads, instead design the traffic movement on such roads such that Public transport vehicles would get the first priority.

That is, If the road or a stretch is narrow and can not accommodate both PT buses and Private Vehicles, then on that stretch private vehicles must not be allowed to play. Only Buses or feeder vehicles only should be allowed to use the roads. There is no other way to stop this madness of road widening and at the same time crying for promoting public transport usage. For mass public transport system to succeed in Bangalore, the Public Transport vehicles should move at a reasonable speed, certainly much above the current avg speed of 10-20 kms/hr. For that to happen, the ground infrastructure environment must present:

1. Zero/negligible congestion on roads, intersections and bus tops.
2. Safety embedded in the operation and maintenance
3. Stops, roads, signals all supplementing the faster and safe movement.

 Syed

comment shifted to

http://bangalore.praja.in/blog/kbsyed61/2009/01/25/is-there-official-flag-representing-karanataka#comment-10666

editor

Thanks for the post Murali. A good progress is being made at the Infrastructure Committee.

Incidentally, the HOHO circular bus system that ABIDe is promoting, is a direct effort of the Infra Committee, of which some Prajagale are also a part. I don't think, we care about ownership of the idea, as much as we do of the complete implementation. Part of the HOHO idea is to have a micro circuit for the CBD like MG Road and Cubbon Road area. Similar shuttle services are being planned in the industrial areas of Peenya and EC/Bommasandra, with the intention of also improving frequency of trunk route buses. With a HOHO service in Peenya, a bus from Shivajinagar or KBS etc., can be terminated at the Peenya bus interchange, rather than going all the way in to the deepest recesses of Peenya, thus being turned around faster.

A longer term approach of the micro MG / Cubbon Road HOHO, would be to make parking extremely expensive in this area. Rs. 50 per 30 minutes, in parallel with a parking lot at one corner of the CBD.

The DRM made some very good points, and was generally positive in his approach. He is facing certain technical constraints, but we should work with them to arrive at a solution. The DRM has asked for a meeting with a BCIC delegation so specific points can be discussed. I do not know who is the Railways specialist on Praja, but I request for that person to put together some ideas around CRS, and be part of the delegation.

Please appreciate, while we are part of the overall pppulace, we will emphasize points of importance to industry such as a commuter rail between Bidadi-Bangalore-Hosur, Byapanahalli-Whitefield, Bangalore-Tumkur, etc. Express trains in the mornings and evenings between Bangalore and Mysore, etc.

With regards to HSRL, I think Prajagale know my view. We need a rail link to the airport that is all inclusive and not only passenger oriented. In fact professional consulting firms, some who are advising BIAL, are also of the same view. One of them wrote to me "The discussion regarding the BIA connectivy is indeed a major issue which has to be solved in the near future. We share your point of view that the HSRL will never fulfill the reuqirements of the airport and I do not understand how the politics can give a go ahead to such a project which never ever will fly!"

I was at the ABIDe consultation meet this morning. Mr. Rajiv Chandrashekar said that the government has approved the HSRL to the point at which the proposals are invited and the promoters come back to government for VGF (Viability Gap Funding). At that point, it will be seen if the VGF request is justifiable. Almost everyone expects this to be in the area of 3K-6K Crores. In my opinion, the government does not have this money. The coffers are empty.

My fear is that the HSRL will become another repeat of BIA or NICE in terms of signing away massive public land. Dr. Sreedharan is rumoured to have circulated a note, where it will be the Government, not the private promoter that will acquire the land, and hand it over to the HSRL project. Imagine the value of a 7.5 meter strip of land all the way from Minsk square till BIA. It will be 10K crore or more.

I think we have recent experiences with this type of land exchange, and they have not been present.

We have to let government know. Easiest way, I feel, is to write a letter to the Chief Minister, and a copy to ABIDe. Do not make it long. Just say, you prefer an alternate connection to BIA instead of HSRL. Metro or mono, it does not matter. Let the CM find the solution with ABIDe and others.

Politicians get away with these moves, becuase no one writes to them and reminds them, we are watching.

-----------------------

Regards

Devesh R. Agarwal

Bangalore Aviation

1. There is evidence that what was once a signle stroke water pump engine turned in to a people carrier is one of the most polluting vehicles on our roads. One must also factor in the noise pollution caused by the 3 wheelers.
2. Rather than being a custom made vehicles it was a contraption born out need (no other transport means were available) - for this reason, it has remained the most un-scientific form of engineering. The center of gravity is an issue with this vehicle as many of our surgeon and orthopedic colleagues will tell stories of treating victims of RTAs caused by toppled rickshaws. This phenomenon is more common than one thinks.
3. These are vehicles which over time have become faster (approaching 40 kph) but without any crash testing, no seat belts etc.
4. The fact that they can do a 180 deg turn on the spot causes much of traffic chaos, congestion & accidents.
5. That new registration of 3 wheelers has stopped a while ago should suggest that the numbers dwindle but this could take many years and many more lives or limbs lost.
6. 50k or more of these contraptions occupy lot of space on our roads. Oft they idle away in what should be no parking zones or roam around empty (guzzling away).
7. Instead a combination of BEST like bus service and 20k Tata Nano's as a cab service will be better for Pune. The former reduces need for ITP, the latter by being more expensive than a 3 wheeler will drive people towards buses and citizens will use them only when really required.
8. 20k 4 wheel cabs when run on shift system will ensure that all current rickshaw drivers will remain employed (they should be given first preference and retrained).
9. 20k as against 50k 3 wheelrs will help enormously rationalise the service. Further traffic regulation will improve vastly.
10. Govt should regulate the private firms given licenses to run such schemes with regards quality and pricing.
11. Major employers (cab firms) will also ensure that cab drivers are on pay rolls, have contributions made in to pension schemes, proper annual leave, work in shift hours that do not lead to driver fatigue (and hence reduce accidents)......the benefits are plenty.

Managed a quick read through the transportation plan

a. I liked the guiding principles part of the document - for two reasons.  One that there are actually guiding principles and two that the guiding principles overlap with my bias. I think the fact that they recognize that funds are limited is a big breakthrough in itself rather than announcing elevated roads and trains running all over the city.  I like that pedestrians and public transport have been called out as a priority.  Proof of the pudding will be in the eating though and in the funds allocated for pedestrians (someone needs  to remind them that it is most likely the pedestrian who votes and not the BMW user).

b. I like the focused attention on the big 10.  It makes sense.  I don't agree with the junction removal approach.  At best remove junctions leading away from the city so that one-half of the drive becomes easier.  As TM says above, I will sail through Bannerghatta Road only to find myself stuck on Museum road.  How does that help?  Signals are not a problem.  Signals help regulate traffic.  Let us say I have a 10 km stretch of road with signals every 1 km.   Let us say that I wait ON THE AVERAGE 1 min per signal.  That makes it 10 mins wait.  Let us say because I have streamlined traffic by having uniform usable lanes throughout, I can drive at an average of 40 kmph between signals.  That makes it 15 mins of driving time + 10 mins of waiting time = 25 mins for a 10 km journey - better than 30 kmph.  Compare this to speeding at 60 kmph and then spending 30 mins trying to clear a mega mess.  Any supply chain works best with small lot sizes (please read Eliyahu Goldratt's _ The Goal for more details).  Signals reduce lot sizes to manageable proportions.  Chaos at a junction is probably proportional to some power of the number of vehicles there.   Maybe remove junctions only outside ORR (assuming that ORR is where 50-60% of the people branch off). 

c. They need to push pedestrian facilities - good footpaths with iron railings, pedestrian crossings - surface, under, over, have refuges on one-ways doubling up as lane markers.

d. Buses - doubling is not the solution.  5000 buses are enough to provide us good public transport.  Narayan and Syed's ideas need some study.  

e. Did not see enough on Namma Metro in there.  If there is one thing that needs kick up its backside it is Namma Metro's progress.  In Bombay the Reliance Metro is coming up quite fast and that too on the very very crowded Andheri Kurla Road.

f. On city wise statistics - Delhi's average speed along major corridors is 15 kmph or thereabouts - just goes to show that wide roads and flyovers cannot solve the problem

Srivathsa

These vehicles are very affordable and as Vasanth was mentioning before they are low powered and dont go too fast either..these should replace the indica's for ferrying people!

1. HOHO - is great but rather than specific routes, HOHO should be within zones and apply across all types of buses
2. I do not favour a class system of buses. There should really be no difference between comfort levels. PT initiatives are great equalisers. This will only lead to confusion when it comes to route and frequency rationalisation.
3. One ways - very wide one ways seem to be a quick fix our traffic planners have fallen in love with. Actually capacity remains same - if you have two roads parallel to each other each 2+2 lanes, it offers 4 lanes to traffic moving in one direction. One ways do not change anything in this regard. What they do is by taking away opposing traffic, the traffic lights phases reduce (hence cycle length is reduced).
4. But try crossing 4 lanes!! We know how dangerous this is. Try changing lanes - if you join this road at point X on right and want to leave it at point Y on other side of the one way in 100 meters or so - imagine the chaos and danger posed by vehicles moving criss-corss - in fact this will slow down the traffic and off-set any benefit hoped for from such a system.
5. Contra-flow bus lanes will help reduce issues pertaining to above two points. Part grade separation (see my proposal for SB road in Pune) with pedestrian refuges solves many problems, streamlines traffic along with well planned traffic signals.