Urban Transport Strategy. Management in Developing Countries John A Cracknell, страница 102

City-Project

Type of Measure[53]

Bogota, Colombia

Major segregated busway under implementation (Ave 80) but the scheme is beyond scope of “normal” traffic management as major road reconstruction involved; a city-wide network of segregated busways planned and is reported upon in the parallel Background Paper “Mass Transit in Developing Countries”

Cala Region, Philippines

A segregated busway is proposed for inclusion in project but as with Bogota (above) major construction involved

Dhaka, Bangladesh

Bus priority proposed

Guangzhou, China

5.4 kms of bus lane proposed in city centres

Liaoning, China

Proposed (i) Shenyang busway and some bus lanes; (ii) Fushun busway; (iii) Anshan busway.

Mexico Medium

Cites

Various cities, notably Puebla, Leon, Ciudad Juarez planning segregated busway systems, similar to Curitiba

Mumbai

One major contra flow bus lane/traffic management scheme proposed for inclusion in project

Urumqi, China

Some bus lanes proposed - risk of elimination from project

Note- the busways in Chinese cities are under development but it is reported that there is some risk of nonimplementation due to doubts over inadequate bus services/buses, lack of experience in design of innovative busways lack of impetus arising and lack of city ownership and understanding.

Comments and Issues – Buses are, and will remain, the backbone of public transport systems in most developing cities.  Efficient bus services are vital to achieve maximum effectiveness from the road network, to offer an acceptable alternative to non-essential car use and to provide mobility for the poor (see Chapter 7).  Few bus priority measures have been included in Bank projects over the last few years. However, outside Bank projects, there has been more progress in cities in both developing and developed counties.  For example, in recent years schemes have been introduced or are planned in Taipei, Kuala Lumpur, Seoul and other Korean cities, Quito, Lima, Mexico City (contra flow), Moscow (contra flow tolleybus lanes), Singapore and of course (i) the Curitiba system continues to be consolidated (with assistance from an IADB Loan) and (ii) in European countries traffic management for buses including bus lanes, traffic signal activation etc are widespread and increasing.  The possible reasons for the limited number of schemes in Bank projects include:

§  lack of understanding of the objectives of bus priority; politicians are unwilling to commit to measures which adversely affect the (rich) private cars users and provoke local opposition due to changes in access, servicing, etc; over-coming such opposition may be politically unacceptable

§  the absence of conventional bus systems and the reliance on para –transit makes bus priority difficult to implement due to the high volumes of, largely undisciplined, relatively small vehicles.  Even where larger buses exist, bus congestion can be an issue (e.g. Av 10 in Bogota where mini and midi bus flows exceed 1000 per hour).  Bus lane and busway schemes work best when there is some control over their use by buses.  In a fully deregulated bus system where buses are small vehicles, bus volumes are high on major routes and bus standards are low (particularly relating to emissions), successful bus priority through bus lanes and busways may be difficult to achieve

§  bus services are embryonic in some cities (e.g. China) - buses are few in number, bus services are of poor quality, buses are regarded as a second class mode and thus bus priority is not considered desirable nor justified