The experimental Bus Rapid Transit {BRT} system in Delhi, whichreserves a portion of the road space to facilitate fast movement ofhigh capacity buses and prioritises public transport over private, hasbeen facing a barrage of vitriolic media criticism ever since itsinception. A wary Union Urban Development Ministry has now ordered areview of the Rs.2,883-crore BRT plan for eight other cities —Ahmedabad, Bhopal, Indore, Jaipur, Pune, Rajkot, Visakhapatnam and Vijayawada. Apart from this, Chennai is also planning a BRT under aseparate funding pattern. The controversy has put a question mark over the future of mobilityin urban India. But before we apply permanent brakes — under politicaland media pressure — on a system which has succeeded in several bigcities across the world, we need to pause, reflect and learn theappropriate lessons. Cities across India are now choked with cars. Between 1981 and 2001,on an average, the population of the six metro cities multiplied by 1.8times but the number of vehicles increased by over 6 times. With 1,396cars per square kilometre, Chennai today has a higher car density thanthe vastly more affluent Berlin. The crisis is sure to escalate furtheras the new set of mini-cars hits the roads in the near future. Cars occupy 75 per cent of road space but are used by less than 15per cent of the populace even in the most affluent Indian cities. Incontrast, buses occupy a mere 8 per cent of the road area but are usedby almost 20 to 60 per cent of the people. Pedestrians and cyclistsconstitute an overwhelming 40 to 75 per cent of commuters but arecompletely marginalised in our planning system as a major part ofbudget allocations is consumed for road widening or flyover building,which primarily benefit cars and two wheelers. Compare this with New York, London, Paris or Singapore — the hightemples of international finance. These are all cities where people getaround on foot, by cab or via mass transit. Urban policies discourageprivate cars. With oil prices consistently hovering above $100 a barreland the threats of global warming looming large, there is a clear needto reprioritise our urban transportation policy in favour of publictransit. Among the major urban mass transit options, the road-based busrapids are much more economical in terms of capital cost and offergreater operational flexibility compared to rail based systems likeMetro or Light Rail Transit {LRT}. For the cost of one km of a metrosystem, about 8 to 10 km of LRT or a 30-50 km modern bus network can bedeveloped. In terms of day-to-day running costs and ability to movelarge numbers of people at high speed, dedicated bus transits enjoycertain advantages over LRT systems. However, electric powered rail based systems are environmentallymore sustainable — when running in full capacity — and have been betterable to attract motorists as many stations offer park and ridefacility. They also enjoy a better public image. In India, the DelhiMetro has emerged as a benchmark of efficiency in public service, eventhough running under huge state subsidy. It is of course wrong to see different mass transit options in an‘either-or’ context, as great cities frequently have a combination ofall, most often with integrated ticketing and connection at keyjunctions for seamless transfer. The bus rapids, light rails andtramways frequently act as feeders to the metro system. The appropriateness of the transit alternative depends on ridershippattern and economic profile of the area. Another important factor inintegrated planning is scalability. That is, a particular region maystart with BRT, with an eventual plan of changing over to LRT orfull-fledged metro, at a future date, as demand increases. Rede Integrada de Transporte, the world’s first bus rapid transit,was pioneered in 1974 in the Brazilian industrial city of Curitiba.Enrique Peñalosa, the
www.hindu.com/2008/05/06/stories/2008050654720800.htm