Making TransJakarta a World Class BRT System - ITDP | Institute for ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

A lot of u turn different alternatives are available, but all of then could perform better if sidewalk 50 100 50 buslane u-turn u-turn buslane Side walk cuts conversion physical protection The general concept is to use the same approach already implemented on corridor 1. The main advantage is avoiding the traffic signals that would introduce a considerable delay for BRT buses and the general traffic. On the other hand, at present the U-turns are unprotected from opposite general traffic and this eventually introduces delays and queues that block the BRT lanes. To avoid this problem and improve the situation, we suggest a physical protection is provided, so the U-turn only has conflicts with BRT buses, that at an expected volume of 20 to 30 buses per hour/direction is quite a small conflict compared with the 5000 vehicles (not pcu, just the vehicles) on opposite side. The sidewalk cuts are to provide an extra second U-turn lane, which can double the capacity. The U-turn capacity of this solution is estimated by the following graph: Final Recommendations for TransJakarta, p. 124
U- turn capacity(fig 2 lay-out) Capacity ( pcu/hour) 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 Kyai Tapa estimative Kyai Tapa uncontrolled signalized 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 BRT flow ( bus/h/direction) The green line is the suggested proposal, and the red ellipse is the estimated volumes (conversion of 1500 vehicles if divided on two points should be around 500 to 1000 on each one, and the BRT flow as a maximum of 30/hour/direction (2700 passengers/hour). The traffic signal (blue line) that introduces delays to the BRT buses and general traffic would be recommended at much higher volumes. Grogol intersection – (not evaluated) a. Kalideres- Grogol Not evaluated due to insufficient time to observe the stretch on all periods. It seems that the project is like corridor 2, giving for general traffic more space than they really need, especially on the Kalideres – Pesing fly over (under construction) west stretch. This seems more of a rural highway than an urban road, and the volume/capacity ratio seems very low. b. Rawa Buaya intersection The location is reserved for future highway crossing and space between the two crossings opposite the traffic is around 120 meter. Today the critical point is the right turns which is allowed on the corridor resulting from practically two signals with three phases each one. Final Recommendations for TransJakarta, p. 125
Page 1 and 2:
Making TransJakarta a World Class B
Page 3 and 4:
V. INCREASING THE BUSWAY’S CAPACI
Page 5 and 6:
The main reason the capacity on Tra
Page 7 and 8:
The Harmoni Station is a special pr
Page 9 and 10:
demand. If the single door bus and
Page 11 and 12:
The difference in terms of daily ri
Page 13 and 14:
This operational change would incre
Page 15 and 16:
I.7. Priorities for Next TransJakar
Page 17 and 18:
Lines Headway extension Travel time
Page 19 and 20:
While various BOT options are avail
Page 21 and 22:
That being said, pedestrian safety
Page 23 and 24:
II. INSTITUTIONAL RECOMMENDATIONS G
Page 25 and 26:
? DisHub procured a sub-optimal tic
Page 27 and 28:
had also visited BRT systems in Bra
Page 29 and 30:
encumber the TransJakarta BRT syste
Page 31 and 32:
An additional 34 buses were procure
Page 33 and 34:
Proposal to the City Maximum Points
Page 35 and 36:
indefinite period of time. In these
Page 37 and 38:
o 25 kilometers for stopping the bu
Page 39 and 40:
the greatest flexibility in terms o
Page 41 and 42:
prefer a ‘single-seat’ trip whe
Page 43 and 44:
principal contract. The software to
Page 45 and 46:
capability to do it, but they are n
Page 47 and 48:
operation would be public. In Bosto
Page 49 and 50:
TransJakarta’s ticketing departme
Page 51 and 52:
The verification of the tickets sol
Page 53 and 54:
trips, not a dollar amount. Each ti
Page 55 and 56:
add value to cards should be stored
Page 57 and 58:
IV.1. Projected Demand on Current C
Page 59 and 60:
and Kota, and Kalideras and Kota),
Page 61 and 62:
14 3 7 8 9 6.5 3 6 Shops stairs inv
Page 63 and 64:
Base scenario Lines Headway extensi
Page 65 and 66:
IV. 3. Demand Impact of Different F
Page 67 and 68:
Morning peak hour demand (paying pa
Page 69 and 70:
If both the Blue and Green Lines ar
Page 71 and 72:
The proposed fare was defined at Rp
Page 73 and 74: Jakarta - Desire Lines The current
Page 75 and 76: Passengers at Morning peak hour Lin
Page 77 and 78: Most urgently, TransJakarta should
Page 79 and 80: significant reduction of efficiency
Page 81 and 82: V.3.b. Mitigating Congestion Along
Page 83 and 84: V.3.e. Congestion Along Hayam Wuruk
Page 85 and 86: Existing Proposed 1 st S T A G E 2
Page 87 and 88: That being said, even after reconst
Page 89 and 90: VI. PHYSICAL DESIGN ISSUES ON CORRI
Page 91 and 92: For some high demand stations (such
Page 93 and 94: Corridor 2-3 Examples of minimum wi
Page 95 and 96: Bus Bus The offset of the pedestria
Page 97 and 98: Photo 2: Pulogadung - Flamboyan (Me
Page 99 and 100: VI.4.a.iii. ITDP and DisHub Suggest
Page 101 and 102: 3.5 2.5 1.5 0.5 3 2 1 0 0 10 20 30
Page 103 and 104: The typical cross section correspon
Page 105 and 106: Photo 6: Buses parking on express a
Page 107 and 108: traffic. This practice should not b
Page 109 and 110: ITDP recommendation (after the BRT
Page 111 and 112: Our proposal would be a simpler 2-p
Page 113 and 114: 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 5 10 15 2
Page 115 and 116: No suggestions, as right turns on c
Page 117 and 118: Photo 11: Roxy Mas trade center Rai
Page 119 and 120: 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 5 10 15 2
Page 121 and 122: 3.5 2.5 1.5 0.5 3 2 1 0 3.5 3 2.5 2
Page 123: 3.5 2.5 1.5 0.5 3 2 1 0 Type Sidewa
Page 127 and 128: . . 1 2 Off course the present U-tu
Page 129 and 130: period, and the expansion of the da
Page 131 and 132: Globally, the calibration is very s
show all

Making TransJakarta a World Class BRT System - ITDP | Institute for ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?