Re: WorldTransport Forum New Mobility Thoroughfares
- wrt the original post, I have made similar examples, not so much per hour but per day, for Georgia Avenue and H Street NE in DC, and Columbia Pike in Arlington County, Virginia. They are mostly 4 lane roads, two lanes in each direction.In each case about 25,000 vehicles move through the corridor during an average day. Of these, between 250-300 vehicles are buses, and move about 15,000 people through the corridor. While I don't know the truck breakdown, it's fair to say that about 40,000 people move through the corridor/day, 37.5% of them on bus, in vehicles that are a mix of 40' and 60' in length, taking up 3-5 car lengths, but moving far more people.It's great that you see fit to regularize this research, which is related to the space utilization arguments made elsewhere:Richard LaymanWashington, DC
From: Richard Layman <rlaymandc@...>
To: "WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com" <WorldTransport@yahoogroups.com>
Cc: Paul Minett <paulminett@...>; "WorldCarShare@yahoogroups.com" <WorldCarShare@yahoogroups.com>; "NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com" <NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com>; "CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com" <CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com>; "Cities-for-Mobility@yahoogroups.com" <Cities-for-Mobility@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 9:28 AM
Subject: Re: WorldTransport Forum New Mobility Thoroughfaresone issue with this, at least as it relates to the U.S., is that U.S. people don't tolerate the same levels of in-bus density, "crush loads." So buses that in the U.S. are rated for 80 passengers carry 2x that many in Curitiba or Bogota or Santiago. That's part of the reason that BRT works well in South America, but doesn't in North America. (Plus the whole passenger entrance/exit/multidoor system.) In the U.S., running 2x the number of buses reduces the purported cost advantages of buses over light rail.And the recent ITDP report on BRT in the U.S. did not consistently disclose ridership information over all of the case examples--e.g., using percentage increase without providing base numbers. I think probably because many of the examples aren't that great. (E.g., the Silver Line in Boston has anemic ridership.) Plus there is puffery about ancillary real estate development. E.g., with regard to the Health Line in Cleveland, much of the development was already in the pipeline, as it serves the areas of Cleveland that are still relevant in terms of being prime centers of commercial, health care, and university/academic activity.
From: Dave Holladay <Tramsol@...>
Cc: Paul Minett <paulminett@...>; WorldCarShare@yahoogroups.com; NewMobilityCafe@yahoogroups.com; CarFreeCafe@yahoogroups.com; Cities-for-Mobility@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 9:01 AM
Subject: Re: WorldTransport Forum New Mobility ThoroughfaresTake a look at the Street Films reports on Curitiba and Bogota (Milremo) BRT systems flat out they are describing between 35,000 and 40,000 pax/hr on close headway, fast boarding (200-300 pax/bus) buses - on the video watch c 100 pax board via 4 double doors in under 60 secs(?)
(?) - I recall that the egress rating for a double door fire exit is 80 persons/minute, which makes a lane width operating at maximum moving density = 2 x double fire doors - = 160 ppm = 9600 pph, possibly higher when crush load operation, and allowing for integration of 2 doorways.
Better Paul, to examine the true door to desk trip, and add the access times to the car doorstep to car, and car park to office, and then offer a doubling in size of your workstation - move out of the 6 sq m in a typical open plan office and take over the 12.5 sq m you have for your car as your new office. - Would make an interesting image - transhipping an cramped open plan office to the parking lot and giving each worker twice as much working space!
Anywhere good to set this up as a picture?
Could do something similar with a retail store - with the car park outside turned in to an expanded retail space - or a market - and the earnings per sq m figure posted, a car park, and a retail premises likewise. With the question who is making best use of their assets?
On 17/08/11 11:59, Paul Minett wrote:
Ridesharing InstituteDear ColleaguesThe New Mobility Agenda emphasises ‘people throughput’ as a central consideration for sustainable transportation. It has been a central plank for some years.Now we are planning a research programme where we will be seeking to find the most successful ‘New Mobility Thoroughfares’. Put more succinctly, “Which roads have the greatest person throughput per lane hour?”In Auckland, NZ we have a piece of ‘motorway’ where we calculate that there are about 3,000 people per lane hour at the peak of the peak. We think this is p retty good, but we are sure there must be other places where the total is greater.We would like to build a database of ‘nominated’ roads (call them freeways, highways, streets, arterials, boulevards, parkways, turnpikes, or whatever local term works for you) and rank them by the New Mobility Success Metric of ‘people throughput’.The research will then seek to understand the combination of factors that led to success.The calculation for that piece of motorway in Auckland looks like this:At this location t he motorway is four lanes wide, so the New Mobility Success Metric is 3,050 people per lane hour. (12,200/4).At this point we are keen to start a conversation about this, to find out who is thinking this way, and what the questions are that come up when we try to think this way. If you are aware of any previous research that looks at the same idea, please let me know. One thought is that we might have different categories, such as bus-only lanes, HOV lanes, general use lanes. Perhaps cycle lanes will be contenders as well? Maybe we need categories by different speeds.I look forward to hearing your questions and suggestions, and of course, your nominations.Kind regardsPaul MinettRidesharing InstitutePS Follow the exploits of the Ridesharing Institute by ‘liking’ us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Ridesharing-Institute/226523247393284. PM