Content uploaded by Deepty Jain
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Deepty Jain on Nov 24, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECTS IN INDIAN CITIES: A STATUS REPORT
365BUILT ENVIRONMENT VOL 36 NO 3
Bus Rapid Transit Projects
in Indian Cities: A Status Report
GEETAM TIWARI and DEEPTY JAIN
The level of public transport service in Indian cities is low in terms of reliability,
comfort, safety and security. Together with increasing income levels this is leading
to a shift towards private car use. To halt this trend requires the provision of safe,
efficient public transport and secure support systems for pedestrians and non-
motorized vehicles. This has led to the planning of Bus Rapid Transit Systems
(BRTs) in several Indian cites in the past ten years. This paper presents the existing
status of BRTs projects in ten Indian cities, which are at the different stages of
implementation. For the study, data for all the cities have been collected from
different sources such as local authority websites, organizations involved in the
projects, published reports and studies, and the media.
Why BRT in Indian Cities?
Indian cities predominantly have a mixed
land use system with substantial informal
se lements. This has resulted in short
trip lengths (fi gure 1). Delhi and Mumbai
have populations of more than 10 million,
Hyderabad’s population is about 5 million
and Pune about 3 million. Figure 1 shows
that in big cities like Delhi and Mumbai 80
per cent of trips are less than 10 km in length.
The shorter trip lengths have supported the
use of non-motorized vehicles (NMV) as well
as walking trips in cities. As such, NMV has
a share of about 30 per cent in cities of more
than 1 million, which increases to nearly 60
per cent in smaller cities (fi gure 2). The share
of public transport is also more than 40 per
cent in cities with populations of more than
5 million (mostly organized bus systems)
and about 10–20 per cent in cities with
populations of 1–2 million (primarily served
by informal route taxis).
However, the level of service provided by
the public transport system is low in terms
of reliability, comfort, safety and security.
The infrastructure is not designed for buses.
Generally, pedestrian infrastructure is not
maintained. Public transport users are mostly
Figure 1. Trip lengths in selected cities in India.
Figure 2. Travel mode share (percentage) vs.
different city size (population in millions).
BUS RAPID TRANSIT: A PUBLIC TRANSPORT RENAISSANCE
366 BUILT ENVIRONMENT VOL 36 NO 3
captive users, i.e. they use public transport
because personal vehicles are not available
or the cost of using personal vehicles is too
high. With the present low quality of public
transport services and increasing income
levels, there is a shift to private motorized
vehicles. The current ‘sustainable modal
share’ in favour of walking, non-motorized
vehicles and public transport can be lost very
quickly in ‘the business as usual’ scenario,
leading to higher dependence on fossil fuels,
higher emissions of green house gases, and
increased congestion. To retain the modal
shares and switch from captive users to
choice users of public transport in Indian
cities, requires the provision of efficient and
utility-based public transport systems along
with safe and secure support systems for
non-motorized vehicles.
A wide range of public transport options
is available: rail-based systems catering for
more than 30,000 pphpd (passenger peak
hour per direction) and high-capacity bus
systems (HCBS) that have maximum capacity
of 25,000 pphpd. The optimal trip length for
a rail-based system is greater than 14 km
and that constitutes only 7–8 per cent of the
total trips in megacities (Advani and Tiwari,
2006a). Existing experiences from cities like
Mumbai and Kolkata suggest that rail-based
systems are costly for local authorities and
require heavy subsidies to keep up the
ridership. Moreover, the existing systems are
carrying only a small proportion of public
transport users and attract only a small
share of private transport users (Advani
and Tiwari, 2006b; Mohan, 2003). Given the
socio-economic profile and development
pattern of Indian cities, bus systems are a
viable option and if planned properly can
provide high capacity at a fraction of the
cost of a rail-based system. Moreover, bus
systems are flexible and hence can easily
meet the changing development pattern and
travel demand of a city. At present, buses
are the dominant mode of public transport
system in Indian cities and there is a need to
improve existing services. This has led to the
planning of Bus Rapid Transit Systems (BRTs)
in several Indian cites in the past ten years.
This paper presents the existing status of
BRTs projects in ten Indian cities, which are
at the different stages of implementation. For
the study, data for all the cities have been
collected from different sources such as local
authority websites, organizations involved in
the projects, published reports and studies,
and the media.
History of BRT Systems in Indian Cities
The proposal for BRT was fi rst mooted in
Delhi in 1996. This recommendation was a
part of a report ‘Delhi on the Move’ sub-
mi ed to the Central Pollution Control
Board (CPCB) of India. The main motivation
behind this proposal was to address the
problem of growing road traffi c injuries and
fatalities and pollution in the city (Mohan
et al., 1997). The report was examined by
the Delhi Department of Transport, and
policies were initiated to take it forward.
Then in 2001, a workshop was organized
by Delhi Transport Corporation (DTC) and
Infrastructure Development Finance Com-
pany (IDFC) to enable a detailed discussion
of the concept by international experts and
stakeholders. Following this, the government
set up a commi ee on sustainable transport
chaired by the Chief Secretary of Delhi. On
the recommendation of this commi ee, RITES
(a Government of India enterprise) was
awarded the contract to prepare a feasibility
report and plans for implementing BRT
on fi ve selected corridors in Delhi in 2003.
Detailed designs were prepared based on
2003–2004 traffi c surveys at all thirty-thee
junctions along the corridor. The detailed
topographical survey included exact locations
of all services and trees along the entire
length of the carriageway where the BRT
was to be introduced.
The low level of service provided by
the existing transport systems have led
to problems in many other Indian cities
– increasing numbers of private vehicles,
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECTS IN INDIAN CITIES: A STATUS REPORT
367BUILT ENVIRONMENT VOL 36 NO 3
traffic congestion and degraded air quality.
Concerned with the issues, National Urban
Transport Policy (NUTP) was adopted by
Ministry of Urban Development (MoUD)
in 2006. This focused on the development
of infrastructure to encourage use of non-
motorized modes (walking and cycling) and
public transport systems (Ministry of Urban
Development, 2006). This was followed by
Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal
Mission (JnNURM) funding which from
2007 provided support for the projects that
complied with the NUTP. As a result, nine
Indian cities excluding Delhi have started
developing BRT systems and a total of fifty-
three cities have started to improve their
public transport systems by purchasing new
low-floor buses and improving operation of
existing bus services.
Of the ten cities originally selected for
implementation of BRT, where parts of the
BRT system are operational in three cities and
systems in six cities are under construction
(table 1). Pune was the first city to experiment
with the operation of BRT in December
2006, followed by Delhi in April 2008 and
Ahmedabad in July 2009.
Conceptualization of BRT Systems in
Indian Cities
The success of a BRT project depends on
three factors: institutional structure; concepts
related to operation of buses and integration
of the system with other modes of transport
to provide easy and safe interchange; and
reduction of confl ict between diff erent modes.
This section is thus divided into three parts
dealing with each of these factors.
Institutional Structure (Responsible Authorities)
Planning of all the BRT systems was initiated
by local municipal governments as soon as
assistance under the JnNURM scheme became
available. Except for Delhi BRT, all the sys-
tems are funded by JnNURM with 50 per
cent support from the centre, 20 per cent
Table 1. Status of BRT projects in Indian cities.
City Stage of Construction Operation
implementation started started Remarks
Delhi 5.6 km operational Oct 2006 April 2008
Ahmedabad 25 km operational 2007 July 2009
Pune 17 km operational 2003 Dec 2006
Surat 10.2 km under Not yet started
construction
Jaipur Package 1B Sept 2007 Not yet started
constructed
Indore 11.5 km under October 2007 Not yet started Encroachments and court stays on
construction land parcels and non-availability of
traffic diversion links for the pilot
corridor
Bhopal Under construction: 2008 Not yet started Delay in finalization of the
only 22 per cent in Implementing Agency
progress Delay in transfer of Road from
NHAI & MoRTH
Railways permission is still awaited
for ROB
Vishakhapatnam Under construction 2008 Not yet started
Vijayawada 14.5 km ready for June 2008 Not yet started
operation
Rajkot Under construction 2008 Not yet started
BUS RAPID TRANSIT: A PUBLIC TRANSPORT RENAISSANCE
368 BUILT ENVIRONMENT VOL 36 NO 3
from the state government and 30 per cent
from the local authorities (table 2). In Delhi,
the BRT project was initiated by the Delhi
government transport department, which
formed a joint venture company – Delhi
Integrated Multimodal Company (DIMTS)
– with IDFC to plan a multi-modal transport
system. Special purpose vehicles have been
planned in Ahmedabad, Indore, Pune and
Jaipur also.
Of the ten cities, BRT in nine is being
developed under JnNURM. Except for Pune
and Ahmedabad, MoUD has approved only
phase-I or pilot corridors for implementation
(table 3). The financial plan for the remaining
corridors has not yet finalized in these cities
and this could hinder the full implementation
of these systems and hence their success.
In all the cities BRT corridors have been
identified based on the available rights-of-
way (ROWs), traffic demand and existing bus
routes in the city. The criteria for selection of
the first pilot corridor are based on the ease
of implementation in terms of availability of
ROW except for Delhi, Pune and Bhopal. In
Delhi, apart from the availability of ROW,
demand on the corridor is very high and in
Bhopal the pilot corridor passes through the
congested and dense areas of the city.
Operating Concepts of BRT
Type of BRT System. There are two types
of BRT system: closed systems and open
systems. In a closed system, buses run on
a dedicated corridor without being aff ected
by other traffi c (fi gure 4). The system re-
quires a planned feeder service for the areas
Table 2. Authorities responsible for BRT projects in the ten cities.
City Executing Authority Financial support Operating authority
Delhi GNCTD GNCTD
Ahmedabad Municipal Corp. JnNURM SPV: Janmarg
Pune Municipal Corp. JnNURM SPV: PMPML
Surat Municipal Corp. JnNURM SPV
Jaipur Development Authority JnNURM SPV: JCTSL
Indore Development Authority JnNURM SPV: ICTSL
Bhopal Municipal Corp. JnNURM SPV
Vishakhapatnam Municipal Corp. JnNURM SPV
Vijayawada Municipal Corp. JnNURM SPV
Rajkot Municipal Corp. JnNURM SPV
Table 3. BRT network plan in the ten cities.
City Planned length of Approved length of the Criteria for selection
the corridor (km) corridor by MoUD (km) of first corridor
Delhi 426.00 NA High density
Ahmedabad 88.80 88.80 ROW
Pune 117.00 117.00 ROW
Surat 125.00 30.00
Jaipur 138.00 42.00
Indore 106.00 11.50
Bhopal 44.00 (phase-1) 21.70 High density
Vishakhapatnam 105.70 42.00 Travel demand, ROW
Vijayawada 42.45 15.50
Rajkot 63.00 29.00
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECTS IN INDIAN CITIES: A STATUS REPORT
369BUILT ENVIRONMENT VOL 36 NO 3
where passengers are fewer and hence where
it is not fi nancially feasible to provide trunk
services. Closed BRT systems have been
adopted in Ahmedabad, Surat, Vishakhapat-
nam and Rajkot. In an open system, existing
bus services are upgraded by providing
dedicated lanes for the movement of buses
in congested areas. Open systems are thus
fl exible and easily adapt to existing bus
routes and movement pa erns. Buses can
leave and enter the corridor at intersections
thereby reducing the number of interchanges
required in the case of a closed system (fi gure
5). In addition to closed and open systems,
there can be hybrid systems. As shown in
table 4, BRT in Jaipur and Bhopal is a hybrid
system. In the case of Jaipur, an exclusive
BRT service has been planned. Along with
this exclusive service, destination oriented
services have also been planned. Here the
BRT service is extended to the areas where
dedicated corridors are not present. The
system can thus operate within the existing
travel pa ern in city and provide a more
frequent service to the areas served by
exclusive BRT routes. In Bhopal, the system is
primarily planned as a closed system except
that the buses will run in mixed traffi c lanes
in the areas where right-of-way (ROW) is not
available. Here the existing bus fl eet will not
be allowed to travel on the BRT corridor and
will only be used as feeder service.
Bus Lane Details. The width of bus lanes is
either 3.3 m or 3.5 m with 3.5 and 3.75 m
at bus stops. Diff erent means have been
used to segregate the bus lanes from main
carriageway (table 5). In Delhi, Indore and
Surat kerbs are used, while railings are used
in the other cities. In Delhi, fences have
been used only at intersections to identify
exclusive bus lanes from mixed traffi c
situations. Safe movement of buses in bus
lanes can be assured by the appropriate use
of segregation methods. Rumble strips are
used in Delhi, Pune and Rajkot, while lane
Figure 3. Closed BRT system in Ahmedabad. Figure 4. Open BRT system in Delhi.
Table 4. Type of BRT system in the ten cities.
Cities
Type of system DEL ABD PNE SRT JPR IDR BHP VSK VJD RJK
Open X X X X
Closed X X X X
Hybrid X X
X Planned
Note: DEL: Delhi; ABD: Ahmedabad; PNE: Pune; SRT: Surat; JPR: Jaipur; IDR: Indore; BHP: Bhopal; VIZ:
Vishakhapatnam; VJD: Vijayawada; RJK: Rajkot.
BUS RAPID TRANSIT: A PUBLIC TRANSPORT RENAISSANCE
370 BUILT ENVIRONMENT VOL 36 NO 3
markings are used in Ahmedabad, Jaipur and
Bhopal. Wide medians are planned to be used
in Surat and Vij ayawada.
Bus Stops. Two types of bus stop designs
are possible in case of median bus lanes:
staggered or island platform (fi gures 5 and
6). Of the ten cities Ahmedabad and Surat
have planned for island platforms while in
Jaipur both types of bus stops are proposed.
The average distance between bus stops in all
the cities is 500 m except in Ahmedabad and
Vij ayawada (table 6). Staggered platforms
are planned at the approach arms of the
intersections thus using red phase of traffi c
signals for boarding and alighting. This
enhances the level of service provided by
the system. Wherever intersection spacing
is more and points of signifi cant boarding/
alighting occur in between intersections,
provision has been made for mid-block bus
stops also.
Fare Collection. The fare collection mechanism
and fare policy aff ect customer satisfaction,
convenience and level of service. Diff erent
types of fare collection mechanism exist
ranging from traditional on-board systems
to electronically handled off -board systems.
In Delhi and Pune the existing system of
on-board fare collection is to be continued
whereas in Ahmedabad, Surat, Indore and
Rajkot off -board fare collection is planned.
In the other four cities existing on-board fare
collection systems are to be used together
with provision for off -board systems.
Figure 5. Island platform in Ahmedabad. Figure 6. Closed platform in Jaipur.
Table 5. Bus lane detail in the ten cities.
Cities
DEL ABD PNE SRT JPR IDR BHP VSK VJD RJK
Width of BRT lane is X X X X X
3.3 m
Width of BRT lane is X X X X X
3.5 m
Tools to segregate Only Kerb X X X
bus lane from Railings X X X X X X
carriageway
Tools to segregate Rumble strip X X X
two bus lanes Lane marking X X X
Divider X X
X Planned
Note: DEL: Delhi; ABD: Ahmedabad; PNE: Pune; SRT: Surat; JPR: Jaipur; IDR: Indore; BHP: Bhopal; VIZ:
Vishakhapatnam; VJD: Vijayawada; RJK: Rajkot.
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECTS IN INDIAN CITIES: A STATUS REPORT
371BUILT ENVIRONMENT VOL 36 NO 3
Integration of BRT with Other Modes of
Transport
Walking. All bus users are primarily pede-
strians either during access or egress or for
both the trips. The eff ectiveness of the system
thus depends on the safety of pedestrians on
road and the comfort provided for accessing
the bus service.
Except in Ahmedabad, continuous foot-
paths have been planned for the safe move-
ment of pedestrians along the corridor, which
is separate from the NMV lanes. In Bhopal,
where the right of way (ROW) is less than
20 m, a combined 3 m wide space has been
provided for both pedestrians and cyclists.
Zebra crossings with pedestrian activated
traffic signals have been provided in all the
cities both at junctions and mid-blocks where
bus stops have been planned. In Delhi, raised
zebra crossings have been provided on free
left turns and minor access roads joining the
main corridor. At mid-block bus stops where
demand is high, grade separated facilities
have been planned in Ahmedabad and
Pune. In Surat, the main carriage way has
been elevated to provide at grade crossing
for pedestrians. Dedicated bus lanes in all the
cities are planned on the central lane thereby
reducing crossing distance for pedestrians
using bus on the corridor and conflicts
between buses and slow moving vehicles
(non-motorized modes like pedestrians and
cyclists).
In Delhi, to reduce conflicts between
pedestrians and motorized vehicles at access
point to properties, raised ramps have been
provided.
Cycles and Cycle Rickshaws. Cycle tracks have
been planned based on the availability of
ROW. In Delhi, Indore and Rajkot continuous
cycle tracks and cycle lanes are planned on
either side along the corridor. The width
of these tracks range from 1.8 m to 2.7 m.
Signalized crossing have been created by
providing cycle boxes at intersections to
allow cycles to wait for the green phase
of the signal. Bicycle parking has been
planned along the corridor near bus stops
and junctions in Delhi, Pune, Jaipur and
Indore. On Delhi-BRT corridor, parking for
cycles has been provided along NMV lane
which is not more than 100 m away from the
intersections and there is provision for rent
and ride facilities at some stations.
Intermediate Para-Transit (Three-Wheelers): Free
parking facilities for auto-rickshaws have
been planned along the corridor near bus
stops and junctions in Delhi, Ahmedabad,
Pune, Jaipur, Indore, Vij ayawada and Rajkot.
This increases the all over catchment area of
the BRT system.
Motorized Wheelers. Paid on-street parking has
been planned in Ahmedabad, Jaipur, Indore
and Rajkot. In Vij ayawada paid off -street has
Table 6. Bus stop details in the ten cities.
Cities
DEL ABD PNE SRT JPR IDR BHP VSK VJD RJK
Staggered type bus stops X X X X X X
Island platforms X X X X
Bus stop before junction X X X X X X X
Bus stop far-side of junction X X X X
Overtaking lane at bus stop X X X X
Average distance between 500 800 500 600 500 500 600 700 750
bus stops (m)
X Planned
Note: DEL: Delhi; ABD: Ahmedabad; PNE: Pune; SRT: Surat; JPR: Jaipur; IDR: Indore; BHP: Bhopal; VIZ:
Vishakhapatnam; VJD: Vijayawada; RJK: Rajkot.
BUS RAPID TRANSIT: A PUBLIC TRANSPORT RENAISSANCE
372 BUILT ENVIRONMENT VOL 36 NO 3
been planned for 50–200 equivalent car spaces
for every 1 km of the BRT corridor. In Delhi,
apart from off -street parking, stopping bays
for both cars and heavy vehicles have been
planned along the main carriageway.
Evaluating BRT Systems of India
This section evaluates the diff erent BRT
systems proposed and operational in Indian
cities based on the effi ciency, system require-
ments and infrastructure of each.
Bus Operation and Efficiency
As discussed earlier, open BRT systems
can be easily integrated with the existing
intra-city bus systems. Table 7 presents the
average speed and frequency planned for
BRT. Approximately 9 per cent of the total
routes in Delhi pass through the BRT pilot
corridor (5.8 km long from Ambedkar Nagar
to Moolchand Flyover), with buses running
at peak hours at a frequency of 120 buses
per direction and an average speed of 18
km/h. In contrast, in the case of Ahmedabad
closed system, frequency is 30 buses per
hour per direction with an average speed
of 24 to 25 km/h. The Delhi system has two
parallel platforms at the bus stops on the
near side of the junction. Each platform can
accommodate four or fi ve buses boarding and
alighting simultaneously. Buses can move in
a platoon of ten buses every 2 minutes if the
signal cycle is kept at 2 minutes. At present
the signal cycle is sometimes more than 3
minutes.
Demand Assessment
The demand for which BRTS has been plan-
ned in the ten cities varies from approximately
2,600 passengers per hour per direction
(pphpd) being served by Ahmedabad BRT
over a length of 25 km to the maximum of
13,500 pphpd being served by the Delhi pilot
corridor stretch of 5.6 km. The passenger
demand on selected BRT corridors in many
cities is still low as in Bhopal where the
maximum existing demand on the selected
corridor is 3,800 pphpd and is projected to be
11,400 by 2021 (table 8). In Jaipur the existing
demand ranges from 500 to 1,700 pphpd. In
Indore the demand in 2009 was 1000–6000
pphpd on the identifi ed corridors which is
projected to rise to 2500–10,000 pphpd by
2012 and 60,00–25,000 pphpd by 2021. Except
for Delhi system, planned ridership is fi ve or
six times higher than the planned theoretical
capacity of the system.
Infrastructure Cost
The unit cost of BRT infrastructure in Indian
cities varies from Rs 85 to 155 million per
kilometre with least being in Rajkot and
Table 7. Efficiency of BRT systems in the ten cities.
City Peak hour average speed Frequency Comments
(km/h) (minutes)
Delhi 18 0.5 Achieved
Ahmedabad 24–25 2.5 Achieved
Pune 16–18 2 Achieved
Surat 2–5 Planned
Jaipur 25 2–4 Planned
Indore 20 1.5 Planned
Bhopal 25 2–3 Planned
Vishakhapatnam 1–1.5 Planned
Vijayawada 22–25 Planned
Rajkot 22–25 1.5 Planned
BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECTS IN INDIAN CITIES: A STATUS REPORT
373BUILT ENVIRONMENT VOL 36 NO 3
maximum in Delhi (table 9). The type of
infrastructure provided, materials to be
used, location of the corridor, relocation of
activities and utilities are the major factors
in determining the cost of the infrastructure.
For example in Ahmedabad and Surat grade
separated facilities have also been planned on
the BRT corridor.
Key Findings
Requirements for BRT
Average trip length in the metro and medium
sized cities is more than 5 km. However, in
small cities it is less, except in Indore. Bus
systems are preferable for trip lengths of
more than 3–5 km. Closed systems have been
proposed in small cities also that requires
interchanges to be able to use the system.
With trip lengths as small as 3 km and an
access and egress distance of 500 m, a closed
system is not a viable option.
Demand Assessment
BRT projects can serve a capacity of 20,000 to
25,000 pphpd, depending on the geometry,
bus stop design and operational plans. Of the
ten cities, the appropriate use of the capacity
of system is recognized only in Delhi, where
the existing demand is 13,500 and the system
design off ers for the maximum of 24,000
pphpd. Whereas, in cities like Bhopal or Surat
demand is as low as 1,700 pphpd and the
system is designed to serve only 3,000–6,000
Table 9. Cost of BRT infrastructure in the ten cities.
City Route length Approved cost Unit cost Ranking
approved (km) (Rs x 107) (Rs x 107 per km)
Delhi 426 14.89 2
Ahmedabad 88.8 984.15 11.08 4
Pune 121 1789.16 14.79 3
Surat 29.9 469.02 15.69 1
Jaipur 45 479.54 10.64 6
Indore 22.5 98.45 4.38 8
Bhopal 21.7 237.76 10.96 5
Vishakapatnam 47.5 452.93 9.53 7
Vijayawada 39.45 152.64 3.87 9
Rajkot 29 110.00 3.79 10
Table 8. Demand assessment on BRT corridor in the ten cities.
Stage of City Existing Ridership Planned Ridership
implementation (pphpd) (pphpd)
Operational Delhi 13,500 20,000–24,000
Ahmedabad 2,400–2,600 15,000–20,000
Pune 3,600 10,000–15,000
Under construction Surat 20,000
Jaipur 500–1,700
Indore 1,000–6,000 10,000–20,000
Bhopal 1,800–3,800 11,400
Vishakhapatnam 3,950–5,970 5,750–9,100
Vijayawada
Rajkot 8,000
BUS RAPID TRANSIT: A PUBLIC TRANSPORT RENAISSANCE
374 BUILT ENVIRONMENT VOL 36 NO 3
pphpd. Such a small demand can be be er
served by improving operations of existing
bus system in the city rather than investing
approximately Rs 1–1.5 billion per km for
development of BRT corridor.
Integration with Other Modes of Transport
Integration of BRT with other existing
modes of transport is essential in order to
provide comfortable access and egress to
and from the system. This can be achieved
by providing safe and secure infrastructure
for NMV and parking for cycles, auto-
rickshaws and private motorized vehicles.
This has been obtained in Delhi, Pune and
Jaipur. In contrast, in Ahmedabad planned
footpaths and cycle tracks are narrower than
international standards, non-continuous and
not fully compliant for barrier free access
(Kost , 2009).
From 1995 to 2005, Indian cities discussed
the relevance and feasibility of BRT in India.
Pune was the first city to construct dedicated
central bus lane, followed by Delhi. Both
cities have an extensive bus system. From the
start, Pune did not permit the existing bus
routes to operate in the dedicated corridor.
The Delhi system made it mandatory for all
buses to be in the dedicated corridor. Initially
both systems had fatal crashes involving
buses and pedestrians crossing the road.
Fatal crashes in the Delhi system have been
reduced by more than 90 per cent in the last
two years (DIMTS, 2010). In both cities, there
has been reduction in car speeds and an
improvement in bus speeds by more than 50
per cent. The Ahmedabad system has been in
operation since July 2009; buses are operating
in the dedicated corridor and car traffic has
not faced any reduction in speed because of
the low volume of vehicles on the corridor.
Both in Delhi and Pune media reports have
strongly opposed the system, primarily listing
the reduction in speed and ‘congestion’ faced
by car traffic. Ahmedabad has had positive
reports from the media as cars have not been
affected. At present, most cites are moving
very cautiously and slowly in implementing
BRT projects. The main concern seems to be
to avoid the possible adverse impact on car
traffic. Several cities are preparing plans for
a metro system, which is ten to fifteen times
costlier than the BRT, and are asking central
government for assistance. These projects
have strong support from the media as well
as politicians and bureaucrats. However,
BRT projects, which require less capital
and operating costs and have a potential
to transform the city environment and
benefit large numbers of people, have had a
lukewarm response from the authorities and
the media.
REFERENCES
Advani, M. and Tiwari, G. (2006a) Does High
Capacity mean High Demand? Proceedings of
Future Transport Conference, Gotenburg.
Advani, M. and Tiwari, G. (2006b) Review of
capacity improvement strategies for bus transit
service. Indian Journal of Transport Management,
30, pp. 363–391.
DIMTS (Delhi Integrated Multi-modal Transit
System) (2010) Bus Rapid Transit System
(BRTS): A Case Study of Delhi, in Review
Meeting of Bus Rapid Transit System. New Delhi:
Ministry of Urban Development.
Kost, C. (2009) Janmarg: the people’s way.
Sustainable Transport, No. 2, pp. 6–11.
Ministry of Urban Development (2006) National
Urban Transport Policy. New Delhi: Ministgry
of Urban Development.
Mohan, D. (2003) Pioneering High Capacity Bus
System in Delhi: A Case Study. Proceedings
of Workshop on Integrated Planning for
Transportation, Land Use and the Environment
in Indian Cities, Administrative Staff College of
India, Hyderabad.
Mohan, D. Tiwari, G., Saraf, R., Deshmukh, S.G.,
Kale, R.S., Wadhwa S. and Soumitri, G.V. (1997)
Delhi on the Move: 2005, Future Traffi c Manage-
ment Scenarios. Report prepared for the Central
Pollution Control Board by Transportation
Research and Injury Programme, Indian Insti-
tute of Technology, Delhi.
