Ahmedabad takes the bus
While other cities in India are planning new Metro systems to address their transport woes, Ahmedabad has thrown its weight behind Bus Rapid Transit instead. And given the may advantages this enjoys over rail - cost, potential, flexibility - it may prove to be the wiser choice, writes Madhav Pai.
With crumbling transport infrastructure in many of our cities, various solutions to tackle this are being proposed around the country, and huge investments are in the pipeline. Interestingly, while the attention of nearly every other metropolitan area seems fixed on rail-based systems (Metros) as the solution, Ahmedabad has taken a different route, placing its faith in bus rapid transport. The merit of this alternative is worth examining, as in the coming years many other cities will travel down the congested paths that the major metropolitan areas already find themselves in.
Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) takes part of its name from “Rapid Transit”, which describes a high-capacity transport system with its own right-of-way, implemented using buses through infrastructural and scheduling improvements, to provide a high level of service. Complicated as it sounds, this is nothing but high-capacity articulated buses operating in lanes reserved for their exclusive use.
Segregation - the first step
Would dedicated lanes for buses mean sub-optimal use of already over-capacity roadways? No. Segregation by vehicle type or travel mode is the key to improving traffic flow. Flow theorists studying transport always emphasize homogeneity. On a typical arterial road, buses account for about 10% of the total traffic, but can occupy twice that percentage of road space in terms of area. Given that there is a bus stop every 1.5 to 2 kilometres, imagine the road space consumed by the least manoeuvrable traffic, that is additionally changing lanes back and forth regularly. To add to the problem, buses typically stop 5-7 feet away from the kerb in many locations; this space around the bus stop is anyway eliminated from use due the overflow of passengers waiting at the bus station. In a BRT system the median and the inner most lane or the left most lane can be dedicated to the bus. In case of median lanes bus stops or stations can be built in the median to further improve the flow. Passengers are allowed to cross at the nearest signal or intersections.
It might seem criminal to eliminate one lane of traffic for buses. However, experiences from around the globe, contrary to expectation, tell us that in fact BRT systems have improved traffic flow in the non-BRT lanes too. The segregation of traffic is one of the big reasons for this. A well implemented efficiently-run BRTS will also cause citizens to switch travel modes from car to bus, which will further alleviate the traffic situation.
Planning road volumes
In India, roads are often designed to take a particular number of users, say 30,000 persons per hour per direction. But the demand for use of any one road tells us only part of the story; looking at corridor volumes using a travel demand model is a flawed approach. It is like designing for 30,000 people to travel from A and B, not from their home to work or education institution and vice versa. Travel Demand does not work like that, it exists between origins and destinations, not along point A and point B on an arterial. Hence a service which delivers passengers from their desired origins to their desired destinations should be concieved while designing roadways.
At the same time existing BRTS, like the Trans Millenio in the Colombian capital Bogota, claim to carry 40,000 passengers per hour per direction. A certain degree of infrastructural and design innovation is required to achieve this goal, but it has been proved possible. A single dedicated lane BRTS is known to carry 20,000 passengers per hour per direction. A second lane at bus stops for overtaking has shown to double the system capacity.
And at what cost?
If dedicated bus lanes are so efficient, should we be choosing these instead of Metros for the big cities? Is a 30-km Metro really better than a 500-km BRTS? A comparison between the Delhi Metro and Ahmedabad’s BRT project is instructive.
Experiences from around the globe tell us that BRT systems have improved traffic flow in the non-BRT lanes too.
• Pune’s BRT stumbles at start
The first phase of the Delhi metro is 64 kms. The capital cost of Phase I was estimated as Rs.6000 crores at Apr 1996 price levels. However, taking into account the cost escalation during the construction period of nearly eight years, the completion cost was Rs.10,571 crores. That’s a whopping Rs.165 crores per km. The Bangalore metro project, which recently got off the ground, will be similar in cost; its projected cost of Rs.6500 crores at today’s price levels works out to Rs.178 crores per km, even without accounting for the cost escalation. Almost certainly, the completed cost will be higher.
The Ahmedabad BRT project comprises of creating a 150-km long two-way corridor for swanky 70-seat buses; existing circular roads and some arterial roads will be widened for these to ply, and encroachments from certain portions will be removed. The first tender issued is for the 10-km stretch of road between Naroda and Thakkar Bapanagar in phase-I, at a cost of Rs 75-crore, to be completed in 18-24 months after the bid is finalised. That’s a mere 7.5 crores a km, a tenth of the costs for a Metro. A second tender will be issued for another 8-km Naroda-Chiloda stretch next month, also as part of phase-I.
Higher costs for Metros may be acceptable, if they are accompanied by substantially higher benefits to the transport infrastructure’s current woes. But look at how Delhi’s Metro is functioning. The expected ridership in 2005 was 15 lakh passenger trips per day. Today, after more than a year of being in service, the system actually gets about 4.5 lakh passengers a day. It is very easy to blame the travel demand forecasting model for incorrectly forecasting ridership. How can these be so different? One explanation is the lack of connectivity at ends of the metro lines. This is very similar to the ‘A to B’ example cited above.
Flexibility - another reason for BRTS
An important advantage of BRTS is its flexibility. Like in Ahmedabad, the system can first be implemented over a 10 km stretch. This first-phase system should be in operation in less than 2 years. This approach lends itself to incremental learning of the problem, and eliminating mistakes as the development proceeds. The relatively low implementation costs also don’t leave taxpayers tied to one particular technology or solution. And at the operational level, design changes in response to new concerns are also relatively simple to make even after the system is under operation. A fixed-line Metro at high cost offers none of this flexibility.
A number of other advantages too can accrue from BRTS, but these greatly depend upon design, as well as adaptation of design to local conditions and implementation. Even without those, however, it is quite likely that bus rapid transit is the more profitable solution for many cities. It is very encouraging though to see Ahmedabad make the bold decision to go with BRTS, against the conventional wisdom that favours Metros. As many as 35 cities in the world have successful BRTS, including five in China, besides North and Latin America and Europe. One successful implementation in Ahmedabad could lead to a windfall of equitable, sustainable, affordable and environment-friendly BRTS projects across the country.
Filed under
Cite this article
Madhav Pai (2006) ‘Ahmedabad takes the bus’, India Together, 17 May 2006. https://indiatogether.org/brts-economy/
6 reader responses
Add a response
Prashanth · 28 May 2006
Very interesting article. But, I still cannot understand how can one fit a BTR in the narrow lands of Shivajinagar Road or Airport Road in Bangalore. How will you ensure that the other vehicles, which at the moment wont even spare the pavements for passengers, follow the line discipline?
Sudhir Jatar · 10 June 2006
BRT is no doubt an answer to the traffic woes. However, it is essential to consider the following: a. In no city with more that 10 million population, has the BRT been tried out. b. In most cities where BRT has succeeded, the land use pattern has first been decided to suit the construction of BRT. E.g. in Curitiba, the city first constructed three parallel corridors and ensured development of residential/commercial complexes around the three corridors. After this, the three corridors were designated for BRT. c. In already developed city centres, there is no alternative to Metro rail, however expensive. d. I understand that a Swedish consultant carried out a feasibility study for a BRT in Bangalore in 1999-2000 and found that it was not suitable except for the ring roads. If you have information about this, we would be happy if you could please share it with us. Sudhir Jatar Pune Traffic & Transportation Forum (NGO)
Kashyap Shukla · 14 June 2006
I would definitely favour BRTS because of its two big advantages: Flexibility and Adaptiveness.. However, there are other issues worth thinking about ... firstly, all successful BRT systems have the advantage of Land Use Planning approach ... In a city like Ahmedabad, it's very difficult for the govt to predict and design this kind of system. Secondly, enforcement ... it's pretty difficult to prevent people from using those dedicated bus lanes while BRTS buses are not running (e.g. during night time).
C. Ramachandraiah · 11 July 2006
I would like to know more details about a BRT in big city. A feasibility study for BRT was conducted Hyderabad in 2004-05. The government of AP has more or less accepted the policy for BRT. But was abandoned later. It seems there were difficulties in widening the roads for 'right of way' which is very much necessary for BRT. But now, the state government is pushing the elevated Metro and the streets are going to be widened for the same. I would like to know how many cities have elevated metro (Delhi model) through the thick of the city. Will be thankful for any information on this.
Sujit Patwardhan · 17 February 2007
I find it strange that even those who understand the importance of Public Transport in reducing congestion, pollution and urban blight (caused by auto dominated city development) ask how BRT can work on congested and narrow roads. The implication seems to be that BRT is OK when planners have a chance of putting it on virgin lands, laying out special extra wide roads and putting in place proper land use policies, but when roads are crowded and narrow as in most inner core city areas, and already jammed with traffic, a BRT (by taking away part of the road width) will make the problem worse. Nothing could be farther from the truth. It is precisely because there is (ever increasing) congestion on inner roads that a BRT solution should be considered. A well planned and executed BRT bus running in dedicated lanes, can carry over 70 commuters per bus - imagine 70 less autos on the road. Also appreciate that with dedicated lanes the bus will not obstruct other traffic when coming into the bus stop or leaving a bus stop to re-join the flow of traffic, neither will its speed be reduced by other vehicles coming in its path. If executed properly BRT will start attracting commuters from other modes as it will be seen as a faster, safer and a more comfortable option. It is necessary to look at BRT not from the perspective of a car owner or a scooter owner but from the perspective of the city, where majority of commuters walk, cycle or use Public Transport to commute each day. The issue of Metro is a subject by itself, but Bogota with a population of 7 million is moving more commuters in its TransMilenio buses than many metro sytems costing far more, and there are many cities around the globe with population in the range of 3 to 7 million that could be transformed if they go in for a BRT system which is affordable, flexible and comfortable enough to woe commuters away from the personal auto vehicle modes. That I think is the most urgent need for most large and growing cities. Sujit Patwardhan Pune Traffic & Transportation Forum
Nirav Vidwans · 5 May 2007
Currently working on Ahmedabad BRT System at CEPT, I perceive it to be an efficient way of handling congestion of traffic. It is an ordered way to bring and/or attract private/personal vehicles to mass transport means. This system would definitely provide reduction in pollution provided that Indian public mentality changes and shifts to awareness of use of public transport system. In city like Ahmedabad with highest counts of 2-wheelers it is necessary to introduce a BRTS. Many issues obstruct this venture, but it is in benefit of the community and a big leap towards sustainable development. The system is definitely going to work on wider ROW on external ring roads with lower traffic load, but it is a challenge to introduce BRT on the internal road network. Mixed traffic speed reduction is one of the major issues , but it would benefit the BRTS. Exclusive bus corridor (BRT) has proved fatal in Pune, but it cannot be blamed that the concept is false. Though at a very initial level in Ahmedabad this project and this system could help us to shape our city.