<BODY> The Chennai Seminar: Some points that were not found in The Hindu report and which Pasumai Thaayagam has also not mentioned in this message were as follows (reproduced not exactly but with some perspective): Professor Anantharajan, emeritus urban planning professor of Anna University pointed out that - ** There are 1.7 million motorised vehicles in the city of Chennai, of which 1.3 million are two wheelers. There are 2,773 buses, showing a low percentage of buses to overall motorised vehicle pop (Mumbai and Calcutta fare better). ** 48 per cent of fatalities (period of study not clear) were pedestrians (34) and bicycle users (14). Another 30 per cent were motorised two-wheeler riders. ** Nearly 50 per cent of the bus fleet of 2,773 is at least eight years old. ** 3.7 million pax trips a day are made by bus, 600,000 by suburban rail. ** Mode share for buses, bicycle riders and rail users declined between 1970 and 1992 (one year after economic liberalisation was introduced in India. More recent figures after rampant automobilisation would reveal a worsening of the trend). 1970                                                                    1992 41.5                                                                     37.9             Bus 21.3                                                                     14.2             Bicycle 20.7                                                                     29.5             Pedestrians 11.5                                                                      4.1              Rail (Could the rise in pedestrian trips perhaps be attributed to increasing urban congestion, higher cost of other modes and lack of supply at a time when demand for travel brought about by economic activity? This is no indicator of pedestrian facilities in any case, because sidewalks have been systematically reduced over the last decade. One Mayor famously said that people were not using them so they could be reduced! Some of the anti-pedestrian measures were funded by the World Bank funds through the Tamil Nadu Urban Development Project. The Bank's current project head for TNUDP in India has evaded comment on such outcomes when questioned by the media.) Professor Janakarajan, a social scientist, referred to the bad development policies being followed by Governments in general and the lack of integrated planning approaches leading to scarcity of land and resultant sprawl, pollution - 226 tonnes of pollutants in auto emissions per day in Chennai - and the poor economics of per km cost of monorail (example given was Kuala Lumpur at 58.2 million dollars a km) versus BRT. Continuing with my earlier post on this "conference," one must wonder : Whether Pasumai Thaayagam will pursue a campaign through the Union Minister of State for Railways, Government of India, Mr.Velu, to raise efficiency levels of existing suburban rail systems in Chennai (and elsewhere). Professor Anantharajan pointed out at the conference that many of the stations of the Mass Rapid Transit System were not usable because they had no proper approaches. Existing buses were not integrated with this system, he pointed out. There are NO services of MRTS on weekends, and only 18 services (most of them with three-car rakes a day) on weekdays, which is strange considering that this infrastructure was created at a lot of expense. Most MRTS station precincts are used as open toilets by slum folk (India has notoriously poor sanitation, Pasumai Thaayagam may please note), these are used to deposit garbage generated by surrounding areas (I have pictures) and after 6, have little lighting on approach roads, deterring women and old people from using the few trains available. Many consumer services - postal, grocery, food outlets, would integrate very well with the MRTS, but these are COMPLETELY ABSENT from these stations. Now, on the question of the suburban train lines (first created in colonial times and now converted to broad guage with double lines), Pasumai Thaayagam can, if it is serious, turn some of its wishes into action, again through Mr.Velu and later his successors. Not a single station on the four major lines has an escalator or lift. One must climb about 25 feet of stairs and walk across to platforms. Why has this great leapfrogging giant of an economy not created a single modern station on these rail lines, making them accessible to the elderly, women, children and the disabled? In the absence of simple measures like escalators to cross over, people jump onto the tracks (the traction is overhead) and vault to the platform. Is it surprising that there are at least three or four lives lost in a week to accidents involving suburban rail? Where is the advocacy on all these issues? Ditto for rail crossings across city roads, where lack of bridges and underpasses leads to reckless movement of people and a ghastly tally of deaths each year. It is a long litany of transport woes in urban India. Let us fix what we have and then hope to become world class. Anant ----- Original Message ----- From: arul rathinam <arulgreen@yahoo.com> Date: Monday, February 27, 2006 10:17 am Subject: [sustran] Chennai Seminar - Monorail project not viable,says Anbumani ? The Hindu > Monorail project not viable, says Anbumani > > "Metro rail will suit the State better" > > Staff Reporter ? The Hindu, 27?02-2006 > > · Hassle-free commuting enhances productivity > · Bus-rapid transport system mooted > > Chennai: Union Health Minister Anbumani Ramadoss has > termed the State Government's proposed monorail > project "unviable". Mr. Ramadoss said that the > advanced countries used the monorail system only for > short distances but the Tamil Nadu government had > proposed a 300-kilometre network for Chennai. Even > Japan used it only as a feeder service, he said at a > seminar on public transport systems organised here on > Saturday by the voluntary organisation Pasumai > Thayagam. > > The approximate cost of laying one kilometre of the > monorail network would be Rs. 162 crore, the Minister > said. The fares would also have to be high, thus > making the service unaffordable, he added. > > In contrast to the monorail, the metro rail project > abandoned by the State was a far better option that > would serve more number of people and reduce > congestion on roads, Mr. Ramadoss said. Noting that > vehicle explosion on roads was a serious threat to > road safety, the Minister urged the Government to > strictly carry out the required procedure before > issuing licences. This could prevent a number of road > accidents, he noted. > > Bus rapid transport > > Dinesh Mohan, coordinator of the Transportation > Research and Injury Programme, IIT Delhi, also said > that the monorail was an extremely costly option of > public transport. Making a case for bus rapid > transport systems, Mr. Mohan said that it was a cheap > and efficient method that only required better traffic > management. > "Even in Delhi and Kolkata, the metro rail is > under-utilised. A rapid transport system with a > dedicated traffic lane only for buses is the best > option for cities," he said. A bus rapid transport > system would require very little investment as it did > not require a completely new infrastructure network to > be put in place. Further, advanced information > technology could be used to schedule > transport-on-demand bus systems to meet needs during > peak hours, Mr. Mohan added. > > Urban infrastructure expert Anandarajan, former > professor at Anna University, said that Chennai had a > vehicle population of 17 lakh, of which 13 lakh was > two-wheelers. He called for an integrated bus and rail > system to push up the use of public transport and > reduce dependence on two-wheelers and cars. > > Madras Institute of Development Studies Professor S. > Janakarajan stressed on planned development for the > city's peri-urban areas, which were growing rapidly. > "If roads are congested when a person commutes from a > suburb to the city for work, the hassle he has to go > through reduces overall productivity levels," he said. > > > M.G. Devasahayam, trustee of voluntary organisation > SUSTAIN, said that the average age of the 2,773 buses > in Chennai is 7.62 years. The Metropolitan Transport > Corporation must procure new high-capacity buses such > as vestibule buses. Shobha Iyer, Citizen Consumer and > Civic Action Group, underscored the need for > affordable transport for the poor. She added that > pedestrians and cyclists must be included in the > transport development plan. > > The Hindu, 27?02-2006 > http://www.hindu.com/2006/02/27/stories/2006022714250300.htm > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > ================================================================ > SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people- > centred, equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on > developing countries (the 'Global South'). Because of the history > of the list, the main focus is on urban transport policy in Asia. > </BODY>