Cornie Huizenga (Moderator), 11 May 2012
First Weekend Poll-Discussion: Metro's versus Busses to improve urban transport
We are running our first special weekend poll and discussion. The poll and discussion will be open till Sunday 13 May 20.00 USA East Coast time.
Topic - Metro versus Busses to improve transport in mega cities in developing world.
Cities are growing fast, especially in the developing world. In many cases traffic is getting rapidly worse with as result more congestion, pollution, irritation and loss of quality of life. Please take part in our first weekend poll and discussion on this topic.
What do you think?
Hopefully we will have a great discussion and we can post a report by Wednesday.
Sunny Kodukula, 11 May 2012It is a tough choice definitely not #3 or 4, as 3 is not logical and #4 though logical it is not plausible in all cities.
Which leaves us with #1 and 2. I would suggest an option #5 where #1, 2 and 4 are linked and hence creating a more integrated solution. Both the first two options will raise the question of "Last Mile Connectivity" the holy grail for sustainable transport.
Cornie Huizenga (Moderator), 11 May 2012hi sunny - i have adjusted the poll - hope that this makes it more clear. Look forward to your vote
Kumar Manish from India, 11 May 2012Ideally it should have been an integrated solution with quality & reliable public transport system and better walking and cycling facilities. No doubt BRTS is more economical to construct than metros but a city should understand its needs before investing in Metro Project. When a quality bus based transport system can solve the problem why go for Metro.
Carlosfelipe Pardo (Moderator) from Colombia, 11 May 2012Would any of you suggest other response options?
Clarence Shubert, 11 May 2012We need more options to consider and an integrated approach. Other options include bike and motorbike lanes as well as the new technology Personal Rapid Transit. For hill side communities, escalators as in Hong Kong can work well and be cost effective. Clearly each city has to have a unique mix of systems ideally integrated with a common fare, ticketing and card system. Another issue is scalability and flexibility for future growth and density changes for which buses and bikeways would be more suitable.
Peter dunlop from Belgium, 11 May 2012the choice would depend on the city. In richer areas a subway is a great system. But in developing countries i see a subway as too expensive. This is a very restrictive set of choices offered, suggesting that making this choice is something that can be done in general.
Cornie Huizenga (Moderator), 11 May 2012dear peter - you mention that the options are to restrictive. Which option(s) would you like to see added? Subways are expensive but we can see that an increasing number of Chinese and Indian cities have them as part of their transport system. Question - is that money well spent?
Safira De La Sala, 12 May 2012Hi all! That's my first contribution here :)
I do agree with Peter: the solution depends on the city. In my point of view, subways can have even more "nos" than the expensive costs to build it. To make it happens, it's necessary much more studies, including the environmental perspective, analysis of the soil, the ground water etc - not only how much GEE is going to be emitted (of course that is a key factor, but sustainability and integration with nature in cities go much beyond that). And, of course, on a juridical view (on property rights), there is several expropriations processes to have enough land for the construction, and in growing developing cities, it may mean more segregation and urban sprawl, once that the payment made by the government usually don't follow the market. My city (São Paulo-Brazil) is passing by a real mobility crisis, and as much as love subways, I don't believe that is the answer for us in a short time...
Safira De La Sala, 12 May 2012GEE = GHG :) Sorry, I made a mistake with English and Portuguese
Cornie Huizenga (Moderator), 12 May 2012Safira - thanks for your first insightful comment, look forward to many more. I was in Sao Paolo 2 years ago and it does seem that the city has a big challenge ahead of it. You mention the obstacles for subways (environmental analysis, right of way etc.) but don't you think that a city should be able to deal with these somehow if it wants to provide housing, access etc to all. Especially, if it wants to avoid the urban sprawl which you are also not in favor of?
Safira De La Sala, 12 May 2012Hi Cornie! Being quite direct, yes, in an "ideal" world of course a city should be able and must deal these factor to achieve the "right to the city". However, it seems to me that in LDC and developing countries (I hope that is a false affirmation, but... generalizing, ok?), not only cities have many issues to handle and areas to improve, but also there is usually a lack on policies and "good political will"... It makes some politician chose subways projects instead of busses/bicicles/etc, because being expensive and have a look of modernization, of growing economy, may be easier to let some money disappear in the "tunnels". Also, I would like to say that I'm not against subways at all, but I think it may be not the right answer in every case. As you said, a city must have sanitation, affordable housing, social integration, etc, and as long they have money enough and professionals to do subways (in the right way), of course they can go for it! However, thinking about Sao Paulo, mobility crisis is pissing everybody off: rich, poor, middle class. This year we will have municipal elections, and I'm sure one of the huge tasks for the candidates will be present good proposals in this sector - something environment friendly, not expensive, applicable and to be working quickly! That's why I guess the "easiest" to do now here is an upgrade in buses systems, to bring other classes - at least the middle class - back to public system and guarantee the quality.
Clarence Shubert, 12 May 2012Hi Safira, I hope that Sao Paulo will give some consideration to Personal Rapid Transit (PRT) as well as buses, LRT and MRT. LRT is about half the cost per km of MRT and PRT is about half the per km cost of LRT. In addition, PRT (with small pod cars that go point to point rather than trains that stop at every stop) provides a higher quality of service that is likely to be a more attractive alternative to personal cars. Please check it out on the web.
Safira De La Sala, 12 May 2012Hi Clarence, thank you for your reply. I will definitely check it out. I don't work with mobility, but it is a very interesting topic which I give an special care as a citizen - and I will surely forward these recommendations to friends of mine who works with that.
Kumar Manish from India, 13 May 2012i think we all are too much into PRT,MRT, and i know we are going to add many more RT in coming days. The basic question remains of accessibility and that we all should prioritize. i completely agree with Safira "easiest to do now here is an up gradation in public buses systems, to bring other classes - at least the middle class - back to public system and guarantee the quality."