HOT TOPICS
SPOTLIGHT AGENCIES
Traffic Congestion – Possible case for a PIL
Written By Naveen - 20 October, 2008
Traffic Bangalore CTTP BMTC BBMP BMLTA PIL Action BMRC
As outlined below, the formation of the prescribed bodies to tackle traffic congestion & to improve living conditions in the city was completed some time ago as recommended. Despite this, no concrete steps seem to be planned to stem the rot. The same old solutions continue to be doled out – the usual widening of roads after felling more trees & introducing more bus routes. These temporary solutions have been making things worse as widening roads invites more vehicles & the losers continue to be pedestrians & public transport users.
As I had mentioned in an earlier blog, the quality of street–based public transport can only be as good as traffic conditions will allow it to be. With average traffic speeds around 13.2 km/hr during peak hours in the city, fast, dependable quality bus services will never be possible unless buses are offered priority measures & are not subject to traffic delays. Unless measures to ensure this are taken, the larger business groups will shy away from city bus services if & when they are privatized.
At this stage, the other relevant bodies, such as BBMP & BMTC should be planning a complete shift out from the present stalemate, with the confidence of the public, but they seem to have pinned their hopes altogether solely on a Metro system that by itself, will never be able to solve the myriad transport problems.
The above seems adequate for filing a PIL against the State Government, questioning them as to why urgent steps are not being taken to address traffic & congestion problems in the city & to accord BMLTA with necessary powers to do the same expeditiously & on top priority.
KUIDFC (Karnataka Urban Infrastructure Development & Finance Corporation) had initiated a Comprehensive Traffic & transportation Plan (CTTP), which was carried out by Rail India Technical & Economic Services (RITES) & made public in October, 2007. (Please refer to relevant findings from the CTTP report reproduced below & discussions posted previously on Praja).
The CTTP report had reported the following relevant facts, which are undisputed :
1) Sec.3.9.5 – The average peak hour driving speed in the city was found to be 13.2 Kmph.
2) Sec.3.10.3 – Opinion Survey : Over 70 % of commuters feel that :
- buses are delayed, resulting in long waiting times
- the frequency is not adequate
- distance to bus stops should be less
69 % feel the numbers of routes are not adequate.
98 % of respondents are in favour of MRTS in city
81 % would like feeder bus service to MRTS stations
89 % would like to have parking facilities at MRTS stations
90 % prefer single ticketing system between bus and MRTS
3) Table 3.18 – Modal Share of Public Transport has dropped from 55% in 1982 to 45.7% in 2006. Sec.3.13.1.8 – This is further expected to fall unless adequate and quality public transport system is provided to the people of Bangalore. Share of two wheelers and cars in travel demand is disturbingly high. This trend needs to be arrested.
4) Sec.3.11.2 – Traffic Police have resorted to manage excessive traffic by introducing one way systems in central areas. 87 kms of roads converted to one–ways in the last two years alone.
5) Sec.3.13.1.3 – Traffic composition on roads indicates very high share of two wheelers. The share of cars is also growing. This indicates inadequate public transport system.
6) Sec.3.13.1.4 – Vehicle to Capacity ratios on most of the roads are more than 1.
7) Sec.3.13.1.4 .6 – Household surveys indicate high household incomes. So the vehicle ownership levels are increasing. In the absence of adequate and comfortable public transport system, people are using their personal modes creating not only congestion problems but also environmental pollution.
8) Sec.3.13.1.4 .7 – The household surveys indicate high share of work trips. This segment of travel demand needs to be mostly satisfied by public transport system. Considering the large employment centres being planned in the BMA, the public/mass transport system needs to be upgraded substantially.
9) Sec.3.13.1.9 – There is high pedestrian traffic in core area and some other areas in Bangalore. Footpath facilities are generally not adequate and their condition is deteriorating. Therefore up gradation of their facilities is very important.
10) Sec.3.13.1.10 – Parking is assuming critical dimensions in Bangalore. Parking facilities need to be augmented substantially. In the long run, city-wide public transport system needs to provide not only to reduce congestion on roads but also to reduce parking demand.
11) Sec.3.13.1.11 – Share of cycle traffic has declined over the years. This mode of transport needs to be promoted by providing cycle tracks along the roads.
12) Sec.3.13.1.13 – Large areas are being planned by BMRDA in the BMR. This is likely to increase interaction between Bangalore and suburban towns. There will be need to provide commuter rail services to these towns from Bangalore.
The Government of Karnataka, in its Order No. UDD 134 BMR 2006 (I), dated 8.3.2007, had created the State Directorate of Urban Land Transport [DULT] under the Urban Development Department.
BMLTA was created vide Government Order No. UDD 134 BMR 2006 (2), dated 9.3.2007 with the following functions :
- To co-ordinate all land transport matters in the BMR.
- To prepare detailed Master Plan for Transport Infrastructure based on the comprehensive Traffic and Transport Study for Bangalore.
- To oversee implementation of all transportation projects.
- To appraise and recommend transportation and infrastructure projects for bilateral / bilateral Central assistance.
- To function as empowered Committee for all Urban Transportation Projects.
- To initiate action for a regulatory framework for all land transport systems in BMR.
- To initiates steps, where feasible for common ticketing system.
- Take any other decision for the integrated urban transport and land use planning and Implementation of the projects.
The National Urban Transport Policy (NUTP–2006) had recommended setting up of Unified Urban Transport Authorities in cities with populations exceeding one million. The NUTP recommendations were to facilitate better coordination between planning & implementing agencies of urban transport programmes & projects, & integrating management of urban transport systems. See below for relevant extracts from NUTP–2006. Extracts from National Urban Transport Policy :
- A. Incorporating urban transportation as an important parameter at the urban planning stage rather than being a consequential requirement.
- B. Bringing about a more equitable allocation of road space with people, rather than vehicles, as its main focus.
- C. Encourage greater use of public transport and non- motorized modes by offering Central financial assistance for this purpose.
- D. Enabling the establishment of quality focused multi-modal public transport systems that are well integrated, providing seamless travel across modes.
- E. Establishing effective regulatory and enforcement mechanisms that allow a level playing field for all operators of transport services and enhanced safety for the transport system users.
- F. Establishing institutional mechanisms for enhanced coordination in the planning and management of transport systems.
- G. Introducing Intelligent Transport Systems for traffic management.
[PS: Removed formatting due to HTML problems - blr_editor]
COMMENTS
silkboard - 22 October, 2008 - 05:29
Some more points to read and research
- Is the city following a developed plan (which would be CTTP) in the first place. For example, is ORR upgrade part of the CTTP?
- What is the process being followed for deviations from CTTP?
- What is the process state/city government is following for prioratizing all work laid out in CTTP? CTTP only talks of doing things in phases, there are no clear priorities for recomendations within a phase
- Feedback based on Impact measurement: Thikn of this - how has a project like Outer Ring Road, or Intermediate Ring Road impacted transportation landscape in south/east bangalore. Does the city collect any statistic that would form the feedback for going back and adjusting things in CTTP?
It looks it should be possible to prove that city is not taking transportation planning seriously, but it will require good reading, research and meetings with some people.
The other angle for the PIL could be our time. How much value do we put on our commute time? Is saving on this time something in public interest? Is it in public interest to expect better than 13.2 kmph which is the avg commute speed today? Measures taken in past 5-6 years how have those impacted the average commute time? gone down, right? Did it go down simply because the city got more people than it planned for? If yes, then how many people is the city planning for every year (to prove that it got more migrants than what it expected)?
Naveen - 22 October, 2008 - 16:11
idontspam - 22 October, 2008 - 19:59
A viable alternate solution is to run low floow trams on the streets. Bombardier and Siemens make these low floor rolling stocks. These low floor trams can use existing busstops and pavements. Zero pollution, save on fuel bill. It is the width of a Volvo bus ie fits one lane. Longer than an articulated bus and can be as long as metro trains. You can attach how many you want based on demand. No putting up pillars, digging, displacement, multicrore norman foster stations etc. All they will need is embedded tracks close to the pavement. Vehicles/Buses can use the tram lane when the tram is not using it so no worries of blocking the lane for tram. All you need is draw a overhead line for electricity using the existing light poles on the pavement. Advantage is orderly movement of lots of people and very little expense compared to metro trains. All corridors with more than 1 lane can be a perfect candidate. This probably fits 90% of Bangalores major throughfares. Mini bus connectivity into residential areas can be BMTC revenue.
Trams - Expense is the Problem
Naveen - 23 October, 2008 - 05:02
All rail-based options for Mass transit cost phenomenally more than BRT. This apart, rolling stock is much more expensive to maintain than buses.
As per my understanding, the cost/s per km are appx'ly as follows :
Metrorail (Underground) - 350 crs+
Metrorail (Elevated) - 180 crs
Monorail (Elevated) - 135 crs
High-speed Trams /Light Rail (Surface) - 65 crs+
Prioritized BRT (On surface /existing roads) - <15 crs
There are also other disadvantage/s - Trams /Light-rail is designed to run on embedded tracks on roads, sharing road space with all other road vehicles. Due to this, a great deal of enforcement would be required if they must be made dependable & on time. Designing priority & exclusivity for them can possibly be done at extra cost, but it would be much more challenging than for BRT, particularly at intersections, as longer ramp lengths & larger curvature radii would be necessary.
Light rail will most likely fail in Indian cities as they will get caught up in traffic like the trams in Kolkata, & offer nothing more than what ordinary buses are already providing, other than probably better comfort.
I am game. We would need more stats and research
silkboard - 21 October, 2008 - 05:07
Was thinking of some stats and research we would need to prepare the case for this PIL
- Average speed of traffic in Bangalore when compared to cities of similar size and density
- Comparison of BMLTA with Singapore's LTA
- London Bus (good example), and Delhi Transport corporation - load factors on buses compared to BMTC
- Amount of time it has taken for BBMP to execute works (bus bays) for BMTC
- Number of times BBMP, BMTC, Traffic Police meet, and average number of decisions taken in these meetings.
- Estimate on how much would public transport usage go up by if we had a responsible and powerful regulatory authority
Some key stats IMHO
- Estimated loss of revenue to state because BMTC or public transport carries only 34-37% of commuters and not 60-56% of them.
- Estimated usage of public transport when Metro arrives. How much would it go up by?
- Estimated losses due to low average speeds of commute - basically put a cost to our 2 hours spent each day on the roads
If 3-4 of us can join hands to do some research, I am game for sponsoring and working on this PIL.
PRAJA.IN COMMENT GUIDELINES
Posting Guidelines apply for comments as well. No foul language, hate mongering or personal attacks. If criticizing third person or an authority, you must be fact based, as constructive as possible, and use gentle words. Avoid going off-topic no matter how nice your comment is. Moderators reserve the right to either edit or simply delete comments that don't meet these guidelines. If you are nice enough to realize you violated the guidelines, please save Moderators some time by editing and fixing yourself. Thanks!