[krishnakumar]

Originally Posted by DigitalOne

I am afraid there is a deliberate and sustained push against public transport and towards private transport by this government. Does not bode well for the long-term future of Bengaluru. I am very pessimistic .

+100

Sorry to say this in a “Car” forum, but the more we build our cities around cars (car centric development), the worse it’s going to be. Great urban spaces are those that are devoid of cars. Good urban transport infrastructure design is where we prioritize (1) Pedestrians and Cycles (2) Public transport (3) Private public transport like shared autos/car pooling etc. and finally as a distant last (4) Private vehicles.

In already congested urban areas, we need to take away roads, as counter intuitive as it may sound, to ease congestion - of course in a coordinated approach by enhancing the urban transport infrastructure (in the order detailed above). Block the roads and build pedestrian infrastructure, light rapid transit like tram, BRTs etc. that connects to mass rapid transits like metros.

Side note: Lets be clear, the bus lanes implemented on ORR is not a good comparison, a BRT is only effective if they get priority over private vehicles which wasn’t the case with ORR.

It is all about priorities

Case in point: Church Street, it took all of Rs. 9 crores (in 2017) to rebuild the 750m that prioritized pedestrians over cars and today it stands as one of the best commercial places to be in the city.

Adjusted for inflation, even if it takes Rs. 30 crores to build 1km of such streets, you can build about 500-600km of such an infrastructure with the budget for tunnel roads - benefiting lakhs of people and local businesses vs. benefiting a few thousands of cars.

Now building 500-600km of such streets makes no sense; it’s meant to be a hyperbole that paints a picture, not an actual suggestion.

That said, it is not ludicrous to think that the budget for tunnel roads can be used to build 50-100kms of such pedestrian prioritized streets where there is a lot of congestion and funnel people to these places through a network of light rapid transit like tram and BRT (which are in turn connected to mass rapid transit like metro and suburban rail). Trams are significantly cheaper than metros (20-30% of building metro for the same distance, per km a tram would cost Rs. 75 crores vs. 600-700 crores for metro). They are more accessible as they are at ground level, they don’t need bug fancy stations and can be built on congested locations as well with minimal land acquisition.

In short, we only need the budget of tunnel roads to pretty much fix most of the problems we face in the heavily congested areas. In fact, some of these congested areas might benefit with a section of the road going underground while pedestrian + tram is built on the ground level. Instead, what is proposed in that budget is two tunnel roads that runs in two directions - serving who? Only God knows. No wait, I know - it is serving the politician crooks who have done a coup on our municipality which should rightfully belong to its citizens.

Priorities! NOT wealth or money.

When Indian cities stop building their cities focusing on private cars, we will see our urban quality of life improving.

Disclaimer 1: I am not saying roads are not needed. In fact, we need to have different layers of roads like (1) Access or Collector Roads, (2) Distributor Roads and (3) Through Roads. However, in the less planned parts of the city the through roads (like ORR) have become “access roads”. So we don’t need more access roads, but limit exposing the Through Road to places of interest. This involves taking away or blocking some roads, limiting traffic etc. and reinstate the hierarchy of roads. There is a science to this and can be easily achieved, if there is a will.

Disclaimer 2: I love cars. Absolutely love driving. At the same time, I love a city where I can commute without driving and reserve driving the machines I love for fun - not as a chore.

[am1m]

Originally Posted by krishnakumar

Sorry to say this in a “Car” forum, but the more we build our cities around cars (car centric development), the worse it’s going to be. Great urban spaces are those that are devoid of cars.

The fact that this sort of thinking is slowly getting aired, even on a car-centric forum indicates that more people are seeing the inevitable. Private transport is non-sustainable in cities. Designing for public and pedestrian transport is the only way forward. It will happen, is happening, slowly, but inevitably.

To provide a contrary point, I would say that public transport in Bangalore has actually improved drastically. I've seen more or less the same commute change over 30 years, since I went to school in the same area where I used commute to work for a couple of previous jobs. Back then, buses were like unicorns and autos were even worse than they are now. Now I see school kids taking the metro and at least that option is there for them. Even to a couple of former workplaces in other parts of the city, where I used to take the bike daily, now those offices have Metro connectivity.

Yes, the public transport has not kept up with the growth of the city, and is nowhere where it could be with a planned, government push, but it exists and it is getting better.

We also need a generation to grow up without treating the car as a status symbol. It becomes just a mode of transport and if it doesn't make sense, because of congestion, or cost, or time, why use it. Again, that will take time.

Originally Posted by Rajeevraj

I also cannot think of any approach that can improve things other than remove maybe 60% of vehicles on the road- Which cannot happen.

Remote work for those jobs that can be done remote! (Like IT, which is the biggest contributor to traffic in that area.)

The government will not push for it, they are too beholden to the builders of those IT parks. But what is stopping companies (who claim to care about employee health) from taking those steps? Several companies have. But several are still ok with putting their employees through the ORR commute nightmare.

[Rajeevraj]

Originally Posted by am1m

Remote work for those jobs that can be done remote! (Like IT, which is the biggest contributor to traffic in that area.)

The government will not push for it, they are too beholden to the builders of those IT parks. But what is stopping companies (who claim to care about employee health) from taking those steps? Several companies have. But several are still ok with putting their employees through the ORR commute nightmare.

I think this ship also has sailed. Companies that generally always have/had a flexible working policy are also now insisting/pushing on a 3-5 days in office. Of course, the flexibility remains, but it is on a case to case and need basis. No more blanket 'come only 1-2 days a week' any more. Have heard multiple large companies go this way and more planning to do the same over the next few months.

While there are reports/articles saying that the bike taxi ban has resulted in the increase in traffic, I don't think that is the case. It is simply a case of more and more employees having to come to office on more days of the week.

[ValarMorghulis]

Originally Posted by krishnakumar

Trams are significantly cheaper than metros (20-30% of building metro for the same distance, per km a tram would cost Rs. 75 crores vs. 600-700 crores for metro).

Slight correction:
1. Cost of constructing tunnel roads: ~450-500 cr per km. Link
2. Cost of constructing Metro: ~250cr per km including cost of land acquisition. Link
3. Cost of constructing tram: ~100cr per km (2017) = ~156cr per km (2025 values) without land acquisition. Link

[sachinpk]

New Scheme "Auto Bhagya" to be launched soon...
The base fare will rise to Rs 36 for the first 1.9 km, up from Rs 30. The fare for every subsequent kilometre will be Rs 18, as against the present Rs 15.

[binand]

Originally Posted by sachinpk

New Scheme "Auto Bhagya" to be launched soon...

Appropriate name. I do consider it to be my "bhagyam" if I'm able to find an auto that would take me where I want to go at the official rates...

[itwasntme]

Memorise this lowlife’s face:

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/.../122166781.cms

[Funny]

Originally Posted by itwasntme

Memorise this lowlife’s face:

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/.../122166781.cms

This reminded me of my following post: https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/stree...ml#post4616097 (Beware: New type of Scam/Con in Bangalore)

Sounds like a very similar scam tactic. I was also driving alone with laptop bag kept on the passenger seat which he observed by peeking inside from the front passenger side. And then suddenly I hear banging sound on the rear left quarter. I am glad I didn't stop. These scamsters need to be put away in jail for longer term and strict monitoring should be done post release to ensure they don't go back to their old habits.

[krishnakumar]

Originally Posted by ValarMorghulis

Slight correction

Thanks for sharing the references but does not pass the sniff test at all. Tram has to be significantly cheaper which is just intuitive.

Tram needs no giant pillars, no overhead stations etc. Just the electrical lines, signalling systems, rails and other infra on which trams would run (which should also be cheaper or comparable to metro and certainly not more expensive). Even the train cost should be lesser as the coaches are much smaller. It cannot possibly be as expensive as metro which is what the figures you have shared would look like if we exclude for land acquisition. Even land acquisition should be lesser for tram but for argument sake we can assume that to be same. They would also need much smaller depots or hubs and can be built in shorter lengths.

I do not want to dismiss the references you shared but the figures might be in specific context that we maybe missing. Even globally trams are considered as a much cheaper alternative.

I was referring to this article although I admit I was considerably off on the metro cost - I didn’t cross reference the article properly while typing this on phone. But it should still be significantly cheaper than metro. Linked article which is more recent on proposed Kochi tram

[ValarMorghulis]

Originally Posted by krishnakumar

Thanks for sharing the references but does not pass the sniff test at all. Tram has to be significantly cheaper which is just intuitive...

One important fact is that trams carry on an average ~5000 passengers/ hour/ direction.
Metros carry ~40,000 passengers/ hour/ direction.

Trams aren't 8x cheaper especially in Indian Metros where trams, a la Zurich, Melbourne style, would also compete with other vehicles for space.

Yes, they are significantly cheaper to operate, maintain and run but they also significantly carry less people. Compare a cycle to a car.

[krishnakumar]

Originally Posted by ValarMorghulis

One important fact is that trams carry on an average ~5000 passengers/ hour/ direction.
Metros carry ~40,000 passengers/ hour/ direction.

I knew this was coming and my bad, I wasn’t clear on the first post. Yes, you are absolutely right that they carry less people.

The intent of my post was not to suggest that trams should replace metros or that they are the silver bullet. Both of them serve completely different purposes and I wasn’t explicit about this (in my head it was obvious). But I can see how the cost comparison seems to imply that there is a suggestion of tram as a replacement to metro. It was not. The only reason I compared the cost to that of metro was to give an idea of how the costs stack up because our governments talk so little about trams but a lot about metros.

Trams are meant to replace cars on the road and they carry significantly more passengers for the same space occupied. In fact, all of what I said including pedestrian infrastructure etc. are to replace cars on the roads, as that was the premise. There is no one stop “public transit solution”.

The overall idea is that you can commute anywhere by walking and talking public transport, never having to take a car. And to achieve this replacement of cars, we need layering of public transit in all of their forms, be it pedestrian infrastructure, bus rapid transits, trams, metros and suburban rails.

There should also be no competing for space on roads, because public transit should absolutely have the priority over private cars. Public transit should be built as superior to cars, so that people who have a choice to commute by car choose not to. However, today public transits are used by people who have no other choice as they are intrinsically built as inferior and compete with cars on the road - we have got it completely backwards.

Getting from point A to point B should be just a combination of walking or walking + public transit - it should just feel superior to travel this way. Only in the rarest cases should a person have to commute by car and it should be discouraged by giving it the lowest priority om urban transport design.

There is a whole different topic of how “point A and point B” can be designed in a way that most of such commutes can be minimized altogether - this one is on land zoning regulations and will be on a completely different tangent. This is in fact the primary root cause for traffic on road.

Traffic = f (need to commute for economic activity).

We need to design land zoning regulations in such a way that the need to commute for most of the economic activities is minimized. This is a very big topic in itself. But the gist is that, if there is no need or very less need to commute, there are lesser people on the road, therefore there is lesser stress on public transit and even lesser need to take the car out. For example, how can I build zoning regulations that make it easier for people to find affordable accommodation near their work so that it is just best to walk. Spoiler alert, Bangalore (and MOST Indian cities) suck at that too!

In all of this, the uber point I wanted to make is that the reason why we have bad cities are a function of bad choices, incorrect priorities and a lack of will and determination - NOT because we don’t have funds for it. Because when talking to people on this topic, there is a notion that it is because of lack of funds.

[sachinpk]

"Bike Taxi Bhaghya" scheme coming back??
The central government has issued new policy guide lines for taxi aggregators (Click here). And as per this the, "the state government may allow aggregation of non-transport motorcycles for journey by passengers as shared mobility through aggregators resulting in reduced congestion and pollution, along-with providing affordable passenger mobility....

The transport facilities comes under the Concurrent list of Constitution of India, so both state and central government can frame laws on the subject. But a state government cannot have a law whis is against the central government law. The Karnataka Govt had told the Karnataka High Court that bike taxis cannot be allowed as that was not possible as per central government made rules. Now that the rule has changed, the state government can suo-moto allow bike taxis to operate. Or I am sure that Ola, Uber, Rapido are getting their advocates ready to march to the High Court.

It would be interesting to see what would be the future of the "yellow board" taxis in the long run. They have many more regulatory checks, which the bike taxis will not have to follow (as they are white board vehicles). It was just two days ago, that Karnataka Govt approved hiking of auto rickshaw fares. Now if bike taxis are back, most likely the fare hike would do more bad than good to the auto rickshaw goons .

News from Deccan Herald.
Hopes revive for bike taxis in Karnataka as Centre revises guidelines.
Uber, Rapido welcome new Motor Vehicle Aggregator Guidelines 2025

[sachinpk]

Bengaluru's Yellow Line to get first fully India-made train in early Aug, two a month from Sept.

The never ending saga of "Opening of the Yellow line". Now the revised date of commercial operation is August. July 15th & 16th was the date planned to have the CRS (Commissioner of Rail Safety) inspection.

[sagaranjos]

One thing I have noticed after driving on the ORR is people just don't know how many lanes are there or conveniently poke their way through the smallest of gaps and then have the temerity to honk at people who are actually following their lanes.

No road in Bengaluru has 4 lanes but people don't seem to realise that. I hope there is more awareness built around it.

PS : I am not even getting in to the topic of merging.

[anandhsub]

Originally Posted by sagaranjos

No road in Bengaluru has 4 lanes but people don't seem to realise that. I hope there is more awareness built around it.

Where exactly on ORR are lanes even drawn

On the topic of following lanes/merging the most annoying attitude of drivers, especially personal car drivers, is how they feel no one should be allowed to merge when the roads narrow, especially due to a metro diversion. They seem to think the ones on other lane should have merged in some 500m back effectively shortening the number of lanes for a much longer distance.

Absolutely no concept of zipper merge or give way and take way and they seem to be in some bubble that they are the ones following lane discipline and the the rest are unruly drivers when it is the exact opposite.