Like Tree20Likes

Well Done HK Gov - longer crossing for seniors

Closed Thread
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4
  1. #31

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    23,652
    Quote Originally Posted by civil_servant:
    Also, buses are just slow. It takes time to load and unload them. The more people there are on the buses, the slower they are. Some congestion here and there doesn't have that much of an impact. If a bus is super jammed, I often wait for the next one. Most often it will be along shortly, be less crammed, and actually pass the bus in front of it.
    So you are advocating reducing the number of passengers per bus and increasing the number of buses to reduce congestion.

    Quote Originally Posted by civil_servant:
    We could have more buses, but then you end up having more jams at bus stop. More often than not, buses are actually just waiting for each other to load/unload passengers.
    No - this is just a lack of space given to buses for bus stops

    Quote Originally Posted by civil_servant:
    However, there are a few choke points in the city. Yet I don't see how bus priority schemes would help there.
    Except most dense urban corridors that really be bus only at peak times, tunnels, CBD's.

    Quote Originally Posted by civil_servant:
    Being skeptical of their efficacy.

    There are many papers out there on the benefits of giving priority to buses. Just because HK policy is stuck in the colonial era of focusing on the MTR does not mean it is a good policy. ALL other developed cities have improved their policies for at grade mass transit. HK has seen no changes for 20 years. Poor governance.

    http://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/impe...262-0693-0.pdf

    Interestingly even though HK has the most bus users it is left off this best practice study for international cities.

  2. #32

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    23,652
    Original Post Deleted
    But for around 45% of the population the MTR is not within reach. Buses don't have to suck. They are not as good as they should be in HK as they don't get priority access to the roads.

    The aim should be to reduce journey time. Extending the MTR should happen but it seems links to China have taken priority over making the city more efficient and releasing more land above new MTR lines.

    Priority should be
    MTR
    Buses / Mini buses
    Taxis
    Cars

    At the moment cars have greater priority to buses in much of the city

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_QdXT6T8Tw

  3. #33

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    23,652
    Original Post Deleted
    But that is often an indirect and extended journey. The 6m bus journeys per day would suggest it is an essential form of transport.

  4. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by East_coast:
    But that is often an indirect and extended journey. The 6m bus journeys per day would suggest it is an essential form of transport.
    Many of those bus journeys will take you to an MTR somewhere.

    If you like bus priority so much, I suggest you move to DB. It's the place for you. You can even ride a bike there. Don't be surprised though that during rush hour the bus is still freakin slow despite an absence of cars.

    Your LSE paper was interesting. First, it didn't put focus on entire system, but single projects. The London example is hilarious. They saved time by shortening the route. No shit. Another economist telling us the obvious. Cherry picking at its finest too. While there are successes, there are also many failures. BRTs have come and gone. Bus lanes have come and gone.
    Last edited by civil_servant; 28-01-2018 at 10:01 AM.

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    23,652
    Quote Originally Posted by civil_servant:
    Your LSE paper was interesting. First, it didn't put focus on entire system, but single projects. The London example is hilarious. They saved time by shortening the route. No shit. Another economist telling us the obvious. Cherry picking at its finest too.
    Not really. It picked cities comparable to Hong Kong in terms of development and with mixed options for public transport and gave some examples of success for improving at grade commuting for many.

    Quote Originally Posted by civil_servant:
    While there are successes, there are also many failures. BRTs have come and gone. Bus lanes have come and gone.
    BRTs & Bus Lanes only really get replaced with metro systems IF there is sufficient volume to justify the expense of building one.



    Quote Originally Posted by civil_servant:
    If you like bus priority so much, I suggest you move to DB. It's the place for you. You can even ride a bike there. Don't be surprised though that during rush hour the bus is still freakin slow despite an absence of cars.
    Not sure on the point you are trying to make. Should Db remove buses and have a metro to get around to enclave?

    Db is an area that doesn't have high car ownership, not within walking distance a metro station like many other in HK.

    The loading and unloading of a bus is surely similar to a metro not having sufficient bus stop space is an issue.

    I would guess such a community would want a few options for transport

    - Buses to the local town centre
    - Buses to the nearest Metro station
    - Direct transit to the CBD with sufficient load / off load capacity at each end and a uncluttered fairway free from congestion where mass transit vehicles have an express route strait to the CBD.



    Again it is not clear why Hong Kong is different that government is almost unique for ignoring the needs of road based commuters over the last 20 years.

Closed Thread
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4