Technical Assistance Consultant’s Report
Technical Assistance 7750-IND September 2013
India: Strengthening Urban Transport Subsector under ADB-supported Urban Development Projects − Urban Transport Component
Prepared by Gordon Neilson, Subhajit Lahiri and Prasant Sahu, Study Team Members For the Ministry of Urban Development
This consultant’s report does not necessarily reflect the views of ADB or the Government concerned, and ADB and the Government cannot be held liable for its contents.
ASSAM URBAN INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT
URBAN TRANSPORT COMPONENT
ADB Contract S71818 TA- 7750(IND)
FINAL REPORT
October 2011 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION ...... 1
1.1 Background ...... 1 1.2 Objectives of Study and Tasks ...... 1 1.3 Organisation of Report ...... 2
2. PUBLIC TRANSPORT SECTOR ASSESSMENT ...... 3
2.1 Introduction ...... 3 2.2 Current Situation ...... 4 2.3 Road Map for the Future ...... 6 2.4 Policy Framework ...... 8
3. REVIEW OF DPR’S FOR CORRIDORS 1 AND 2 ...... 9
3.1 Introduction ...... 9 3.2 BRT Design Concept ...... 9 3.3 Ridership ...... 15 3.4 Adequacy of Road Capacity ...... 16 3.5 Land Acquisition ...... 17 3.6 Resettlement and Rehabilitation ...... 18 3.7 BRT Operational Plans ...... 22 3.8 Terminals ...... 23 3.9 Capital Costs ...... 24 3.10 Financial Evaluation ...... 24 3.11 Economic Evaluation ...... 25 3.12 Environmental and Social Impact Assessments ...... 26 3.13 Institutional Arrangements ...... 27 3.14 Conclusions ...... 27
4. EVALUATION CRITERIA ...... 29
4.1 Introduction ...... 29 4.2 Public Transport Demand on the Corridor ...... 29 4.3 Adequacy of Existing Right of Way (ROW) to accommodate a BRT ...... 29 4.4 Spare Road Capacity along the Corridor ...... 30 4.5 Capital Costs ...... 30 4.6 Overall Ease of Implementation...... 31
5. SELECTION OF PILOT BRT CORRIDOR ...... 32
5.1 Introduction ...... 32 5.2 Transport Demand ...... 33 5.3 Current Bus Network ...... 36 5.4 BRT Design Options ...... 41 5.5 Land Acquisition ...... 42 5.6 Traffic Capacity Assessment ...... 42 5.7 Indicative BRT Service Requirements ...... 45 5.8 Terminal Facilities ...... 45 5.9 Capital Cost ...... 46 5.10 Environmental Issues ...... 48 5.11 Initial Corridor Selection ...... 50
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page i Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
6. SELECTED CORRIDOR ...... 52
6.1 Introduction ...... 52 6.2 Existing Public Transport Network ...... 52 6.3 BRT Demand Estimates ...... 54 6.4 BRT Design Principles ...... 55 6.5 BRT Alignment and Lane Arrangement ...... 56 6.6 Station Locations ...... 58 6.7 Parking ...... 58
7. MONITORING AND EVALUATION INDICATORS ...... 59
7.1 Introduction ...... 59 7.2 Proposed Indicators with 2011 Measures ...... 59
8. RISK ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT PLAN ...... 61
8.1 Risk Assessment ...... 61
9. THE NEXT STEPS ...... 62
9.1 Tranche 1 Work ...... 62
ANNEX A: EXISTING INSTITUTIONAL AND REGULATORY STRUCTURE
ANNEX B: BUS, MINIBUS AND TREKKER AUTHORISED ROUTES
ANNEX C: OVERVIEW OF LOCATIONS WITH CAPACITY DEFICIENCIES
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page ii Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1 Public Transport Capacity in Guwahati (1/3/2011) ...... 3
Table 2.2 Annual Vehicle Registrations in Guwahati and Annual Growth ...... 4
Table 3.1 Approximate Roadwidths needed for Selected BRT Layout Options ...... 11
Table 3.2 Pax / Peak Hour / Direction (2009) ...... 15
Table 3.3 Corridor 1 West: Land Acquisition ...... 19
Table 3.4 Corridor 1 East: Land Acquisition ...... 20
Table 3.5 Corridor 2: Land Acquisition ...... 21
Table 3.6 Analysis of BRT Operational Proposals ...... 22
Table 3.7 Adequacy of Proposed BRT Service ...... 22
Table 5.1 Peak Hour Traffic by Location (2011 and 2009) ...... 33
Table 5.2 Comparison of 2009 and 2011 Public Transport Occupancy Counts ...... 34
Table 5.3 Peak Period Person Movement by Location and Mode ...... 35
Table 5.4 BRT Service to meet Peak Hour Demand ...... 45
Table 5.5 Costing Input Parameters ...... 47
Table 5.6 Capital Costs by Corridor Rs(m) ...... 47
Table 5.7 Estimate of Trees to be Felled by Corridor ...... 49
Table 5.8 Environment Management and Monitoring ...... 49
Table 6.1 Ridership by Route: GS Road Survey Locations, 8 – 11 am...... 52
Table 6.2 Ridership by Route: GS Road Survey Locations, 5 – 8 pm...... 53
Table 6.3 Ridership Projections ...... 54
Table 6.4 Station Spacing Options at Flyovers ...... 56
Table 6.5 Proposed Station Locations ...... 58
Table 7.1 Proposed Indicators and Values in mid-2011 ...... 59
Table 7.2 Indicators for Infrastructure Improvements ...... 60
Table 7.3 Pedestrian Safety and Accident Indicators ...... 60
Table 8.1 Risk Management ...... 61
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page iii Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3.1 Layout of Typical BRT Station located at a Junction ...... 12
Figure 3.2 Standard BRT Station / Junction Arrangement ...... 14
Figure 5.1 Trekker Routes ...... 37
Figure 5.2 Bus Routes ...... 38
Figure 5.3 Minibus Routes ...... 39
Study Team Members
Gordon Neilson Team Leader
Subhajit Lahiri Transport Planner
Prasant Sahu Safeguards Specialist
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page iv Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
1.1.1 Recent planning studies for Guwahati1,2, the capital of Assam State, identified the need for major improvements to transport facilities in the city. Chief among these was the construction of some form of mass transit along three major transport corridors in the city. 1.1.2 These proposals were considered further and a Detailed Project Report3 (DPR) for a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) option on two of the three corridors was developed. A DPR for a further possible BRT corridor is currently under preparation. 1.1.3 As part of its Assam Urban Infrastructure Project (AUIP), ADB is interested to assist the State of Assam to progress the BRT proposals and has commissioned this present study to review the DPR for the potential BRT corridors with a view to recommending one of these corridors for selection as a pilot BRT route. This is being undertaken under agreement IND-P44508: S-CDTA for Strengthening Urban Transport Subsector under ADB-supported Urban Development Projects in India. 1.1.4 The AUIP is now at the Project Preparation stage. The major component of the project is a water supply and solid waste project, the preparation for which is well advanced. It is expected that the first tranche of the ADB loan will be used to finance the detailed design and initial stage of construction of this component. The transport component is less advanced; it is hoped however that agreement can be reached on an initial BRT corridor in the course of this study and that in Tranche 1 all necessary further work to obtain ADB agreement to the scheme can be undertaken. This would be followed by detailed design of the infrastructure required to implement the initial route. In Tranche 1 work would also be undertaken to define how best to set up a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) to take responsibility for the construction of the BRT and all ancillary infrastructure. Actual construction of the BRT is planned for Tranche 2 of the project.
1.2 Objectives of Study and Tasks
1.2.1 The overall objective of the study is to examine several predetermined potential BRT corridors and select one for the introduction of an initial BRT route. 1.2.2 The specific tasks outlined in the project TOR are as follows: i) To review the DPRs prepared for the three potential BRT corridors; ii) To determine the most appropriate corridor for an initial BRT route; iii) To prepare indicators for monitoring and evaluation; iv) To undertake a risk analysis and prepare a mitigation plan; v) To determine what additional work, if any, should be undertaken under Tranche 1 to ensure the selected BRT corridor meets ADB’s requirements for financing; vi) To draft TORs for Tranche 1 Technical Assistance as follows: o Preparation of Detailed Design for Selected BRT Corridor;
1 Master Plan for Guwahati, 2009. prepared by Guwahati Metropolitan Development Authority 2 Comprehensive Mobility Plan for Guwahati, 2010. Prepared by Wilbur Smith Associates. 3 Detailed Project Report on BRTS for Corridors 1 and 2, 2010. Prepared by Urban Mass Transit Company
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 1 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report o Creation of a Special Purpose Vehicle to build and operate the BRT and to provide training designed to strengthen government agencies involved with the BRT; 1.2.3 In fact the DPR for the third potential corridor had not been completed at the time of this study and therefore only the DPR covering Corridors 1 and 2 has been reviewed. 1.2.4 This Final Report covers items i) to v) above. The TORs have been prepared as separate documents.
1.3 Organisation of Report
1.3.1 The report has a total of eight chapters. Chapter 2 reviews the current public transport provision in Guwahati as discussed in the Public Transport Sector Assessment prepared earlier. Chapter 3 reviews the DPR for Corridors 1 and 2 while Chapter 4 reports on the analysis of the three potential corridors and proposes one as the initial BRT corridor for Guwahati. 1.3.2 Chapter 5 discusses the institutional requirements for the BRT and how the operation and management of the system will fit within the institutional structure of the city. Chapter 6 presents the indicators proposed for monitoring the BRT and evaluating its performance. Chapter 7 contains the risk analysis for the project together with a plan to mitigate these risks. Finally Chapter 8 discusses the next steps in the process and the additional work to be undertaken in Tranche 1.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 2 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report 2. PUBLIC TRANSPORT SECTOR ASSESSMENT
2.1 Introduction
2.1.1 Guwahati is the capital of Assam State and lies mainly on the southern bank of the Brahmaputra River. The total population in the Guwahati Metropolitan Area as per the provisional results published in 2011 of the 2010 census are that the population of the area is 1,260,419, a decadal growth rate of about 40%. Additionally, substantial numbers of students and workers from the rest of the state and other parts of the north-east region come to Guwahati on a regular basis. The substantial growth in Guwahati is characterised by densification of the central core area and ribbon development along the main transportation corridors. Urban Public Transport 2.1.2 Public transport in Guwahati is provided by buses belonging to the Assam State Transport Corporation (ASTC), private minibuses operating on routes approved by Road Transport Authority (RTA), 10-seat “trekkers” – also operating with route approval from RTA and auto and regular rickshaws. As of May 2011, ASTC is operating a fleet of 219 buses, 25 of which are rented and 194 of which are owned. There are also 1153 privately owned minibuses operating in the city. ASTC city service division is currently operating its buses within a radius of 35 Kms of the city. There are 1116 10-seat shared taxis called Trekkers which provide service along the secondary corridors. There are also some 4,462 auto-rickshaws licensed to operate in Guwahati and many thousand cycle-rickshaws, the latter being heavily used for short trips and feeder trips from the residential areas to and from the main roads. These are licensed by Guwahati Municipal Corporation (GMC) rather than RTA.
Table 2.1 Public Transport Capacity in Guwahati (1/3/2011) Vehicle Type Passenger No of Vehicles Total Capacity AS TC Private Trekker Auto Capacity per Vehicle routes Minibus Routes rick- (approx) Routes shaws Full size buses 85 150 12,750 Minib uses 50 69 1153 61,100 Trekkers 10 1116 11,160 Auto-rickshaws 2 4462 8,924 Total 219 1153 1116 4462 93,934 Source: a. Regional Transport Authority, Guwahati b. Assam State Road Transport Corporation (ASTC), c. Guwahati Comprehensive Mobility Plan
2.1.3 As can be seen from the data in Table 1, the majority of public transport in the city is provided by the minibuses which tend to be of poor quality. These are supplemented by the auto rickshaws and rickshaws. 2.1.4 The existing authorised bus routes in the city are as follows: City Minibuses - Operate on 33 routes ASTC City Buses - Operate on 46 urban routes Trekkers - Operate on 19 routes
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 3 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report Fares 2.1.5 City bus fares depend on the type of bus and the length of the bus route. Regular city buses (minibuses) range from a minimum of Rs3.50 for up to 3 km to Rs17.00 for routes of 25 km while the “low floor” city bus fares range from Rs6.00 for up to 3km to Rs19.00 for 25 km. 2.1.6 Trekker fares per passenger are Rs6.00 for the first 4 km and Rs1.00 for each subsequent km. Auto-rickshaw fares are charged per vehicle trip and are Rs16.00 for the first km then Rs1.50 for each subsequent 200m. Rickshaw fares are not fixed but are approximately Rs10 for first km and about Rs10 per subsequent km.
2.2 Current Situation
2.2.1 Before discussing the vision for the urban transport sector and the objective of the facility it is perhaps worthwhile to discuss the problems identified by ADB in terms of urban transport provision in Guwahati.
Growth in Vehicles 2.2.2 In recent years there has been a very rapid increase in the numbers of motor vehicles on the road in Guwahati. Details are shown in Table 2.2.
Table 2.2 Annual Vehicle Registrations in Guwahati and Annual Growth Gr 08- Gr0 09-1 Gr1 10-1 Average Vehicle 20078 -0 20089 -0 20090 -1 20101 -1 09 (%) (%) (%) (%) Cars 8623 9441 13312 17099 9.5 41.0 28.4 26.3 Trucks 1803 1396 1724 2757 -22.6 23.5 59.9 20.3 4-w LCV 1036 860 1606 2167 -17.0 86.7 34. 9 34.9 3-w LCV 1244 782 950 1230 -37.1 21.5 29.5 4.6 Buses 205 13 118 388 -93.7 807.7 228.8 314.3 Taxi 666 419 1090 1108 -37.1 160.1 1.7 41.6 Auto rickshaws 378 510 785 1300 34.9 53.9 65.6 51.5 M/c 13459 14754 22626 29913 9.6 53.4 32.2 31.7 Others 802 998 1246 1935 24.4 24.8 55.3 34.9
2.2.3 Since the pace of road construction has not kept up with the rate of increase in vehicles, congestion levels are steadily rising. In fact, the growth of vehicles within the city has been so rapid in the last decade or so that the density of vehicular population in Guwahati is considered to be one of the highest in the country Limited Road Network 2.2.4 The length of surfaced road within the city is reportedly 218 km. The major roads suffer from insufficient right of way, occupation of kerb lane by parked vehicles, illegal construction and encroachment into the carriageway and very poor traffic management. The city lacks a secondary road system to act as distributors within the areas off the main roads placing further pressure on the major roads. The roads in the residential neighbourhoods are extremely narrow (lack of proper regulations) and poorly maintained. The maintenance of many of the major roads in the city centre is also very poor.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 4 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report Inadequate Public Transport 2.2.5 Many buses are heavily overcrowded at peak times indicating a severe lack of capacity. The majority of the buses are small to medium sized with about 30 seats. The condition of the bodywork of all but the newest buses is very poor which gives a bad impression of the public transport service. Bus stops are often blocked by parked vehicles making it impossible for buses to stop close to the kerb. 2.2.6 Buses themselves are a major cause of congestion as they wait at congested areas to pick up passengers. It is not uncommon to see three or four buses waiting in what are essentially single ground level exit lanes before flyovers and as a result blocking traffic for considerable distances upstream. This is the result of the bus drivers operating on their own account and attempting to maximise their revenue. Poor Traffic Management and Enforcement
2.2.7 Much of the congestion which can be seen today is the result of highly inefficient use of roadspace. The traffic volumes are not particularly high and with reasonable driver behaviour and proper traffic management it is unlikely that congestion would arise. However driver behaviour is typically very aggressive and as a result mini-gridlock situations arise frequently with subsequent loss of road capacity. Better traffic management, improved driver behaviour and increased police enforcement would greatly improve matters even without any increase in roadspace.
Poor Pedestrian and NMT Facilities
2.2.8 Although NMT modes of travel account for 25% of total, the NMT facilities are very poor. Sidewalks consist of concrete slabs placed over elevated drainage channels. These are often dislodged or missing making it treacherous to use the sidewalks. In addition where sidewalks do exist they are often encroached by hawkers and as a result many people walk in the road despite the dangers there. On most roads there is no lane segregation for slow moving vehicles making use of cycles dangerous. There are almost no protected pedestrian road crossings with most people crossing major roads through gaps in the fencing which is placed in the centre of the road to deter crossing. Insufficient Parking 2.2.9 As a result of the increase in private cars with no corresponding provision of off street parking, most major roads have solid lines of parked cars in the kerb lane and often double parking in the adjacent lane. This is a major contributor to congestion as road capacity is effectively reduced by one third or more. 2.2.10 In the central area of the city adjacent to the wholesale markets at Fancy Bazaar and Pan Bazaar parking of small trucks is pervasive which greatly reduces the road capacity on the narrow streets in this area. 2.2.11 Though there is a parking lot in the riverfront at Bharalumukh, the capacity of the parking lot is not sufficient to cater to the present demand and at the same time the location of the parking lot is not ideal. In the absence of adequate parking facilities, vehicles are parked on the side of the road resulting in major bottlenecks. Currently the city traffic police allow passenger vehicles to park on the side of the road thereby considerably reducing road capacity.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 5 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report 2.3 Road Map for the Future
2.3.1 To address the issues raised above, the government has undertaken a number of studies, one of which, a Master Plan for Guwahati, was prepared in 2009. It lists six main goals: i) To conserve the natural environment ii) To develop an integrated multi modal transport system with three mass transit lines iii) To develop physical and social infrastructure – education, health, cultural facilities plus water supply and solid waste management iv) To provide space for efficient functioning of economic activities v) To create an image befitting that of the State capital. vi) To provide affordable housing with removal of slums 2.3.2 Three new town areas were included in the Master Plan; two on the north of the river and one on the south. In addition to the general comments on transport improvements listed above, plans were put forward to construct a new bridge across the Brahmaputra to link the southern bank near the city centre to the new town on the northern bank. 2.3.3 The second goal listed above, to improve the transport system and create three mass transit lines, was followed up in the Comprehensive Mobility Plan (CMP). In the CMP it is stated that the Plan “seeks to create an integrated land use and transport plan that aims to guide investments in transport in an efficient manner to achieve an overall mobility vision for the city. The CMP will emphasise the movement of people and goods, not just motor vehicles, and so will give priority to public transport and non-motorised modes”. It will be designed to “ensure that the city will have a planned, best performing transport system that addresses the needs and concerns of the city”. 2.3.4 This is very much in line with National Urban Transport Policy formulated by the Ministry of Urban Development in 2006. The objectives of this policy are as follows: Integrating land use and transport planning Priority to the use of public transport Integrated public transport systems Pedestrian facilities and pathways Non motorised vehicles Parking Freight traffic Capacity building Pollution reduction
2.3.5 Following the acceptance of the CMP by the Assam authorities, Detailed Project Reports (DPRs) were commissioned for BRT systems on two of the three corridors identified as being suitable for mass transit. These reports were endorsed by the Assam authorities and made available to ADB. ADB is now investigating the possibility of using ADB financing to construct an initial BRT corridor and is carrying out a study to review the pros and cons of each corridor. Vision for Urban Transport Sector 2.3.6 It is clear that the proposed project will assist Guwahati to meet its stated objectives and will also fully support the National Policy objectives in a number of key areas. The BRT project is focused on improving public transport and moving people rather
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 6 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report than vehicles. The higher speeds of the BRT are in line with the need to give priority of road use to mass transit carriers. The higher speeds also lead to better productivity in the use of vehicles and manpower which in turn leads to lower costs and therefore lower fares. This clearly will benefit the poorer members of the community. The BRT will be integrated with the regular bus services on routes feeding into the BRT and it is hoped that a unified fare structure can be agreed. There will also be a need to control kerbside parking which is seen as a major problem at present in Guwahati. It is hoped that the discipline imposed by the BRT and the removal of on-street parking will open up opportunities for private sector development of off-street car parks. 2.3.7 The BRT is likely to lead to some densification of land use in and around the station areas and this is very much in line with the national policy in terms of land use supporting transport facilities. 2.3.8 As noted above, a major aspect of the consultancy to create the SPV will be capacity building in the relevant Government agencies in Guwahati. This is discussed in more detail below. 2.3.9 In other cities it has been shown that it is possible for major works to act as a catalyst for change in many areas. The most important aspect is of course providing the citizens with a greatly improved quality of public transport. While at present people travelling by bus or car at peak times are subjected to considerable delays, the BRT should be able to travel much faster. In addition the interiors of the BRT vehicles will be kept clean and in good repair which will be essential to demonstrate that public transport, if planned properly and well executed, can provide a high level of service to the public. 2.3.10 The BRT will be able to provide this fast journey time only if the protection the BRT will enjoy is respected by other road users, either through driver education or through police enforcement of the BRT reserved lanes on the road. Thus good traffic management must be employed to ensure delay free operation of the BRT. It is hoped that the demonstration of the benefits of good traffic management along the BRT corridor will spur the local authorities to extend the principles learned from the BRT to other areas of Guwahati – with or without BRT. 2.3.11 For all road based public transport it is usually necessary for each passenger to cross the road at least once per round trip. Currently there is virtually no provision for safe crossing of roads in Guwahati. At each station of the BRT there will be a signalised protected pedestrian crossing or an overpass. Since the BRT will not permit any pedestrians to cross the busways, and since stations will be about 700m apart on average, there will be a need to construct foot overbridges or provide signalised at grade crossings as necessary to enable pedestrians to cross the road between stations. Thus it is intended that the introduction of the BRT will highlight the needs of pedestrians and how these needs can be met, again not only along the BRT corridor but throughout Guwahati. 2.3.12 The BRT will necessitate the removal of all or most of the on-street parking along the potential corridors. It is hoped this will provide the catalyst for the private sector to come forward with plans for parking areas along the corridor. For this to be workable it will be necessary for parking restrictions to be put in place and for the police to take action to enforce the parking bans. It is hoped that this process can be repeated across all major roads in the city and spur the development of off-street parking lots or multi storey car parks. 2.3.13 While it is envisaged that the BRT system would be owned and managed by a wholly Government owned SPV, there would exist opportunities for private sector involvement in many aspects of the operation. These would include contracted provision of bus service, fare collection and IC card ticketing provision, advertising,
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 7 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report station maintenance and cleaning, etc. Similarly the private sector may well be interested to provide the terminal which would be designed not only to act as a turnaround area for the BRT but also for an interchange location between the BRT buses and longer distance buses serving the outer areas.
2.4 Policy Framework
2.4.1 The urban transport policies being followed in Guwahati have until now been simply to try to cope with the ever increasing volume of vehicles on the road with piecemeal road widening and the construction of flyovers at major intersections. Apart from the few routes operated by ASTC, urban public transport has been left largely to the private sector to decide if and where it wishes to provide service. The recent JnNURM initiative to promote bus usage through grants to help cities purchase new buses has resulted in many new 12m buses in service in Guwahati. JnNURM policies also called for the setting up of an Urban Mass Transport Authority (UMTA) in all cities. One of the major responsibilities of a UMTA would be to assess the need for public transport services throughout the city and ensure that these were being provided by one or more operators. The ADB project supports the setting up of a UMTA in Guwahati and has significant funds available for capacity building in the new organisation. This is supportive of the proposed BRT system as although an SPV would be set up to oversee the design and construction of the system, ultimately it is likely that the BRT would fall under the aegis of the UMTA and it will be important that the UMTA is able to perform at the highest standard. 2.4.2 With the creation of the UMTA it is anticipated that the proportion of Guwahati served by fixed route bus services with specified periods of operation and frequency will be increased. Equally importantly much better discipline should be imposed on the private minibus operators not to wait excessive periods of time for passengers in narrow roads which creates congestion problems for all road users including other bus passengers. The BRT will depend to a lesser or greater extent on feeder bus services bringing passengers to interchange stations and the policy on how these services are to be provided and the fares to be charged will have a great bearing on the success of the BRT. 2.4.3 The policy of encouraging the private sector to become more involved in public transport is welcomed. It will be important for both sides of any PPP arrangement to work together to ensure success. To accomplish this it is vital that the terms of the agreement between the public sector agency responsible for the investment, e.g., UMTA if a private sector BRT turnaround and interchange is proposed, and the private party are clearly spelled out. The public service obligations of the private party must be made as clear as possible, certainly specifying clearly the functional specifications. In the event that some aspects of the developments do not go according to plan then both sides must do their utmost to arrive at a fair solution. If the initial private sector involvement is unsuccessful as a result of government intransigence then further private sector initiatives will be more difficult to attract with negative consequences for the pace of development.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 8 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report 3. REVIEW OF DPR’S FOR CORRIDORS 1 AND 2
3.1 Introduction
3.1.1 As noted above, following the completion of the CMP, a Detailed Project Report (DPR) was commissioned by the State of Assam to examine two of the proposed BRT corridors: Narengi – Jalukbari Khanapara – Paltan Bazaar 3.1.2 The DPR was completed in February 2011 and following its completion it was decided to examine a third corridor as a possible BRT route. This corridor is an orbital corridor connecting 6th Mile with Narengi along VIP Road. As of writing this DPR had not yet been completed and so cannot be reviewed herein. In Chapter 4 however, the VIP Road corridor is assessed along with the two corridors in the DPR and a proposal for an initial BRT corridor is made after evaluating all corridors. 3.1.3 Since the purpose of this current study is to select the most suitable corridor for an initial BRT project, the first task undertaken was to review the work carried out in the DPR in order to assess whether or not the proposals contained therein were valid and if they could be adopted as the basis for the subsequent evaluation. The remainder of this Chapter reviews the DPR from a number of key standpoints including BRT design concept, ridership assessment adequacy of road capacity for general traffic accuracy of land acquisition estimates BRT operational planning financial, economic and environmental assessments
3.2 BRT Design Concept
BRT System Design Options 3.2.1 BRT systems come in a wide variety of designs. In terms of the physical design of the system, the following are the key components: Bus lane location – the bus lane can be located in the centre of the road or on the kerbside lane. Most BRT systems have the bus lanes located centrally to avoid conflict with kerbside activity. Station location – stations either be located on lateral platforms, i.e., with doors on left hand side as normal, or on centrally located island platforms between the bus lanes which requires the buses to have doors on the right hand side. Overtaking at stations – systems which allow buses to overtake at stations have a much higher capacity than those which do not. BRT system operation can be closed or open. Closed means that only designated BRT buses operate on the busways, usually operating from end to end like a train while open systems allow all bus routes which operate along the BRT corridor to enter and leave the busway at designated locations. Restricted- open systems permit specified routes only to make use of the busway. Closed systems tend to provide more regular and reliable service levels while open systems require less interchange. Station design – the platform area must be sufficient to cope with maximum expected numbers of waiting passengers. If overtaking is permitted, the platform
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 9 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report length can be extended to provide separate stops for different routes or groups of routes. If overtaking is not possible there is limited benefit from extending the platform length. Terminal stations - these should be located exactly at the end of the busway and should provide space for the buses to turn round and for layovers at the end of each trip. They should also have space for feeder buses or other public transport modes to terminate in order to encourage interchange with the BRT. Space should also be provided for bicycle and motorcycle parking and possibly cars also. If space exists, the terminals can also serve as retail centres and as focal points for high density residential development to encourage BRT ridership. Pedestrian access to stations – all stations should have a protected pedestrian road crossing which in Guwahati implies a signalised pedestrian crossing if the stop is not located at a signalised junction. If necessary a foot over-bridge could be provided. Interchange at stations – provision should be made for interchange from bicycles, motorcycles and rickshaws at selected stations and the outer terminal. If a closed system is selected, provision must also be made for interchange from other bus routes. Ticketing system – while all BRT systems should have off-bus ticketing, stations can be either open, i.e., with tickets cancelled by passengers on the platform or on the bus, or closed, i.e., there are turnstiles or gates to enter and leave the station platform and a ticket is needed to access the platform.
3.2.2 The roadwidths required for typical standard BRT bus lane designs are listed in Table 3.1. For the running sections between stations, one dedicated lane in each direction can provide enough capacity. It is the station sections and the delays incurred at intersections which determine the capacity of the system and the critical roadwidth required. As can be seen from Table 3.1, for options where the BRT has a dedicated lane, the additional width needed at stations can range from 2m to 12m more than the running section depending on the layout adopted. The station widths shown are about the minimums needed and wider platforms could be required if passenger numbers were high. BRT Design adopted for DPR 3.2.3 The decision process which the consultants appear to have followed is that they first decided to have a semi open system. They also did not wish to have to purchase new buses for all routes using the bus lanes and therefore they kept the bus doors on the right hand side. The kerbside lane was rejected in favour of the central lane as the location of the busway and therefore the stations are positioned between the bus lane and the general traffic lanes. Stations are mostly located at junction approaches but where mid block stations have been used these are laterally displaced in order to minimise the roadwidth required. 3.2.4 The junction designs show a mixed traffic lane for BRT + regular traffic on the exit to the junctions. There seems no reason not to have the BRT lane start immediately after the junction since there are only two approach lanes to the junction so three exit lanes are not necessary. On the other hand, the junction approaches usually only have two lanes to be used for all movements – left turn, straight and right turn. If there are more than one or two right turning vehicles they will occupy one lane while waiting to turn thereby reducing the through and left turn traffic to one lane. At no point on the corridors examined is a one lane approach sufficient to cater for the existing traffic. A typical junction layout from Corridor 2 is shown in Figure 3.1.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 10 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
Table 3.1 Approximate Roadwidths needed for Selected BRT Layout Options
Running Section Station Sections BRT Operating in Exclusive Bus Lane BRT in Mixed Traffic
Central Island Central Island Lateral Stations Lateral Stations Lateral Stations Normal Running Station (no Station (with (facing, with (facing, no (offset, no Lateral Stations (offset, Section overtaking) overtaking) overtaking) overtaking) overtaking) BRT in mixed traffic) m m m m m m m sidewalk 2.0 sidewalk 2.0 sidewalk 2.0 sidewalk 2.0 sidewalk 2. 0 sidewalk 2.0 sidewalk 2.0 traffic lane 3.5 traffic lane 3.5 traffic lane 3.5 traffic lane 3.5 traffic lane 3.5 traffic lane 3.5 traffic lane 3.5 traffic lane 3.5 traffic lane 3.5 traffic lane 3.5 traffic lane 3.5 traffic lane 3.5 traffic lane 3.5 traffic lane 3.5 BRT 3.5 BRT 3.0 BRT 3.5 Platform 3.0 Platform 3.0 Platform 3.0 Platform 3.0 BRT 3.5 Platform 3.0 BRT 3.0 BRT 3.0 BRT 3.0 BRT 3.0 BRT 3.0 traffic lane 3.5 BRT 3.0 Platform 4.0 BRT 3.5 BRT 3.0 BRT 3.5 traffic lane+BRT 3.5 traffic lane 3.5 traffic lane 3.5 BRT 3.0 BRT 3.5 Platform 3.0 traffic lane 3.5 traffic lane 3.5 sidewalk 2.0 traffic lane 3.5 BRT 3.5 BRT 3.0 traffic lane 3.5 traffic lane 3.5 sidewalk 2.0 Total 25.0 sidewalk 2.0 traffic lane 3.5 Platform 3.0 traffic lane 3.5 sidewalk 2.0 Total 24.0 Total 27.0 traffic lane 3.5 traffic lane 3.5 sidewalk 2.0 Total 27.5 sidewalk 2.0 traffic lane 3.5 Total 30.0 Total 35.0 sidewalk 2.0 Total 37.0
If dedicated cycle tracks are to be provided, add 5m to cross section. If stations are located at junctions, should be on both approaches and set back adequate distance to ensure station platform always available for boarding. Ensure sidewalk and platform widths are designed to accommodate peak passengers / pedestrian traffic. Additional traffic lanes may be needed depending on general traffic volumes For left hand drive operations, special arrangements at junctions needed for right and U turns Bus bays may be needed on the normal running section for non-busway buses / feeder buses etc; add 6m. If footbridges are needed to cross the road at stations add 4m to allow for stairs adjacent to sidewalk.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 11 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
Figure 3.1 Layout of Typical BRT Station located at a Junction
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 12 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
3.2.5 Since the BRT design adopted in the DPR has attempted to squeeze the bus lanes into the smallest possible roadwidths, it has been necessary to compromise on a number of key elements of BRT design. In many places the lane widths available to general traffic have been reduced considerably. As will be discussed later, given the present traffic volumes there are many locations where capacity will be inadequate. Given the rate at which traffic is increasing it is highly likely that the general traffic lanes will be subject to unacceptable levels of delay. Since the BRT does not maintain its dedicated bus lanes throughout the corridors but operates in mixed traffic, this will result in the BRT buses also being delayed which defeats the main purpose of providing the BRT in the first place. 3.2.6 The layouts at junctions do not appear to make any provision for right or U- turning vehicles at junctions. If right turns are to be permitted a right turn lane must be provided at the junction. Normally this would lie to the left of the BRT lane and would have its own separate signal head controlling its movement. The setback distance to the BRT station should be sufficient to allow adequate storage of the right turning vehicles. 3.2.7 The stations are very narrow ranging from 1.65m to 2.5m in width. As a result of this the DPR consultants indicate that it will not be possible to provide off-bus ticketing – one of the defining characteristics of a BRT system. This width may also be insufficient to allow entering and leaving passengers to cross safely on the platform given that the platform will be elevated to the height of the bus floor – possibly around 800mm – and will require guard railings to be erected on both edges of the platform. Normally at least 3m station widths are provided which enables two sets of reversible turnstiles at the entry together with a small kiosk for ticket sales and enquiries. 3.2.8 While the setback distances are not shown clearly on the drawings, it appears that the station area stretches about 75m from the stop line. The start of the station should be at least two bus lengths or 25m from the stop line to allow BRT buses to clear the station and also for wheelchair ramp. The remaining distance can be platform but 50m would seem excessive for a single lane system. 3.2.9 The consultants have also tried where possible to fit a cycle track along the corridors. This has been done when the available ROW was greater than 28m. Since this ROW was not consistently available along the length of the corridor, the result has been that the cycle track is only intermittently available. 3.2.10 As designed, the displaced lateral stops other than those on either side of a junction require two protected pedestrian crossings in a very short distance. While the pedestrian signals can be coordinated with the junction signals, it would be much better to have only one pedestrian crossing serving stations in both directions. 3.2.11 The construction of a BRT, if done properly, will be a major feature of the urban landscape and will greatly improve public transport in Guwahati. It will be operational for many decades to come and it would be wise to design the system properly from the outset. As noted in earlier, while the BRT does not require much roadspace for normal running sections, at stations and at junctions where right turning movements are permitted the space requirements increase. If overtaking at stations is required then the space requirements increase further. The road width requirement for a standard BRT arrangement with stations on both approaches to a junction with right turning movements permitted is shown in Figure 3.2 for a centrally located station. It is strongly recommended that any BRT proposals for Guwahati accept these dimensions as the minimum necessary to achieve satisfactory BRT operation. Station widths and sidewalk widths may both have to be increased if passenger numbers or pedestrian movement warrant.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 13 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
Figure 3.2 Standard BRT Station / Junction Arrangement
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 14 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
3.3 Ridership
3.3.1 As part of the work in the DPR, surveys were carried out of general traffic and also public transport passengers. Survey results are reported in the Annex to the DPR and a summary of the public transport ridership is reproduced in Table 3.2. It can be seen that the maximum hourly ridership along Corridor 1 was observed on the western arm of the corridor inbound at Maligaon, 5494 passengers per hour per direction (pphpd), while along Corridor 2 the maximum of 3586 pphpd was observed at Ganeshguri. On the eastern arm of Corridor 1 the maximum flow was 4143 pphpd observed inbound at DC Court.
Table 3.2 Pax / Peak Hour / Direction (2009) Location Inbound Outbound Maligaon 5494 2734 Bharalumukh 5020 2885 DC Court 4143 3115 Ulubari 3306 3451 Christian Basti 2260 2341 Ganeshguri 3586 2252 Khanapara 1113 1426
3.3.2 The DPR states in Section 3.2 that the total peak hour public transport demand on Corridors 1 and 2 is 5125 and 3988 pphpd respectively based on the passenger flows at the date of the survey. Estimated peak demands for the BRT are given in Table 3-2 and the figures suggest a high proportion of the current public transport demand would be carried by the BRT in what was termed a hybrid i.e., semi open system. Not all public transport would be on the busway however and therefore there remains a need for provision for bus stops or bus bays along all the roads. 3.3.3 This estimate of BRT demand appears to lack any depth of analysis. The BRT system as shown simply would not work if all the minibuses and buses operating along these corridors were permitted to use the busway – the volume of vehicles would far surpass the capacity of the system. Thus the system has to either be a closed system with only large BRT designed vehicles operating or partly open with a limited number of designated routes being allowed to use the busway – again using large BRT designed vehicles. 3.3.4 Similarly the acceptability of the proposed BRT fare of Rs8 as compared to the fare on the minibuses which ranges from Rs3 for the minimum distance of 5km to Rs8 for a distance of up to 15km must be considered. It is believed that most trips along the corridors being considered are about 6km which would cost Rs4 on the minibuses. At this fare differential many people will not choose the BRT and great care will have to be taken in amending the existing bus route structure. 3.3.5 Thus it would appear for several reasons that the BRT ridership assumptions are unrealistically high. 3.3.6 In Chapter 8 of the DPR, the ridership on the BRT is forecast to rise by 5% pa from 2014 to 2023, an increase of 55% in 10 years. If this rate of increase is also applied to the peak loadings, then the demand at Maligaon would increase from 5494 to over 8500 pphpd. The ability of the proposed design to accommodate the existing and future ridership levels is discussed in Section 3.7.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 15 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report 3.4 Adequacy of Road Capacity
3.4.1 For much of the eastern section of Corridor 1, the available roadwidth for general traffic is shown to be 5.5m. Much of the length this includes a painted cycle track while for other sections 5.5m is shown as two traffic lanes with an additional 1.5m for a cycle track. The Annexes to the DPR provide some traffic count information but no capacity analysis. At Guwahati Club on GMD Road, the number of vehicles was about 1500 to 1800 per hour per direction. Counts undertaken as part of this current study, which are more fully reported in Chapter 4, found peak hour flows of between 2100 to 2600 pcu per hour per direction. Given the number of intersections, the maximum capacity of what is effectively a one and a half lane road is about 1200 to 1500 pcu per hour depending of the phasing of the traffic signals. 3.4.2 Thus the removal of the roadspace for the BRT would result in insufficient roadspace for the remaining traffic and thus result in severe congestion. On this basis it is considered that the design along the eastern part of Corridor 1 is not feasible. 3.4.3 On the western arm of Corridor 1, the traffic flows as reported in the DPR suggest peak hour flows of about 1500 to 1700 vehicles per hour per direction. Surveys conducted for this present study found the peak hour traffic levels along this corridor to be 2400 to 3200 pcu per hour per direction. For most of this corridor two full lanes per direction or 7m in total per direction are provided for general traffic. Depending of the traffic signal phasing the lower level of demand can be accommodated in two lanes but it seems likely that at the upper level there would be insufficient capacity. This is especially true at Maligaon Pandu junction in the outbound direction where right turns are shown to be permitted for general traffic in a total approach roadwidth of 8m including a cycle track. This would not be possible given the traffic levels and the need to allow time for pedestrians to cross the road both associated with the BRT stop and for general pedestrian movement. 3.4.4 At Kamakhya junction the outbound junction approach is 8m which includes a cycle track. No right turn movement is shown as being allowed but it seems that given the importance of this junction it would not be possible to ban the right turn movement. In this case the available roadwidth would not be sufficient and again the road would require widening at the junction to accommodate the traffic. In general there are not enough right or U turns shown in the drawings. With the BRT in the centre lanes, right and U turns must be specifically provided for and it appears that this has not been done in the DPR. 3.4.5 On Corridor 2 south of Paltan Bazaar to Ulubari, roadwidths are not shown on the DPR drawings until after Ulubari Flyover and it is therefore more difficult to assess the situation. From observation, congestion arises on the ground level roads by- passing the flyover as traffic leaves GS Road to turn left or right or make U turns. The flyovers along GS Road are generally uncongested since the ground road capacity creates a bottleneck in the approaches. This is especially true for the northbound approach to the Ganeshguri Flyover with traffic wishing to turn right to Zoo Road backing up for a considerable distance in the peak periods. 3.4.6 Since the major movement along GS Road has few signalised intersections, traffic speeds are higher and congestion less. The removal of two lanes for BRT between the junctions can be accommodated if the parking on the kerbside lane is removed. This would mean that the status quo of two lanes for movement would be maintained. 3.4.7 No provision for right or U turns has been shown on Corridor 2 other than under the flyovers. It seems likely that some right turns will be needed, e.g., at Rajeev Bhawan Junction or Christian Basti Junction. At present neither of these junctions makes any allowance for right or U turning movements.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 16 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report 3.4.8 It is concluded that for most of Corridor 1 east, the BRT design would result in insufficient capacity for general traffic and would therefore not be feasible. There are also several junctions and specific locations on Corridors 1 west and Corridor 2 where adequate road widths for general traffic have not been provided.
3.5 Land Acquisition
3.5.1 From the point of view of identifying the extent to which the introduction of the BRT in the two corridors necessitates land acquisition, the DPR drawings leave much to be desired. It is not possible from the drawings to identify the existing land uses, the existing road width, the existing sidewalk / drainage widths or other space. The red lines on the drawings were never explained and they do not appear to have any consistent interpretation. 3.5.2 The annotation on the drawings in many cases is very misleading. While normally arrows are shown to reflect movement of traffic in lanes, many times two or three arrows are shown in a section of road that is 5.5m wide. Given the lack of clarity in the drawings it is not clear if the road is to be widened (but no land acquisition is reported) or if the road remains as is and the arrows only show the possible movements at that point. 3.5.3 As discussed above, the philosophy the DPR consultants appear to have followed in designing the BRT is reflected in DPR Annexure 5 which lists how the consultants would allocate roadspace for any given available ROW. Thus it appears that the availability of roadwidth and ROW has dictated the design rather than desirable / minimum roadwidths being defined and land specified for acquisition where needed. 3.5.4 In the central area from Bharalumukh in the west to Pan Bazaar in the east and to Paltan Bazaar in the south, the present designs require a significant resumption of land. Some along MG Road is parkland beside the riverbank while in Paltan Bazaar the land contains multi-storey buildings. Along the radial corridors themselves, the DPR suggests that minimal land is required. 3.5.5 Since it was not possible to ascertain the position on land acquisition from the drawings, independent checks on the land requirements were undertaken. The ROW stated as being available in Table 6 of Annexure 2 and the dimensions on the drawings were checked against each other to see if the roadwidths in the drawings could in fact be accommodated in the stated ROW. Roadwidths were also obtained from the official GMDA Contour Map and site observations by the study team at a number of locations along the corridors. In view of the limited resources it was not possible to undertake a complete survey of existing roadwidths. The results of these investigations have been summarised in Tables 3.3 – 3.5. For presentation purposes Corridor 1 has been divided into east and west sections. 3.5.6 The first check performed was to ascertain whether or not the proposed BRT lanes as per the drawings could be accommodated into the reportedly available ROW. As can be seen from column l in the tables below, in many locations there appears to be a need for land to be acquired but this has not been reported in the DPR. In the case of Corridor 1E this applies to virtually the whole corridor. The second check carried out was to compare the land requirements as per DPR with the ROW available as documented in the GMDA contour maps. A similar situation was observed at many locations along all the corridors with land being required but not reported in the DPR. 3.5.7 The final check listed in column p is the amount of land required at these locations if a 26m ROW is to be obtained for the BRT operation – the suggested minimum width for the running sections of the BRT. This shows that considerable land is needed for Corridor 1 while less is needed for corridor 2.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 17 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report 3.5.8 The conclusions from this work are that the land acquisition reported in the DPR is a significant underestimate of the actual land which would need to be acquired if the BRT were to be built according to the DPR designs. If a standard 26m ROW to accommodate BRT busways and two lanes per direction for general traffic is to be provided it appears that Corridor 2 can meet this requirement with the smallest amount of land acquisition. This will be discussed further in Chapter 4. 3.5.9 Based on the land acquisition estimates in Tables 3.3 – 3.5, it would seem that the actual land requirements for the corridors assuming the BRT design in the DPR and the stated ROWs in the DPR, excluding the central area as noted above, would be as follows: Corridor 1 – 56,400 sq m Corridor 2 – 3,400 sq m
3.6 Resettlement and Rehabilitation
3.6.1 There is no discussion of resettlement and rehabilitation (R+R) in the DPR. However it is noted that the land cost of Rs70,000 appears high for Guwahati and it may be that the consultants have included a notional amount for R+R in their land estimates.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 18 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
Table 3.3 Corridor 1 West: Land Acquisition
All Details from DPR Report and Drawings Comparing DPR Annex 2 with GMDA Contour Map
ROW in ROW in Land Additional GMDA GMDA Additional ROW Acquisition ROW Chainage and Contour Contour Map ROW (Annexure required? required for Corridor Location Drawing Sheet Measurement according to DPR Drawing Map including 4m required for 2, / Land DPR BRT No. – excluding estimate for 26m BRT Table-6 ) Acquisition using footpath / foot paths / ROW shown? GMDA Map drainage drainage
MV / Footpath / Cycle Mixed Shelter / Yes or No BRT Other Total Meter Meter Meter Drainage Track Traffic Station (Meter) Lane a b c d e f g h i j k l m n=m+4 o=k-n p=26-n 1 West Jalukbari 0+000 to Not Shown 4 3.3 13 6.1 2.5 1.5 30.4 20.36 24.36 6.04 1.64 0+075 (01) 1 West Jalukbari 0+150 to Not Shown 8 3 13 3.1 0 0 27.1 21.6 25.6 1.5 0.4 0+175 (02) 1 West Maligaon_ Pandu Junction 2+050 to 2+175 (15) 25.44 3.6 3.8 15 3 0 3 28.4 Yes/No 16.19 20.19 8.21 5.81 1 West Maligaon_Pandu Chowk II to NE 2+500 to Railway lane Maligaon III 2.625 (18) 24.95 4 4 14 6.2 0 0.8 29 Yes/No 18.8 22.8 6.2 3.2 1 West NE Railway lane Maligaon_III to 3+100 to Kamakhya Temple 3+325 (22-23) 22.45 3 3 12 3 2.5 0.5 24 Yes/No 18.78 22.78 1.22 3.22 1 West NE Railway lane Maligaon III to 3+825 to Kamakhya Temple 3+950 (27) 22.45 4 3 12 6 0 1 26 Yes/No 16.25 20.25 5.75 5.75
1 West Shanti pur to Bharulumukh -1 5.250 to 5.425 (36-37) 24.75 7 3.5 12 6.1 2.5 0.6 31.7 Yes/No 23.4 27.4 4.3 -1.4
1 West Bharulumukh I to Bharulumukh 5+875 T0 20.1 4 3 12 3 0 0.5 22.5 Yes/No 19.58 23.58 -1.08 2.42 II 6+000 (40-41) 1 West Bharulumukh I to Bharulumukh 6+125 T0 20.1 0 3.5 12 6.1 0 0 21.6 Yes/No 19.83 23.83 -2.23 2.17 II 6+275 (42-43) 1 West Bharulumukh II to Fancy Bazar 6+275 to CMO Office 8+025 (43-55) 21 7 3.5 14 3.1 2.5 1 31.1 Yes/No 18 22 9.1 4 1 West Sukhleshwer Temple 8+050 to 8+175 (56) 19.35 7 3.5 14 6.2 0 1 31.7 Yes/No 10.15 14.15 17.55 11.85
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 19 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
Table 3.4 Corridor 1 East: Land Acquisition
All Details from DPR Report and Drawings Comparing DPR Annex 2 with GMDA Contour Map ROW in Land ROW in GMDA Additional GMDA Acquisition Contour Map ROW Chainage and ROW Contour Additional ROW required? including 4m required for Corridor Location Drawing Sheet Annexure Measurement according to DPR Drawing Map required for 26m – / Land estimate for DPR BRT No. 2, Table-6 excluding BRT ROW Acquisition foot paths / using GMDA footpath / shown? drainage Map drainage MV / Footpath / Cycle Mixed Shelter / Yes or No BRT Other Total Meter Meter Meter Drainage Track Traffic Station (Meter) Lane a b c d e f g h i j k l m n=m+4 o=k-n p=26-n
1 East WTP 8+350 to 8+950 15.08 5.5 0 0 7 2.5 0.5 15.5 No/No 9.54 13.54 1.96 12.46 (58-61) 1 East Hotel Rialto to Shanti 8+950 to 9+250 Lodge (Pan Bazar) (62-63) 15.5 7 0 14 0 2.5 1.5 25 Yrs/Yes (7) 10.9 14.9 10.1 11.1 1 East Shanti Lodge (Pan Bazar) 9+300 to 9+550 to RBI (Bank) (63-65) 15.5 7 2.8 6.7 6.6 0 1.5 24.6 Yes/Yes (8) 10.8 14.8 9.8 11.2 1 East Assam Museum To 9+700 to Guwahati Club 10+250 (67-70) 21 4 3 7 6.2 0 1 21.2 No/No 15.21 19.21 1.99 6.79 1 East Guwahati Club To 10+250 To Shilpukhari 11+075 (71-76) 22.27 4 3 11 6.35 0 0.65 25 Yes/No 14.76 18.76 6.24 7.24 1 East Shilpukhari to Chandmari 11+400 to 12+000 (79-82) 26.05 5 3 11 6.2 0 0.8 26 No/No 16.4 20.4 5.6 5.6 1 East Chandmari to Sarvajanik 12+000 to Hindi High School 13+775 (83-96) 22.19 4.9 3 11 6.2 0 0.9 26 Yes/No 13.29 17.29 8.71 8.71 1 East Noonmati (Vandana 14+750 to Cinema) to Sector 3 Fly 16+125 (102- 18 4.5 3 11 6.2 0 0.55 25.25 Yes/No 9 13 12.25 13 Over Bridge 112)
1 East Narengi 17+125 to 17+700 (119- 33 8 3 11 6.2 0 0.8 29 No/No 17.8 21.28 7.72 4.72 123)
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 20 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report Table 3.5 Corridor 2: Land Acquisition
Comparing DPR Annex 2 with GMDA Contour All Details from DPR Report and Drawings Map ROW in ROW in Land Additional Additional GMDA GMDA Acquisition ROW ROW Contour Contour Map required? required for required Measurement according to DPR Drawing Map including 4m / Land DPR BRT for 26m ROW excluding estimate for Corrid Chainage and Drawing Acquisition using BRT Location Annex 2, footpath / foot paths / or Sheet No. shown? GMDA Map ROW Table-6 drainage drainage MV Lane Footpath / Cycle / Mixed Shelter / Yes or No BRT Other Total Meter Meter Meter Meter Drainage Track Traffic Station (Meter) Lane a b c d e f g h i j k l m n=m+4 o=k-n p=26-n Paltan Bazar to Ulubari 2+475 to 2+950 (8-11) 2 26.02 4 0 15 0 2.5 0.5 22 No/No 12.1 16.4 5.6 Flyover 9.6 Ulubari Flyover to S D 3+500 to 3+800 (15 -17) 2 29.2 3.6 3 13.6 6.6 0 1.65 28.45 No/No 22.69 26.69 1.76 Deorah College -0.69 S D Deorah College to 3+800 to 4+400 (18 - Yes /Yes 2 29.2 6.5 3.6 13.6 6.6 0 2.2 32.5 19.2 23.2 9.3 Bhangaghar 21) (1.50m) 2.8 Hero Honda Show room to 5+800 to 6+000 (31 - No /Yes 2 36.27 3.4 2.3 14 6.2 2.5 1.86 30.26 23.88 27.88 2.38 Income tax Office 32) (1m) -1.88 Christian Basti Church 6+300 (34) 2 31.07 4.75 3.5 13.6 6.6 0 1.45 29.9 No/No 22.92 26.92 2.98 -0.92 International Hospital 6+625 to 6+700 2 31.7 4.6 4 13.6 6.6 0 2.2 31 No/No 21.6 29.6 1.4 -3.6 Guwahati Tea Auction Centre 7+725 to 7+825 2 29.4 3 3.19 14 6.2 2.5 1.45 30.34 Yes/No 27.23 30.31 0.03 -4.31 Assam Secretariat 8+025 to 8+450 2 34.39 7.24 4 13.6 6.6 0 4.2 35.64 Yes/No 20.3 38.71 -3.07 -12.71 Super Market 8+575 to 8+675 2 36.73 9 3 20.1 3 2.5 1.15 38.75 Yes/No 15.58 36.43 2.32 -10.43 Deka Filling Station 9+150 to 9+425 2 35.85 6 4 13.6 6.6 0 3.75 33.95 No/No 14.39 21.76 12.19 4.24 Central Dairy 10+775 to 10+900 2 31.3 4.62 4 13.6 6.6 0 2.2 31.02 No/No 23.49 29.72 1.3 -3.72 Note: From International Hospital to Central Dairy the GMDA ROWs including footpath and drainage include actual width of open nullah
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 21 . Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
3.7 BRT Operational Plans
3.7.1 The peak hourly public transport flows observed by the DPR consultants in 2009 were as follows: Corridor 1W 5494 pphpd at Maligaon Corridor 1E 4143 pphpd at DC Court Corridor 2 3586 pphpd at Ganeshguri 3.7.2 Based on these figures the consultants proposed three routes using standard buses with peak demand, peak headways and fleet requirement as shown in Table 3.6. Table 3.4 also shows the peak capacity if the headways shown are adopted with an assumption of 85 capacity for a standard bus. The fleet size is also calculated assuming an operating speed on the BRT of 20kph with 10% layover in the peak. It can be seen that based on these calculations the headways proposed cannot carry the demand and the number of buses is excessive for the schedule proposed.
Table 3.6 Analysis of BRT Operational Proposals DPR Data Check Calculations One Way Rt Terminal Route Peak Peak Buses Hourly Buses No. Points Length Demand Headway Needed Capacity Needed @85 km pphpd mins Nos pax/bus @20 kph Narengi to 1 Jalukbari 18.5 2449 5 40 1020 24 Khanapara to Lankeswar 2 Temple 22.4 2181 5 41 1020 30 Khanapara to 3 Narengi 24.4 1706 7 35 729 23 TO TAL 116 77
3.7.3 If it is assumed that the number of buses proposed is correct, the actual peak headways which could be operated given the conditions are 3 min, 4 min and 5 min approximately for Rts 1, 2 and 3 respectively. At these headways the capacities offered on the corridors are as shown in Table 3.7.
Table 3.7 Adequacy of Proposed BRT Service Observed Demand Capacity as peak Combined /Capacity percent of Rt demand Peak Peak for 100% total pt Nos. Corridor pphpd Departures Capacity BRT demand @85/ bus 1+2 1W 5494 24 2040 2. 7 37 % 2+3 2 3586 20 1700 2.1 47% 3+1 1E 4143 20 1700 2.4 41 % TOTAL 64 5440
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 22 . Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report 3.7.4 If there are to be no other buses on the road, i.e., a fully open system with all buses on the BRT lanes, then clearly the proposed BRT service cannot carry the current levels of demand. Thus either more buses must be added to the BRT routes or other buses must be allowed to operate on the regular traffic lanes of the roads. 3.7.5 If it is assumed that there is a turnover of 20% at the peak and that the peak one hour is 10% of the daily traffic, then a peak hour one way capacity of 5440 if fully used would correspond to a daily ridership of about 130,000. This matches closely with the figure of 128,000 in Table 8.2 of the DPR. Thus it would seem that the BRT is not being designed to carry all public transport demand on these corridors and that some regular bus operations must continue on the regular carriageway. 3.7.6 In Figure 4-3 of the DPR it shows that some lengths of the BRT routes (near Guwahati Club and from Jalukbari roundabout to Guwahati University) have regular buses operating also. It is not clear if provision has been made for bus bays etc. for these buses to use. In fact there is no analysis of extending the BRT beyond Jalukbari roundabout. To provide dedicated BRT lanes in this section would require considerable road widening. 3.7.7 Since the BRT routes as proposed cannot replace all the existing bus and minibus routes serving the corridor, the design of the BRT corridors must take into account where bus stops can be located for regular bus routes. Given the fact that the regular traffic will be reduced to two lane operation, bus bays should be constructed along the BRT corridors. In this case feeder and other buses can make use of these and would not need to make use of the BRT reserved lanes. This would however place further demands for more roadwidth. 3.7.8 It is concluded that there are many questions about the fleet requirements and the adequacy of the capacity of the BRT in the DPR. It may be that the lack of any proper ridership forecasts examining the diversion of ridership from the existing bus and minibus routes to the BRT has led to the confusion in the operational plans. Before progressing any further with the BRT proposals it is essential to have a clear understanding of the adjustments required to the existing public transport operations to accommodate the BRT.
3.8 Terminals
3.8.1 The DPR proposes that an empty plot of land at the “intersection near Fancy Bazaar and the foot of the ROB” be used as a BRT Terminal with private car parking. This is believed to be the south east corner of MN Road and Jail Road junction. This would be an ideal location for a downtown terminal as it is at the intersection of Lines 1 and 2. During a recent site inspection however it did appear that this site was in the process of being developed and thus would no longer appear to be available as a BRT terminal. 3.8.2 For Corridor 1, the existing terminal at Adabari is proposed to be used as the BRT terminal although it is proposed that buses would actually turn at Jalukbari roundabout. This would appear to be a rather impractical proposal. In the event that the BRT system were to be built and if Adabari terminal were to be used then access to the terminal by right turns to and from AT Road would be needed and Adabari terminal itself would require to be completely redesigned and upgraded. If Jalukbari roundabout were to be served it should be served in both directions . 3.8.3 There is no mention in the route description of a terminal at the outer end of Corridor 2 or at Narengi on Corridor 1 but in Figure 5-1 of the DPR a BRT terminal is shown at Khanapara and a terminal cum depot is shown at Narengi. A second depot cum terminal is shown at ISBT on the ring road, presumably to provide maintenance facilities for both BRT and regular city buses.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 23 . Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report 3.9 Capital Costs
3.9.1 The DPR provides capital cost estimates based on PWD Schedule of Rates in 2007- 08 prices with a two year escalation factor. The costs are based on the assumption that the roads would be rebuilt with new drainage, new pedestrian sidewalks, relocation of utilities, new junctions and new street lighting. Bituminous flexible pavement appears to have been assumed for the whole road; this surface has been shown elsewhere to be unsatisfactory for BRT due to excessive rut formation. 3.9.2 The study team consider that agency and supervision charges should be included in the costs. Apart from this, the development charges which UMTC has proposed has been assumed under the head relocation of utilities, R&R and environment charges. The land acquisition cost given by UMTC is considered to be over estimated for land compensation alone; however as there is no mention of resettlement and rehabilitation (R and R) costs in the DPR it may be that the unit cost for land acquisition includes R and R costs. If this is the case it should have been stated in the report. UMTC has included cost of establishment of SPV in their estimate. 3.9.3 On balance it appears that the infrastructure costs given by UMTC to develop the BRT in each corridor are reasonably accurate. However since the estimates were prepared using 2007-2008 PWD Schedule of Rates the current cost of construction is likely to be much higher. Most key components of construction of the BRT, i.e., labour, cement, steel and asphalt have all risen by about 10% pa from 2008 to 2011 and so the total costs can be expected to have increased by over 30%, excluding any increase in cost for increased land acquisition.
3.10 Financial Evaluation
3.10.1 The DPR provides a financial analysis which suggests the project is financially viable if the Government funds the capital cost of the system. After opening, it is concluded that the SPV as the owner of the system would generate sufficient revenue to meet all bus operating costs and all operations and maintenance costs associated with the upkeep of the BRT infrastructure. 3.10.2 The capital construction cost estimates used in the DPR have been discussed above in Section 3.9 and it was concluded that these were generally acceptable although it is likely that the construction costs would have increased by about 30% between 2008 and 2011. 3.10.3 The DPR capital costs include an allowance of Rs549m for land acquisition based on 7700 sq m at Rs70,000 per sq m. As discussed in Section 3.5, it would appear that the actual land acquisition corresponding to the BRT designs as shown in the drawings for each corridor should be much greater than 7,700 sq m. As noted, the quality of the drawings makes it very difficult to compare the existing roadwidth and ROW with the roadwidth necessary for the BRT as designed. In the time and resources available to this study it was not possible to prepare an accurate base map of current conditions with which to compare the proposed BRT design but from the work that could be done it appeared that the required land acquisition should be about 60,000 sq m in addition to the 7,700 sq m mentioned in the DPR for land in the central area. 3.10.4 If the assumed land value of Rs70,000 per sq m continues to be adopted, the increase in land acquisition would result in an increase in cost of Rs4,200m. This is clearly a major difference from the initial estimates and it suggests that a comprehensive and thorough assessment of the land situation be undertaken prior to any further action on the BRT.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 24 . Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report 3.10.5 The bus requirement was commented upon earlier but will be accepted for calculation purposes. The assumed cost of a bus is Rs2.5m or US$55,000; this is for a non a/c bus with a floor height of not more than 900m – described as semi-low floor. For a BRT system it is usual to provide a much higher quality of service than the above vehicle is likely to do. Given the temperature, rainfall and air quality conditions in Guwahati, and given the objective of this system is to offer a reasonable alternative to private car travel for suitable journeys, it would seem that a/c buses should be used. If the BRT buses are only operating on the busway and only stopping at stations with raised platforms at the same height as the bus floor – to allow easy entry – then 900mm is acceptable. If however the BRT buses are also to be used on and off the busway and have to stop at normal stops at the kerbside, a floor height of 900mm is far too high for convenient entry and exit. 3.10.6 It is not clear how the capital costs of the buses have been treated. It would seem that the bus capital costs have been added to the infrastructure capital costs for the purposes of the financial evaluation as there is no mention of bus depreciation in the operating cost parameters. If no depreciation allowance has been made in the operating costs then the operator will have no funds available to help fund the replacement buses. If the replacement buses are to be bought by the state this is not a problem but if the SPV is expected to purchase the buses, or if a contracted operator will buy the buses, then the ongoing financial position will be poorer than that reflected in the DPR. 3.10.7 The operating costs include costs for 2.8 conductors per bus. It is stated in the report that off-bus ticketing cannot be done at the stations due to space constraints. One of the defining features of BRT systems is that all ticketing is done off bus to ensure rapid boarding. At the next stage in this study it should be a requirement that the system designers find an acceptable way to achieve off-bus ticketing. The design principles adopted in this DPR where many aspects of the BRT performance have been compromised should be subject to complete re-appraisal before proceeding further. 3.10.8 The operating cost assumptions include a fuel consumption rate of 22 litres per 100km which is very low for a 12m bus, even a non a/c bus. If a/c buses were to be used this fuel consumption rate would certainly increase substantially. 3.10.9 It is suggested in the DPR that the average vehicle utilisation per day would be 215 km/bus/day. If the bus is in service for 16 hours per day and actually running for 14 hours per day, this implies an average speed of about 15 kph. For busway operation on BRT it is hoped to achieve average operating speeds of 20 – 24 kph. It would appear that the vehicle requirement has been calculated using higher speed than 15 kph. 3.10.10 Assuming the 215km/bus/day, the average cost per bus per day is forecast to be about Rs6000 including allowance for ITS costs. The forecast average passengers per bus per day is about 1100 which at a fare of Rs8 suggests a daily revenue of Rs8000. Thus an operating surplus of Rs2000 per bus per day before inclusion of advertising revenue is forecast. In earlier sections of this chapter it was suggested that the ridership is likely to have been significantly overestimated and the land costs underestimated. A re-assessment of the financial position of the BRT would appear to be required.
3.11 Economic Evaluation
3.11.1 There is no economic evaluation of the BRT project in the DPR. It is assumed that this would be required before proceeding to detailed design.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 25 . Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report 3.12 Environmental and Social Impact Assessments
3.12.1 The DPR describes only generic aspects of the environmental impact assessment on Corridors 1 and 2 and does not address local environmental parameters or their mitigation measures. As no DPR has been prepared for the proposed BRT Corridor 3, there is no environment impact on this corridor to review. For Corridors 1 and 2, the impact on environment is considered in three stages:- before construction, during construction and during operation stage of proposed BRTS project. 3.12.2 It can be said that the general environmental impact has been discussed without detailing the loss of vegetation on proposed BRT corridors or corresponding mitigation measures. There is no detailed study on soil quality, water quality or noise pollution levels. Overall, the physical and social environmental features of the BRT corridors are missing in the DPR. The mitigation measures suggested in the DPR are also generic and appear not to reflect prevailing conditions on the proposed BRT corridors. 3.12.3 Key issues are as follows: The Environment Impact Assessment of the proposed BRT corridors has not mentioned the baseline data on number and the type of tree species felling. So it was difficult to calculate the environment management cost of the project. Due to the lack of data, a vegetation survey was initiated. There is no discussion about the location and importance of sensitive receptors along the proposed BRT corridors because they have not been surveyed. Accordingly a sensitive receptors survey was initiated. Air, water, soil quality data of Guwahati city particularly along the proposed BRT corridor was not discussed in the Environment Impact Assessment study in DPR. Also there was no assumption of air quality data discussed during construction and after commissioning of BRT corridor. The noise pollution level in Guwahati city along the proposed BRT corridors was not discussed in the impact assessment study and also there was no projection of data calculation mentioned during construction and commissioning of BRT project. Availability of flora and fauna and endangered species are not discussed in the impact assessment report. Economic Development Features (trade and commerce, major markets, industry, water supply and sewerage, storm water drainage has not been discussed in the DPR. Social and cultural features like health and tourism has not been discussed in the DPR. The detailing of archaeological sites around the BRT project area has not been done. Nothing has been documented about impact of the BRT project during and after construction on the archaeological sites.
3.12.4 Overall, the Environment Impact Assessment study and the mitigation measures suggested in the DPR have not followed the customary steps of EIA study. As a result it is recommended that further more detailed study of environmental issues be undertaken in the context of additional studies of the BRT.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 26 . Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
3.13 Institutional Arrangements
3.13.1 The DPR supports the creation of an Urban Mass Transit Authority (UMTA) in Guwahati. The DPR suggests that the UMTA should be a coordinating agency whose role would be to coordinate the work of other urban institutions. It is suggested that the UMTA meet once every six months or more frequently if required. Secretarial and technical support to the UMTA would be provided by a proposed SPV. This suggests that the UMTA is essentially a committee which meets periodically. This would not seem compatible with an agency charged to coordinate all the work in Guwahati relating to public transport and many other aspects in addition. 3.13.2 The SPV proposed would “coordinate all public bus services in Guwahati so that there would be an integrated service”. There is no mention of the SPV being created in order to take responsibility for the implementation of the BRT. 3.13.3 This proposed institutional structure is rather different from that which is envisaged by this study team. The view is taken that the UMTA should be given overall responsibility for public transport in Guwahati and existing responsibilities should be transferred from the current agencies and consolidated in UMTA. UMTA would not be a committee which meets from time to time but a fully staffed division of Government. Thus while UMTA would coordinate with other agencies where needed, it would have many powers over its primary areas of responsibility. 3.13.4 UMTA, rather than the SPV, would have responsibility for planning and regulation of bus services and would be responsible to the city / state government for ensuring adequate public transport throughout Guwahati. It would be empowered to issue and remove route licences, to specify the level of service to be supplied and to acquire these services according to overall government policies. 3.13.5 In contrast, it is envisaged that the SPV would have a much more narrowly defined role which would be to take responsibility for the successful creation of the BRT and to operate the BRT upon its completion. 3.13.6 A summary of the existing regulatory structure for transport in Guwahati is given in Annex A.
3.14 Conclusions
3.14.1 From the assessment of the DPR, the following conclusions have been drawn: The introduction of the BRT as proposed in the DPR does not appear to leave sufficient road capacity for general traffic in many stretches of road, especially on Corridor 1; the plans as shown would result in severe traffic congestion; The BRT as designed appears to need much more land acquisition than was reported in the DPR; the cost and difficulty of implementation would therefore both increase; The DPR appears to assume a mix of vehicles operating on the busway with new BRT buses operating alongside existing minibus and bus services. It is believed that this approach would not achieve the objective of providing Guwahati with a completely new and modern public transport link; Due to the lack of platform width at stations, the BRT would not offer an off- bus ticketing system which is a defining characteristic of a BRT system; The DPR does not provide satisfactory BRT ridership forecasts;
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 27 . Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report The DPR does not provide an economic analysis which is essential for ADB funding. 3.14.2 It is concluded that the DPR, while providing much valuable information, does not provide sufficient information upon which to base the granting of an ADB loan. The BRT design itself appears to be compromised in many aspects through lack of roadwidth and the provision of roadspace for general traffic in many locations is inadequate. 3.14.3 The selection of the preferred corridor will not therefore be based solely on the work in the DPR but will draw upon alternative professional opinions concerning BRT design and adequacy of roadspace for general traffic. 3.14.4 It is therefore recommended that following the selection of a preferred corridor a full Feasibility Study should be conducted to review the basic BRT design and to ensure that all necessary aspects of the feasibility study are conducted to the satisfaction of ADB. After completion of this study, work can proceed to detailed design.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 28 . Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report 4. EVALUATION CRITERIA
4.1 Introduction
4.1.1 One of the tasks of this study is to compare the three corridors and to decide which of the three would be the best initial corridor. A number of evaluation criteria are suggested below for discussion.
4.2 Public Transport Demand on the Corridor
Existing Demand 4.2.1 In almost all cities where BRT or other forms of mass transit have been introduced, the vast majority of passengers on the new modes were diverted from other existing public transport modes. There would seem no reason for Guwahati to be different. Additional ridership is also usually generated by the new mode but the amount of this depends on the quality of the existing modes and the degree of improvement achieved by the new mode. 4.2.2 This is a very important criterion but one which is rather complicated to estimate. It depends on the extent of improvement over existing public and also private transport modes and also the extent to which competing bus routes are restructured to remove or limit the non-BRT buses running parallel on the BRT corridor. It is also affected by the availability of good feeder bus routes bringing people to interchanges where they can take the BRT and this in turn is affected by the fare structure of the overall public transport system. If through ticketing is available for the feeder + BRT trip and if the fare is similar to the single boarding on a regular bus then ridership on the BRT is likely to be higher. 4.2.3 Since the planning and construction of the BRT takes time, usually a minimum of about three years and often much more, areas forecast to undergo rapid expansion may also be suitable for BRT. In fact they may benefit from plans to introduce BRT since the new land uses may be located in such a way that the walk-in catchment to the stations is maximised. 4.2.4 With the caveat that future plans can affect ridership, other things being equal, corridors with high existing public transport usage are to be preferred to those with low public transport usage. Forecast Future BRT Ridership 4.2.5 Although the key factor for a pilot corridor must be its ability to demonstrate that BRT can offer better public transport in the immediate period after it is implemented, any corridor which also fits well with planned future development proposals should be favoured.
4.3 Adequacy of Existing Right of Way (ROW) to accommodate a BRT
4.3.1 For a BRT layout using lateral stations rather than an island stations, if the stations are 3m wide and facing each other, and the bus lanes at the stations are also 3m wide, the system needs about 12m of road width. If two regular lanes are also to be provided for normal traffic in each direction this requires four lanes of 3.5m width or 14m in total. If two 2m footpaths are also provided they require 4m. Thus the total cross section needed for a BRT section with stations is about 30m and for a section without stations a minimum of about 26m is needed. If some median or planter lane separation, a cycle lane or a parking / service lane is to be provided then clearly more width is needed.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 29 . Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report 4.3.2 BRT systems can however be provided in road widths much less than 30m by one way operation, avoiding stations in narrow sections, reducing regular traffic to one lane, having the BRT operate in a pedestrian street, etc. Examples exist of BRT operations in almost all road widths – the key issue is the accompanying traffic management measures, i.e., whether the remaining road space can accommodate the traffic flows without serious congestion arising. 4.3.3 The need to acquire land, especially land in the built up city areas, greatly increases costs but more importantly greatly increases the time likely to be taken to bring the BRT into operation as land acquisition often results in protracted negotiations before any deal is agreed. Thus for a pilot corridor, the less the need for land acquisition and property resumption the better.
4.4 Spare Road Capacity along the Corridor
4.4.1 Other things being equal, if there is spare capacity along a corridor it would suggest that the impact of taking two lanes from the general traffic may not result in any appreciable speed reduction for general traffic. This is of great assistance when estimating the travel time impact of the BRT as it suggests that while BRT passengers should travel faster than before using regular buses, private vehicle users may not suffer significant time disbenefit. 4.4.2 The availability of spare capacity on the corridor also should enable time to be given to pedestrians to cross the road protected by signalised pedestrian crossings; something they do not have at present. 4.4.3 Thus other things being equal, corridors which currently have some spare capacity will be favoured over those which do not. Frequency of Existing Right and U Turn Movements 4.4.4 The frequency of junctions which permit right and U turns along the corridor also has a bearing on the choice for BRT. Since the BRT is to be located in the centre of the road, any vehicles turning right at junctions must be given special treatment if the right turn is to continue to be permitted as uncontrolled turning across the busway is not permitted. If right turning movements are to be restricted then alternative routes must be found to enable these movements to be made. The existence of a secondary street system alongside the BRT corridor to facilitate G-turns or Q-turns must be considered when assessing the junction frequency. If there are many alternatives then the junction frequency is less critical. 4.4.5 A similar concern applies to pedestrian road crossings. At present in Guwahati pedestrians cross the road at will and where central railings have been erected gaps have been left (created?) for pedestrians to cross the road. Since pedestrians will not be permitted on the BRT busway lanes other than at controlled crossings, adequate measures will have to be made to replace pedestrian crossing facilities. The availability of existing pedestrian overbridges etc. would be a favourable factor for a corridor.
4.5 Capital Costs
4.5.1 For the initial pilot BRT corridor, if a sensible corridor can be found that can be formed without huge capital costs this would clearly be better than one which required major infrastructure and high costs. While none of the corridors being considered in Guwahati is likely to require significantly higher construction costs per km., differences in land take and building resumption could result in very different total costs and much higher costs to be borne by local Guwahati authorities.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 30 . Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report 4.6 Overall Ease of Implementation
4.6.1 For a pilot project this is an important consideration. Clearly it encompasses many of the measures listed above but could also include the absence or otherwise of difficult issues, e.g., rail crossings, involvement of non-cooperative agencies, specific problem areas, etc. Any corridor likely to encounter major implementation issues should best be avoided for the pilot BRT.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 31 . Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report 5. SELECTION OF PILOT BRT CORRIDOR
5.1 Introduction
5.1.1 The purpose of this Chapter is to report the steps taken to select the most appropriate route for an initial BRT service along one of the two corridors studied in the DPR or alternatively along a third corridor, VIP Road, which connects Narengi with 6 Mile on GS Road. As noted earlier, the DPR for this latter corridor is not yet complete. 5.1.2 For the purposes of corridor selection, Corridor 1 in fact can be thought of as two radial corridors to the city centre, i.e., Corridor 1 West (1W) from Jalukbari and Corridor 1 East (1E) from Narengi. This would make them more similar to the radial Corridor 2 since all would then be radial corridors to the CBD and could be combined in any way desired in the future, e.g., could link corridor 1W with Corridor 2 or 1E, etc. 5.1.3 There are many plans at an advanced stage for changes in the city centre. There are plans to relocate the wholesale market at Pan Baazar to a location outside the city centre on the ring road, there are plans to close the jail with inmates being moved elsewhere, there are plans to construct a new waterfront designed to make the city centre more attractive for tourists and residents alike and there are also longer term proposals to relocate the central railway station to a location outside the city. Thus the BRT network should be planned in close cooperation with the city planning authorities to ensure the best possible circulation pattern for the BRT network in the central area, given a new land use pattern. 5.1.4 As noted in Chapter 3, in the DPR the vast majority of the reported land acquisition was located in the central area. The DPR also proposed a major downtown terminal on a vacant site in Fancy Bazaar. It appears however that that site has not been protected for public use and is now under development by a private company and therefore not available for the downtown terminal / interchange. If it is decided in Guwahati that the BRT will form the backbone of the future public transport system then good circulation and interchange must be provided downtown. This need not be an off-street site – if land were not available for a terminal it could take the form of an on-street BRT interchange where the BRT buses passed through but did not terminate. 5.1.5 Thus there are many issues to be resolved before fixing the downtown circulation system. For the purposes of this report it has been assumed that for the initial route, the BRT would be given as much priority as possible in the downtown area but would not adopt a circulation pattern that was dependent on major land acquisition and property demolition unless this was part of an overall long term urban renewal program. As this cannot be determined at this point in time, the BRT corridor evaluation will examine the corridors to the edge of the downtown area. The exact circulation pattern through the downtown area must be determined at the next stage of the study prior to the preparation of detailed design. 5.1.6 Thus the corridors to be evaluated are as follows: Corridor 1W; Jalukbari to Fancy Bazaar 8.3 km Corridor 1E; Narengi to Fancy Bazaar 9.4 km Corridor 2 ; Khanapara to Paltan Bazaar 10.7 km Corridor 3; Narengi to 6 Mile 6.6 km
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 32 . Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
5.2 Transport Demand
Existing 5.2.1 The DPR provides survey results from traffic counts at a number of locations along the corridors. As these counts were conducted some time ago it was decided to undertake new counts as a check on the earlier surveys and to determine the current situation. Four classified traffic volume count (TVC) locations, one on each corridor, namely AT Road (Corridor-1W), GNB Road (Corridor-1E), GS Road (Corridor-2) and VIP Road (Corridor-3) were selected to assess the present day traffic volume and review the capacity estimates on each section. 5.2.2 In addition to these traffic counts, eight locations, two each on Corridors 1W and 1E, one on Corridor 3 and four on Corridor 2 were selected for public transport occupancy counts. 5.2.3 The TVC results for peak hour traffic at the survey locations are given in Table 5.1.
Table 5.1 Peak Hour Traffic by Location (2011 and 2009) Section Location Direction Time 2011 DPR Survey Surveys Total traffic 2009 (PCU) (PCU) Air port to City 3175 Morning 5492 AT City to Airport 1809 Bharalumukh Road Airport to City 1680 Evening City to Airport 2371 Ambari to Chandmari 1272 Morning 3580 GNB Guwahati Chandmari to Amabri 2616 Road Club Ambari to Chandmari 1257 Evening Chandmari to Amabri 2153 Khanapara to Paltan Bazar 1536 Morning GS Christian Paltan Bazar to Khanapara 2270 Road Basti Khanapara to Paltan Bazar 1816 Evening 5278 Paltan Bazar to Khanapara 3039 Narengi to 6 Mile 479 Morning VIP 6 Mile to Narengi 779 NA Road Narengi to 6 Mile 480 Evening 6 Mile to Narengi 708
5.2.4 The results of the 2011 public transport occupancy surveys and a comparison with the corresponding figures in the DPR are shown in Table 5.2.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 33 . Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
Table 5.2 Comparison of 2009 and 2011 Public Transport Occupancy Counts Road Location 2011 Survey Results (1) DPR 2009 Survey (2) Morning Peak Hour Evening Peak Hour Peak hour AT Rd. Inbound Outbound Inbound Outbound Inbound Outbound Adabari 6748 2889 4103 3776 5385 2880 Bharalumukh 7979 3786 3079 5950 5020 2865 GS Rd. Ulubari 4891 4112 2677 4684 3700 3285 Christian Basti 2374 3313 2692 2159 2108 2176 Secretariat 3410 4825 3078 2732 n/a n/a Khanapara 846 1087 991 1209 1084 2250 N C Rd. Guwahati Club 1773 3912 1877 2609 4049 3246 Noonmati 1930 827 912 1626 2452 1690 VIP Rd. VIP Road 256 421 228 334 n/a n/a Notes: (1) All pt modes - trekkers, minibuses and buses at these locations (2) Maximum hour in the am or pm survey periods.
5.2.5 While there are some anomalous results and no consistent pattern, in general it would seem that there has been growth of more than 30% on the AT Road corridor, about 30% at the top end of GS Road and no growth in the NC Road corridor. It may be that the surveys should be repeated for several days to improve reliability by reducing any daily fluctuations that might occur. 5.2.6 The results of the counts on VIP Road are consistent with informal counts made some months earlier and confirm that the total peak hour public transport demand along this road is of the order of 400 pphpd. The maximum observed vehicles in the peak hour was 780 pcu/hour. Public transport demand of this amount is not sufficient to support a BRT system and the total peak hour traffic levels indicate that there is no potential to increase the BRT ridership from significant numbers of private vehicle users. 5.2.7 The share of passenger movement by mode was also recorded and this is shown in Table 5.3. It can be seen that the highest public transport share of about 62% was observed at Bharalumukh.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 34 . Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
Table 5.3 Peak Period Person Movement by Location and Mode
Auto Cycle % share of Peak M/c Trek- Mini 3 hr Average Location Direction Car Rick- Bus Cycle Rick- public Period scooter ker Bus Totals One Hour shaw shaw transport Assumed ave. occupancy 2.5 2 1.5 1 1.5 Bharalumukh Airport to city 4513 1016 4664 1499 9986 5944 334 182 28137 62 9,379 AM City to airport 3213 798 2031 797 5422 1959 206 111 14537 56 4,846
Airport to city 4835 726 3206 1214 4304 2351 147 92 16874 47 5,625 PM City to airport 7685 804 2841 776 7574 6068 267 213 26228 55 8,743 Guwahati Club Ambari to Chandamari 2350 804 1413 821 5325 483 221 108 11525 58 3,842 AM Chandmari to Ambari 4033 1344 4004 969 5228 981 382 155 17095 42 5,698
Ambari to Chandamari 3600 628 2012 771 7823 1079 193 165 16271 59 5,424 PM Chandmari to Ambari 3865 1278 4215 535 5086 1285 237 173 16674 41 5,558 Christian Basti Khanapara to Paltan Bazar 4225 1910 2381 735 3286 2700 531 99 15867 42 5,289 AM Paltan Bazar to Khanapara 2733 1314 1523 906 4368 2627 510 24 14004 56 4,668
Khanapara to Paltan Bazar 5865 1552 3918 311 3888 1324 542 132 17532 32 5,844 PM Paltan Bazar to Khanapara 4393 1552 3848 717 5364 2300 351 14 18538 45 6,179 VIP Road 6 mile to Narengi 1355 368 803 772 48 43 127 56 3571 24 1,190 AM Narengi to 6 mile 375 66 251 627 37 0 169 179 1703 39 568
6 mile to Narengi 973 100 648 507 88 85 139 72 2612 26 871 PM Narengi to 6 mile 405 54 204 428 0 77 212 96 1476 34 492 Note: Morning peak is three hours 8am - 11am; Evening peak is three hours 5pm - 8pm Passenger volumes on pt modes are actual counts
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 35 . Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
Future PT Demand 5.2.8 From the comparisons given in para 5.2.5 above, it can be seen that the public transport demand has increased quite considerably. Since the surveys were conducted on the major corridors they could be expected to reflect the underlying growth in demand. Thus the potential for increased ridership on the BRT on the major corridors is great. 5.2.9 Along the VIP Road corridor however the situation is rather different. In the Guwahati Master Plan, there are no significant proposals for large population growth along this corridor. It is concluded therefore, based on the absence of current demand and the lack of any indication of significant growth in future, that VIP Road is not a suitable candidate for an initial BRT corridor.
5.3 Current Bus Network
5.3.1 A review was made in this study of the trekker, bus and minibus routes which operate wholly or in part in the study area. Lists of authorised bus, minibus and trekker routes were provided by Road Transport Authority (RTA) and these are copied in Annex B. 5.3.2 As noted above, traffic count and public transport occupancy surveys of each type of vehicle were carried out for three hours in morning peak and three hours in the evening peak at a number of locations on each corridor. While doing this it was found that most of the routes on the RTA list are either not in operation or operating on different routes. This is true for all public transport vehicles. The minibuses and trekkers have route numbers marked on them which makes it easier to identify but in the case of the ASTC routes, none of the buses have route numbers including the new JnNURM buses. Many of them do not even have origins and destinations clearly marked on them. 5.3.3 Figures 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3 show all the routes as per the list of routes provided for trekkers, minibuses and buses respectively. Routes which were observed to be in operation have been highlighted in yellow on the study corridors. It is clear that if all the routes provided in the list were to operate, then many more routes should have been observed on these surveyed sections. The most remarkable results were observed from the comparisons for the buses. Not one route given in the list could be located on all the eight sections which were reviewed. On the contrary routes like Khanapara - Paltan Bazaar - Jalukbari, Airport - City, Narengi - City were found to be in operation.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 36 . Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
Figure 5.1 Trekker Routes
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 37 . Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
Figure 5.2 Bus Routes
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 38 . Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
Figure 5.3 Minibus Routes
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 39 . Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 40 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
5.3.4 The following conclusions were drawn from the surveys: Along Corridor 1W the main routes are the various bus routes, minibus routes Nos. 1 and 6 and trekker route No 6. Minibus route Nos 3 and 6 and trekker route No 6 were observed at all points along corridors 1W and 1E suggesting they operate from Jalukbari to Narengi. In total along Corridor 1 it appeared that there were 13 minibus routes, eight trekker routes and various bus routes operating for some portion of the corridor. Along Corridor 2, the major routes were the minibus routes Nos 1, 21 and 27 and the ASTC buses. In total at the four survey points along Corridor 2 there were five minibus routes, six trekker routes plus the various bus routes. The great majority of the buses and also minibus Route 21 appeared to travel between Khanapara and downtown at Church Field and could therefore be candidates for replacement by the BRT. Rts 1 and 27 connect Khanapara and Jalukbari and therefore any passengers on these routes travelling across the city centre would require to interchange if using the BRT if it terminated at Paltan Bazaar. The other minibus routes had few observations. 5.3.5 To fully understand the route network which is actually operating along the two corridors it would be necessary to spend more time than was available to check all observed routes. However if the trekker routes are ignored for the moment, Corridor 2 with only the ASTC route plus three major minibus routes serving all or almost all the corridor, would seem to be an easier corridor to organise into a BRT type pattern than Corridor 1W.
5.4 BRT Design Options
5.4.1 As discussed earlier, there are many possible designs for a BRT and no one design is suitable or best in every case. Much depends on the existing road cross section, whether or not a median strip is available, whether demand is likely to be walk-on walk-off or if many passengers are expected to arrive and depart from stations by feeder bus or other mode, potential for selective road widening, etc. 5.4.2 The BRT design proposed in the DPR attempted to fit the BRT into the narrowest possible roadwidth and in doing so compromised many key aspects of BRT operation. The BRT operates in mixed traffic in many locations and stations in some areas are only 1.65m wide which could present some safety issues. The roadwidths available for general traffic as pointed out earlier appear quite inadequate for today’s traffic flows and could be expected to result in severe traffic congestion both now and in future. Thus it was concluded in Chapter 3 that the BRT designs proposed in the DPR did not provide a satisfactory basis upon which to evaluate the three corridors. 5.4.3 As the DPR stated that a hybrid system – i.e., a restricted open system - was proposed, there would continue to be some buses using the regular traffic lanes and therefore a need to provide local bus stops along the kerb lane. As discussed earlier, it was concluded that the BRT could only cope with a proportion of the demand and that normal bus routes would have to continue to operate on the regular carriageway. 5.4.4 It is therefore considered essential that before moving to the detailed design stage of this project alternative designs for the BRT should be considered. This will be discussed in more detail in Chapter 6. For the moment however in assessing the suitability of the four corridors for the initial BRT, it will be assumed that there must be at least six lanes available for all or most of the corridor to allow two lanes for the BRT and four lanes for other traffic. If this minimum cross section is not currently
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 41 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
available then the evaluation of the corridors will assume that land is taken to enable six lanes to be provided. The exception will be the flyovers where four lanes are provided with one or more lanes per direction at ground level.
5.5 Land Acquisition
5.5.1 In Chapter 3 it was revealed that in many cases the designs shown in the DPR required much wider ROW than was actually available today but did not show any need for land acquisition. The implication is that the costs of the BRT in the DPR have been underestimated and the difficulties of implementation are likely to be more significant. 5.5.2 In the time and with the resources available for this study it has not been possible to undertake a thorough survey of site conditions on all three corridors. The designs proposed in the DPR were discussed in Chapter 3 and found to be below internationally recognised standards for a BRT. To estimate the land requirements it has been assumed that the minimum ROW to operate a BRT in any of the corridors is a 26m running section ROW, i.e., four 3.5m traffic lanes, two 3.5m BRT lanes, two 2m sidewalks and two 0.5m lane separators. The additional land required at various locations along the corridors to provide the needed roadwidths was estimated by comparing the 26m requirement with the available width as shown in the official GMDA contour map. The additional width required was multiplied by the distance along the road for which these conditions were believed to apply. As noted above these are the best estimates possible given the time and resources. The additional widths were shown in Tables 3.3, 3.4 and 3.5 and when these additional widths are multiplied by the longitudinal distances the areas required are obtained. To allow for additional width at stations, at footbridge footings, at intersections with right and U- turns, etc., an allowance of 20% was added to the basic estimates. 5.5.3 The results for the three corridors are shown below: Corridor 1W 13,800 sq m Corridor 1E 75,300 sq m Corridor 2 8,900 sq m
5.5.4 The results show that Corridor 1E requires a very significant land acquisition program to obtain the necessary ROW while Corridors 1W and 2 require much less. 5.5.5 Comparing the corridors, it can be seen that Corridor 1E is by far the worst, followed by Corridors 1W and 2. On the basis of this finding, Corridor 1E was rejected as a candidate corridor.
5.6 Traffic Capacity Assessment
5.6.1 As noted above, to provide a satisfactory BRT operation, the roadwidth of the running sections should be at least 26m. At the junctions however, additional width is required if a station is to be provided and / or right or U-turns are to be permitted. All new signalised junctions with or without stations should have a protected pedestrian phase and this requires a share of the cycle time which may reduce the time available for general traffic. Finally, if the BRT is to be given some signal priority, this will further reduce the time available for general traffic. 5.6.2 In this assessment, notional extra land acquisition has been allowed to enable roads to be widened at junctions. To provide the background to this decision, some capacity calculations were carried out for key intersections on the major corridors to demonstrate the need for additional road width. An assessment has been made of
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 42 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
the key junctions where road capacity is likely to be critical from the point of view of general traffic and any buses not on the busway. GS Road at Christian Basti 5.6.3 Peak hour traffic along GS Road is currently 3039 pcu / hour in evening peak and this would reduce to about 2700pcu/hr if most of the buses were converted to BRT. If the northbound right turn is banned, roadwidth necessary to accommodate two straight thru’ lanes per direction for general traffic and one BRT lane per direction plus a 2m pedestrian island in the centre of the road is 23m, sidewalks not included. Assuming a discharge rate of 1600 pcu/lane/hour, i.e., 2.25 secs/ pcu, the 2700 pcus require 50 minutes per hour. If the side street traffic is about 240 pcu/hour, at the same discharge rate it would require 9 mins/hour. This suggests that the full hour of capacity is required for traffic and therefore leaves no time for a separate pedestrian phase which would be essential. With these assumptions the lane configuration above would not be able to provide enough capacity to match the current demand and some road widening would be necessary. 5.6.4 Not permitting the right turn movement would put additional pressure on the downstream U turn and this movement may not have adequate capacity. If the right turn were to be permitted an additional lane and phase would be required. The road would need to be widened to at least 27m excluding the sidewalk at the northbound approach on GS Road. GNB Road at Guwahati Club 5.6.5 The current roadwidth at this junction on GNB Road is about 15m with two lanes in each direction. The DPR drawings show the westbound approach to the junction having a width of 6.75m. From the surveys, the maximum westbound traffic was 2616 pcu / hour which would fall to about 2256 pcus after introduction of the BRT. Based on the DPR all-movement counts at this junction, about 15% of the westbound traffic turns right to MC Road and about 400 pcus turn left from MC Road to travel eastbound. 5.6.6 Using the same assumptions as above, the straight thru’ traffic would require about 42 minutes per hour of green time, the right turn to MC Road would require 15 minutes of green per hour and the left turn from MC Road would require about 8 minutes given a two lane discharge. Allowing the westbound traffic to continue when the right turn phase is in operation would allow this configuration to operate within capacity. The roadwidth required would be 27m on the westbound approach – significantly in excess of the 15m available at present. Maligaon – Pandu Junction 5.6.7 The traffic flows in the DPR show all movements at this junction. The eastbound thru’ movement is about 1600 pcu/hr which if split between two lanes would require about 30 mins green time per hour. The right turn movement to Pandu Gaon is 229 pcu/hr which would require about 9 mins and the side road traffic of 585 pcu / hour on two lanes would require about 11 minutes. In addition a pedestrian phase would be needed which would require to be at least 15 seconds per cycle. If a 100 second cycle time were adopted, the junction would operate at about full capacity. The required roadwidth on the westbound approach would be 27m which is about 10m wider than the width shown on the GMDA contour map. Any smaller roadwidth and the junction would be overloaded. 5.6.8 The above examples illustrate that to accommodate the BRT and provide the necessary movements at junctions requires adequate numbers of lanes in the approaches to the junctions and if BRT is to be considered for Guwahati it will be necessary to acquire the land at these locations to avoid unacceptable levels of traffic congestion.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 43 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
Corridor 1 W (Jalukbari to Water Treatment Plant) 5.6.9 The maximum traffic on Corridor 1W has been observed in the morning peak hour and is of the order of 4700 pcus. The sections of the Corridor 1W which would require widening to accept the BRT are listed below: a. Jalukbari RUB b. Maligaon Flyover c. Pandu Intersection d. The stretch of AT Road from Pandu to Kamakhya e. Bharalumukh Intersection f. M.G.Road from Bharalumukh to WTP.
Corridor 1 E (Ambari to Narengi) 5.6.10 Corridor 1E is the narrowest of all corridors. The existing cross section is 4-lane divided carriageway with heavily built up commercial and residential development. There are numerous bottlenecks such as Chandmari Flyover, Noomati Refinery, Noonmati ROB, railway track and siding etc. The traffic volume figure is of the order of 3888 pcus during the morning peak hour. 5.6.11 The sections of the Corridor 1E which would require widening to accept the BRT are listed below: a. The total stretch between Ambari to Chandmari Flyover b. Chandmari Flyover to Noomati Refinery c. Noomati Refinery to Narengi d. Noonmati ROB
Corridor 2 (GS Road) 5.6.12 Corridor 2, GS Road starts from Paltan Bazaar at the heart of the city. The major portion of the road is abutted by commercial land uses with intermittent semi-govt. or government use like the various offices and Secretariat. Because of the commercial land use one lane on either side of the road is presently being used for parking.
5.6.13 A traffic volume count was carried out and the present peak hour volume was observed in the evening at around 4855 pcus. Corridor 2 would require widening to accept the BRT from Paltan Bazaar intersection to Ulubari flyover.
Corridor 3 (VIP Road)
5.6.14 VIP Road is link road between 6 Mile flyover on GS road and Narengi on N.C.Road. The area is sparsely developed and may become a residential area in the future. Commercial development is not envisaged for this section. The traffic on this section is also very low. The peak hour traffic is around 1200 pcus. As noted above, the public transport demand levels on this road make it unsuitable for BRT.
Summary 5.6.15 Without widening the roads at the locations listed above severe congestion will arise. Given that the assessment has been done using today’s traffic levels it is certain that the problems will be far greater in future when traffic levels increase. 5.6.16 From the assessment carried out above, it is clear that Corridor 2 has far fewer narrow sections than either Corridors 1W or 1E and would therefore be able to
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 44 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
accommodate the BRT lanes with either less congestion for general traffic and /or less land acquisition. 5.6.17 Further information on the traffic problem areas on the corridors is given in Annex C.
5.7 Indicative BRT Service Requirements
5.7.1 For the three corridors, if the BRT system is to cater for 50% of the public transport demand along the corridor, then the peak headways required for two bus types – 12m single deck and 18m articulated - are as shown in Table 5.4.
Table 5.4 BRT Service to meet Peak Hour Demand Bus Type 12m Single Deck 18m articulated Bus Capacity 85 135 Peak Assume Dep. / Dep./ Demand BRT Headway Headway hour hour (2011) Demand Corridor Location pphpd pphpd mins mins 1W Bharalumukh 8000 4000 47 1.3 30 2.0 1E Guwahati Club 4000 2000 24 2.5 15 4.0 2 Ulubari 5000 2500 30 2.0 19 3.0
5.7.2 From the above table it can be seen that on Corridor 1W, even using 18m articulated buses with capacity of 135 passengers, if the BRT is to carry 50% of all public transport passengers it would have to operate at 2 minute headways. Given the constraints of the single BRT lane and the presence of signalised intersections this would be hard to achieve. For Corridors 1E and 2 the demands are lower but would still require about 2 minute headways to carry all the public transport demand on 12m buses or about 3 – 4 minute headways with 18m articulated buses. 5.7.3 Thus from the point of view of an initial route, Corridor 1W would seem to present a great challenge to arrange capacity to meet the demand. From the point of view of coping with the demand, the other two corridors would seem to be better suited as potential initial routes. 5.7.4 Since the BRT is not expected to carry 100% of the public transport demand along the corridors then other buses must operate alongside the BRT in the regular traffic lanes. In this case space must be given for bus stops etc on the kerbside lane. If it is not possible to find space for bus bays then the capacity of the road section with bus stops would be greatly reduced.
5.8 Terminal Facilities
5.8.1 For the initial route, an off-street BRT terminal at the outer end of the route would be required together with a smaller on-street facility in the city centre. The size of the outer terminal would depend on the functions to be performed there. An area of about 1ha should be adequate to allow turnaround of the BRT, some layover space, some meal break parking, some minor maintenance space and some terminal space for feeder buses from out of town, This assumes that there would be a maintenance and overnight servicing and parking depot located elsewhere. 5.8.2 At present there is a bus terminal at Adabari on Corridor 1W and this could be upgraded and used as a terminal for the BRT. It is not ideal and if a BRT were to be constructed on Corridor 1W some attempt should be made to identify a terminal location at or beyond the Jalukbari roundabout. If this were not possible then full
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 45 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
access in all directions should be provided to Adabari terminal so that the BRT could serve Jalukbari roundabout in both directions. 5.8.3 For Corridor 1E the DPR proposed a terminal at Narengi. There are a number of open pieces of land there at present and if it was decided to operate the initial route to Narengi then land should be acquired as soon as possible. 5.8.4 For Corridor 2 the terminal should be located at Khanapara at the junction of GS Road and the ring road. This location is already a major interchange location with scores of minibuses, trekkers, auto-rickshaws and other vehicles all parked up waiting for passengers. The construction of the flyover which is underway at present has created a number of areas adjacent to the flyover which would be ideal for a terminal for the BRT and also an interchange point for other buses. 5.8.5 Thus the potential appears to exist at present to acquire a piece of land near the flyover at Khanapara which would provide a very suitable terminal.
5.9 Capital Cost
5.9.1 The capital costs of constructing a BRT system on each of the four corridors have been estimated based on the input parameters given in Table 5.5.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 46 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
Table 5.5 Costing Input Parameters
Corridor- Corridor- Corridor-2 Corridor- 1W 1E 3 Distance 8.3 9.44 10.7 6.6 km Peak load 4000 2000 2500 400 pphpd Bus Capacity 85 85 85 85 pa x Departures per hour 47 24 29 5 dep /hour Peak freq 1.3 2.6 2.0 12.8 mins Speed 22 22 22 22 kph Round trip time 49.80 56.64 64.20 39.60 mins PVR 39 22 31 3 veh Fleet @10%spare 43 24 35 3 veh Depot area 6445 3665 5193 512 sq m Ave station spacing 650 650 650 650 m No of stations 13 15 16 10 Terminal area 10000 10000 10000 10000 sqm Ave dist. between ped crossings 325 325 325 325 m No of signalised intersections 6 6 6 3 No of footbridges 7 9 10 7 Land acquisition 14940 81540 7500 sq m La nd unit cost 20,000 25,000 40,000 Rs/sq m
5.9.2 Based on the above parameters and the unit costs shown below, the estimated cost to reconstruct the roads and incorporate a BRT within a 26m running width ROW are shown in Table 5.6.
Table 5.6 Capital Costs by Corridor Rs(m)
Unit cost Corridor Corridor- Corridor- Corridor- Item Unit (2009-10) 1W 1E 2 3 Corridor Length 8.30 9.44 10.70 6.60
Dismantling km 3,082,667 25.59 29.10 32.98 20.35 Relocation of utilities km 4,819,277 40.00 45.49 51.57 31.81 Strengthening of Flexible pavement lane km 8,165,500 271.09 308.33 349.48 107.78 Rigid pavement lane km 9,706,675 161.13 183.26 159.19 128.13 Drainage km 1,500,000 24.90 28.32 32.10 19.80 Stations unit 1,729,21 0 22.08 25.11 28.47 17.56 GPS / ITS / ATC System unit 100,000,000 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Traffic Signals and Ped Crossings unit 2,500,000 15.00 15.00 15.00 7.50 Footbridges unit 14,000,000 94.77 119.32 146.46 100.15 Depot sq m 26,074 168.04 95.56 135.40 13.36 Terminal (10000sqm) sq m 15,526 155.26 155.26 155.26 155.26 Street and Station Lighting km 7,000,000 58.10 66.08 74.90 46.20 Fare Collection System unit 80,000,000 80.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 12m buses unit 5,500,000 214.82 122.16 173.09 17.08 Land Acquisition - - - - Road widening (approx.) sq m 298.80 2,038.50 300.00 - Depot land sq m 20,000 128.89 73.30 103.85 10.25 Terminal land (outer area) sq m 30,000 300.00 300.00 300.00 300.00 Miscellaneous km 1,002,246 8.32 9.46 10.72 6.61 TOTAL (Rs m) 2,166.80 3,794.27 2,248.47 1,161.84 Total (USDm) 48.15 84.32 49.97 25.82
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 47 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
5.9.3 From the above it can be seen that the capital costs of Corridors 1W and 2 are very similar while the costs of Corridor 1E are far larger due to the high land acquisition costs involved.
5.10 Environmental Issues
5.10.1 The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in the DPR describes only generic aspects of environmental study on the proposed BRT Corridors 1 and 2. This section outlines specific issues that require to be addressed for whichever corridor is selected for the proposed BRT project and makes a preliminary comparison of the environmental issues on each corridor. More information on environmental issues and the associated legislation are provided in the separate Preliminary Environmental Assessment. 5.10.2 The environmental impacts and their mitigation measures which will require to be addressed in the full FS are listed below: Detailing of the loss of vegetation / felling of trees; Detailing of the protected Archaeological sites; Conducting of Sensitive Receptors Survey; Conducting of reconnaissance survey and undertaking transect along proposed BRT corridor project for Socio-Economic and Environmental public consultations for information disclosure and participation; Identification of specific issues of land acquisition, resettlement and rehabilitation and its mitigation measures for each of the proposed BRT project corridor. 5.10.3 Based upon the above there will be areas for action which include the procurement of permission for BRT corridor project construction around protected areas, land acquisition, identification of resettlement and rehabilitation need, management of vegetative cover and clearance, development of mitigation measures for identified impacts and an appropriate monitoring plan. The nature of project includes heavy construction in all parts of the BRT corridor, some of which may take place around State or Central Government protected / restricted Archaeological Sites. Although it appears none of these is expected to be disturbed by the actual construction activities this will require confirmation. 5.10.4 Although the BRT project aims to improve the environmental condition of urban areas of Guwahati by introducing a more efficient and cleaner transport system than the present, the proposed transport infrastructure facilities may exert certain adverse impacts on the natural environment. Impacts during the construction stage are expected to be more severe than impacts during the operation phase, although for a short duration. However, positive impacts should outweigh the negative impacts if due care is taken especially during the construction phase. Existing Vegetation 5.10.5 There are legal provisions that protect all trees and other protected species. In order to obtain some information to guide the choice of corridor in this respect, a vegetation survey was conducted based on reconnaissance survey and transect undertaken along the proposed BRT corridor. All the trees including those less than 50 centimetres girth were counted to estimate the total number of trees to be felled on each corridor. The results are shown in Table 5.7. It can be seen that Corridor 1 West has by far the largest number of trees with girth over 3m and the largest number overall.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 48 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
Table 5.7 Estimate of Trees to be Felled by Corridor Corridor 1 Corridor 2 Girth Size of West East Felling trees (Jalukbari to Pan (Pan Bazar WTP to Bazar WTP) Narengi Circle) < 0.5 m. 416 339 245 > 0.5m. < 1 m. 360 20 65 > 1 m. < 2 m. 80 45 203 > 2 m. < 3 m. 0 0 0 > 3 m. 12 0 2 Total 868 404 515
Public Consultation and Information Disclosure 5.10.6 Given the limitations of time and information, formal public consultation meetings could not be held. Informal discussions however took place with the local people, pedestrians, shopkeepers, vendors at busy markets and intersection areas. Mostly people objected to congestion in the city due to parking of vehicles on the roads, lack of enforcement and lack of wide roads. Also they were very apprehensive about the proposed BRT system to cope with the present demand of traffic in the city. Also the main concerns among the respondents were loss of livelihood, loss of property and business establishments, dust pollution, bad traffic movement during construction in cases of widening of proposed BRT Corridor. Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan (EMMP) 5.10.7 The project will require an EMMP to be prepared. The likely areas of action required and the agencies responsible for each are shown in Table 5.8. Table 5.8 Environment Management and Monitoring Project Areas for Action Responsibilities Phase Design Acquiring permission for construction in or near GMDA Phase protected sites and Reserved Forests (RFs) Tree clearance permission GMDA Development of appropriate design to ensure least Project design possible damage to vegetation and felling of trees engineers Development of appropriate design to ensure Project design landscape is not scared by construction of BRT engineers Supervision of design to ensure least damage to vegetation and minimum tree cover loss or GMDA landscape scarring Constru Ensuring that standing vegetation is not disturbed Construction Co ction Consultation with the residents and other groups in As above Phase the area to minimise disturbance during the construction and development of appropriate plan based on consultation. Ensuring all sites are well managed to reduce As above accidents and other problems Provision of site and emergency plan during As above construction Design Supervision of construction company Supervision Consultancy
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 49 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
Project Areas for Action Responsibilities Phase O&M Ensuring low levels of disturbance in Agency in- Phase neighbourhood charge of Management System Development of accident and emergency plan and As above its implementation if required Overall supervision of functioning of the transport GMDA or and traffic management agency agency identified by the GMDA
5.10.8 In order to implement the identified monitoring plan sufficient budget must be made and included in the final project design budget estimates. Based upon the identified issues a few monitoring needs have been recognised. These relate to: Noise during construction and operation; Air Pollution; Clearance and management of vegetation during construction; Resettlement and Rehabilitation activities.
5.10.9 Each of these needs to be carefully planned and implemented during detailed design and construction stage of proposed BRT corridor. Conclusion 5.10.10 From the preliminary environmental assessment of the proposed BRT system, it would appear that Corridor 2 has fewest problems. The estimated number of large trees to be felled is highest in Corridor 1 West which also has the maximum vegetation cover from Bharalumukh to WTP Pan Bazaar area. From the environmental point of view, Corridor 2 seems to be the most suitable of the corridors proposed. 5.10.11 The proposed BRT project should proceed through the full FS to detailed design and implementation, subject to mitigation measures and monitoring programs as outlined above. From this initial review, it would appear that there are no significant adverse impacts which are irreversible or which may lead to considerable loss/destruction of environment. All the impacts have proven mitigation measures to minimize/mitigate them. However there is a need for good quality supervision to ensure that the identified mitigation measures are implemented on the ground. Therefore, there is need to regulate implementation and if required identify experts who may support the identified agency/ies for ensuring the implementation of mitigation measures.
5.11 Initial Corridor Selection
5.11.1 Based on the above analysis it has been concluded that Corridor 2 along GS Road should be recommended for selection as the initial BRT corridor. The process by which this conclusion was reached can be summarised as follows: Corridor 3 along VIP Road was rejected on the grounds that the existing and likely future ridership along this corridor was insufficient to justify or support a BRT operation. Corridor 1E from Narengi to Fancy Bazaar currently has a cross section along much of the corridor of around 20m. If exclusive lanes are to be provided for the BRT operation without unacceptable levels of traffic congestion land must be
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 50 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
acquired for considerable distance along the corridor. This would be very time consuming and expensive and not desirable for an initial corridor. If the reserved BRT lane was not provided and the BRT operated in mixed traffic for much of the corridor this would not provide significant improvement to public transport service. For these reasons Corridor 1E was rejected. Although not as bad as Corridor 1E, Corridor 1W has several narrow sections where either the BRT would have to operate in mixed traffic or, if a reserved BRT lane is provided, the general traffic would be very congested in the remaining space. Otherwise the road would need to be widened and this would require land acquisition as shown above. To widen Corridor 1W along MG Road would require the felling of many mature trees along the river bank garden which was also seen as a highly undesirable aspect for an initial corridor. It appeared, comparing Corridors 1W with 2 that there were more severe problems on Corridor 1W than Corridor 2 and therefore Corridor 1W was rejected. Corridor 2 maintains a dual three lane cross section for almost all of its length other than on the four flyovers which are dual two lane. The proposal for Corridor 2 is that the BRT would use the flyovers in mixed traffic with stations located as close to the start and end of the flyovers as possible. This in the worst case would imply a station spacing of about 800m so a maximum walking distance of about 400m. An alterative would be to widen the flyovers at the mid point and construct a station with steps / lifts to the ground level. This is done elsewhere in the world on other BRT systems but it is not clear if it is possible in Guwahati. This can be examined in detail at the next stage of the project. The third option would be to widen the ground level roads such that a reserved bus lane could be provided in the right hand lane. This would require the BRT buses to switch from the inner lane at the approach to the flyover and then cross back again to rejoin the reserved lane. It would seem that one of the first two options would be preferable. Thus while none of the corridors could be said to be ideally suited to an initial corridor, Corridor 2 on balance appeared best.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 51 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
6. SELECTED CORRIDOR
6.1 Introduction
6.1.1 Having selected GS Road as the preferred corridor for the BRT service, this chapter provides some additional information on a number of aspects of the proposed system.
6.2 Existing Public Transport Network
6.2.1 As reported earlier, public transport occupancy surveys were carried out on all potential BRT corridors. More detailed results showing the ridership in the morning and evening 3-hour peak periods at the survey stations along GS Road are shown in Tables 6.1 and 6.2 respectively. It can be seen that the majority of the traffic along the corridor is carried by minibus No M21 which travels the length of the corridor. Minibus No M1 joins the corridor at Secretariat and travels on to Pan Bazaar and then on to Jalukbari. Minibus No M27 is a circular route which follows the Ring Road, then GS Road, AT Road and back to the Ring Road terminating at the long distance bus station. 6.2.2 The ASTC buses also serve the corridor as do some buses operated on behalf of ASTC as well as other buses. Since these buses do not carry route numbers but rely on conductors calling out destinations it is not easy for surveyors to accurately identify the routes. In total the buses carry a significant proportion of the passenger traffic.
Table 6.1 Ridership by Route: GS Road Survey Locations, 8 – 11 am. Route Khanapara Secretariat Christian Basti Ulubari No In /b Out/b In /b Out/b In /b Out/b In /b Out/b M1 3682 1351 1196 1888 3150 3335 M21 923 76 3075 1291 1903 2054 3764 300 5 M27 385 269 155 396 213 372 M8 219 173 M3? 15 385 M4? 1080 M12 85 35 M-PK 1753 Bus 1402 681 1713 1485 2700 2627 2333 3015 T4 379 183 170 369 T5 114 86 106 85 T8 25 76 T11 12 T14 735 874 T15 20 T-KP 112
Note: Minibus routes have been given prefix M while trekker routes have a prefix T.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 52 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
Table 6.2 Ridership by Route: GS Road Survey Locations, 5 – 8 pm. Route Khanapara Secretariat Christian Basti Ulubari No In /b Out/b In /b Out/b In /b Out/b In /b Out/b M1 1866 835 1054 1728 2421 1896 M21 1449 940 3018 2125 2513 3350 3420 2868 M27 219 170 321 261 210 130 M8 135 M3? 15 355 M4? 45 M12 M-PK 1865 Bus 779 552 1745 1258 1324 2300 2885 2030 T4 244 207 325 461 T5 131 105 114 35 T8 94 109 T11 T14 370 717 T15 12 T-KP 272
6.2.3 The key minibus and bus routes actually observed in operation are shown in Figure 6.1. As can be seen from the above tables, the trekker routes tend not to travel long distances along the corridor.
Figure 6.1 Key Routes serving GS Road 6.2.4 The consultants progressing this project will have to consider carefully how best to restructure the network in the initial stage when only GS Road BRT is in operation.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 53 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
Clearly minibus route M21 duplicates the proposed BRT and would be absorbed by it as would the ASTC route following the same path. The key issue relates to route M1 which joins the corridor at Secretariat and then continues on past Paltan Bazaar to Jalukbari. One possibility would be to split the route into two – one route using BRT type buses which would use the busway and terminate around Baralumukh and the other following the current route which would use standard buses, not use the busway and continue to Jalukbari. 6.2.5 Good feeder access from the areas around the southern end of the BRT will be essential and the trekker routes can be restructured to serve this purpose. 6.2.6 This route reorganisation will be the responsibility of the soon-to-be-formed UMTA but it will be essential that the staff at the SPV take the lead to ensure maximum ridership on the BRT. The SPV will also be required to enter into discussions with the operators of the minibus and trekker services to determine how best to introduce the BRT while preserving their livelihoods.
6.3 BRT Demand Estimates
6.3.1 Approximate demand estimates were provided earlier in this report based on the total public transport movement at various points along the corridor. Examining the existing ridership pattern in more detail provides a basis for these figures. This is shown in Table 6.3 based on the passenger volumes observed at Ulubari inbound in the morning peak period from 8 to 11 am. These figures assume BRT fares will be the same or very similar to existing bus and minibus fares. If the BRT fares are much higher than the current fares it will not be possible to replace the competing routes with the BRT and the ridership diversion to BRT will be much lower.
Table 6.3 Ridership Projections % Pax at Pax on Existing Route No / Passenger Diversion Ulubari BRT to BRT M1 3,150 30% 945 M21 3,764 100% 3,764 M27 213 20% 43 Bus 2,233 30% 670 Sub Total 5,422 Peak period ridership assuming 20% turnover 6,506 Ridership from other minibus routes, trekkers, auto-rickshaws, rickshaws etc 500 Ridership from motor cycles / generated trips 500 Total at Ulubari – 3 hours 7,506 Total at Ulubari – peak one hour 2,500 Daily two way ridership (12.5% peak factor) 40,000
6.3.2 In section 5.8 it was estimated that the peak vehicle requirement (PVR) to supply a 2 minute headway on the GS Road corridor was 31 buses on the road which corresponds to a fleet of 35 buses at 90% availability. On this basis the average number of passengers per bus PVR per day would be 1290. Assuming an average trip distance of 5km and a fare level about 10% above the current minibus fare, the fare would be Rs4.5 and therefore the average daily revenue per bus per day would be Rs 5,805.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 54 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
6.3.3 Detailed estimates of current operating costs of buses have not been made as part of this present study. Based on the figure of Rs5,791 per bus per day in 2014 implied from Table 8-3 of the DPR it would suggest that the bus operation would be more or less break even. If however more expensive air conditioned buses were to be used then the cost would be higher. Whether or not it is better to use a/c buses and charge a higher fare but risk not being able to cancel the competing minibus routes or to use better quality non a/c buses and cancel competing routes is a key matter to be resolved through market research. This should be done as part of the full feasibility study proposed to be conducted prior to detailed design.
6.4 BRT Design Principles
6.4.1 In many cities BRT has been used as a catalyst for change. The quality of the BRT service in these cities was deliberately made far superior to anything then available from local bus services. The situation in Guwahati today is somewhat similar to that. The quality of the local minibus and bus services is very poor with badly maintained vehicles, heavily damaged bodywork and some reckless driver behaviour. As can be seen from the survey results, few routes operate where they are supposed to do and some services appear to operate along unauthorised routes. There would therefore seem to be a strong case to try to create a completely separate system for the BRT – one which could impose much higher standards than has been possible to date and a service which would be acceptable even to those who owned a private motorcycle or car. 6.4.2 If the BRT can operate smoothly in its own exclusive lanes for all or most of its journey then the operating speeds should be much higher than the current minibus speeds in the congested downtown area and therefore the productivity of the vehicles should be much higher. This should enable the service to be operated more cost effectively. 6.4.3 It is therefore concluded that the BRT should not be open to any vehicles other than the specially designed BRT buses. These buses in the initial years may have to operate for some of their time off the reserved busway but this should be kept to a minimum to preserve the image of the BRT service. For this reason the largely open system proposed in the DPR does not seem optimal. However in the initial years it seem inevitable that the BRT will have to operate in mixed traffic in the downtown area until large scale land acquisition is carried out. As noted earlier, the renovation of the entire downtown area is currently being considered and the BRT should be designed into the fabric of the revitalised downtown area. This is likely to take many years to accomplish. In the short term BRT services could operate around Paltan Bazaar, to Fancy Bazaar and possibly as far as Kamakya Temple area to provide some downtown distribution for BRT passengers and avoid the need for short distance interchange. 6.4.4 It is also suggested that the BRT stations be located as islands between the two BRT busways rather than laterally on the right hand side of the buses. In the outer areas of GS Road and also AT Road there are median reserves which offer space for stations. At intersection stations there is no savings in roadwidth requirements but in the outer areas at mid block stations the island station is far superior requiring less area, less pedestrian crossings, one set of ticketing equipment, etc. While this requires buses to have doors on the right hand side, this has been done elsewhere in India and is not a problem.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 55 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
6.5 BRT Alignment and Lane Arrangement
6.5.1 It is proposed that the BRT operate from a new multi modal terminal at Khanapara to Paltan Bazaar or Fancy Bazaar in the downtown area. The exact alignment in the downtown will have to be studied carefully in conjunction with the city planners who are considering the relocation of the wholesale market, the jail and the beautification of the riverfront area. The further into the downtown area the BRT can penetrate the better but this should not be allowed to result in erratic travel times while off the busway. Whatever bus priority measures can be put in place to ensure minimal delays should be done. 6.5.2 As noted above it is proposed that the BRT operate in the centre lanes of GS Road and that the stations be located as island platforms between the two BRT lanes. Stations should be about 650m apart to limit the walking distance to the stations. 6.5.3 It is proposed that the BRT should use the four flyovers along GS Road in mixed traffic. This is not ideal for a number of reasons. Firstly if traffic congestion builds up on the flyovers the BRT buses will be delayed. This could be addressed by limiting the general traffic flow onto the flyovers and forcing traffic to queue where the BRT has an exclusive lane. Secondly, unless BRT stations can be constructed on the flyovers with connections to the street below (which has been done elsewhere), the station spacing at the flyovers will be quite long. A review of potential station spacing options at the flyovers is given in Table 6.4..
Table 6.4 Station Spacing Options at Flyovers Criterion Ulubari Bhangaghar Ganeshguri 6 th mile Width of flyover 15.12m 14 .30m with 16.21m with 16.18m w/ with median median (0.6m) median median (0.6m) (0.6m) (0.6m) Start and end chainage 2+955 to 4+515 to 6+845 to 9+900 to of flyover from Paltan 3+475 5+065 7+475 10+585 Bazaar Length of flyover 520m 550m 630m 685m Proposed DPR bus No 240m before 270m before 235m stop distances on demarcated flyover flyover before either side of the bus stop 250m after 285m after flyover flyover before flyover flyover 315m after flyover flyover 625m after flyover Distance between bus 1245m 1040m 1185m 1235m stops as proposed in the DPR Average width 7.0m 8.0m 6.0m 6.99m available beside the flyover - left Average width 5.5m 6.5m 6.0m 7.0m available beside the flyover – right Proposal The possibility of providing additional vehicular lane and bus stop on the top of the flyover would mean extending the flyover slab by 5.5m. None of the flyovers have ground space to provide foundation. The support structure would have to be a portal of sort. Keeping mind the distance available the slab extension would reach the adjacent
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 56 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
Criterion Ulubari Bhangaghar Ganeshguri 6 th mile building.
There can be two ways to provide access to buses at the flyovers: a. The buses use the mixed traffic at grade beside the flyover. The outcome would be that the BRT will run at lower speed in these sections. b. The bus stops are planned as soon as possible before and after the flyovers and buses use the flyovers. Proposal – a 130m 138m 158m 172m Average walking distance to the nearest bus stop Proposal – b 310m 325 m 365m 392m Average walking distance to the nearest bus stop
6.5.4 Locating the BRT stations close to the start and end of the flyovers is done elsewhere. The photograph below shows the same situation at a flyover in Guangzhou. The BRT station is located about 60m from the start / end of the flyover.
Figure 6.2 BRT in Mixed Traffic on Flyover
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 57 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
6.5.5 If BRT stations are very close to flyovers with high traffic flow, it may be necessary to limit the pedestrian access to the stations to either foot overbridges or pedestrian underpasses. This will depend on the traffic volumes and speeds.
6.6 Station Locations
6.6.1 On the assumption that the stations will be located as close as possible to either end of the flyovers, the suggested station locations are as given in Table 6.5. Stop locations within the downtown area will need to be decided as part of the Feasibility Study.
Table 6.5 Proposed Station Locations No Location Distance (km) (approx) 1 Paltan Bazaar 0 2 Before Ulubari Flyover 450 3 After Ulubari Flyover / Lachit Nagar Road 580 4 Bora Service Station 520 5 Before Bhangaghar Flyover 400 6 After Bhangaghar Flyover / Tarun Nagar Road 780 7 Christian Basti 520 8 Orion Towers 650 9 Before Ganeshguri Flyover 35 0 10 After Ganeshguri Flyover 800 11 Secretariat 650 12 After Secretariat Road Junction 520 13 Rukminigaon 650 14 Before 6 Mile Flyover 520 15 After 6 Mile flyover / Dairy Gate 780 16 Jana Path / Farm Gate 520 17 Veterinary Science College 650 18 Khanapara Terminal 400 Total 9740
6.7 Parking
6.7.1 Parking is permitted on the kerbside lane for much of GS Road. If the BRT is to be introduced then most if not all of this parking will have to be banned. An important part of the Feasibility Study must be to examine where and how replacement parking can be provided, possibly making use of some private sector initiatives.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 58 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
7. MONITORING AND EVALUATION INDICATORS
7.1 Introduction
7.1.1 If the BRT project goes ahead it will not only greatly improve the public transport service along GS Road but with the associated reconstruction of the entire road the general traffic conditions should also be improved. Traffic flow should be made much smoother and more orderly and the pedestrian facilities – both for walking along GS Road and for crossing GS Road should be greatly improved. 7.1.2 While it will be necessary to remove most of the current on-street parking in order to achieve the necessary road capacity, one aspect of the BRT project must be to establish a mechanism for the provision of off-street parking facilities. This could be publicly financed or it could be privately financed. It may also require some changes in the road traffic ordinance to prohibit parking other than in designated spaces along GS Road and when this is done it will require the introduction of fixed penalty tickets for illegal parking together with some system to ensure the penalties can be enforced.
7.2 Proposed Indicators with 2011 Measures
7.2.1 The indicators which are proposed for this project and which relate to the performance of the public transport system and to its share of ridership are listed in Table 7.1. Other locations along the corridor in addition to Christian Basti could be added if desired. It should be noted that these data refer to different survey days. As traffic conditions vary considerably from day to day it is recommended that the detailed design consultants undertake new surveys to update the information below.
Table 7.1 Proposed Indicators and Values in mid-2011 Indicator Inbound Outbound AM PM Daily AM PM Daily peak peak peak peak hour hour hour hour At Christian Basti Total PCU 1536 1816 n/a 2270 3039 n/a Total person trips 5289 5844 n/a 4668 6179 n/a Total PT person trips 2374 2692 n/a 3313 2159 n/a PT % mode share 45% 46% n/a 71% 35% n/a Bus vehicle trips 74 63 n/a 113 77 n/a Average pax / bus 32 43 n/a 29 28 n/a For Whole Corridor (9.71 km) Private car journey time (mins) 22 47 39 23 Private car speed (kph) 27 12 15 25 Bus journey time (mins) 51 112 31 75 Bus speed (kph) 11 5.2 18.8 7.8 Note: Bus includes ASTC buses, minibuses and trekkers, i.e., all forms of public transport on the corridor.
7.2.2 A second set of indicators relates to infrastructure improvements and these are listed in Table 7.2. They focus on two aspects – the first is the availability of pedestrian sidewalks in good condition and the second is the availability of car parking spaces along GS Road. At present the kerb lane is largely taken up by car parking and if the BRT is to be introduced this will have to be removed. The extent to which it can be
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 59 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
replaced in reasonable proximity to the corridor will be an important factor in gaining support from the more wealthy members of the community for the BRT. 7.2.3 As of writing no 2011 values are available and the detailed design consultants will be expected to establish baseline data at the start of their project.
Table 7.2 Indicators for Infrastructure Improvements Sidewalk availability North side South side (m) (m) None Available Poor / dangerous Fair / reasonable Very good / excellent TOTAL
Parking spaces spaces On -street spaces Along corridor Side streets (1) Off-street spaces (1) TOTAL Note (1) legal spaces within 300m of corridor
7.2.4 The final set of indicators relates to pedestrian and general road safety. The indicators listed in Table 7.3 comprise measures of available safe road crossings along the corridor and secondly the reporting of accident statistics for pedestrian and bus related accidents. 7.2.5 At present no accident data for 2011 is available and so figures will need to be collected by the detailed design consultants in due course.
Table 7.3 Pedestrian Safety and Accident Indicators Indicator 2011 statistics Safe Pedestrian Crossings Fully Signalised and Protected 0 FOB with escalator / lift 0 Maximum distance between safe crossings n/a
Accident Statistics No of fatal pedestrian accidents No of serious injury pedestrian accidents No of accidents involving buses Bus accident rate (nos / million bus km)
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 60 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
8. RISK ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT PLAN
8.1 Risk Assessment
8.1.1 The proposal to introduce a BRT system to Guwahati is a bold initiative given the very low state of public transport and traffic regulation in the city. There are many risks associated with this project and the more critical ones are listed in Table 8.1. It is believed that with close supervision of the project by ADB and with high calibre consultants undertaking the preparation of the SPV the risks can be mitigated.
Table 8.1 Risk Management Assessment Assessment without with Risks Mitigation Management Plan or Measures Mitigation Plan will fail to receive High ADB to offer visits to successful BRT Medium high level political operations in India and other countries to support and will not be garner support. Should be started very proceeded with. soon. Implementation will fall High ADB to specify professional standards at Medium short of expectations SPV to be created and to make available due to lack of adequate funding for competitive salaries adequate professional inputs Required cooperation High ADB to ensure SPV staff undertake Medium from many agencies training of local government staff. will not be forthcoming. Long delays may High ADB to place time limits on disbursement Medium occur while land is of loan. acquired for terminals, depot and selective road widening Costs may increase High ADB to place time limits on disbursement Medium due to higher land of loan. prices or general inflation Restructuring the High ADB to ensure SPV staff assume Medium minibus and trekker responsibility for dealing with local routes may be difficult. transport operators BRT ridership is much Medium ADB to monitor closely the work of the Low lower than predicted design consultants to ensure forecasts are reasonable Integrated fare High ADB to ensure SPV staff pay close Medium structure not achieved attention to this issue Resistance from car High ADB to ensure design consultants pay Medium owners and shop special attention to the reprovisioning of owners if parking is car parking spaces removed. Overall High Medium
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 61 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
9. THE NEXT STEPS
9.1 Tranche 1 Work
9.1.1 If the conclusions presented herein are accepted, the next step should be to undertake a full review of the BRT proposals in the DPR. As explained earlier, the approach adopted in the DPR to fit the BRT into a narrow roadspace apparently to avoid having to acquire land has resulted in a BRT design which leaves much room for improvement. It is suggested as part of the initial work in the next stage of this project, that a BRT system based on centrally located stations served by buses with doors on the right hand side should be examined. This arrangement requires a cross section of about 28m at station sections and 26m on running sections. Since there are only about 17 stations on Corridor 2 it should be possible to identify some suitable locations where sufficient width exists. For the other locations it should be possible to find places where land could be acquired for road widening with minimal disruption and cost. 9.1.2 Even for Corridor 2 which has relatively few bus or minibus routes in operation, to have all of them on the BRT corridor would almost certainly overload a single lane operation. For Corridor 1W which should be the next corridor to be considered for introduction of a BRT, the number of routes and buses is too great for a single lane operation and therefore some routes would have to remain on the general traffic lanes. This suggests that provision must be made on the kerbside lane for bus bays or bus stops. 9.1.3 Since it seems likely that the whole of the downtown area of Guwahati will be redeveloped in the coming years, the provision for the BRT should be considered as an integral part of this redevelopment. For this reason the proposals in the DPR for land acquisition in the downtown area to accommodate the BRT were not supported. It is suggested that for the present the BRT operate off the busway in the downtown area with as much protection as possible without taking property. This could either be a short turnaround using the gyratory around the Paltan Bazaar stadium or the shorter loop to the east of Paltan Bazaar. 9.1.4 A full understanding of the bus, minibus and trekker routes which are in actual operation must be obtained as must the passenger movements on the routes affected if a BRT were to be built, i.e., the ASTC route between Khanapara and Church Field, minibus routes 1, 21 and 27 and some trekker routes. The extent to which passengers use routes 1 and 27 to travel through the downtown area should be ascertained in determining the BRT service pattern. If the BRT route is to terminate at Paltan Bazaar then suitable interchange arrangements must be made. 9.1.5 The review of the DPR must prepare accurate base maps showing clearly the current roadwidths, sidewalk widths and location of building lines. These must also show entrances and all side streets accurately as well as large trees and other possible obstructions. These maps will be necessary to assist in planning station locations and to determine land acquisition if any. 9.1.6 Upon the completion of this review, the proposed BRT design should be presented to the authorities for a decision whether or not to proceed. If the decision is favourable the project should move forward to detailed design. 9.1.7 As noted earlier, it has been proposed that a SPV be set up both to bring the BRT into operation and to be responsible for its ongoing operation once completed. In the next stage of this process, a consultancy should be set up to prepare all the necessary documentation for the creation of the SPV and to ensure the agency comes into being in good time. The consultancy would also be responsible for
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 62 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
preparing a staffing list for the agency, job descriptions for all staff and to help with the recruitment of the senior staff.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 63 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
ANNEX A
EXISTING INSTITUTIONAL AND REGULATORY STRUCTURE
1. Transport Department
Originally, Transport Department was under the care and control of Home Department, Govt. of Assam till the last part of 1950. The affairs of Transport Department were looked after by an officer of the rank of Inspector General of Police during the relevant period of time. With the passage of time and under the changed circumstances with a view to cope with the necessities, a separate department under the name and style " Transport Department, Govt. of Assam" was introduced at the beginning of the year 1951. Transport Department was headed by a Secretary of the Govt. of Assam at the relevant period of time. Thereafter, with the rolling of years, the position of Administrative Head has been occupied by Commissioner & Secretary and now at present by a Principal Secretary. The Head of the department under the Govt. of Assam, Transport Department is the "Commissioner of Transport", Assam. The Transport Department, in the government of Assam has two major subordinate offices namely, the Commissionerate of Transport and Directorate of Inland Water Transport and another enterprise, the Assam State Transport Corporation. The functions and duties of the Transport Department are as given below:
To frame Transport policies for the State of Assam To implement the Transport policies through the Commissionerate of Transport, State Transport Authority, DTO & Secretary, RTA, in all districts of the State and through Directorate of Inland Water Transport and Assam State Transport Corporation as the case may be, To run the administration of the Transport Department a. Commissionerate of Transport
The Commissioner of Transport, Assam is vested with the following functions and activities:
Enforcement and implementation of Motor Vehicle Act., 1988; Assam Motor Vehicle Rules, 2003; The Assam Motor Vehicle Taxation Act., 1936; Assam Motor Vehicle Taxation Rules, 1940; The Assam Passengers and Goods Taxation Act.; Bengal Public Demand Recovery Act. Registration of vehicles Issuance and renewal of driving licence Issuance and renewal of conductors' licence Assessment and collection of Motor Vehicles Tax and Fees etc. Issuance of International Driving Permit Grant/Issuance of fitness certificate to the transport vehicles Issue road permits to stage carriage, contract carriage, goods vehicles and countersign the same Authorisation and issuance of permit for national and all India vehicles Detection of offender vehicles violating the relevant rules & regulations and take action against them through the Enforcement Wing of Transport Department Observance of programmes/workshop/seminar on Road safety at regular intervals Running of Driver and Conductor's Training Institutes Taking action to minimize the vehicular air pollution
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 64 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report b. State Transport Authority & Regional Transport Authority
The State Transport Authority of Assam is constituted by the Govt. of Assam in Transport Department under Section 68 of The Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. The Commissioner of Transport, Assam also functions as the Secretary, State Transport Authority of Assam. The vital functions of the State Transport Authority are to issue and renew the various road permits for transport/commercial vehicles and also to countersign the same, fare fixation of auto/taxi and buses.
Likewise, the District Transport Officers in district level function as the Secretary & Regional Transport Authority. As the Secretary of Regional Transport Authority, he is to issue permits for transport/commercial vehicles and renew the same.
Minister of Transport
Principal Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, Transport Department
Joint Secretary to the Govt. Of Assam, Transport Department
Commissioner of Transport & Secretary State Transport Authority
Addln. Director of IWT DTO & Secretary Assam State Commissioner of RTA Transport Transport Corporation
2. Guwahati Development Department The mandate of the Guwahati Development Department is to oversee the development of Guwahati City through the development works carried out by Guwahati Municipal Corporation and Guwahatj Metropolitan Development Authority and in some cases by the other Departments of Government of Assam. The function of the Department is the Administrative control of the Guwahati Municipal Corporation and Guwahati Metropolitan Development Authority and to monitor the activities of these two organizations and also to sanction and release fund for the various developmental schemes to be undertaken by these two organizations. Further, the Department is also to construct the Permanent Capital Complex and execute the various developmental schemes under the Twelfth Finance Commission and through the funds sanctioned by the GOI under NLCPR, One Time Additional Central Assistance and JNNURM.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 65 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report a. Guwahati Metropolitan Development Authority Preamble of the ACT: The preamble of the GMDA Act reads as follows:
"Whereas it is expedient to provide for the establishment of an Authority for the enforcement and execution of the Master Plan and for the formulation and execution of schemes for the planned development of Guwahati Metropolitan Area, for the co-ordination and supervision of the execution of such plans and schemes with the object of securing proper living and sanitary conditions, to conserve and promote the public health, safety and general welfare of the people living therein and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto". Functions: GMDA's functions include the following: Planning: Preparation of Mater Plan and Zoning Regulation. Development: Preparation and execution of development schemes. To carry out or cause to be carried out such works as are contemplated in the Master Plan. Regulation and Control: To regulate and control the development though statutory plans and other measures. Co-ordination: To co-ordinate development activities of other public agencies operating within Guwahati Metropolitan Area.
b. Guwahati Municipal Corporation
The Guwahati Municipal Corporation is the creation of the Guwahati Municipal Corporation Act.1971. The Corporation was duly constituted in 1974 in the first meeting of the elected councilors as per provision of Sec.45 of this Act.
The Corporation is headed by a council of 60 elected ward commissioners. The council is headed by a Mayor and a Deputy Mayor. There are five standing committees of the council to supervise various works. The Commissioner is the executive head of the corporation. He is assisted by Addl.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 66 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
Commissioner and Jt. Commissioner. The water works division is headed by a Chief Engineer. The Public works department is headed by a Chief Engineer. The garage branch is headed by a Superintendenting Engineer. The accounts branch is headed by a Financial Advisor and Chief Accounts and Audit Officer. Each revenue zone is headed by a Deputy Commissioner.
The Corporation has the following major branches.
1. Conservancy 2. Water Works Tax Division 3. Public Works 4. Building Permission 5. Street light and Electrical Section 6. Municipal Markets 7. Sanitation & Health 8. Veterinary 9. Enforcement 10. Property Tax 11. Mutation Branch 12. Trade Licence 13. Advertisement 14. Slow Moving Vehicle Branch 15. Dead body and night soil removal Branch 16. Poverty alleviation 17. Birth and death registration 18. Garage Branch 19. Accounts Branch
3. Registration and operation of public transport vehicles The following section is the summary of the procedure and permit related issues for operating public and goods vehicles in Assam.
Registration Basic As per the Section 39 of Motor Vehicle Act 1988 no person shall drive any motor vehicle and no owner of motor vehicle shall permit the vehicle to be drive in any public place or any other place unless the motor vehicle is registered in accordance with the Chapter-IV of The Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. After purchasing the vehicle from the dealer the owner shall have to register the vehicle in the District Transport Office, in whose jurisdiction, the applicant has the residence or a place of business.
Necessity of Permit As per the Section 66(1) of M.V.Act.1988 no owner of a motor vehicle shall use or permit the use of the vehicle as Transport Vehicle in any public place unless he obtains a permit from Regional or State Transport Authority.
Granting of Permit For obtaining a road permit the owner of a vehicle may apply to the Regional Transport Authority or the State Transport Authority in the prescribed application form. The granting of the permit will be decided by the concerning RTA or STA board, keeping in view the public interest of the area.
Stage Carriage Permit Stage Carriage Permits are generally issued to the buses/mini buses/city buses for carrying passengers on hire in a particular area. The route consists of stages where passengers can be picked up and dropped. Regional Transport Authorities are empowered to issue such permits to the
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 67 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report vehicles for operation in his jurisdiction and outside of the jurisdiction of the concerned RTA. But such permits are subjected to countersignature by the RTA of the regions concerned.
Goods Carriage Permit Such permit are issued to an applicant to use his motor vehicle for the carriage of goods for hire or reward or for the carriage of goods for or in connection with a trade or business carried by the applicant. In general, there is no restriction for grant of permits to goods vehicles.
Contact Carriage Permit This type of road permits is generally issued to the Bus/Mini Bus/ Tata Sumo/ Tourist Motor Cab/ Auto Rickshaw and Taxies to carry passengers under a contract for a fixed destination within or outside of the State. Other than these there are National Road Permits, Tourist Permit, Temporary Permit and Special Permits.
Proposed Changes to Structure The current institutional structure for the provision of public transport in Guwahati is clearly not working well. There needs to be one agency within the city structure which has full responsibility for ensuring that adequate public transport services are available in Guwahati. In this regard it is hoped that the proposed Guwahati Urban Mass Transit Authority (UMTA) will fulfil this role. The UMTA staff should carry out an initial assessment of the actual routes being operated by minibuses and trekkers and compare these with the authorised routes. Any authorised routes which are not being operated and which are not considered needed should have the authorisations revoked. Any operator holding the licence for a route which is not being operated but which UMTA considers necessary should be required to start operations within a given time period or lose the licence. The decision is expected soon to proceed with BRT as the backbone of the future public transport system in Guwahati and to construct an initial line using ADB financial support. To construct the initial BRT line and to ensure that the subsequent operation is to the highest possible standard will require a set of skills which does not appear to exist at present in Guwahati. For this reason it is proposed that a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) be created. This SPV would be a company wholly owned by the State of Assam and which would be given the responsibility of bringing the BRT system into operation. The terms and conditions to be offered to the staff of this company would be such that it could attract top quality personnel.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 68 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
ANNEX B TREKKER, MINIBUS AND BUS ROUTES
Trekker Route Nos.
1 Nepali Mandir to Balaji Mandir 2 Lalganesh to Natboma (housing complex) 3 Public School (Batahguli) to A.G. Residential Complex 4 Rajgarh (closed rly gate) to Adabari 5 Sunchali to Chandrapur 6 Jaipur (Lalsing Academy) to Lenga 7 Pandu to Balaji Mandir 8 Bharalumukh to Rani 9 Bharalumukh to Balaji mandir 10 Khanapara to Kalitakuchi 11 Khanapara to Airport 12 Khanapara to Amsing Jorabat 13 Khanapara to Panikhaiti 14 Basisthamandir to Adabari 15 Basistha Chariali to Garpandu Bus stand 16 Pathar quarry to Adabari 17 Pathar quarry to Patarkuchi 18 GMCH to Bhubaneswari Mandir 19 GMCH to Assam Engineering College
Minibus Route Nos.
1 Basistha Mandir to ISBT 2 Garpandu Bus stand to Kahalipara 3 Garpandu Bus stand to Natboma 4 Garpandu Bus stand to Amsing Jorabat route 5 GMCH to Changsari 6 Forest gate to Garpandu Bus stand 6A Chandrapur to forest gate 7 Garpandu Bus stsand to Panajabari 8 Ayurvedic College to Panjabari 9 Rani to GMC (Bhangaghar) 10 Gorchuk to Church Field 11 Guwhati medical College to Tetilia 12 VIP to GMC Bhangaghar 13 Kachari to ISBT 14 Garpandu bus stand to Power house (Kahalipara) 15 Church field to Kamakhya 16 Garpandu to garpandu -circular route 17 Pandu to pathar quarry 18 Basistha Chariali to Changsari 19A Garpandu to Hengabari
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 69 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
19B Patharquarry to Garpandu 20 Church field to Chayagaon route 21 Church field to 9th mile 22 Guwhati Medical college to Soalkuchi 23 Garpandu to Bonirhat 24 Church field to Chayagaon ext Barihat 25 Joypur to Kalitakuchi 26 Adabari to Burnihat 27 Circular ISBT-ISBT 28 Khanapara to Khanapara 29 Lokhra chariali to Garpandu 30 Jalukbari to ISBT 31 Garpandu to Baihata chariali 32 ISBT to Garpandu
Bus Route Nos.
1 Pandu - Khanapara via Paltan Bazar 2 Pandu - Forestgate via Chandmari 3 Basistha Mandir - Jalukbari via Paltan bazar 4 Khanapara - Forestgate via Zoo road 5 Forest gate - Chandrapur via Narengi 6 Khanapara - Jalukbari via Paltanbazar 7 Platanbazar - Kamakhya via Panbazar 8 Churchfield - Engineering College via Jalukbari 9 Churchfiled - Sualkuchi via Jalukbari 10 Highcourt - Guwahati University via Jalukbari 11 Foresgate - Jalukbari via Chandmari 12 Khanapara - Jalukbari via ISBT 13 Adabari - Burnihaat via Paltanbazar 14 Paltanbazar - ISBT via Lokhra 15 CRPF - Jalukbari via Paltanbazar 16 Pa njabari - Jalukbari via Paltanbazar 17 Basistha Mandir - Jalukbari via Paltanbazar 18 Khanapara - Jalukbari via Zoo Road 19 Jayanagar - Amingaon via Paltanbazar 20 ISBT jalukbari via Hatigaon 21 ISBT - Basistha Chariali - Dispur - Zoo road - Chandmari -RBI - ISBT 22 Ulubari - Airport via Paltan Bazar 23 Basistha Mandir - Adabari via Paltanbazar 24 Narengi - Adabari via Paltan bazar 25 Panjabari - Adabari via Paltan bazar 26 Paltan bazar - Morigaon via Khanapara 27 Paltan bazar - Jagiroad via Khanapara 28 Church field - Mukalmua via Jalukbari 29 Churchfield - Mirza via Palashbari 30 Churchfield - North Guwahati via Jalukbari 31 Dispur - Goreswar via Paltan Bazar 32 Dispur - Guwabari via Paltan Bazar 33 Dispur - Darranga via Paltan Bazar
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 70 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
34 Khanapara - Nalbari via Paltan Bazar 35 Khanapara - Allia via Paltan Bazar 36 Dispur - Pandu via Paltan Bazar 37 Dispur - khatikuchi via Paltan Bazar 38 Dispur - Dihina via Paltan Bazar 39 Church Filed - Ramdiya via Jalukbari 40 Church Field - Chaigaon via Jalukbari 41 Dispur - Chaigaon via Paltan Bazar 42 Khanapara - Baihata Charialai via Paltan Bazar 43 Khanapara - Rangia via Paltan Bazar 44 Khanapara - Hajo via Paltan Bazar 45 Basistha Mandir to ISBT via Basistha Chariali - Ganeshguri - Zoo Road - Chandmari 46 Jalukbari - Forestgate via Chandmari 47 Chandmari - Forestgate via Panikhaiti 48 Jalukbari - ISBT via Paltan Bazar - Khanapara 49 Ayurvedic College - Panjabari via - Six mile - Chandmari - Guwhatai Club 50 Rani - GMCH via Church Filed 51 Airport - Ulubari via Paltan Bazar 52 Jalukbari to ISBT via Nepali Mandir - Lalganesh 53 Kahilipara - Jalukbari via Paltan bazar 54 Church Filed - Machkhowa 55 Jalukbari - Pathar Kuwari via Chandmari 56 Basistha Chariali - Baihata Chariali via Paltan bazar 57 Jalukbari - Pathar kuwari via Paltan bazar 58 Pathar Kuwari to Jalukbari via Express highway 59 9th mile (CRPF) - Jalukbari via Paltan bazar 60 Burnihaat - Jalukbari via Paltan bazar 61 Circular Road ( ISBT ti ISBT via Paltan bazar) 62 Circular Road ( Khanapara to Khanapara via Paltan bazar - Jalukbari - ISBT ) 63 ISBT to Jalukbari via Bhetapara - Hatigaon 64 Circular Road (Jalukbari to ISBT via Machkhowa - Chandmari - Super Market ) 65 ISBT to Jalukbari via Basistha Chariali - Ganeshguri -- Paltan bazar
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 71 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
ANNEX C
TRAFFIC CAPACITY ASSESSMENT
Where one lane in each direction is taken for the BRT, the remaining lanes will be required to cope with all the remaining general traffic. An assessment has been made of the locations where road capacity is likely to be critical from the point of view of general traffic and any buses not on the busway. The traffic volume counts carried out on the four corridors were analysed. Table C-1 shows the capacity constraints on each of the sections. Table C – 1. Capacity Calculations Sl Section Location Width Capacity Peak (m) (PCU) Width - BRT Width BRT - Traffic (PCU) (PCU) Traffic Corridor (m) Capacity (PCU) BRT Corridor (m) BRT BRT Traffic (PCU) (PCU) Traffic BRT Total Traffic - BRT BRT - Traffic Total Total traffic (PCU) traffic Total a b c e f g h i j k l m (h) -i (e) -j AT Morning 5071 1454 7 3617 7 1500 1 Bharalumukh 14.0 3000 Road Evening 4239 721 7 3518 7 1500 GNB Guwahati Morning 3347 392 7 2955 7 1500 2 14.0 3000 Road Club Evening 3024 275 7 2749 7 1500 GS Christian Morning 3905 533 7 3372 14 3500 3 21.0 5000 Road Basti Evening 4499 317 7 4183 14 3500 VIP Morning 1494 59 7 1435 7 1500 4 14.0 3000 Road Evening 1504 118 7 1387 7 1500
A physical description of the constraints of the roads under review are given below.
Corridor 1W (Jalukbari to Fancy Bazaar on MG Road)
o Jalukbari RUB is at the starting point of the section. It has a four section box with railway line over it. Widening or pushing another box is possible but would involve a number of agencies like the railways, etc.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 72 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
o Maligaon ROB is located over the railway line leading to Pandu yard. There are two separate 2-lane ROBs. There is very little space at the side for ground level movement.
o Pandu Intersection – Right after the Maligaon ROB is a major intersection with little scope of widening without major demolition.
o MG Road – MG Road begins right after the Bharalumukh Bridge. This traverses along the river with large number of old trees lined between the river and the road.
o The Pan Bazaar section of MG Road is a narrow cross section along the river. The right hand side of the road is the major wholesale market with truck parking and traffic movement is congested.
o Shukleswar Temple foot over bridge on MG Road.
The maximum traffic on Corridor 1W has been observed in the morning peak hour and is of the order of 4700 pcus. The sections of the Corridor-1W which would require widening to accept the BRT corridor are listed below:
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 73 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
g. Jalukbari RUB h. Maligaon Flyover i. Pandu intersection j. The stretch of AT Road from Pandu to Kamakhya k. Bharalumukh Intersection l. M.G.Road from Bharalumukh to WTP.
Corridor 1 E (Ambari to Narengi) Corridor-1E which is NC Road is the narrowest of all corridors. The existing cross section is 4-lane divided carriageway with heavily built up commercial and residential development. There are numerous bottlenecks, like Chandmari flyover, Noomati Refinery, Noonmati ROB, railway track and siding etc. The traffic volume figure is of the order of 3888 pcus during the morning peak hour.
o The whole section of GNB Road between Ambari (Dighol Pukuri to Noonmati) is a narrow stretch with 4-lane divided carriageway and heavily built-up corridor. The first photograph shows the true cross section of GNB Road.
o The second picture shows the traffic intensity along with the built-up section.
o This section is under the Chandmari flyover with all 4-lanes under one opening. Expansion on this section will be difficult.
The sections of the Corridor-1E which would require widening to adopt the BRT corridor are listed below: e. The total stretch between Ambari to Chandmari flyover f. Chandmari flyover to Noomati Refinery g. Noomati Refinery to Narengi h. Noonmati ROB
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 74 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
Corridor 2 (GS Road) Corridor 2 originally known as GS Road (Guwahati-Shillong Road) starts from Paltan Bazaar at the heart of the city. The major portion of the road is abutted by commercial land uses with intermittent semi-govt. or government use like the various offices and Secretariat. Because of the commercial land use one lane on either side of the road is presently being used for parking. A few photographs of the section are given below.
o GS Road has four major intersections namely, Ulubari, Bhangaghar, Ganeshguri and 6 Mile crossing at which the urban development department has successfully constructed flyovers to ease the traffic. Photographs of the section are given below.
UUlubari Flyover Ganeshguri Flyover
A traffic volume count was carried out and the present peak hour volume was observed in the evening at around 4855 pcus. The sections of the Corridor 2 which would require widening to adopt the BRT corridor are listed below: a. Paltan Bazaar intersection to Ulubari flyover
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 75 Contract S71818; TA – 7750 (IND) Final Report
Corridor 3 (VIP Road)
VIP Road is link road between 6 Mile flyover on GS road and Narengi on N.C.Road. The area is sparsely developed and would become a residential colony in the future. Commercial development is not envisaged for this section. The traffic on this section is also very low. The peak hour traffic is around 1200 pcus. As noted above, the public transport demand levels on this road make it unsuitable for BRT.
Summary If the roads are not widened at the locations listed above then congested conditions will arise. Given that the assessment has been done using today’s traffic levels it is certain that the problems will be far greater in future when traffic levels increase.
Guwahati Final Report 111027.doc Page 76