Skip to main content

Median BRT does not force users to cross more traffic lanes!

This is a follow-up to my earlier post about Delhi's BRT project.

Now I do realise that this project may not be a perfect example of the well-proven BRT genre. But some of the arguments being thrown up against it are pure nonsense.

One foolish claim is that median-BRT will force bus users to cross more streets, or more lanes of traffic. This is suggested for example, by an anti-BRT article in India's Pioneer newspaper on November 7, 2007:
The most disconcerting aspect of the lunatic HCBS idea is the placement of bus stops in the centre of the road in those sections where the bus lanes run down the middle. ...

When the scheme becomes operational, passengers will be required to cross the road on either side to access the bus stop. In the best of times, this stretch is marked by unruly motorists/scooterists and even more unruly pedestrians. Once they are legitimately given the right to scamper across the road, the ensuing chaos can be easily visualised.

Gosh. I don't know where to start on the false assumptions there... So I will stick to my main point.

A few years back I heard Walter Hook from ITDP demolish this argument very simply and easily in a presentation to a conference in Agra. The same clarification is made in a report (by RITES) on a 2005 Stakeholders’ Consultation on Delhi's BRT (pdf). It is not hard to understand.
THE TOTAL NO. OF LANES OF MOTORISED TRAFFIC THAT A BUS COMMUTER WOULD HAVE TO CROSS IN A RETURN JOURNEY REMAINS THE SAME.
It is obvious if you think about it.

Without BRT in the median you will cross the whole road once in a journey (your destination must be on one side or the other, right). If your destination is on the same side of the road as your bus stop then you will not need to cross immediately after getting off the bus. But you will still need to cross later to get to the bus stop in order to make your return journey. With median BRT you cross HALF the street at both arrival and departure. But the total lanes crossed is exactly the same as before.

Median bus lanes have worked very successfully in many of Taipei's busiest streets since the mid-1990s.

Actually, in general it should be SAFER for pedestrians after most median BRT projects are put in place. This is because median refuges (the bus stops) will likely become more common than they were before. So pedestrians will not have to cross the whole street in one dangerous attempt. This enhanced refuge effect should help all pedestrians, not just the bus passengers.

Comments

  1. Unfortunately the success of BRT has very little to do with median or peripheral lanes. Paris BRT and a few other cities have lanes on the periphery.

    To call these problems as 'teething' is an understatement. 18 months since start of Pune BRT, beyond a segregated bus lane, no other feature associated with the concept of BRT is in place.

    To find out more about numerous problems with the way India's BRT prpjects have been badly planned check read this document - http://better.pune.googlepages.com/WhyBRTinIndiadoesnotexciteme.htm

    Dr Joglekar

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Save Manila's (mostly informal) public transport!

Metro Manila depends on informal, lightly-regulated public transport which now faces a catastrophe as a result of this pandemic. The Mobility Coalition, an alliance of eight Metro Manila transport advocacy groups, has ideas on what to do. I spoke with Robie Siy who is active in the Mobility Coalition and who writes the weekly Mobility Matters column for the Manila Times.   [Scroll to the end for more details on Robie, Mobility Matters and the Mobility Alliance.] Scroll down for highlights of our conversation or listen with the player below. Click here to learn how to subscribe to this podcast.

Singapore Urban Transport: The Warts-and-All Story

Singapore's National Day is this week (9 August). So I decided to share Singapore's urban transport story - or my slightly  unusual take on it .  It is   a unique city in various ways but its urban transport policies are well worth your attention even if you don't live in Singapore. This is a warts-and-all version of the story, and it is my own view, not any kind of official one. It's also a little wonkish in parts. [Hi all you policy wonks!] But I hope to keep your interest with some surprising twists, such as: Why was the bus-only public transport system in an awful state by the early 1970s? If the buses were awful in early 1974, how was Singapore able to impose drastic increases to the cost of motoring in 1975? You will have guessed that the buses must have been drastically improved in 1974/75. But how was that achieved? Singapore urban transport enjoyed success through the 1980s and 1990s but its core social bargain (cars for the rich; decent but bas

Shaping public transport

If you care about promoting public transport, you need to understand the key choices about organising and regulating it. These choices shape the industry and they really matter. This is NOT just about privatisation versus government operation. It is more interesting than that. This edition of Reinventing Transport shares the key alternatives and gives a sense of what's at stake. The focus is buses but most of the ideas also apply more widely. Click here to learn how to subscribe to the podcast. You can either read the article below or listen to the podcast episode  (use a podcast app or the player at the beginning of this article or click HERE ) . This is just the basics, not a deep dive. If you want more gory details, then follow the links right at the end of the article. It may seem dull but bus regulation is important! [1:29] The regulatory framework sets how decisions get made and who makes those choices. It makes a huge difference for things you care about