[sustran] Fwd: Transport Alternatives in MUMbai

[Chris Zegras]

>Date: Wed, 9 May 2001 10:17:57 -0400 (EDT)
>From: Neeta Misra <neeta at MIT.EDU>
>To: <duspstu at mit.edu>
>Subject: Transport Alternatives in MUMbai
>
>
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Mon, 7 May 2001 12:01:37 +0500 (GMT+0500)
>From: R. Ramakumar <ramkumar at igidr.ac.in>
>Subject: Transport Alternatives.
>
>
>MUMBAI'S TOPSY-TURVY TRANSPORT PLANNING
>by Darryl D'Monte
>23 April 2001
>
>It is ironical that the state government's proposal to build an elevated
>roadway or fly-over along Peddar Road has coincided with the Konkan
>Railway's announcement that it is contemplating a Sky Bus Metro Project in
>the city. Admittedly, these solve different problems. The Peddar Road
>scheme is being mooted to ease the traffic jams that will be created when
>the Bandra-Worli Sea Link is completed in a couple of years. The Sky Bus
>is a novel technology and is initially being recommended to provide
>much-needed east-west connectors in a city where transport is aligned on a
>north-south axis.
>
>The very fact that the Peddar Road scheme has been thought of so late in
>the day is typical of the knee-jerk planning that has vitiated Mumbai's
>recent transport projects. The Maharashtra Road Transport Development
>Corporation (MSRDC), which was given excessive powers under the earlier
>BJP-Shiv Sena regime, has gone ahead with the Bandra-Worli Link without
>clearing the next stretch of the Western Freeway Sea Link, from Worli to
>Nariman Point. The Ministry of Environment has yet to okay this section,
>which is why the government earlier thought of an elevated road from
>Tardeo to Chowpatty. When it faced the ire of citizens there, it turned to
>Peddar Road as an alternative. The apex planning body, the Mumbai
>Metropolitan Region Development Authority, is nowhere in the picture.
>
>Either way, it will attract public interest litigation from citizens who
>do not want their surroundings to be polluted with an estimated 1,25,000
>cars each morning and an identical number on the return journey. More
>importantly, the government seems unaware that private car-owners form
>only 9 per cent of the city's commuters and yet contribute 60 per cent of
>the air pollution (as was officially admitted during the naval fleet
>review). What Mumbai needs, like any well-planned city, is efficient
>public transport, which means trains and buses. Cars compete with buses
>for space on roads and, elsewhere in the world, are being discouraged from
>entering the central business district. The public transport system needs
>to be strengthened - with many more options, including air-conditioned
>train compartments and special buses to accommodate motorists.
>
>The Sky Bus at least has the merit of meeting some of these needs: it is
>clean, cheaper than some options and comfortable. It does not clog the
>existing arteries or disrupt traffic while building new routes. The
>Reliance group is contemplating investing in the Rs 5,400 crore 120-km
>system. With due apologies to the Konkan Railway, however, there is reason
>to be sceptical about its technical competence to operate what is
>apparently a unique monorail. It is one thing to run a railway between
>cities and quite another within cities, particularly one as congested as
>Mumbai. It is a variation of the light railway which has been proposed
>from time to time. KFW, the German government's financial wing, had
>offered a Rs 5,000 crore loan for such a system in Mumbai, Thane, Pune and
>Nagpur when Manohar Joshi was Chief Minister.
>
>The overwhelming need is for a mass public transport system. The Sky Bus
>doesn't fit the bill because it can reportedly only carry 15,000 people an
>hour. With a current population of 11.9 million, according to the 2001
>census early estimates, Greater Mumbai requires to transport some 5-6
>million commuters in the space of three hours in both directions daily.
>Planners term this a "peaking" problem, similar to the surge in demand for
>power at certain times. Any "bus" - whether it is in the sky or on the
>ground - is by definition mainly for short distances, ideally to and from
>railway stations, given Mumbai's geography. Even the fast or
>air-conditioned buses don't carry masses, only classes. The BEST is a
>time-tested war-horse, which ought to be given a boost, with cleaner fuels
>and better vehicles.
>
>For the same reason, marine transport is certainly a mode whose time has
>come, but it can at best relieve the roads of some cars. It will be the
>most pleasant way to commute, provided the connections from the landing
>points are good. Four Seasons, owned by a New York-based NRI, Mohan Shah,
>has proposed ferries from Marve to Nariman Point on the western suburbs
>and Nerul (in Navi Mumbai) to the Gateway of India. The state government
>is examining various bids: Four Seasons has offered to build four jetties
>along the west coast too. But the fares - up to Rs 115 for a 46-minute
>journey from Marve and Rs 65 for a 20-minute ride from Bandra to Nariman
>Point - will deter the bulk of commuters.
>
>The state government ought to accord the top priority to the second phase
>of the Mumbai Urban Transport Project (MUTP), a Rs 6,500 crore scheme
>which will be part-funded by the World Bank. Mamata Banerjee's rail budget
>this February unfortunately didn't provide the resources. This scheme
>envisages augmenting the rail capacity, including a new line from Borivli
>to Virar. The expenditure on roads is minimal and consists mainly of
>bridges over level crossings. Only 1.1 per cent of the total expenditure
>is on fly-overs, as recommended by the British consultants, W.S. Atkins,
>who undertook a comprehensive study of Mumbai's transport needs. By
>contrast, the previous government has spent some Rs 1,500 crore on around
>50 fly-overs, which benefit only the minority of motorists. However, even
>the capacity of the railways to carry more passengers is limited by the
>shortage of platforms for a quick turn-around of trains, even if platforms
>are extended. At the very least, the railways ought to build subways
>within stations for the convenience of commuters.
>
>Ultimately, Mumbai may have to seriously consider the most expensive but
>highly efficient alternative, which is the Metro project or seventh rail
>corridor, which is partly underground. The 17.5-km underground section
>would run from Bandra to Colaba, with some 20 convenient stations through
>the busiest precincts en route. A consortium consisting of Tata
>Consultancy Services (TCS) and British experts has studied this scheme,
>which was estimated to cost Rs 8,121 crore ($1.89 billion) at March 1999
>prices. According to Dr P.G. Patankar, the former BEST General Manager who
>is now a consultant to TCS, the state government would have to provide the
>land worth Rs 386 crore, but the scheme would be part-funded by commercial
>development within stations and by levying employment and location benefit
>taxes. The Metro would carry up to 75,000 passengers per hour, which is
>reason enough for planners to examine all its pros and cons.

--------------------------------------------------
Christopher Zegras
MIT * Center for Environmental Initiatives * Room E40-468
1 Amherst Street * Cambridge, MA 02139
Tel: 617 258 6084 * Fax: 617 253 8013