The experimental Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system in Delhi, which reserves a portion of the road space to facilitate fast movement of the high capacity buses and prioritises public transport over private, has been facing a barrage of vitriolic media criticism, ever since its inception.
A wary Union Urban Development Ministry has now ordered a review of the Rs 2,883 crore BRT plan for eight other cities - Ahmedabad, Bhopal, Indore, Jaipur, Pune, Rajkot, Vizag and Vijaywada. Apart from this, Chennai is also planning BRT, under a separate funding pattern.
The controversy had put a question mark over the future of mobility in urban India. Before we apply permanent break under political and media pressure, on a system, which had succeeded in several big cities across the world, we need to pause, reflect and take lessons.
Cities across India are now choked with cars. Between 1981 and 2001 on an average, population in the six metro cities had multiplied by 1.8 times but the number of vehicles by over 6 times. With 1396 cars per square kilometre,Chennai now has higher car density, than vastly more affluent Berlin. The crisis is sure to escalate further, as the new set of mini cars hits the roads, in near future.
Cars occupy 75% of road space and are used by less than 15% of the populace even in the most affluent Indian cities. In contrast, buses occupy a mere 8% of road area and are used by almost 20 to 60% of the people. Pedestrians and cyclists constitute an overwhelming 40 to 75% but are completely marginalized in our planning system, as major part of the budget allocation are consumed for road widening or flyover building, which primarily benefit cars and two wheelers.
Compare this with New York, London, Paris or Singapore – the high temples of international finance – cities where people get around on foot, by cab or via mass transit. Urban policies discourage private cars. With oil prices consistently hovering above hundred dollars a barrel, and the threats of global warming looming large, there is a clear need to reprioritise our urban transportation policy in favour of public transit.
Amongst, the major urban mass transit options, the road based bus rapids, are much more economical in terms of capital costs and offer greater operational flexibility compared to the rail based systems like Metro or Light Rail Transit (LRT). For the cost of one km of a metro system, about 8 to 10km of LRT or 30-50 km modern bus network can be developed. In terms of day-to-day running costs and ability to move large number of people in high speed, dedicated bus transits enjoy certain advantages over LRT systems.
However, electric powered rail based systems are environmentally more sustainable – when running in full capacity and had been better able to attract motorists as, many stations offer park and ride facility. They also enjoy a better public image. In India, the Delhi Metro, has emerged as benchmark of efficiency in public service, even though, running under huge state subsidy.
It is off course wrong to see different mass transit options in ‘either-or’ context, as the great cities, frequently have a combination of all– most often with integrated ticketing and connection at key junctions for seamless transfer. The bus rapids, light rails and tramways frequently act as feeder to the metro system.
The appropriateness of the transit alternative depends on ridership pattern and economic profile of the area. Another important factor in integrated planning is scalability. That is, a particular region may start with BRT, with an eventual plan of changing over to LRT or full fledged metro, at a future date, with increase in demand.
Rede Integrada de Transporte, the world’s first bus rapid transit, was pioneered way back in 1974, in the Brazilian industrial city of Curitiba. Enrique Peñalosa, the former mayor of Columbia’s capital Bogotá, started the famed Transmileno BRT in 2001 as part of his visionary concept of a more inclusive urban space, by giving the city back to the people -through an integrated policy for pedestrian and cycle friendly streets and affordable mass transit. He had to overcome extreme political hostility.
The Transmileno is now universally acknowledged as the most advanced BRT system, and operates almost like a surface metro – even with grade separation in stretches. It has attractive stations with wheel chair access, bicycle parking and air conditioned low floor buses. The central control room monitors bus movements, round the clock, through GPS and synchronies traffic lights.
The success of Bogotá, had inspired other bus rapids like the Los Angles Orange Line, Ottawa Transitway, and Adelaide O-bahn. The Chinese cities are going big on BRT and Beijing one will be opened before the Olympics.
Success in other countries off course does not guarantee success of BRT in India, as we have a unique heterogeneous traffic pattern – over speeding cars, zigzagging bikers, slow push carts, jay walking pedestrians – all jostling for road space, with little regard for road discipline.
On the other hand, adverse feedback from a small stretch in South Delhi does not mean that BRT cannot succeed elsewhere in India, for each city has certain inherent internal characteristics.
Mumbai, Chennai or Kolkata have much more compact urban form, longer tradition of public transit and better road discipline than Delhi. The Delhi NCR has sprawling spatial pattern, great distances and more cars than the combined figure of the other three metros.
Although appropriate at a broad conceptual level, the BRT implementation in Delhi had suffered due to poor detailing and lack of interdisciplinary coordination amongst the stake holder agencies.
Undoubtedly, cars and two wheelers offer most comfortable, door to door journey, particularly for distances up to 15-20 km. Since the primary objective of the BRT is to reduce road congestion, all successful systems in the world offer high-quality vehicles that are easy to board, clean and comfortable to ride.
But what appeared in Delhi BRT are the accident prone, rickety tin-pot Blueline buses- charging down the road in competitive frenzy. The high capacity low floor buses originally proposed for the segment were found grossly inadequate in numbers. Obviously, the bus procurement plan and BRT implementation were not synchronized.
The Delhi Metro, in contrast, from the very beginning, had caught the public imagination, with its spic and span image, punctuality and attention to quality. Urban India is no longer willing to accept the murky and the obsolete.
The pedestrians, who should normally have the first claim on the road in any matured city, have become the missing dimension in our transportation policy. Be it the BRT or any other newly opened flyover, which criss-cross our cities today. Desperate ladies, trying to jump over the medians or old men running through the maze of traffic to cross the road – are sights common enough in India, to generate bewilderment.
Thus the BRT has bus stops along the central verge, but without any quick crossover. In our country, pedestrian crossovers get built only after a few fatalities – as an afterthought. Elevated foot over bridges with long stair climbs are off course a cruel joke on the disabled and the aged. But then who cares?
The BRT or any other transit system to become successful needs to grow beyond mere traffic engineering. Socio cultural parameters need to be built in, right from the conceptualisation stage. The issue of equity and social justice, in the urban physical realm are seldom explored. We need to make our urban transportation policies more inclusive, equitable and sustainable. But the crux of the challenge lies in a co-ordinated policy implementation. Failing this, the future of mobility in urban India will forever remain stuck in jam.
