The debate on the Bus Rapid Transit System has been acrimonious, ranging from utter dismissal of the project to informed suggestions to revise the design.
No urban development project in the recent past has received so much attention as the Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) in Delhi. In April 2008, a dedicated 5.8-km bus lane was introduced as a pilot project. Two lanes at the centre of the road, one each way, were earmarked exclusively for buses to ensure uninterrupted flow. Of the remaining three lanes each way, two are meant for cars and two-wheelers and the last one is divided between pavement and cycle-users.
Opinions on the new system are split along the lines of what mode of transport one uses. While bus-users are relieved, and enjoy the comfort of the much-improved system, car-users who go through a long wait at traffic signals are not happy. The debates have been acrimonious ranging from utter dismissal of the project to informed suggestions for revising the design. Delhi’s experiment with BRT has become nationally important as about 10 cities, which have opted for BRTS, eagerly await the results of the debate.
Delhi is one of the mega cities in the world that is grappling with transportation. Its population is estimated to reach 23 million by 2021 and the transport demand is expected to increase from about 14 million (2001) to 28 million passenger trips (2021). Of these, 25 million would be motorised trips. Despite the alarming numbers and the fact that buses perform 60 per cent of the trips, the investment in public transport has been poor. Between 2005 and 2007, about two lakh cars were added to the city, while only 5,000 more buses joined the fleet. In spite of having a large network of roads, about 21 per cent of the city area, Delhi is infamous for its congestion, road accidents and pollution.
In 2002, the Delhi government set up a committee on sustainable transport. It recommended that mass transport be given priority. Fourteen road corridors were identified for priority bus lanes and five of them earmarked for the first phase. After a detailed study, the 19-km stretch between Ambedkar Nagar and ISBT was taken up first for implementation. The Delhi Integrated Multi Modal Transit System (DIMTS) was established to implement this corridor. The RITES was the project management consultant and the Transportation Research & Injury Prevention Programme (TRIPP) of the Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, provided the design. When the design was approved in 2005, the project was reduced to a 14-km stretch. The construction commenced in 2006 and the corridor was subsequently curtailed to a 5.8-km trial phase. BRTS has been in use since April 2008.
The initial reports of the trial run focussed on the chaos on roads. The media were hostile and car-users found it unacceptable. There was a hue and cry over the safety of the design, and demands were made for rejection of the project. However, the government did not decide to shelve it and recently announced that it was taking a re-look at the design, including possibilities of radical changes to the alignment.
Travelling in BRTS helps one realise its advantages better. The new buses are comfortable and the drive along the 5.8 km is smooth and quick. Nihar Singh, who has been driving for 29 years and operates on route 522, is immensely pleased with the quality of buses — the best he has driven, he says. Without hesitation he declares that the exclusive bus lane is a gift to bus-users. His conductor agrees and so do many others who travel in the bus. Drives on other routes feel the same way — the buses are useful and comfortable. A recent survey confirms that 83 per cent of all commuters are happy with the dedicated lane system of BRT and want it to continue (The Hindu, May 22 , 2008).
Car-owners have a different story to narrate. They complain about the long wait and reduced lane space. Earlier, cars could use four lanes. They have now been limited to two. The TRIPP team, on the contrary, claims that the lanes for cars have been increased. Earlier studies showed that cars could effectively use only one-and-a-half lanes but they have now been provided with two lanes. Car-users are not convinced. For K.T. Ravindran, president, Institute of Urban Designers India, the objective is to prioritise public transport. The reduced speed of cars and the relatively long wait are disincentives, according to him. A.G.K. Menon, a noted urban planner and frequent user of the stretch, feels what one loses out in terms of time at traffic signals is made up by a smooth and quick ride between them. To both Mr. Menon and Mr. Ravindran, BRT is not a stand-alone transport project, but is a part of the larger scheme to improve the environment.
The national integrated energy policy considers urban mass transport more fuel-efficient per passenger km. The transport sector accounted for consumption of 28 per cent of petroleum products in 2004-2005. The increased use of BRT, it is felt, will make a difference to fuel consumption. The national transport policy that laments the low share of buses in the total — a mere 1.1 per cent (2004) — clearly favours increased investment in public transportation.
The low capital cost, shorter travel time and reduced CO2 emissions have been BRTS’ major advantages as an alternative form of mass transport. It is estimated that BRT will cost Rs.5 crore to Rs.50 crore a km as against Rs.100 crore to Rs.1,000 crore a km of other kinds of mass rail systems. Among the public modes, it is the closest one can get in terms of shorter door-to-door transport time. In terms of CO2 emission, U.S. data show that a 40-foot long CNG-fuelled bus in a BRTS emits about 66 grams of CO2 per passenger mile, while a personal vehicle emits about 397 grams. To the much-polluted Delhi, any reduction on this front would literally bring in a breath of fresh air.
While the advantages of BRT are acknowledged, the debate in Delhi has shifted to safety and signal management issues. The bus lanes are in the middle of the road and bus stops are located closer to traffic signals. This, many say, is unsafe and has caused accidents. The TRIPP team explains that by locating bus shelters just before the junction, the bus dwell time and the bus waiting time at the red light could be combined to make pedestrian crossing easy. Many accidents are attributed to undisciplined crossing of the road. Sandeep is one of the many private security personnel who regulate the crossing near a BRTS bus stop. Even at 7 p.m., standing near Andrews Ganj, he has to be alert and watchful. His stories are all about careless pedestrian behaviour. But he is optimistic. “It will take time for people to learn to use the system and get disciplined.” It takes as many as seven traffic marshals to manage a busy BRTS junction.
Moving the bus lanesThe government has, meanwhile, decided to move the bus lanes to the left of the road. The TRIPP design report earlier considered this and rejected it. The argument was if the bus lanes were shifted to the left, the high volume of turning traffic would interfere with the through movement of the bus traffic. In addition, the buses would be forced to stop at every red signal with other vehicles reducing their efficiency. Foreign experts who recently examined the BRTS, as reported in Mail Today (May 16, 2008), also find the shifting of lanes counterproductive. The suggestions increasingly doing the rounds are relocation and redesign of bus stops to include a pedestrian foot overbridge. The visiting experts seem to think that the bus stops should be located about 70 metres away from the signal. On the other hand, the TRIPP team thinks shifting bus stops would increase walking time for interchanging passengers especially at heavy volume junctions. A foot overbridge would mean a 12-metre vertical climb to walk a 6-metre horizontal distance. This is not promising, they feel.
A.K. Sharma, transport planner and Dean of Studies, School of Planning and Architecture, Delhi, reminds us that design is one aspect but “unless overall travel options are improved, there may not be many new bus-users. First, buses have to be made safe for women to use.” The scope to fine-tune the design exists and safety measures could be added. It appears that the contestation here is more about who gets priority on roads. Penalosa, former mayor of Bogotá, in a recent interview to The New York Times, said constructing a good sidewalk is about constructing democracy. Not only sidewalks, bus lanes too have now come to express equality. A beginning has been made in Delhi and it needs to be supported.
© Copyright 2000 - 2008 The Hindu
1 comment:
BRTS, indeed any mass transit system, has a chance to succeed only if it is part of an integrated plan that includes at the micro level accessibility and quality of sidewalk activities and at the macro level inter-modal integration and a homogeneous development pattern with planned mixed land-use around the mass transit system.
A 5.8km stretch is never going to fully exemplify the benefits of an integrated system, on the contrary, it is only going to add to the traffic woes of the city. Unless that 5.8km stretch can significantly reduce the need for personal automobile use, there is no incentive or disincentive for the automobile user to take the bus.
What really needs to be done is for an integrated approach between the urban development authority, the transportation development authority and the city's government to lay down a homogeneous plan and have the conviction to implement it.
Post a Comment