Table of Contents

Executive Summary Introduction Need for Better Public Transport in Mumbai Investments in Public Transport in India What is BRTS? Why BRTS? BRTS Around the World and in India Implementing BRTS in Mumbai Past Attempts at BRTS in Mumbai Need for Political Will ORF Recommendations Appendix: Key contributors to Roundtable Discussions Abbreviations and acronyms References i iii 1 6 10 12 17 25 34 35 38 41 42 43

Acknowledgments
The Observer Research Foundation (ORF) Mumbai expresses its deepest gratitude to Dario Hidalgo, Global Director of Research and Practice, and Madhav Pai, Director, EMBARQ, for their wholehearted support to this study. The study would not have been possible without the sizeable contributions of urban transport planner Ashok Datar, the Chairman of Mumbai Environmental Social Network, and transport engineer and planner Sudhir Badami. Thanks are also due to ORFs Research Fellow Deepa Dinesh, who researched significant details for this report despite the pressure of deadlines. We are also thankful to all the participants in the two roundtable conferences organised by ORF on this subject. Their experienced insights and expertise provided important inputs for this report.

Executive Summary

ublic transport in Mumbai, Indias commercial capital, has witnessed a sharp decline in overall quality and quantity in the last two decades. The Brihanmumbai Electric Supply and Transport (BEST) Undertaking, which operates the citys municipal bus services, once globally recognised for its reach and efficiency, has buckled under the extreme pressures of an everincreasing population and unprecedented expansion of the suburbs. The Western Railway and Central Railway-run suburban railway services, considered to be citys lifeline, have remained largely unsuccessful in coping with everyday pressures. The travel conditions inside the cramped train coaches that ferry approximately 65 lakh commuters daily make the proverbial sardines in a can seem quite comfortable. The 109 railway stations that dot the suburban railway network are bereft of even the most basic commuter amenities. To make matters worse, people have to bear the whims of the other two key modes of public transport operators in the city auto rickshaws and the black and yellow taxis which, backed by powerful trade unions, often hold the commuters to ransom. Numerous studies commissioned by state authorities and carried out by the Indian Institute of Technology Bombay have in the past highlighted the urgent need for creating an integrated mass public transport policy for not just Mumbai city, but for the entire Mumbai Metropolitan Region (MMR), which today forms one of the fastest growing urban agglomerations in the country. But for the implementation of the capital intensive Metro corridors whose real effectiveness and benefit to the people is yet to be measured, the government has mainly focused on spending thousands of crores of rupees of public funds to create a transport infrastructure that caters exclusively to the needs of private car owners. A case in point in the Rs. 1,600 crore Bandra-Worli Sea Link and its proposed two-phased extension from Worli to Haji Ali and onward to Nariman Point, as part of the Western Freeway Sea Link project. The ambitious Western Freeway Sea Link eventually envisages linking up Bandra to Versova, extending up to Borivali in the north through a long network of sea bridges and coastal roads. Against this, plans like the Bus Rapid Transport (BRT) corridors, which have been successful in providing a sustainable solution to public transport problems in many countries the world over, and which are expected to cost a small fraction of the Bandra-Worli Sea Link, have gathered dust for last 10 years. That the swanky AC buses procured under the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM) funds exclusively for the citys proposed BRT system are being currently pushed into the regular BEST service is a testimony to the callous attitude of the authorities toward the implementation of BRT in Mumbai. Sadly, but for a few failed attempts, the government has not even actively considered utilising the citys vast coastline to create waterways as a means for mass transport, or even to supplement the existing modes. According to a Comprehensive Transport Survey (CTS) commissioned in 2005 by the World Bank, 2.83 crore commuter trips are made in MMR daily. Of this, 52.42 percent commuters reach their work places on foot, 24.62 percent commute to work by local trains, 12.53 percent use public bus services, 3.73 percent ride on two-wheelers, 4.50 percent use auto rickshaws / taxis and only 2.20 percent commuters use cars. The CTS was conducted over a two year period and made public in 2007.

ii

Given the current state of affairs, all of these commuters groups are left fuming: Train commuters, who do a vast majority of the trips, complain as their daily grind has, in a sense redefined the term cattle class travel. Pedestrians complain as they do not have any space to walk the footpaths are mainly non-existent and wherever present, they are either dangerously dilapidated or encroached upon by hawkers, and in some parts, even by pavement hutments. Bus commuters are fed up not just due to the unending wait for buses, but due to the crawl of the BEST buses that travel at an average speed of 12-15 kmph. Given the pothole-riddled roads, two-wheeler riders risk their lives every time they take a ride. The commuters who use taxis and auto rickshaws the two key feeder transit options to reach the railway stations besides the BEST buses are often the victims of blatant overcharging and sick of the constant refusal of the taxi and autowallahs to ply short distances. Car owners, on the other hand, complain of the traffic congestion, often having to spend 2-3 hours covering distances of less than 30 km. Evidently, the philosophy of the authorities and transport planners in Mumbai revolves around ensuring smooth movement of vehicles, completely ignoring the basic principle of urban transport planning, which must essentially focus on and facilitate Moving People, Not Cars. Sustainable mass public transport, along with other civic amenities and public infrastructure, is one of the key components of future planning and development of a city. Sadly, the lack of an integrated public policy for public governance has adversely impacted the quality of life for the citizens of Mumbai. This report uses primary data gathered through consultations, and also relies on secondary inputs to understand the current complexities and challenges with respect to mass transport in Mumbai. It studies the existing transport patterns of the people of Mumbai and, through several Indian and international case studies, analyses the critical financial and technical aspects for the implementation of a BRT system in the city. This report puts forth concrete recommendations for the government to facilitate the implementation of a BRT system in Mumbai and strongly backs the creation of an empowered Unified Metropolitan Transport Authority (UMTA) for MMR.

iii

Introduction

ustainable transport can be broadly defined as any means of public transport which is environmentally-friendly, and which focuses on speedy mobility of the masses without compromising basic travel comforts. It includes all forms of transport that fulfill these aspects walking, cycling, road, rail and water-based transport, car pooling etc. In other words, it promotes all means of mass transport that are easily accessible by all, high on fuel efficiency, healthy and space saving. Sustainable transport systems, when combined with other wider concerns of socioeconomic and environmental sustainability as part of holistic and integrated urban town planning, contribute positively to the environmental, social and economic interests of the communities they serve1. While referring to sustainability, we have to keep in mind the three Ps People, Planet and Profit; this is referred to as the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) 2. According to an Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report, in 2004, the transport sector contributed to 23 percent of the worlds total energy-related CO2 emissions. Its growth rate was the highest registered among all the end-user sectors. If the current growth pattern continues, the share of transportrelated CO2 emissions is expected to increase exponentially by 2030. These are not sustainable trends. The road fatalities, time taken to commute and the air/noise pollution cause considerable impacts to peoples health. Additionally, the loss of time and lower productivity due to road congestion and traffic adversely affect the economy. Globally, urban centres, which have the largest concentration of private vehicles, have with varying degrees of success accorded top priority for an early and effective mitigation of this problem by introducing all possible sustainable and mass public transport solutions. Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) is widely recognised as one of the effective components of sustainable transport3. For a city like Mumbai, just as for numerous other cities across the world where it has been successfully implemented, the BRTS, along with metro or light rail is considered to be one of the most cost-efficient, environmentally friendly and socially beneficial modes of mass public transport. With increasing congestion and travel time, equitable use of road space and the importance of timely mobility ought to drive public policy on urban transportation. If Mumbai wants to be recognised as a world-class city, it needs to focus more on improving the quality and quantity of its public transport. Mumbai has been discussing BRTS for over a decade. Initial efforts for a BRTS for Mumbai started around 2001. Since then, there have been numerous visits by experts and administrators who have successfully implemented BRT systems worldwide, as well as public fora and various committees formed under the government. We have heard a number of times from globally renowned urban planners like Mr. Enrique Penelosa, the former Mayor of Bogota in Columbia, about the sustainability and efficacy of a BRT system. Mr. Dario Hidalgo, another expert who successfully implemented BRTS in Bogota and several other global cities, has strongly recommended it for Mumbai. Noted Indian transport experts like Prof. Dinesh Mohan, Prof. Geetam Tiwari and Prof. Shivanand Swamy have also underscored its need for Mumbai. Despite these efforts, there has been no concrete progress and a BRTS solution for Mumbai is still pending. The government has also carried out extensive feasibility studies for its implementation. So what is stopping us from taking forward this important initiative? While we are still stuck discussing BRTS in Mumbai, Ahmedabad, in the neighboring state of Gujarat, has already added 44.5 km of fully functioning BRTS lanes. By March 2012, further 9 kms will be added to the network, which will eventually cover a total intercity network length of
4

88.5 kms. The Janmarg BRTS of Ahmedabad is currently used daily by 1.5 lakh commuters 4. BRTS in Delhi and Pune, after initial problems, largely due to unplanned and haphazard implementation, is being slowly welcomed by its bus commuters. Jaipur, Surat and many other cities are in their detailed engineering design stage. In order to understand the problems and to generate serious discussion in favor of BRTS, the Observer Research Foundation (ORF) Mumbai and EMBARQ jointly organised a half-day roundtable discussion on BRTS for Mumbai Why We mustHow We Can! on Tuesday, 2nd March, 2010. The purpose of this meeting was to look at the roadblocks to implementation of BRTS in Mumbai and create a roadmap for the future to ensure its successful development. The ORF roundtable was aimed at bringing experts, transport analysts and activists along with officials from Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (MMRDA) to discuss the developments and to pave the way ahead. On 4th October 2011, the issue of sustainable transport for Mumbai was again discussed at a day-long roundtable conference organised by ORF and the Berlin-based Rosa Luxemburg Stiftung, one of Germanys largest political studies institutions. This event, which focused on four critical, and long-neglected, issues for creating an Inclusive Mumbai: slums, the plight of the millions engaged with the unorganised labour sector, citizens participation in city governance and sustainable and affordable public transportation options. The key discussion points from these roundtable consultations, various policy recommendations distilled from the study of transport policies and analyses of state expenditure on public transport infrastructure form the basis of this report. Please see the Appendix for a list of the key participants at both roundtables. This report makes a case for better road-based public transport systems, which rely on optimum utilisation of road space for transporting the maximum number of people.

Need for Better Public Transport in Mumbai

The city is not made up of machines. It is made up of people so we have to give people the priority.
Jamie Lerner Former mayor of Curitiba, Brazil A rapidly urbanising India is seeing a corresponding increase in demand for a number of urban services and infrastructure. Mobility being a critical need of urban existence, there has been a considerable rise in the number of daily trips being made by urban residents, leading to the now familiar features of overcrowded public transport systems and roads choked with vehicular traffic in all Indian metropolises. Public transport plays a key role in the economic and social growth of any urban agglomeration. The ease and speed with which citizens can move from one location to another impacts productivity and health. Reducing transit times can also improve social capital and community building. Industries and commercial bodies decide where to locate on the basis of public transport facilities and so do families.

An integration of land use and transport planning will be very important to create a sustainable system in MMR.

The presence of an efficient public transport system was a strong reasons for Mumbais economic progress historically with the city having one of the best-run suburban railway networks and the BEST buses providing continuous mobility for millions of commuters. The role of public transport in Mumbais economic growth and social development will only increase in the future and hence it is important to take a deliberate and planned approach to expand the transport provisions through various modes. This expansion needs to be seen in the context of the Mumbai Metropolitan Region (MMR) and not just Greater Mumbai. An integration of land use and transport planning will be very important to create a sustainable system. While this is well understood as a planning principle, there is a discernible lack of incorporation of these principles in our City Development Plans. The ongoing work for the preparation of Mumbais new Development Plan and Development Control Rules provides an ideal opportunity to the citys political leadership and city planners to take a holistic view of all these aspects and make adequate infrastructure provisions to facilitate the entire regions integrated and, importantly, sustainable and socially beneficial future development. The past five years have seen the emergence of Metro Corridors and Light Rail as long-term solutions for public transport in Mumbai. Water transport seems to make little or no progress, although a perceived need exists. The MMR has seen considerable activity in terms of the development of new centres of commercial growth and residential settlements. New rail lines have emerged where there were none till a decade ago and road-based transport has increased exponentially. Unfortunately, despite these developments, the time taken for any intercity commute over even short distances has increased hinting that congestion has worsened despite growing road transport capacity. Although the percentage of commuter trips using public transport has reduced marginally over the past two decades, in absolute terms, they still far outnumber trips taken by private transport. Only three percent of all commute trips in Mumbai are made using private transport. The kind of conditions under which Mumbais suburban railway
6

network commuters have to travel and the fact that the average speed of BEST buses hovers around 15 kmph does not speak well of the state of public transport in the city. The conditions in the trains and the increased commute times in the BEST buses are encouraging more commuters to use private transport. This modal shift correspondingly leads to increased congestion on the roads and commute times. During the 14-year time period from 1991 to 2005, the population of the Mumbai Metropolitan Region (MMR) grew by 43 percent. However, during this period, while suburban rail trips have grown by 35 percent, bus trips have increased by only nine percent5. The huge increases in the number of two wheeler and auto rickshaw trips often serving many rail commuters for the start and end of their commuting journey in place of traditional bus service may explain the minimal growth in bus trips. Car ownership and taxi registration increased by over 100 percent during this time period. The following table shows the growth trend in various transport indicators during the period 1991-2005. Indicators of % increase of public transport use (1991-2005) Suburban train daily trips 35% Bus daily trips 9% Registered cars 137% Registered two wheelers 306% Registered auto rickshaws 420% Registered taxis 128% Registered commercial vehicles 200%
Source: EMBARQ Bus Karo 2010

Solutions towards enhancing mobility will have to draw a fine balance between efficient use of financial resources and identifying the most appropriate transport systems. Only this will lead to the provision of best combination of services for the largest number of commuters. An ideal transport policy would have an optimum mix of rail and road, and in case of a coastal city like Mumbai, even waterways. On the contrary, all efforts in Mumbai have been primarily skewed towards rail-based systems and private transport. While rail-based systems are important, it is necessary to realise that there has been a gradual increase in overall trips and road-based systems will have to be developed simultaneously as a key supply augmentation. A rational use of road space will have to be followed to avoid grid locks and high commute times on the road. Accordingly, public investments will have to be allocated in a manner that supports an optimal mix of modes. At present, the Government of Maharashtra has approved (as of March 2010) the remaining two phases of the Western Freeway Sea Link. The Rs. 5,000 Crore Worli-Haji Ali Sea Link (3.20 km) will be developed in Phase 1, while work on the Rs. 6,000 Crore Haji Ali-Nariman Point Sea Link will be taken up in Phase 2. However, it is to be noted that the construction of the 5.4-km-long Bandra-Worli Sea Link began in 2001 with an estimated cost of Rs. 400 crore, but ended up spending Rs. 1600 crore of public funds when it was finally inaugurated in July 2009, after a delay of five years from its original commissioning target of 2004. These sea links, though necessary, cater almost exclusively to private transport. By contrast, investments in BRTS are estimated to be a mere Rs. 1,500 crore for a 50-km system. The sea links would have served their real purpose and also been the citys proud and modern infrastructure marvels in the true sense, had they come up after the government had first cared to create alternative means of robust mass public transport systems to provide relief to the citys teeming masses, and not just to car owners.

As public transport is a public good, government authorities have an important As public transport is a public responsibility to plan and make equitable good, government authorities provisions for it. In this regard there is a vital need for a nodal agency to plan transportation have an important for the whole of MMR. Creating a Unified responsibility to plan and make Metropolitan Transport Authority (UMTA) would equitable provisions for it. be the most appropriate institutional framework for ensuring that best practices and principles are incorporated and implemented while planning public transport for Mumbai in the coming decade. Currently, the Unified Mumbai Metropolitan Transport Authority (UMMTA), which is being merged with the MMRDA, will continue to be meaningless until all public transport services being run by the municipal corporations of Greater Mumbai, Thane, Navi Mumbai, Kalyan-Dombivali and Mira-Bhayandar are merged to form a single transport authority for the entire MMR. The MMR and Mumbai, are facing a complex set of dynamics: A rapidly growing population Limited road space Changing pressures of modern lifestyles The rise of economic ambitions driving up car ownership Increased urban expansion and changing land use

All these factors have only worked to exacerbate present city transport crisis. The situation degenerate further unless something is done to create a system of sustainable, desirable and efficient public transportation. In 2005 the Government of Maharashtra through the MMRDA embarked on the Comprehensive Transport Plan for Mumbai known as Transform (Transportation Study for the Region of Mumbai) with the prime objective of identifying travel patterns of residents in MMR and recommending long-term comprehensive transportation strategies for the region up to 2031. This initiative falls under the World Bank-funded Mumbai Urban Transport Project (MUTP). The authorities need to understand the future of public transportation in MMR in the context of the Comprehensive Transport Study (CTS) report findings on the various modes of transport being used by citizens of Mumbai for their daily trips. The CTS was commissioned by the World Bank and carried out by the Canadian firm LEA International in 2005. The findings of this survey, which took three years to complete, were made public in 20086. Currently, 63 percent of Mumbais total population of 12.4 million resides in slums. Many of these people walk or cycle to work. As a result, over half the trips made in Mumbai are on foot. According to the Bus Karo guidebook on bus planning and operations published by EMBARQ in 2010, if we do not consider the mode share of walking, rail has the highest mode share with 52 percent followed by bus with 26 percent7. The remaining 22 percent of motorised trips use vehicles including rickshaws, taxis, cars and two-wheelers. Even though these trips account for only 22 percent of total trips, they are responsible for much of the heaviest congestion.

Some key comments from the CTS providing relevant data and forward looking statements for strengthening road based public transportation are tabulated and graphically represented in the following page. Despite the shocking findings of this report, the MMRDAs Regional Plan currently states the following about Public Transport: Major modes of transport used are train and bus, together accounting for 87 percent of the total trips. Modes other than bus and train are used significantly by the higher income groups and mostly for purposes other than work. A large proportion of the trips by bus and train cost less than one rupee per trip. Transport facilities in general are found to be satisfactory by a majority of the households except in Kalyan and Navi Mumbai. Coming from the states top urban planning agency, the above considered view, which seems to have formed the basis for the preparation of the Regional Plan for the entire MMR, seems quite myopic when compared with the situation on the ground. The grim public transport scenario in Mumbai and the governments obsession with facilitating private transportation options lends credence to the following quote by renowned India-born British town planner Colin Buchanan, who said in 1963:

We are nourishing at immense cost a monster of great potential destructiveness, and yet we love him dearly. The Motor Car.

Highlights of the CTS Report (2008) Over the years, minimum average travel speed in the Island city has fallen from 18 to 8 km/h whereas, in spite of major capacity expansion programmes underway, maximum average travel speed has shown marginal increase from 25 to 30 km/h, which is primarily due to construction of flyovers reducing location specific (and movement specific) delays. Most of the network remains highly congested. A total of about 2 crore people in MMR make about 2.85 crore journeys (trips) every day, counting going-to and coming-back separately. More than half of these journeys, about 1.5 crore, are made entirely on foot. Another 1.35 crore are made by a combination of modes, at least one of which is motorised. It has been estimated that all these journeys total to about 25 crore km of travel every day. The first challenge is to improve MMRs public transport system to accommodate the growth of population and employment. This can be achieved by capacity enhancements to the existing suburban railway system; creating new metro corridors; connecting major existing and planned activity centres of the region; providing exclusive bus lanes to reinforce rail-based transit with a higher order road based public transport system. Transit First is a guiding principle. Total travel during morning peak period (6:00 to 11:00 AM) is expected to increase from 4.75 million motorised trips to 10.00 million trips by 2031. Most of these trips need to be supported by public transport modes.

Mumbai Travel Demand Main Mode (Average Working Day): 2005 Main Mode Walk Train Bus Rickshaw Taxi Two Wheeler Car Total Trips per day 1,48,50,000 69,75,000 35,50,000 10,50,000 2,25,000 10,50,000 6,25,000 2,83,25,000

Source: CTS, 2008

10

Investments in Public Transport in India

National policies for improving public transport in India:
There are a number of national policies that emphasise the improvement of public transport in urban areas in India. Some of them are: Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM) The JNNURM is a nationwide mission launched by the Central Government in December 2005 to facilitate 63 select Indian cities for urban renewal with huge grants in infrastructure and governance. The aim of the mission is to encourage reforms and fast-tracked planned development of identified cities with focus on efficiency in urban infrastructure and service delivery mechanisms, community participation, and accountability of Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) towards citizens. JNNURM aims to have sustainable developmental outcomes, so funding for the creation of public transport infrastructure, like all other projects undertaken by the beneficiary city under the mission, depends on the implementation of certain state-level and city-level reforms. For creating or upgrading public transport infrastructure, JNNURM mandates the following city-level reforms to be implemented before, during, and post project completion: Advertising policy for additional profits Clear parking policy Integration of multi-modal transport for seamless connectivity Automated vehicle tracking and monitoring Traffic management centre Formation of a Unified Metropolitan Transport Authority

The funding pattern of JNNURM projects is as depicted below: Category Cities/UAs with 4 million+ population as per 2001 census Cities/UAs with million+ but less than 4 million population (2001 census) Cities/towns/UAs in North eastern states and Jammu & Kashmir Cities and UAs not mentioned above Central grant 35% 50% 90% 80% State grant 15% 20% 10% 10% ULB/Parastatal share 50% 30% 10%

Source: JNNURM, 2009 (Parastatal bodies are companies / corporations which are owned and controlled by the Government)

National Urban Transport Policy 2006 (NUTP) The NUTP proposes feasible solutions to issues of rapid urbanisation, public accessibility and mobility, health and safety risks due to increasing traffic and pollution8. Its key objectives are: Urban transportation issues and concerns need to be addressed at the planning stage Integrated land use and transport planning need to be encouraged to improve accessibility and mobility; Allocation of investments for public transport rather than motor vehicles Facilitate networks between production, labour and their corresponding markets
11

Funding under NUTP: The Central Government encourages high capacity public transport systems being set up through the mechanism of Special Purpose Vehicles (SPV) and offers financial support either in the form of equity or one-time Viability Gap Financing (VGF), subject to a ceiling of 20 percent of the capital cost of the project provided the users (direct and indirect beneficiaries within the city) pay for the operating costs and the rolling stock. (Source: Ministry of Urban Development, 2006) Urban Transport Fund: As per the recommendations of the Ministry of Urban Development, the NUTP has proposed the formation of an Urban Transport Fund for the development and maintenance of public transport in the urban areas. It recommends innovative financing mechanisms and greater mobilisation of private capital. In addition to the above policies and financing options, subsidies or profits made by the transport agencies can be used to improve the quality of public transport service so that public transport can compete with private vehicles in safety, reliability and comfort.

Funding options for improving public transport in India:

The National Urban Transport Policy and the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission recommend that for sound financial planning for the long-term viability of public transport agencies, the public transport system needs to function as independently as possible with minimal influence from political agencies9. According to the Bus Karo, EMBARQs guidebook of bus planning, operational plans should be developed in such a way that the system is as financially independent as possible and requires little or no subsidy from the government10. This makes it much easier for the agency to take important decisions with less influence from political parties. The profits earned must be ultimately used for the benefit of the users. A public transport company has to constantly perform a delicate balancing act to meet its twin goals of providing comfortable transport service to the public and maintaining financial viability ignoring one or the other will have serious implications. Public transport agencies must consider two types of costs: Capital costs This mainly includes cost of bus procurement, devices to operate and monitor buses such as GPS, automatic fare collection boxes, construction and equipment for a control centre. For a BRT system, however, capital costs additionally include right-of-way acquisition, construction of new bus-only lanes and material to segregate the bus lanes, bus stations, ITS and depots. EMBARQ in its Bus Karo guidebook has studied various capital costs, which vary from system-to-system depending on the type of operational infrastructure and other related facilities being set up or purchased. Operational costs This includes cost of operation and maintenance of the BRTS such as fuel, fleet maintenance, staff salaries, bus station and road maintenance, fleet depreciation etc. The main goal for any BRTS operator is to be able to at least recover its operational costs by fare earnings and other means such as advertising revenue etc.

The financing of the BRTS system can be divided into two categories.

12

Financing the infrastructure of the BRT system: The government and its agencies would be required to fund the infrastructural investments like project design, land acquisition and development, construction of bus stations and depots. Financing the buses: The CES Detailed Engineering Report for BRTS in Mumbai suggests various options for induction of buses through the formation of a special purpose vehicle (SPV) as recommended by the NUTP11. They are; Gross cost system: Buses owned, operated and maintained by a private party who is paid for the number of kilometers covered by the buses; the user fare revenue collection can either be done by the BRT staff or outsourced to a third party so that it helps in integrated ticketing arrangement between BRT and other feeder lines/BEST buses. Net cost system: The buses are owned, operated and maintained by a private party who is also responsible for collecting revenues and paying a stipulated charge to the BRT SPV. The SPV subsidises the operator for any loss due to uneconomic operations. Ownership and operations: The SPV owns, operates and maintains all bus operations The CES feasibility report for Mumbais BRTS suggests the option of gross cost system along with outsourced fare collection as the best option amongst the above three for bus induction.

Investments in public transport in Mumbai:

An analysis of the investments made in the recent past indicates a distinct leaning towards costlier projects over A key question to be cheaper ones. Another key trend is a fascination for posed is: Who pays bridges and sea links which supports mobility primarily for for the infrastructure, private modes of transport. While thousands of crores of rupees are spent on creating roads and flyovers and sea and who uses it? links, there is not much focus on how the scarce road space would be used to provide transport to the maximum number of people. A key question to be posed is: who pays for the infrastructure, and who uses it? When taxpayers money is used for public infrastructure projects, shouldnt the choice of transport systems have a leaning towards those modes which support the largest number of people being transported, while at the same time offering the best returns on investment of scarce public funds? The years between 2000 and 2005 saw the MMRDA execute the Rs. 4,500 crore MUTP and the Rs. 2000 Crore MUIP. While 60 percent of MUTP was devoted to augmentation of the suburban railway system with the JVLR and SCLR being two major investments in the road component, MUIP was wholly devoted to the widening of roads, creating new roads and other road works leading towards road network expansion. In the last two decades, the city spent considerable sums of public finances towards the creation of a number of flyovers over the highways with an aim of facilitating faster travel by private transport. Such transport planning is quite contrary to the objective of the NUTP, which aims to ensure safe, affordable, quick, comfortable, reliable and sustainable access for the growing number of city residents to jobs, education, recreation and such other needs within our cities. The NUTP seeks to achieve this by bringing about a more equitable allocation of road space with people, rather than vehicles as its main focus, which is one of the policys stated objectives. Keeping this as the base, how is road space being allocated in Mumbai? The following table shows the investments made in various public transport infrastructures:
13

Major public transport investments in Mumbai and MMR (key completed, ongoing and planned projects)
No. Cost of (Rs. Kms crores) No. of vehicles / Time to passengers per day completion (if project operational / original projection) 37500 vehicles Completed against projection of 80000 MSRDC projection of Work yet to 2.10 lakh vehicles commence from Bandra to Haji Ali ------85000 ----Completed, but traffic bottlenecks remain March 2012 Toll/fare BOT Collections period per day (Rs. Lakh) 16 30 VGF availed? (Rs. Crore) 650

Bandra-Worli Sea Link Worli-Haji Ali Sea Link

4.5

1600

4.7

5100

--

40

1392

Haji Ali-Nariman Point Bandra-Versova Sea Link

10.9 10.3

6000 4000 300 8300 1220 221.5

-------

-------

-------

Peddar Road 4.4 flyover Sewri-Nahva Sheva 22 Trans Harbour Link Sion-Panvel Link 12 Road expansion Jogeshwari-Vikhroli 10.3 Link Road

Santacruz-Chembur 6.45 Link Road Subtotal 34.8 Mumbai Metro 11 Phase 2 (VersovaAndheri-Ghatkopar) Mumbai Metro 32 Phase 1 (CharkopBandra-Mankhurd) Mumbai Metro 103 Phase 2 and 3 (7 other corridors) Subtotal 146 Mono rail (Chembur-WadalaSant Ghadge Maharaj Chowk) 20

550 27291.5 2365

--

--

--

--

11500

1.15 lakh passengers initial projection --

August 2012

N.A.

35 years 35 years --

650

2016

N.A.

1532

47000

--

--

N.A.

--

60865 2460 568 passengers per monorail 2 N.A.

BRTS

50

1500

Up to 45000 persons per hour per direction (PPHPD)

--

N.A.

--

--

Source: MMRDA, MSRTC, MSRDC, EMBARQ and newspaper reports

14

What is BRTS?
BRT is a high-quality bus based transit system that delivers fast, comfortable, and cost-effective urban mobility through the provision of segregated right-ofway infrastructures, rapid and frequent operations and excellence in marketing and customer service.
ITDP Report - BRTS Guide, 2008 A Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) aims at utilising finite road space in the most efficient possible manner to transport the largest number of commuters. The BRTS does this by setting aside exclusive bus lanes where the right of way is limited to only the buses which are a part of the system. BRT systems have low infrastructure costs and can operate comfortably without public subsides, unlike other modes of public transport12.

Common features of a BRTS:

Model of a BRTS corridor (Source: MMRDA)

Dedicated bus lanes Centrally controlled transport management High frequency services Specially designed bus stops BRT stations Branded bus service Pre-boarding fare collection Level boarding for easy access Elevated or separated pedestrian crossings

In several countries across the world, this has been achieved by making improvements to existing infrastructure, vehicles and scheduling. The goal of these BRT systems is to approach the service quality of rail transit while still enjoying the cost savings and flexibility of bus transit. With no interference from other vehicles, the buses can run unobstructed at much higher speeds than would be possible in a mixed vehicle lane. The buses are sequenced at regular intervals to create a steady flow of buses. The primary focus of the BRTS is mobility versus mode. The focus is on clean, comfortable, systematic and fast movement of the passengers. While the dedicated bus lane is a key component of the BRTS, it is the intelligent planning of the bus stops distances, utilising technologies like GPS and central control rooms and the integration of the BRTS with other modes of transport, creating feeder networks etc. which make the system efficient as a whole.

15

BRTS comes with its own unique characteristics, including ergonomically designed, disabled-friendly The spread of Bus Rapid bus stops, pre-boarding fare collection through ticket Transit Systems in the 21st vending machines or manned ticket booths, all of which lead to a reduction in waiting time. The waiting Century mimics the time, and therefore, the rush is regulated as buses in worldwide spread of the dedicated lanes move at high speeds with adequate streetcar a century earlier frequency. In Bogota, the capital city of Columbia, ITDP Report BRTS operates at a highly unbelievable frequency of 13 a bus every 20 seconds during peak hours . While the bus stops are designed keeping in mind the needs of the handicapped, the buses are designed to align perfectly with the bus stops. Janmarg, which operates the BRTS in Ahmedabad has designed its bus stations to enable wheelchairs to be easily rolled into the buses from the bus stops. With more and more cities embracing the high-tech hybrid and CNG-run buses, the BRTS is also being acknowledged as an eco-friendly option, apart from the fact that an efficient BRTS contributes to lesser cars on roads, thereby reducing vehicular pollution to a large extent in the first place. Bus Rapid Transit was first implemented in Curitiba, Brazil in 1974, and is increasingly becoming a global phenomenon in the 21st century. Major new BRT projects have opened since the turn of the century in Africa, Australia, China, India, Indonesia, Iran, Mexico, Turkey, several cities in Europe, and dozens of cities in Latin America. Even in the U.S., where public transport has been traditionally dominated by a particular mode (a century earlier the focus was on creating rail infrastructure, while the last century belonged to cars), several cities have adopted BRTS as sustainable solution to supplement their existing transport infrastructure. While several BRT systems have become operational in the U.S., more than a dozen are in the pipeline in cities spanning the entire breadth of the country from San Francisco to Chicago. An ITDP report Recapturing Global Leadership in Bus Rapid Transit, published in May 2011 states that the spread of BRT in the 21st century mimics the worldwide spread of the streetcar a century earlier. If BRTS has proven to be a sustainable solution in so many cities the world over, why hasnt it been implemented in Mumbai?

16

Why BRTS?
While planning a BRTS for Mumbai it is important to appreciate the numerous proven advantages which make it a system of choice for a large number of cities. Reduction of dependence on private transport and even aiming for being car-free is not seen as inimical to progress any longer. Till a few decades back cities in the West, which were being planned around cars soon realised that cars only increased congestion and commute time while reducing urban air quality. Consequently, a number of these cities moved towards supporting excellent public transport and placing curbs on private transport. London and New York are two prime examples. In Mumbai, we need to learn from the wealth of global experience now available and not repeat the same mistakes that were done by other cities.

More efficient use of road space:

Globally the past two decades have witnessed a better understanding of using finite road space effectively. Consequently, High Capacity Bus Systems (HCBSs) or Bus Rapid Transit Systems have emerged as a road based public transport of choice. A standard bus has a capacity to transport 100 passengers. If all these bus passengers were to use private vehicles or even taxis or rickshaws to travel, the corresponding road space used would be much higher. On a finite road length, if the number of vehicles increase beyond a point and all the vehicles try to move through the same section of the road there is bound to be congestion and increased commute times.

In Mumbai, the road length in the city has remained more or less static at around 2,000 kms. As opposed to that, the number of cars on the roads has increased continuously with ball park figures suggesting an addition of 200 new cars to the citys roads everyday14. It is evident that if a large proportion of the population in Mumbai were to use private vehicles to commute, then the commute times and travel experience would deteriorate considerably for all commuters, whatever be their mode of transport.

17

Bringing about a more equitable allocation of road space with people, rather than vehicles is its main focus.
Key objective of National Urban Transport Policy, 2006, Government of India Road space being at a premium in Mumbai, there is a clear need to free up resources to facilitate low-cost mass rapid transport. Dr. P. Vedagiri from IIT, who has studied the traffic scenario in Mumbai in detail, says that at present buses transport 67 percent of the road population but occupy only 34 percent of the road space, whereas car owners who make up only 33 percent of the road commuters take up 66 percent of all the available road space. Such distribution of road space is inequitable, besides being socially and environmentally damaging. Results from Dr. Vedagiris studies and simulations seem to show that concerns about shrinking carriageways under a BRTS are exaggerated. The impacts of providing exclusive bus lanes under heterogeneous traffic conditions are likely to be less damaging than envisioned. For this, dedicated bus lanes must have well defined physical boundaries and not just markings on the road depicting the exclusive bus lane, as the failed experiment at Haji Ali in Mumbai has proved. Nevertheless, it is important to address such concerns with studies that build a better understanding of Mumbais unique transport characteristics, and develop the most appropriate solutions accordingly. With considerable growth expected in the MMR over the next two decades, it is important that in addition to the proposed BRTS corridors concerted efforts are taken to urgently identify other viable BRTS corridors in MMR, and a proactive plan is initiated in starting these corridors. Besides the proposed 25-km stretches each on the Western and Eastern Express Highways, the government must consider implementing BRTS on the Jogeshwari-Vikhroli Link Road (JVLR) and on the ongoing Santacruz-Chembur Link Road (SCLR). Provision for a BRTS must also be an integral part of the design of the proposed Goregaon-Mulund Link Road (GMLR), which will be relatively easier, as the GMLR is still a Greenfield project. A cost and capacity comparison of the system with other modes of public transport compares favourably with other modes (see table on page 9). Especially the low cost of the system makes it favourable from a public finance perspective. Bogotas TransMilenio system moves 45,000 passengers per hour per direction (PPHPD) while BRT corridors in Sao Paulo can also provide capacities over 30,000 PPHPD15, 16. Such capacity numbers are in fact larger than many railbased systems, such as the system in London, Santiago and Bangkok. Current average speed of BEST bus: 12 - 15 km/ph Speed of bus in a BRTS: 27-48 km/ph

BRTS can work economically as a feeder service or system extension service, and it can do so without requiring subsidies or prohibitively expensive fares. The Latin American BRT systems have also proven that it functions perfectly well on relatively high-density mainline corridors. BRT can equally deliver the transit-oriented development and land use advantages of rail.

We need a radical overhaul of how we travel and manage our road system if we are to do more than simply tinker at the edges.
John Cridland, Deputy Director-General, Confederation of British Industry

18

A greener model of travel:

The National Urban Transport Policy and the National Action Plan on Climate Change (NAPCC) give priority to public transport as a climate change mitigation measure. Emissions from various forms of private and public transport form a significant portion of the global greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions and hence it becomes important to design transportation systems which yield a low carbon footprint.

Road-based transport is the main source of GHG emissions in the road-based sector. Mass Rapid Transit Options including buses, railways and mass rapid transit systems, etc. are the principal option for reducing energy use in the urban transport sector, and mitigating associated GHG emissions and air pollution.
National Action Plan on Climate Change, 2009, Prime Ministers Office, India The NAPCC reiterates these well-known principles while offering little guidance on translating good intentions into implementation. While the right words and ideas have been mentioned, the ground reality in Mumbai as of 2011 with regards to transport planning is not consistent with the kind required for mitigating climate change. Efforts are underway at organisations like the National Environmental Engineering Research Institute (NEERI) to quantify the air pollution and GHG inventory for Mumbai. It is difficult to comment on the exact contribution of the transport sector, but with reduced manufacturing activity, the transport sector has emerged as the key contributor to emissions in the city. There is a felt need for a deliberate approach to plan transport infrastructure in a manner which stabilises and reduces GHG emissions over a period of time. A study done by The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI) in 200217 has given a break up of the environmental impact of various road transport modes, as per the following table: Energy Intensity by mode of transport Mode of Transport Occupancy (passengers/vehicle) Petrol Passenger modes: BTU/passenger-km Scooter / motorcycle: 2-stroke Scooter / motorcycle: 4-stroke Auto rickshaw: 2-stroke Auto rickshaw: 4-stroke Car Urban bus Suburban electric rail Main line rail Freight modes: BTU/ tone-km Truck Main line rail 1.5 1.5 1.75 1.75 2.5 50 800 900 --527 426 938 738 1206 ------

Fuel type Diesel ----1302 197 -135 1587 256 CNG ----971 311 ----Electricity ------27 46 -85

Source: TERI study, May 2002 and Planning Commission, May 1980

19

Some modes [of transport] move people and goods far more efficiently than others. For instance, a petrol-powered car consumes 1,206 BTUs to move one person over one kilometer whereas a CNG-powered bus does the same for only 311 BTUs and main-line railway under electric traction does it for only 46 BTUs.18 Owing to an increase in travel demand (both passengers and freight traffic) and inefficient means of travel, fuel consumption in the road transport sector has grown over the years. Passenger kilometers tripled from 118 billion in 1970 to 380 billion in 1997 and freight tonne kilometers increased from 127 billion to 287 billion.19

The transport sector contributes to 23% of energy-related CO2 emissions and is the fastest growing sector in terms of GHG emissions in developing countries.
Bridging the gap Pathways for transport in the post 2012 process (www.transport2010.org) Significantly, and in recognition of the GHG abatement possibilities of a BRTS, TransMilenio of Bogota has managed to secure carbon credits for the reduced emissions from its operations20.

Better, healthier and faster commutes:

Average commercial speeds for BRT systems generally are in the range of 27 to 48 km/ph21. As a surface transport option, BRT reduces travel times through rapid access to stations and platforms, simply because the bus moves in a dedicated BRT lane with no obstacle whatsoever on its way. Significantly, a U.S. Government Accountability Office study found that BRT systems actually produced faster average speeds than Light Rail Transit (LRT)22. Long commute times have a detrimental impact on health of the citizens. From an economic viewpoint, longer commute means loss in productivity, and consequently, a financial cost implication. A reduction in commute times and improvement in the travel conditions would be desirable for a vast majority of companies whose employees generate the various trips. From a health perspective, faster commute times would lead to less stress. In Mumbai, where we face enormous road congestion it would be worthwhile to have a better understanding of what congestion on the roads costs us and whether our transport policies are tuned to reducing or further exacerbating the same. A recent study by Confederation of British Industry, the U.K.s top business lobbying organisation, estimated that road congestion currently costs the countrys economy close to 8 billion every year in lost productivity. It would be interesting to carry out similar research for Mumbai, where commute times are no less, if not more, tiresome.

Technology empowered transport:

Many cities around the world have successfully streamlined their BRTS with the use of technology. Seoul, London and Sao Paulo have integrated their BRTS with technology by using tools such as: Global Positioning System (GPS) devices for monitoring bus performance and passenger information in real time, smart card technology for integrated ticketing systems and fare collection, and camera technology for enforcing lane segregation. The chart on the following page shows the different technologies adopted by cities that have efficient BRTS systems.

20

BRTS riding on technology London Control Centralised command Systems centre; GPS based signal priority for buses Fare Smart card system collection (Oyster) Enforcement Bus lane enforcement using cameras and number plate recognition software User Real time passenger information information and next bus arrival countdown
Source: Bus Karo - EMBARQ, 2010

Sao Paulo Centralised command centre; GPS based bus tracking Smart card system and Unified Ticketing (Bilhete Unico) Bus lane enforcement using cameras and number plate recognition software Real time passenger information and next bus arrival countdown

Seoul Centralised command centre; GPS based bus tracking Smart card system and Unified Ticketing (T-Money) --

Real time passenger information and next bus arrival countdown

Mumbai has its own contactless smart card GO MUMBAI that can be used as a travel card both on the suburban railway network and on the BEST buses. Mumbai can leverage more on the advantage of India being one of the powerhouses of technology in the world, by successfully adopting and internalising technology tools in its proposed BRTS. Such cards can make integration between the key modes of public transport in the city possible and a person can travel on a single card on the transport mode of his choice.

21

BRTS around the world and in India

While planning a BRTS for Mumbai it is important to study the systems already operational in cities in India and the world. Some cities have a similar demographic, geographic and commute profile, while others have a drastically different profile and hence differing requirements. To this end, the ORF roundtables aimed to provide a global snapshot on the progress of BRTS and illustrate specific case studies, detailing the technical and financial features in addition to the timelines, the support and the difficulties faced by different projects. Dr. Dario Hidalgo, who heads EMBARQs international team of transport engineers and environmental scientists, gave a detailed overview of the evolution of BRTS in Latin America. He also mentioned some of the important systems developed around the world in the past decade and focused on the considerable progress made in China in the past few years. BRTS has proved to be affordable and successful in 68 cities across the world. The system has been adopted as a means of sustainable transport in 15 cities in Latin America, 16 cities in Asia and 20 cities in Europe. Across Asia, 51 BRT systems are being planned or constructed at present. In China, nine cities adopted BRTS in 2008-09. The Kunming BRTS now carries 156,000 passengers per day. Guangzhou in China has taken the recent pride of place with its newly launched BRT corridor which has a peak hour capacity of 27,400 passengers per hour per day. Besides the ones operational in the following cities, China is in the process of building more than 30 other BRT systems. Existing BRT systems in Peoples Republic of China by Network length City Commencement Lines in Number of Network Peak capacity year operation stations length (km) (PPHPD) Dalian 2008 1 13 13 6500 Guangzhou 2010 1 26 22 27400 Hefei 2010 1 9 7 2700 Chongqing 2008 1 9 11 600 Changzhou 2008 2 51 44 4500 Hangzhou 2006 2 50 55 6300 Zaozhuang 2010 2 49 62 600 Jinan 2008 2 46 34 4500 Xiamen 2008 3 31 40 3600 Beijing 2004 4 60 54 8000 Kunming 1999 5 63 46 8600 Zhengzhou 2009 8 38 30 5600
Source: www.chinabrt.org

Dr. Hidalgo gave a background to the historic evolution of BRTS in the 1970s as a response to the requirements of a rapidly developing Brazil which did not have the resources to undertake systems which were capital intensive. Citing several other global examples, he explained how the BRT system is a developing countrys response to the needs of its people and cities, and is an approach that is well suited to the prevailing land use and densities.

22

A presentation by Mr. Madhav Pai, Director, EMBARQ India, highlighted the rapid rollout of the BRT corridor in Istanbul. Istanbul BRT has a number of parallels with Mumbai, where the BRTS runs on a highway stretch, which is what is proposed in the conclusion of the pre-feasibility study carried out by MMRDA. What is notable is that the Istanbul BRTS was rolled out in 11 months from concept to implementation and has considerably increased the capacity of the highway to transport more commuters per hour. The system is used by 850,000 passengers daily, the initial 18 km of which was built at a cost of Rs. 600 crores. Mr. Pai highlighted the considerable time savings to thousands of commuters as a result of the BRTS, which is now very popular among the residents. Several cities in India including Ahmedabad, Delhi and Pune have already implemented BRTS with varying degrees of success. BRTS corridors are currently under construction in Indore, Surat and Jaipur. As of 2009, 17 cities in the country were planning a BRT of which 10 were being funded by the JNNURM. Recently, Bangalore has announced launching a pilot corridor of 30 km on the outer ring road from Hebbal to Central Silk Board junction. The proposed BRTS project eventually proposes to have 14 corridors totaling 290 kms and will cost Rs. 3,498 crores. Intentions are also to have BRT corridors for Mysore and Hubli-Dharwad. A slow but steady appreciation for bus-based systems is slowly but surely emerging across India.

Ahmedabad BRTS Janmarg

The Ahmedabad BRTS, called Janmarg, is currently the highlight of BRTS in India. Janmarg operates on a 44.5 km network covering 61 stations. Janmarg will cover 88.5 km when the current expansion is completed. Work on Janmarg started in 2005, and the system was inaugurated in October 2009. In November 2004 when Enrique Penelosa visited Mumbai, he also visited Ahmedabad where after meeting him, the political leadership took a firm decision to have a BRTS for the city, and made it possible in just five years. The Janmarg now has a daily ridership of around 1.50 lakh commuters23. The system features median stations, level boarding, and fare pre-payment. The Ahmedabad Janmarg Limited was constituted as a Special Purpose Vehicle by Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation specifically for the project.
The Ahmedabad BRTS won the ITDP Sustainable Transport Award in 2010 This years Sustainable Transport Award nominees demonstrate the relevance of the developing world in the fight against climate change while improving citizens quality of life and enhancing their international competitiveness. Cities have the power to significantly reduce carbon emissions by actively seeking ways to improve transport. Walter Hook, Executive Director, ITDP

ITDP Board President Enrique Pealosa stands next to Dr. Ramachandran, Secretary, Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India, as representatives of Janmarg accept the award. (Photo credit: Ethan Arpi )

23

Prof. Abhijeet Lokre, Senior Lecturer at the Faculty of Planning and Public Policy at CEPT University, Ahmedabad, was one of the key presenters at the roundtable. He took the participants through the evolution of the Ahmedabad BRTS. He said that Janmarg was clearly made possible only as a result of the keen interest taken by the Chief Minister of Gujarat, Narendra Modi, who gave a free hand to key senior bureaucrats like the Municipal Commissioner of Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation and Prof. Shivanand Swamy of CEPT University to design and execute the system.

Before BRTS

After BRTS

24

Ahmedabad Janmarg Key Statistics: 44.5 km of BRT lanes presently 58 km of BRTS planned in Phase 1 30.5 km of BRTS planned in Phase 2 1.5 lakh daily commuters Current fleet of 75 buses Plan to add 150 buses by end 2012 62 bus stations at present 10 trunk routes and 21 feeder routes Daily earnings: Rs. 8.25 lakh, projected to go up to Rs. 14 lakh daily Final estimated cost of BRTS: Rs. 1000 crore Fares: Rs. 2 for 2 km ride up to Rs. 20 for 40 km travel Unique features Tree-lined avenues Signalised square abouts Use of elevated roads Median and curb side BRTS access High floor buses with specially designed stations
Source: Janmarg, Newspaper reports

25

New Delhi BRTS

The Delhi BRTS had strong political backing from Chief Minster Mrs. Sheila Dikshit and administrative / technical support from the Delhi Integrated MultiModal Transit System Ltd. (DIMTS). However, the Delhi BRTS has been embroiled in problems from its inception in 2008. The project received highly negative publicity from the local media which was more influenced by the impact that the BRTS would have on car users.

5.6 km of BRT lanes present now 26 BRT corridors are planned in total to cover 310 kms by 2020 13 BRTS corridors planned in Phase 1 and 7 are to be completed by the end of 2010, with the other 6 to be taken up shortly after at a cost of Rs. 1819.10 Crores Number of buses: 48 at present, addition of 50 more by 2011 end. Daily ridership of 50000 passengers
Source: http://www.dimts.in/road.html

26

A number of lessons can be learnt from the Delhi BRTS pilot project (Source: CES, September 2009). They are: Avoid ad-hoc implementation. Have a long range vision and a comprehensive plan Be transparent. Involve all stakeholders from the beginning. Strive for consensus. Do not compromise on system fundamentals Proper implementation of all component parts of the system is important It is important to translate benefit onto system productivity and user satisfaction Establish appropriate, capable, accountable institutions for planning, development, operation and management of the system

Pune BRTS
Pune was the first city in India to develop a Bus Rapid Transit System in December 2006. However, unlike the highly successful and acclaimed Janmarg BRTS in Ahmedabad, Punes attempts have been fraught with difficulties to the extent that its failures have been exaggerated by negative press coverage. The Pune experiment seems to have been mired in trouble right from the first day of operations, owing to a number of intrusions taking place on the dedicated corridor. From that day on, the Pune BRTS has remained somewhat a non-starter. This highlights the importance and need for detailed engineering design, rigorous testing, planning and execution for a successful BRTS. The civic body is in the dock also for not completing the pilot project on the 16.5 km stretch from Katraj to Hadapsar even though it was launched in 2006. It lacks basic features like continuous dedicated lanes, proper pedestrian facilities, offboard ticketing, bus-stations, level boarding facilities and frequency.
Key reasons for Pune BRTS failure: Political bickering Haphazard: No transport survey undertaken, no detailed project report acquired, public consultation was not even thought of The current BRTS is more like a marginally modified bus service Key elements like reserved lanes, off-board ticketing, integration with other modes of transport, routes and fares, depots etc. absent Poor financial, managerial and operational structure to run the system

"I would have liked to see a high-end BRT on multiple dedicated lanes to facilitate express and local service, with supporting systems fare collection off board vehicles, level boarding, multiple doors for ease of boarding and alighting, priority at intersections to reduce waiting times, non-polluting propulsion, and other measures that discourage use of automobiles. On this count, Punes BRTS is just a marginally modified bus service.
Venkat Rao Pindiprolu Transport Expert, US Federal Transit Administration, 2010
27

Istanbul BRTS
Key Statistics: 18 kms currently covered by BRTS 33 kms of additional new routes planned 32 bus stations 850,000 daily users Fleet of 200 BRTS buses Cost of BRTS: Rs. 600 crore Frequency: Every 26 seconds during peak time Median bus stop design with single integrated fare, easy pedestrian access to bus stations and good links to other modes of transport Unique features: Use of the Bosphoros sea suspension bridge Dramatic increase in road capacity from 9,800 passengers per sq. km to 23,600 passengers! Luxury A/C Mercedes buses carrying 230 people
Source: EMBARQ India

Before BRTS

After BRTS

First day operations

Before, people in cars used to look at those of us stuck in buses as 3rd class citizens Now, as we speed past them, we look at the people in cars stuck in traffic as 3rd class citizens. Travel times in Istanbul have been cut by one hour as a result of BRTS. Passenger surveys have indicated 93% commuter satisfaction with the service. Istanbuls Metrobus BRTS created history in 2009 when it started the worlds first intercontinental service linking Europe and Asia

28

Guangzhou BRTS

Key Statistics:
22.5 kms of BRT lanes 900,000 daily users 800 busses in the fleet 26 bus stations 42 bus routes Cost of BRTS: US$ 6 million (per km)

Unique features:
Worlds highest number of passenger boarding at BRT stations (800,000!) Highest BRT bus frequency globally Longest BRT stations Continuous bike lanes along the trunk lines Escalators connecting FOBs / walkways Connecting tunnels from BRT platforms to 3 key metro stations

The recently opened Guangzhou BRTS experiences the highest capacity of any BRTS globally, carrying 25,000 passengers per hour per direction!

Source: EMBARQ India

29

Implementing BRTS in Mumbai

BRTS Associated infrastructure:
The Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP) defines a clear cut methodology for choosing the right infrastructure (vehicle selection, fuel type, fleet size, etc) 24. The following diagram would depict the various stages in vehicle selection:
Define needs Define size Operations Environment Legal restrictions Fleet size Available Technology Chassis and body Propulsion technology Fuel types Environmental performance Strategic issues Evaluation & Procurement Risk assignment Purchase options Direct bidding Leasing

selection
Financial aspects Operational aspects Environmental aspects Strategic issues

Source: ITDP, 2007

Vehicle size: The Bus Karo handbook of EMBARQ, published in 2010 mentions that vehicle size, doorway width and platform height are the three major factors that determine the dwell time of the passengers at the bus station. The vehicle size needs to be selected based on: Traffic volume: Low/high volume of traffic demand mini/large capacity buses Characteristics of the road system: Low/high floor buses need to be selected based on road quality and stopping/turning movements The type of services that passengers want: Comfortable and state-of-the-art buses are needed to wean people away from their private vehicles

The number, size and position of doorways significantly contribute to the stoppage time of the vehicle. Provision of several doorways instead of just one, helps in distributing bus capacity as well as reduces bottlenecks in boarding and alighting. In the present day, there are three options for floor height with their own advantages and disadvantages: Low floor, Semi-low floor, High floor. While low floor buses can be easily used by the physically challenged and the elderly, high floor buses reduce bumps on the road and provide comfort while travelling. In the last 10 years, many companies like Tata Motors, Ashok Leyland, Swaraj Mazda, King Long and Volvo have setup their manufacturing units for premium CNG, high floor and low floor buses. Impact on environment: One of the primary reasons for implementing BRTS is to minimise environmental pollution by reducing the number of vehicles on the road. So it is of great significance that the fuel type selected for the modern BRT buses is eco-friendly so that emissions into the atmosphere are as low as possible. Sadly, amongst all the fuels available in the market today no single fuel emerges as the winner in low emissions. In 2002, the Indian government passed an order to convert all the buses to CNG. While CNG has low particulate matter emissions, it has high greenhouse gas emissions but its still considered to be less damaging to the environment than diesel and petrol25. Most countries in Europe use Ultra Low Sulphur Diesel (ULSD) as it reduces emission of Nitrogen Oxide and other pollutants26.
30

Bus station design: Bus station improvements are absolutely necessary to increase the success of the BRT system. Some important improvements are: Innovative bus station design in terms of local architectural style and regional climate Level boarding coupled with wide doorways ease the boarding and alighting of passengers and also provides quick turnaround and in turn, reduces fleet size Optimal station size to accommodate waiting passengers comfortably Effective changes in the public perception of bus transport

The number of bus terminals and depots also need to be determined based on the size and organisation of the bus network and the travel demand. The following table provides a birds eye view of the BRTS facilities needed, based on the travel demand. A proper assessment of the passenger demand in Mumbai is mandatory for commencing a successful BRT system.
Expected demand (pphd) <1000 Example city Type of segregation Bus lanes Vehicle types Bus station Intersection

Standard vehicles (60 passengers)

10003000

London

Bus lanes

30006000

Guadalajara , Mexico

600010000

Mexico city

1000015000

Curitiba, Brazil

>15000

Bogota

Physically segregated right of way with 1 lane Physically segregated right of way with 1 lane Physically segregated right of way with more than 1 lane Physically segregated right of way with more than 1 lane (at least 1 for overtaking)

Standard vehicles with double decker (60-120 passengers) Standard vehicles Articulated buses (60-170 passengers) Articulated buses (140-170 passengers) Bi-articulated buses or Convoy (240270 passengers) Bi-articulated buses or Convoy (240270 passengers)

No prepayment, no level boarding, low entry, single platform Prepayment, level boarding, low entry, single platform Prepayment, level boarding, single platform Prepayment, level boarding, single platform Prepayment, level boarding, multiple platforms Prepayment, level boarding, multiple platforms, passing lanes, express lane

No changes

Signal priority for buses ay junctions No changes

Ban turning movements

Ban turning movements

Ban turning movements

Source: Bus Karo EMBARQ, 2010 (pphpd: Passsengers per hour per direction)

Current Scenario of bus Services in Mumbai:

The BEST Undertaking owns and operates a fleet of 4700 buses along 365 routes averaging 70,000 kilometers daily. It employs 38,000 people including 22,000 bus drivers and conductors. The BEST purchased around 1000 new buses as part of the JNNURM programme in the past two years. These buses were meant for BRTS operations, but due to lack of dedicated lanes
31

and related infrastructure, were pressed into the regular BEST operations. Thus, instead of providing any tangible relief to a majority of commuters, the additional buses put a severe strain on the BEST, as it did not have trained drivers, maintenance staff and even enough parking spaces for these buses. Commenting on this problem of plenty, BEST General Manager Om Prakash Gupta has gone on record stating that the Undertaking made mistakes in planning when the buses were purchased.27 Broad division of the bus routes is as follows: Feeder routes: Buses feed the railway stations from residential areas/business districts East-West connectors: Linking Eastern and Western suburbs which have no suburban railway services Trunk routes: Services along North-South directions, almost parallel to the railway lines Intercity routes: Buses connecting Mumbai to Greater Mumbai region such as Navi Mumbai, Thane etc The table below shows BESTs market share in various corridors of Mumbai: Item description Feeder East/West Trunk Intercity
BEST Passenger Trips Other Modal Trips Daily (Lakh) Market Size in Trips Daily (Lakh) BEST Market Share (%)
Source: Bus Karo - Embarq, 2010

Total
45 78 123 37

21 8 29 72

5 2 7 71

15 65 80 18

4 3 7 57

Within these corridors, BEST operates various services as follows: Ordinary: Normal bus service with buses stopping at various stops Limited: Buses stop only at certain important stops along high volume routes Special: Buses ply only on routes with railway terminuses and business districts Express: Buses ply on long distance intra-city routes Air conditioned: Buses with A/C but with same routes as Ordinary bus service. The Undertaking also operates various types of buses as part of its bus services. The fleet contains the following type of buses: 1) Midibus, 2) Single deck, 3) Leyland Articulated (Vestibules), 4) Low floor buses and 5) A/C luxury buses. It also plies a few double-decker bus services in some areas of South Mumbai. The BEST undertakings system performance measurement statistics: Fleet size and number of routes 4700 buses, 365 routes Route km 6,00,000 km Number of employees 38,000 Average speed (km/ph) Peak/Off-peak period Peak period: 14 km/ph, Off-peak: 19 km/ph Average passengers per day 4,500,000
Source: Bus Karo - Embarq, 2010

Current scenario of bus transport subsidies:

In Mumbai, the two most widely used modes of public transport i.e. suburban railway and BEST buses are subsidised. As in many other cities, the middle class in Mumbai is more likely to use public transport for travel than the poor. The poor, however, also use public transit, and their expenditure on public transit constitutes, on average, a larger share of their income than it does for the middle class. It is, therefore, the case that the poor benefit from transit subsidies in
32

Mumbai, as well as the middle and upper-middle classes. A World Banks survey-based Policy Paper Public Transport Subsidies and Affordability in Mumbai, India published in November 2007, however, states that the poorest 27% of the population receives only 19% of bus subsidies and 15.5% of rail subsidies28. Indeed, 26% of the lowest income households surveyed do not use rail, while 10% do not use bus, implying that they receive no transit subsidies. The lowest income groups earning less than Rs. 5000 per month constituted 26.6 percent of the random sample of 5000 households surveyed for this paper. In 2005-06, bus riders in Mumbai received a subsidy equal to 30 percent of the bus fares. The survey found that commuters in the Rs. 7500-20,000 income range were the largest users of public transport in the city, with the modal share for bus being highest for commutes between three and 10 km. Average household expenditure on rail increased with income; so did average expenditures on buses until the highest income category (Rs. 20,000 per month plus), when it decreased slightly. The percent of income spent on public transport was, however, highest for the lowest income group, indicating that transit subsidy as a percentage of income will be the highest for poorest in the city. Subsidies have helped the BEST to maintain low bus fares, and thus are an important component for its sustainability. However, given that BEST has been historically making huge losses on its bus operations, periodic revision of fares is the only longterm option to keep its finances sustainable. In the medium to long term BEST will have to find other sources to cover transport losses, reduce costs or increase bus fares. Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority and BRTS in Mumbai: MMRDA has been involved in the past five years with the process of doing the feasibility study and subsequent execution of a BRTS for Mumbai. Thus it came as a surprise for the participants of the first ORF roundtable conference when MMRDA communicated their decision, at the roundtable, not proceed with the implementation of the BRTS in Mumbai. Citing their involvement in many big ticket projects as the reason, MMRDA proposed that the project be handled jointly by BMC and BEST. Making this announcement, Mr. R. Ramana, Additional Chief (Transport Planning), shared a copy of the detailed feasibility report titled Planning, Design & Implementation Assistance for BRTS in Mumbai under MUIP which was presented to MMRDAs Executive Committee on 28th January 2010. The report prepared by the Consulting Engineering Services (CES) for MMRDA under MUIP clearly delineates the salient features of Mumbai BRTS. The report details the execution of BRTS over 25 kms of Western Express Highway (WEH) between Dahisar and Bandra Kurla Complex and 25 kms of Eastern Express Highway (EEH) between Cadbury Flyover and Sion. The BRTS would operate with an initial procurement of 564 buses (AC & Non AC) having a construction period of two years (2010-2012) and being operational by 2013. MMRDA indicated that they were willing to provide financial assistance to BEST in terms of easy loans to facilitate the implementation of the project. The key contention which emerged in the discussion after this information was that the BEST-BMC partnership does not currently have the capacity to undertake BRTS as only MMRDA is currently equipped with Transport Engineers. And this may end up delaying the project further.

33

Key features of Mumbai BRTS highlighted in January 2010 by the CES report S. No. Components Features 1 Study corridor WEH and EEH 2 Placing of BRTS lane Median side with passing lanes at bus stop 3 Vehicle technology Floor height: 400 mm Acceleration: 1m/sec2 4 Capacity 12 m length 70 18m length 125 25m length 170 5 Operating system Closed 6 Service Pattern Trunk and Feeder 7 Bus frequency 22.5 seconds in peak hour 8 Bus stops At Mid block & staggered At about 1 km spacing 9 Facilities at bus stop Foot over bridge with staircase, escalators and lifts Toilet, shops, parking 10 Intelligent Transport System (ITS) Passenger Information System Ticket Issue and verification off board at terminals Vehicle tracking, signal prioritization, bill payment system 11 BRTS depots Total 9 nos., 6 nos. in first phase (Dharavi, Ghatkopar, Dindoshi, Poisar, Dahisar, Thane) 12 BRTS terminals 5 Nos. (Bandra Kurla Complex, Dahisar, Andheri, Ghatkopar, Thane) 13 Integration with other transport system Feeder bus system IPTS Metro & mono rails Existing suburban system Provision of skywalks 14 Project investment Total Rs. 783.20 Crore on WEH & 529.76 crores 15 Institutional arrangement BEST with participation and funding of MCGM Total project cost (in crores per km) as per the report: S. No. Description 1 With skywalk & buses & terminal cost (overall cost) 2 Without skywalk & buses & terminal cost 3 Without skywalk & with buses & terminal cost Cost of road and road infrastructure Bus procurement & Bus Depot ITS technology / Fare Collection
Source: CES, 2009

WEH EEH 31.61 18.54 11.85 11.94 22.89 17.84 Rs. 8142.90 crore Rs. 384 crore Rs. 268.90 crore

BEST and BRTS in Mumbai:

Road-based public transport in Mumbai is currently dominated by the century-old BEST Undertaking, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai. Ever since 1905 when BEST set up its first power plant to operate its electric tramways the company also become a generator of electricity for the city. The operations from its
34

electricity operations used to subsidise the loss making transport operations till sometime ago. In the financial year 2009-10, the company earned Rs. 2973.82 crore from its electricity department and Rs. 926.67 crore from its transport department. Against this, the BEST Undertaking incurred operating expenditure of Rs. 1431.55 crore on its bus service division, experiencing a loss of Rs. 504.88 crores. BESTs only subsidy comes from its electric supply division and not from the BMC or state government. With high costs and low income, losses have steadily increased at the rate of 6.7 percent every year29. Overall, the Undertaking is not in BEST spirits 2011-12 (BE) Income 4414.78 Expenditure 4414.77 Surplus/Deficit 0.01 Revenue to be 0.00 claimed Net Surplus/Deficit 0.01
Source: BEST

2011-12 (RE) 3871.58 4595.86 724.28 560.00 164.28

2012-13 (BE) 4577.50 4833.50 256.00 256.01 0.01

BE: Budget Estimates; RE: Revised Estimates; Figures in Rs. crore

Congestion on the roads has led to considerable reduction in the speed of BEST buses and that has led to a longer turn-around time and possibly had an impact on the financial health of the Undertaking. Currently, the average speed of the buses can be as bad as 12-15 kmph in certain sections. The proposal for BEST to run the BRTS draws on the considerable expertise it has developed over the years in running bus operations. Today BEST buses cover not only all areas of the city and suburbs but also operate services to Mumbai from Mira-Bhayandar and even Navi Mumbai. A BRTS is, of course, more than owning and running buses and involves technical expertise which the BEST currently lacks. However, developing capacity is not difficult and there is enough institutional expertise available within organisations like CEPT University and EMBARQ who can support the exercise. BRTS Travel Demand in Mumbai
BRTS Bus Trips in Horizon year on WEH Corridor (2031) Horizon year (2031) Morning Peak Hour Evening Peak Hour Max. Min. Max. Min. Sections Kalina Jn. To Nancy Colony to Kalina Jn. To Nancy Colony to Vakola Jn. Gokul Anand jn. Vakola Jn. Gokul Anand jn. Direction UP DOWN UP DOWN UP DOWN UP DOWN Mini + BEST Bus Pax. 29642 28584 6769 3930 22392 26242 7330 3946 Shift from Car, 2 wheeler, IPT and Train to Bus 16539 15967 6357 6479 16514 15837 6624 6581 Potential BRTS Pax. 46181 44550 13126 10408 38906 42079 13955 10527 BRTS Trips @ 65% of potential BRTS 30018 28958 8532 6765 25289 27351 9071 6842 Other Bus Pax. 23341 27777 6075 3025 31306 15678 9755 3831 No. of BRTS Bus Trips with capacity of 70 & L.F. 1.0 429 414 122 97 361 391 130 98
(Source: CES, 2009) *Pax = Passengers

35

BRTS Bus Trips in Horizon year on EEH Corridor (2031) Horizon year (2031) Morning Peak Hour Evening Peak Hour Sections Max. Min. Max. Min. Sion Jn. To Mulund Jn. To Sion Jn. To Mulund Jn. To Suman Nagar Teenhath Suman Nagar Teenhath Jn. Naka Jn. Jn. Naka Jn. UP DOWN UP DOWN UP DOWN UP DOWN 22777 24542 5165 2438 27236 14789 6480 1797 9445 32223 19334 13107 276 9184 33726 20235 25408 289 6130 11295 6777 13561 97 6042 9806 8480 37043 5088 22226 5445 15174 73 318 9420 24209 14525 20366 208 6503 12983 7790 13863 111 6247 8043 4826 3529 69

Direction Mini + BEST Bus Pax. Shift from Car, 2 wheeler, IPT and Train to (Mini + BEST) Bus Potential BRTS Pax. BRTS Trips @ 60% of potential BRTS Other Bus Pax. No. of BRTS Bus Trips with capacity of 70 & L.F. 1.0
(Source: CES, 2009)

Now that MMRDA has clearly indicated its lack of interest in executing the BRTS, for reasons that are not too difficult to understand, it is now up to the BMC and BEST Undertaking to get the project moving again. Former BEST Chairman Mr. Dilip Patel visited Ahmedabad in January 2010 and tried, without any success, to push it in Mumbai. Post his tenure, which ended in March 2010, his immediate successor as well as the current incumbent Mr. Govind Shinde, has not shown any active interest in taking the project forward. Since the BEST Chairmans tenure is of one year, it now remains to be seen how enthusiastically the new Chairman will pursue the project, once Mr. Shindes term expires in March 2012. It is clear that in the new role that BEST is expected to play in executing the BRTS in Mumbai, it will have to lead by example, show a sense of ownership and dynamism if it is to succeed. Not only that, it will have to be persistent with the state government and the MMRDA to seek the necessary technical and engineering expertise in designing, executing and operating a BRTS project. Ideally, the government must support the BEST and BMC to form a SPV that can have its own dedicated technical cadre to rollout the project.

BRTS on Western and Eastern Express Highways:

Initial discussions on BRTS debated whether it should function as a trunk service, a feeder service or both in the context of Mumbai. The narrow widths of some of the key arterial roads like LBS Marg and SV Road creates difficulties for a dedicated corridor. It is presently not possible to implement BRTS on each and every road in Mumbai, thus the focus of recent efforts has been to implement BRTS corridors on the citys two main highways Western and Eastern Express Highways. A detailed feasibility study carried out by CESAECOM for MMRDA has also clearly stressed this case. The presence of super-dense crush capacity loads on the Western Suburban Rail Corridor between Borivali and Bandra provides a good reason for developing a BRTS corridor along the Western Express Highway. The areas surrounding the highway have in the past decade seen an explosion in residential and commercial development, which has led to a corresponding increase in population and trip generation.

36

Commuters who currently use the suburban railway from Borivali to any of the destinations down to Bandra would be the potential users of a BRTS on the Western Express Highway. This could potentially lead to some commuters doing a mode shift from the densely crowded local trains to the BRT corridor thus creating humane traveling conditions on the suburban section while providing a comfortable alternative for commuters on the same corridor. The fact that 4000 railway commuters lose their lives on the suburban railway corridor every year, some by falling off overcrowded trains, is a good reason for a BRTS along both the highways. On the Eastern side, the same could also be expected from Cadbury Junction, Thane, to Sion. The details of the trip projections from the MMRDA pre-feasibility report are illustrated in the previous page. A higher density of population will also make the project financial viable and improve the rate of return.

37

The Jogeshwari Vikhroli Link Road provides one of the best possibilities for an East West connecting BRTS

Section of the Western Express Highway near Aarey Milk Colony, Goregaon East

At present suburban railway train services are excessively crowded and exhibit the trademark Mumbai super dense crush capacity - specifically on the western corridor.

38

Past attempts at BRTS in Mumbai

October 2002 Presentation of Urban Transport Priorities and High Capacity Bus Systems Prof. Dinesh Mohan, Prof. Geetam Tiwari and Walter Hook under the aegis of Urban Design Research Institute Prof. Dinesh Mohan leads a team to meet Dr. T. Chandrashekhar, Metropolitan Commissioner, MMRDA, to talk on BRTS in general, resulting in a presentation to MMRDA the following day Workshop at MMRDA on BRTS conducted by Prof. Dinesh Mohan and Prof. Geetam Tiwari Enrique Penelosa makes a presentation on BRTS at IMC Hall under GoM/SPB initiative Presentation on BRTS to C.A.G./ Bombay First by Prof Dinesh Mohan & Prof Geetam Tiwari Seminar on Urban Transportation with focus on BRTS in Mumbai at Sahyadri, by GoM & MTSU Meeting called by Principal Secretary Transport G S Gill at Mantralaya, attended by Dr. T. Chandrashekhar, MMRDA First meeting of CWG on BRTS took place impromptu at Mantralaya Pre-feasibility Study on BRTS for Mumbai submitted by MTSU to Principal Secretary G S Gill by CWG / MTSU Advertisement for Expression of Interest in Mumbai papers by MMRDA MMRDA receives EOI from 15 parties CES Appointed as Consultant to carry out feasibility study Meeting called by Principal Secretary, Transport, Ramanath Jha o Consultants CES made presentation o First meeting of steering committee fixed for 22 August 2008 First Meeting of Technical Advisory Committee held o Planning, Design and Implementation Assistance for BRTS Under MUIP o Presentation to Technical Advisory Committee 27 October 2008 World Bank-LEA Consultants Comprehensive Transport Survey Report October 2008 made public MMRDA says it is busy with other big ticket projects and passes on the BRTS buck to BMC-BEST Chief Minister Prithviraj Chavan reaffirms creation of BRTS in Mumbai Cabinet Committee clears the deck for MSRTC for the northern extension of the existing Banra-Worli Sea Link from Bandra to Versova.

August 2003

March 2004 December 2004 2005 December 2006 January 2007

February 2007 March 2007 May 2007 June 2008 July 2008

October 2008

December 2008 December 2010 February 2011 August 2011

Source: ORF, MMRDA, newspaper reports

39

Need for Political Will

The lack of political will in Mumbai for a BRTS emerged as the strongest reason for the considerable delay and lack of road map towards a BRTS for Mumbai. Cities that have implemented BRT have clearly done so as a result of strong support from elected mayors or corresponding public authorities. The first Latin American cities which implemented BRTS had very strong city mayors who clearly worked towards identifying the needs of the majority and in their endeavour to find the best solutions zeroed in upon a bus-based system. The past decade has seen a marked absence of any elected representatives or political parties championing better public transportation systems. There is a clear lack of informed social discussion on the kind of transport infrastructure investments being made and their relative benefits. All of this has led to a larger proportion of investments being skewed in favor of car-centric solutions.

A number of bureaucrats have participated in deliberations for BRTS; what was clearly lacking was the participation and zeal of elected representatives to take the project through. Neighbouring Ahmedabad, though beginning after Mumbai, created a world class BRT system in just three years.

The BRTS debate in Mumbai received strong support from the Mumbai Transformation Support Unit, under the All India Institute of Local Self Government which organised a number of key meetings between various government bodies on the subject. Transport Planner Bina Balakrishnan played a key role in creating the deliberations, which yielded a number of productive meetings and outcomes between 2006 and 2008. While a number of senior bureaucrats participated in these deliberations, what was clearly lacking was the participation and zeal of an elected representative to take the project through. And ironically for a system which takes the least time to implement. Transport Analyst Sudhir Badami has championed the BRTS since 2002 and played a role in organising the visit of numerous experts on the subject. Mumbai Environmental Social Network (MESN) has since 2005 been spearheading the discussion with Ashok Datar having personally visited the system in Bogota and other cities as well. The roundtable at ORF clearly identified this lack of political will as the single key factor holding up a BRTS for Mumbai. The fact that no political representatives attended the event or even delegated a representative for the roundtable was a telling comment. In Ahmedabad, which began deliberations towards a BRTS in 2005 (a little after Mumbai) the strong support of the Chief Minister Shri Narendra Modi has been the key determining factor in the Centre for Environmental Planning and Technology (CEPT) University working together with Janmarg Limited in rolling out the BRTS in Ahmedabad. Dr. Hidalgo clearly brought out the importance of political will having played the key role in BRTS implementation in all the cities. He also highlighted how the atmosphere in Bogot (where he implemented the system), before the BRTS, was one of skepticism and the city not having faith in being able to find a solution to its problems. He showed appreciation for the fact that the
40

pre-feasibility studies for two corridors in Mumbai is now ready and reiterated the need to look to look ahead, and not dwell on problems from the past. While it may be difficult and perhaps undesirable to replicate the zeal of Enrique Penelosa for a car-free healthy city it is important that the political leadership is sensitive to the multiple benefits flowing to the citizens of Mumbai from a well-developed and efficient public transport system and more specifically from a BRT system for Mumbai. Abhijit Mehta, one of the participants at the round table, clearly brought out the futility of carrying efforts on just technical matters, and stressed for the resolution of the real issues impeding the implementation of BRTS. Commenting on the prevailing governance structure in Mumbai, he said it provided no clear incentive for elected representatives to take initiatives and calculated risks towards new ideas and solutions. The present Chief Minister of Maharashtra, Prithviraj Chavan, and the current Mayor of Mumbai, Shradha Jadhav, will clearly have to show dynamism and lead the efforts from the front. In cities like Curitiba in Brazil, the political leadership has shown enormous zeal not just towards implementing BRTS but has adopted a comprehensive approach to merging land use planning and transport planning. Curitiba was the first city in the world which back in the mid 1970s showed the way to the first BRTS. Even in India, the Janmarg BRTS in Ahmedabad has skillfully adopted the Bogota model. Going forward efforts of all stakeholders interested in a BRTS for Mumbai will have to be towards creating the necessary political support for the implementation. There was a felt need for more honest discussions with the political representatives and key administrators. ORF Mumbai will continue its engagement in this area and will continue to advocate for the recommendations that were distilled from the roundtable. It will be a pity if the local political leadership continues to ignore the urgent necessity of BRTS for Mumbai. The civic elections, which are due early 2012 provides an excellent opportunity to all the political parties to incorporate BRTS as a strong election promise to the citizens. The citys political class may well remember that several political pundits have attributed Sheila Dikshits victory in the Delhi elections to her strong and unstinted backing to the Metro rail project.

Urban transport is a political and not a technical issue. The technical aspects are very simple. The difficult decisions relate to who is going to benefit from the models adopted.
Enrique Penelosa, Mayor of Bogota

The role of commuters, civil society groups and businesses:

Political will does not exist in isolation. It is a function of the level of involvement of the public and civil society organisations in desiring a particular outcome. It is indeed very astonishing to see the poor level of participation of various stakeholders who stand to benefit from improved public transportation. The millions of commuters using transport systems everyday and the thousands of businesses who see their employees productivity being impacted have had no organised participation whatsoever till now in demanding or even discussing improvements in public transportation and solutions like BRTS.

41

There is today a plethora of information which is easily available for creating an understanding of the essentials of BRTS and taking action on the same. Civic activism and support for better urban infrastructure and experience is now a mainstay of media coverage, especially print media. Mumbai now has many more newspapers than it had five years ago, all vying to inform their readers better and running specific campaigns on a Better Mumbai. Understanding the indifference and unwillingness of the average Mumbaikar to demand better public transport, in spite of so much information and discussion on transport reforms, may be the key to why the BRTS has not found itself being executed even after a decade of discussion. It could also be possible that the majority of the discussion is taking place between activists, researchers and a select intellectual group with very little actionable information being available for the average commuter on the street. If such is the case then the concerned civic society organizations and individuals may like to look into it as a focus area. This much is clear that until there is a bottom up demand from those most affected by the problems of public transport there will be little progress beyond tinkering at the edges.

42

ORF Recommendations
Following the ORF roundtables and a number of consultations with transport experts and activists, a number of obstacles to BRTS in Mumbai were identified. Subsequently ideas on how to push forward to develop a BRT system for Mumbai have been distilled. We hope that the following recommendations will help the stakeholders, particularly the authorities and the political leadership of Mumbai to implement BRTS corridors in the city and accord this work top priority, over creating more expensive and car-centric solutions like sea links.

Developing and communicating the road map for BRTS

The authorities (the Chief Minister of Maharashtra as well as the Mayor of Mumbai, Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai along with BEST) need to develop a clear vision and produce a detailed practical plan of how they will implement BRTS in Mumbai. It is important that they issue a joint vision document to communicate their intent and commitment to the wider public. Public Awareness Campaigns will form an essential part of this initiative as broad-based public support will further help to bolster political will to act on this project. Ensuring that the plan is well communicated will help to increase accountability and keep the project on track. Towards this end, it is important that the Chief Minister and Mayor create a website like that of Ahmedabad BRTS at the earliest (http://www.ahmedabadbrts.com). This website should become the focal point of the authorities communicating their progress on BRTS. We would additionally suggest that a concerted effort be made towards identifying potential BRT corridors for all suitable cities of scale in Maharashtra and the Department of Transport and Urban Development Department be engaged in facilitating the same. The forthcoming civic elections in Mumbai provide an ideal platform for political parties to embark on this exercise.

BRTS on the JVLR and SCLR

In addition to the Western and Eastern Express Highways, the other corridors of choice for a BRTS are the Jogeshwari-Vikhroli Link Road (JVLR) and the Santacruz-Chembur Link Road (SCLR). These are very important arterial roads which provide crucial East-West Links which have been developed in the past five years, of which, SCLR is still to become operational. A feasibility study must be undertaken for these two important East-West corridors without further delay. The proposed Goregaon-Mulund Link Road, too, should have a provision for dedicated BRTS lanes. MESN has recently prepared a detailed paper strongly advocating BRTS on the JVLR. The report points out that there is no likelihood of any metro coming up on the JVLR at least during the next 8/10 years. The arterial road has a minimum width of 22 m (3 lanes on both sides with a median divider). It has remained relatively safe from illegal use such as parking, hawking etc. A dedicated BRTS corridor here will provide great relief to commuters to this employment hub where over 120,000 employees commute to their offices in SEEPZ, Larsen & Toubro, MIDC and the Hiranandani Industrial Estate daily. The report states that JVLR is already used by up to 300 buses in peak hours (of which about 2/3rd are private buses for employees).

43

Making a strong argument for the JVLR BRTS, the report states that at present, 36 BEST routes operate via JVLR. Total number of buses allocated to these routes is 372 (almost 9% of BESTs total fleet). Average length of the routes is over 20 km and they take more than one hour in each direction about 15 minutes longer during the peak hour which can be mostly eliminated once bus priority lanes are commissioned. Once Kanjur Marg ROB the main bottleneck on the JVLR is fully widened (expected to be completed in the next 6 months) traffic jams due to the narrow width of current Road Over Bridge (ROB) will be eliminated. The entire 10.3-km-long JVLR can then become a feeder transit hub for shuttle bus services between Larsen and Toubro, SEEPZ, Hiranandani Gardens and Industrial Estate, Kanjur Marg station and even all the way up to Jogeshwari station to the west of the JVLR. ORF recommends an open system accessible to buses coming from and going to WEH/EEH but fenced central lane which can be used by all buses (and ambulances) with a total of 19 bus stops all supported by signalized and raised pedestrian crossing for passengers to reach the bus stops. Similarly, the government must urgently take up BRTS on the SCLR, the other major arterial link providing the crucial east-west connectivity. The proposed GMLR must also have BRTS as part of its engineering design.

Empowered Joint Working Group

The authority taking up BRTS for Mumbai should also form an internal working group to coordinate with passenger groups, NGOs and Businesses to develop appropriate and sustainable transport arrangements in a consultative manner. The working group can play a role as critical as the one played by CEPT University in Ahmedabad for the creation of the Janmarg BRTS. In view of past failures in inter-departmental coordination, and considering the confusion and surprise at MMRDAs decision not to develop the BRTS, ORF recommends that the MMRDA, MCGM and BEST form a joint working group towards this objective. MCGM and BEST should develop programs for the necessary capacity building of the members of the Working Group to the highest levels. The empowered working group would be responsible for developing and implementing the BRTS on the Eastern and Western highways as per the pre-feasibility study by MMRDA. It should have the necessary support from the MCGM, the State Government, the Chief Minister, the Mayor of Mumbai and the Guardian Ministers of Mumbai. The working group should address the following issues:

Setting up an SPV for this initiative Technical specifications Additional feasibility studies for BRTS on the JVLR and SCLR Physical infrastructure development Policy coordination with authorities like the Public Works Department (PWD) of the Government of Maharashtra, which maintains the WEH and EEH or the MMRDA Public consultations and communicating progress frequently (monthly)

The Central Government can also help with capacity building among state authorities, for example through the formulation of a specific cell within the JNNURM to help cities with the requisite capacity-building and institution development to undertake BRTS. While there is
44

considerable focus and guidelines on the purchase of buses for the local transport bodies under the ULBs it is important that the numerous hurdles in terms of the agency which would handle the implementation, formation of SPVs etc. are addressed in greater detail by JNNURM.

Creation of a unified multi-modal transport authority (UMTA) for MMR

The presence of a unified multi-modal transport authority for Mumbai is a key requirement towards which the local and the State government need to pay urgent attention if they are serious about creating a vibrant Mumbai of global standards. In the past decade cities which did not have good public transport institutions have gone ahead and created such institutions while Mumbai still does not have a path towards the same. ORF strongly advocates that a Unified Multimodal Transport Authority (UMTA) for MMR be set up as a priority. The concept has already achieved recognition in the National Transportation Policy developed by the Ministry of Urban Development and must be acted upon quickly by the regional authorities. We envisage that this institutional set up would vastly improve the interagency coordination, planning and resource allocation that presently hinders optimal, integrated and sustainable transport development in Mumbai.

Quantify commute time improvement, GHG reduction and health benefits

While the existing pre-feasibility report by the MMRDA has covered the technical details relating to the corridor, the trip data and the cost aspects, it is equally important to have a study on the various benefits arising from BRTS. There needs to be an estimate of the travel hours that will be saved and the productivity benefits achieved therein. Similarly the health benefits arising from the reduced air pollution and stress levels need to be understood. With climate change being a matter of concern it is important that there is a study in place to quantify the GHG reduction potential of the BRTS. Towards this end MMRDA or MCGM need to initiate a scientific and authoritative study though an institution of repute, without any further delay.

45

Appendix
List of key participants at the ORF Roundtables Mr. Sudhir Badami Mr. Akshay Mani (EMBARQ/WRI - Transport Specialist) Ms. Sulakshana Mahajan (MTSU) Dr. P. Vedagiri (IIT Bombay) Mr. Abhijit Lokre (CEPT University Ahmedabad) Mr. T. Srikanth (MMRDA) Mr. D. M. Bimrar (MMRDA) Mr. Vaishakh Iyer (Transport Planner, CES IPL) Mr. Ashish Agrawal (CES (I) Ltd.) Mr. Vamsee Modugula (Contractor to EMBARQ) Mr. Ashok Datar (Chairman, MESN) Ms. Tahira Thekaekara (EMBARQ) Mr. R. Ramana (MMRDA AC (TP)) Ms. Anuradha Bhavnani (Regional Director, Shell Foundation)

46

Abbreviations and acronyms:

BRTS Bus Rapid Transit System MMRDA Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority MMR Mumbai Metropolitan Region WEH Western Express Highway EEH Eastern Express Highway JVLR Jogeshwari Vikhroli Link Road SCLR Santacruz Chembur Link Road CDP City Development Plan BEST Brihanmumbai Electric Supply and Transport Undertaking MUTP Mumbai Urban Transport Policy CTS Comprehensive Transportation Study MUIP Mumbai Urban Infrastructure Project NUTP National Urban Transport Policy GPS Global Positioning System HCBS High Capacity Bus Systems NAPCC National Action Plan on Climate Change GHG Green House Gases NEERI National Institute of Environmental Engineering CNG Compressed Natural Gas BTU British thermal unit CO2 Carbon Dioxide GAO Government Accountability Office LRT Light Rail Transit CBI Confederation of British Industry JNNURM Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission FOB Flyover Bridge ITDP Institute for Transportation and Development Policy CEPT Center for Environmental Planning and Technology GIDB Gujarat Infrastructure Development Board DPR Detailed Project Report GoI Government of India DIMTS Delhi Integrated Multi-modal Transit System BMC Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation MTSU Mumbai Transformation Support Unit UMTA Unified Metropolitan Transport Authority Janmarg BRTS in Ahmedabad; In Hindi, means The Peoples Way TOD Transit Oriented Development TBL Triple Bottom Line PPHD Passengers per hour per direction UA Urban Agglomeration ROB Road Over Bridge
47

References
1. Schafer, A. (1998) "The global demand for motorized mobility." Transportation Research A 32(6), 455-477 2. Sustainable Transport An International Perspective: A holistic framework for Urban Development and Transportation with Innovative Triple Bottom Line Sustainable Metrics; Projections Volume 9, MIT Journal of Planning 3. Planning Guide for Bus Rapid Transit Institution for Transportation & Development Policy (June 16, 2007) 4. Ahmedabad Janmarg Ltd. website, newspaper reports 5. Comprehensive Transport Survey (TRANSFORM) World Bank, LEA International - 2008 6. Comprehensive Transport Survey (TRANSFORM) World Bank, LEA International - 2008 7. EMBARQs Bus Karo A guidebook on bus planning and operations (Dec 2010); Available at http://www.embarq.org/en/bus-karo-a-guidebook-bus-planning-operations 8. Ministry of Urban Developments National Urban Transport Policy (2006); Available at http://www.urbanindia.nic.in/policies/TransportPolicy.pdf 9. Ministry of Urban Developments funding specifications for buses under Ja waharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM), 2009; Available at http://jnnurm.nic.in/wpcontent/uploads/2011/01/buses_funding.pdf 10. EMBARQs Bus Karo A guidebook on bus planning and operations (Dec 2010); Available at http://www.embarq.org/en/bus-karo-a-guidebook-bus-planning-operations 11. Consulting Engineering Services (CES) Detailed Engineering Report for Mumbai BRTS (Sep2009); http://www.cesinter.com/tnt_home/tnt_proj6.asp?x=Transport,%20Economics%20and%20Financi al%20Studies&y=Showcase%20Projects 12. ITDP Report, BRTS Guide 2007 13. Why is TransMilenio Still So Special? Dario Hidalgo, TheCityFix.com, August 5, 2008 14. http://www.hindustantimes.com/tabloid-news/mumbai/200-cars-a-day-add-to-city-s-trafficwoes/Article1-667659.aspx 15. Urban Transport in the Developing World, A Handbook of policy and practice Harry Dimitrion and Ralph Gakenheimer 16. Urban Transport in the Developing World, A Handbook of policy and practice Harry Dimitrion and Ralph Gakenheimer 17. TERI Report Environmental Impact of Transport Emissions 2002 18. http://www.energymanagertraining.com/Journal/Making%20the%20transport%20sector%20more %20energy%20efficient.pdf 19. http://www.energymanagertraining.com/Journal/Making%20the%20transport%20sector%20more %20energy%20efficient.pdf 20. http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTURBANTRANSPORT/Resources/FactsheetTransMilenio.pdf 21. Characteristics of BRT for decision making. Federal Transit Administration (August 2004). 22. United States Government Accountability Office study 2001 23. Daily News and Analysis; http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_ahmedabad-brts-needs-to-hikefares-for-sustainability_1598257 24. ITDPs Bus Rapid Transit planning guide (Sep 2007); Available at http://www.itdp.org/index.php/microsite/brt_planning_guide 25. The Hindu; CNG versus Diesel, R. Desikan, June 12, 2001 26. Public Transport: Planning, Management and Operations Peter White 2002, pg 61-65 27. http://www.indianexpress.com/news/buses-have-increased-our-staffers-havent/802725/0 28. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper Public Transport Subsidies and Affordability in Mumbai, India November 2007 29. BESTs Financial report for 2009-10; http://bestundertaking.com/pdf/FINANCE%20NOTE_2008-09.pdf

48

OBSERVER RESEARCH FOUNDATION

Ideas and Action for a Better India
Observer Research Foundation (ORF) is a leading non-partisan Indian Think Tank that seeks to influence public policy formulation. It was established in New Delhi in 1990 by the late Shri R. K. Mishra, a widely respected public figure, who envisaged it as a broad-based intellectual platform pulsating with ideas needed for Indias nation-building. In its journey of twenty years, ORF, pursuing its mission of Building Bridges for a Global India, has brought together leading Indian policy makers, academics, public figures, social activists and business leaders to discuss various issues of national importance. ORF scholars have made significant contributions toward improving government policies. ORF has produced a large body of critically acclaimed publications. Until recently, ORFs activities were based mainly in New Delhi. Beginning 2010, ORF Mumbai has been established to pursue the Foundations vision in Indias business and finance capital. It has started research and advocacy in six broad areas: Education, Public Health, Inclusive Development, Urban Renewal, Youth Development, and Promotion of Indias Priceless Artistic and Cultural Heritage. ORF Mumbais mission statement is: Ideas and Action for a Better India. It will champion the cause of balanced socio-economic development and a better quality of life for all Indians. It will also work towards strengthening Indias democratic institutions to become more responsible, responsive and sensitive to common peoples needs and concerns, especially those of most vulnerable sections of the society. Besides conducting diligent research in its above six core areas, ORF Mumbai also pursues wideranging initiatives like: Maharashtra@50 Study Centre Forum for India-China Citizens Dialogue India-Israel Innovation Initiative Centre for the Study of Indias Ancient Knowledge Traditions Gurus of Science Series

49

ORF Mumbais other areas of interest

Maharashtra @ 50 Study Centre Maharashtra is one of the leading states of India. With a population over 10 crore, every development that takes place in the state positive or negative markedly impacts Indias development and destiny. Therefore, attaining deep knowledge of all the major issues, challenges, achievements, failures and emerging trends is necessary from the point of view of the progress of Maharashtra as well as the nation. The overriding purpose of the Centre is to create hope in place of pessimism, clarity in place of confusion, consensus in place of discord, and cooperative action for ambitious, integrative goals in place of confrontational pursuit of sectional interests. Forum for India-China Citizens Dialogue ORF Mumbai believes that in the changing world order, friendship between India and China is not an option. It is a mutual necessity. Moreover, it is an essential factor for peace and stability in Asia and the world. Obviously, diplomatic efforts are not alone enough to restore India-China relations to the desired level of affinity. The imperative need, to create mutual understanding and cooperation between our two countries, demands closer and vastly increased people-to-people contacts. It is against this backdrop that ORF Mumbai has taken the initiative to establish the Forum for India-China Citizens Dialogue. This is a non-partisan, non-governmental platform for all those who believe in, and are willing to contribute to, the cause of promoting fraternal and cooperative relations between the peoples of India and China. Centre for the Study of Indian Knowledge Traditions ORF Mumbais Centre for the Study of Indian Knowledge Traditions seeks to promote the rich reservoir of knowledge and wisdom in Samskrit and other Indian languages, especially focusing on their enormous contemporary relevance. The Centre aims at studying Indias knowledge traditions not from a purely academic perspective, but from the point of view of their contemporary relevance and usefulness. It is the endeavour of the Centre to highlight how these traditions can enlighten and benefit our institutions of governance, political establishment and civil society initiatives. India-Israel Innovation Initiative Israel has emerged as a powerhouse in innovation and hi-tech industries in the recent past. India, on the other hand, is growing at more than 8 percent and, together with China, has become an engine of global economic growth. India and Israel share common values of democracy and entrepreneurship. Both are knowledge-driven societies. The economies of both are complementary to each other. In the last two decades, Indo-Israel cooperation has grown exponentially, with bilateral trade expected to soon cross USD 5 billion. This special relationship has a long way to go, particularly in the field of joint R&D and innovation. Against this backdrop, and to mark the beginning of the 20th year of diplomatic relations between our two countries, ORF Mumbai has mooted the idea of India-Israel Innovation Initiative. This is an alliance comprising academia, public and private sector companies, and think tanks from India and Israel, for deeper engagement with the subject of innovation-led cooperation between the two countries. ~*~

50