BRT in India

Loading...

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

0 comments

Post a comment

    Post a comment
    Embed Video
    Edit your comment Cancel

    2 Favorites

    BRT in India - Presentation Transcript

    1. BRT in India Madhav Pai EMBARQ Pai and Hidalgo, JnNURM Funded BRT Systems in India, A Review, TRB 2009
    2.  
      • Background: J n NURM, NUTP and Delhi. 
      • The J n NURM 4 cities and their projects (road widening to BRT)
      •   How the projects are coming along
      • Early progress & lessons learnt:
        • Need for operational planning, demand estimation, external subsidies, and better institutional set up.
      • Conclusions/lessons learnt
      OUTLINE
    3. J n NURM – Urban Renewal Mission
      • Focus on efficiency in urban infrastructure and service delivery mechanisms
      • Focus on strengthening Municipal and other urban local bodies
      • Emphasis on community participation, and accountability towards citizens
    4. National Urban Transport Policy
      • Focus on building people centric urban transport. To achieve its objective it recommends
        • integrated land use and transport planning,
        • equitable allocation of road space,
        • priority to public transport,
        • priority to non-motorized transport,
        • discourage use of personal motor vehicles,
        • coordinated planning and
        • association with private sector
      • Marriage - J n NURM to NUTP
      and 4 Road Widening Projects became 4 Cities with an opportunity to create high quality public transport system, oriented to the user that offers fast, comfortable and low cost urban mobility
    5. Round 1 J n NURM funded BRT projects in India (Under Implementation)
      • Ahmedabad (Janmarg)
      • Indore (MetroJet)
      • Jaipur
      • Pune
      • Road widening projects transformed into BRT projects or projects developed with a focus on road infrastructure
      • System design was done without an operations plan as starting point
      • Very little or no demand estimation
      • Costs for all components of BRT not accounted for upfront (Technology, Rolling Stock, Staffing SPV)
    6.  
    7. Photo: Madhav Pai, EMBARQ Delhi BRTS (2008)
    8. Delhi Busway - Initial Corridor
      • Initial Operation: 2008
      • Length: 5.6 Km
      • Stations: 12
      • Ridership: N/A; 8,000 pphpd
      • Frequency: 60 buses/hr
      • Commercial Speed: 11-13 Km/hr
      • Median lane busways on Arterial – open system (0.1)
      • Small shelters with narrow platforms – insufficient bays (0.25)
      • Mixed fleet (0.25)
      • Manual fare collection – on board, no central control (0.1)
      • BRT Rating: 0.70 (18%)
      Source: Pai and Hidalgo, JnNURM Funded BRT Systems in India: A Review, TRB 2009
    9. @ Ambedkar Marg & Mehrauli Badarpur Road Junction Bus priority at junction
    10. Delhi bus corridor had several problems during the first weeks:
      • The traffic signals did not work properly. Signal cycles excessively long (12 minutes)
      • Bus queuing at stations - spillovers
      • High number of Blue Line Bus breakdowns in the bus lane.
      • Bus drivers were not well informed of the new operations. Additional traffic wardens have helped providing instructions.
      • Motor vehicles and two wheelers invaded the bus lanes
      • Pedestrian jaywalking
    11.  
    12. The difficulties received wide media coverage : focused on the problems for car drivers
    13. Most problems are being corrected, but the concept is in doubt - expansion has slowed down Delhi’s problems resulted in a negative impact for BRT all over India
    14. Early Progress & Lessons Learnt
    15. Boost to Bus Based - Public Transport
      • Change in perspective towards bus-based public transport
      • Realization in city bureaucracy for
        • restructuring state owned municipal corporations
        • implementing organized bus based public transport in cities where buses operate on carriageway contracts and/or IPT has major share.
    16. Capacity Building
      • Bus Industry
        • Bus body building was a cottage industry until a few years ago.
        • In the last four years manufacturers through internal research and joint ventures have rapidly built capacity.
      • ITS Industry
        • Local manufacturers are working very hard to build capacity in manufacturing GPS devices, traffic signal technology and other ITS equipment.
        • Local manufacturers have managed to significantly drop costs
      • Consulting Expertise
      • Contractors
      • Exposure visits, MoUD workshops (Ahmedabad, Pune, Jaipur and Indore) and conferences (India Mobility) have provided an excellent platform for exchange
      Capacity Building
    17. Capacity Building
    18. Difficulties of working with new vendors/contractors
        • Costs for technology haven’t stabilized, which makes financial planning extremely difficult
        • Technologies (buses and equipment) haven’t been fully tested and systems have to endure a learning process as industry matures
    19. Financial Sustainability, Fare Levels & Bus Occupancy Alternate revenue sources - Fixed annual subsidy; Land development
      • Fare levels are low, one rupee per kilometer or lower
      • Planned services maybe faster, more reliable and with better bus and information technologies, however planned bus occupancy is very high
      • Fares at these levels alone are not sufficient to provide adequate level of service and make the system financially sustainable
    20. Convincing all City Staff
      • There is buy-in from the main stakeholders of the project, engineers, contractors, land development authorities implementing the project are not fully convinced.
      • Logic of running the buses in median lanes continues to be questioned
      • Buy-in and confidence in the project is required to make bold decisions
      • Transfers of primary stakeholder has been a big concern
      • Special efforts to emphasize the need for equitable allocation of road space to all its constituents (Pedestrians, Bicyclists, Public transport, IPT and Personal vehicles).
    21. Staffing SPV’s
        • Special Purpose Vehicle’s (SPV) currently not staffed or staffed with public officials who are transferable
        • Staffing SPV’s with qualified competent full time staff is a big challenge
      • Current Status – 17 Cities are considering, planning or implementing busway/BRT projects.
      • 10 of the 17 are being funded through J n NURM
    22. Conclusions
      • Systems reviewed are all expected to improve travel conditions, quality and performance of public transport.
      • Systems in their current form will significantly contribute to mobility needs in Tier II cities, but are far from reducing the pressures of rapid motorization.
    23. Recommendations
      • Operations Plan – Should be the starting point of the design process
      • Traffic Engineering – Implemented and managed by traffic engineers.
      • Performance Based Contracts - Comprehensive, performance based specifications in contracts to cover for lack of experience on the vendors/contractors.
      • Bus Operator & Fare Collection Contracts - Understand long term implications of contracts being negotiated with private parties for bus operations & fare collection.
      • Technology – Fare Collection/Integration, Operations Control & Signals
      • Monitoring, Supervision and Control – Post Implementation
      • THANK YOU!
    SlideShare Zeitgeist 2009

    + EMBARQ NetworkEMBARQ Network Nominate

    custom

    1206 views, 2 favs, 2 embeds more stats

    By Dario Hidalgo, Senior Transport Engineer, EMBARQ more

    More info about this document

    © All Rights Reserved

    Go to text version

    • Total Views 1206
      • 1133 on SlideShare
      • 73 from embeds
    • Comments 0
    • Favorites 2
    • Downloads 90
    Most viewed embeds
    • 72 views on http://www.embarq.org
    • 1 views on http://www.irf2010.org

    more

    All embeds
    • 72 views on http://www.embarq.org
    • 1 views on http://www.irf2010.org

    less

    Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
    Flag as inappropriate

    Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate. If needed, use the feedback form to let us know more details.

    Cancel
    File a copyright complaint
    Having problems? Go to our helpdesk?

    Categories