PART II TOLL EXPRESSWAY SYSTEM CHAPTER 6 EXPRESSWAY NETWORK DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER 6 EXPRESSWAY NETWORK DEVELOPMENT 6.1 EXPRESSWAYS IN OTHER MEROPOLITAN AREAS 6.1.1 Characteristics of Other Metropolitan Areas To obtain a dynamic picture of the transport system in a large-sized metropolitan area such as Cairo Greater Region (CGR), the following section presents a comparative analysis on different metropolises in advanced countries from the viewpoints of socioeconomic characteristics and the transport system as well, especially the motorway networks. Here, motorways are defined as limited access roads without intersections. Such metropolises are: London, New York, Paris and Tokyo. It should be mentioned that a broad analysis on such aspects shows that efficiency of transport systems depends to a great extent on the integration of land-use and transport planning, and suggests that there are ways in which the cities can draw lessons from each other in order to improve their transport systems in ways that minimize negative environmental impact and economic cost. Since the cities vary in the size and area, they are divided into four comparable zones sharing similar spatial and demographic characteristics in order to be certain of measuring the comparative parameters. The collected data are summarized in Table 6.1-1, in which it will be noted that Paris, as a denser and smaller metropolis, does not extend to Zone 4. Under this comparative analysis, zones as shown in Figure 6.1-1 are defined in the metropolises as follows: Zone 1 – The Central Area: the central business area of the city, which accommodates between 180,000 and 600,000 inhabitants. Zone 1 & 2 – The Metropolitan Area: the densely built-up areas of the city, which accommodates approximately 7 to 9 million inhabitants. Zone 1, 2 & 3 – The Outer Metropolitan Area: a commuter hinterland, which accommodates approximately 10 to 13 million inhabitants. Zone 1, 2, 3 & 4 – The Region: the entire region, with at least 17 million inhabitants. 6 - 1 Table 6.1-1 Major Characteristics of Metropolitan Areas London New York Paris Tokyo Cairo Population (‘000) Zone 1 177 543 622 266 400 Zone 1 & 2 6,852 7,497 8,791 8,164 7,069 Zone 1, 2 & 3 11,606 13,526 10,661 11,856 14,391 Zone 1, 2, 3 & 4 17,549 19,843 - 31,797 - Surface Area (Square kilometers) Zone 1 27 23 29 42 17 Zone 1 & 2 1,578 757 2,060 617 293 Zone 1, 2 & 3 10,385 5,793 12,011 1,777 1,885 Zone 1, 2, 3 & 4 27,224 33,165 - 13,143 - Population Density (Persons per square kilometers) Zone 1 6,490 23,610 21,450 6,330 23,564 Zone 1 & 2 4,340 9,900 4,270 13,230 24,098 Zone 1, 2 & 3 1,120 2,330 890 6,670 7,636 Zone 1, 2, 3 & 4 640 600 - 2,420 - Employment (‘000) Zone 1 917 1,967 1,025 2,381 17 Zone 1 & 2 3,349 4,132 4,494 7,249 293 Zone 1, 2 & 3 5,279 7,444 5,075 8,628 1,885 Zone 1, 2, 3 & 4 7,775 10,674 - 16,441 - Car Ownership (vehicle per household) Zone 1 0.54 0.22 0.49 - - Zone 2 0.83 0.63 0.91 0.47 - Zone 3 1.22 1.65 1.33 0.74 0.34 Zone 4 1.08 1.83 - 0.96 - Number of Metro and Rail Stations Zone 1 68 90 133 67 9 Zone 1 & 2 576 521 575 392 46 Zone 1, 2 & 3 845 742 732 532 91 Zone 1, 2, 3 & 4 1,018 888 - 1,306 - Length of Motorways/Expressways in kilometers Zone 1 0 8 5 43 - Zone 1 & 2 62 345 436 185 - Zone 1, 2 & 3 n/a 1,343 782 224 - Zone 1, 2, 3 & 4 6,643 2,996 - 911 - Density in Motorways/Expressways kilometers per square kilometers of land area Zone 1 0.0 0.78 0.17 1.02 - Zone 2 0.04 0.46 0.21 0.25 - Zone 3 N/a 0.20 0.03 0.03 - Zone 4 0.05 0.06 - 0.06 - 6 - 2 London New York Figure 6.1-1 Metropolitan Area Zoning System (1/3) 6 - 3 Paris Tokyo Figure 6.1-1 Metropolitan Area Zoning System (2/3) 6 - 4 10th of Ra madan Oboor I nternati onal Airport Zone 3 Zone 1 Zone 2 New Cairo Gi za 6th of October City Legend Zone Boundari es 15th of May City Arteri al Highways Ri ver 0 5 10k m Cairo Figure 6.1-1 Metropolitan Area Zoning System (3/3) 6.1.2 Motorway Network Whilst all the cities have a developed motorway/expressway network in their region, New York is the city with the largest and densest network. London has no motorways in the city center, which is under a pricing system at present. Tokyo has numerous toll motorways, most of which are elevated on multiple tiers. Paris and Tokyo are still continuing to build new motorways in their regions. New York has by far the most motorway kilometers compared with other cities. Well over half are in Zone 4 and a third in Zone 3. Tokyo also has a substantial urban motorway network. What differentiates Tokyo is its urban expressways in Zone 1 with the length of 34 kilometers for a density of about 1.0 motorway kilometer per square kilometer of land area. Many of Tokyo’s elevated urban expressways run through relatively narrow streets or on top of canals or railway commuting lines. New York has only 8 kilometers of motorways in Zone 1, Paris 5, and London none. In Zone 2, both New York and Paris have more than twice the motorway length of other cities, but in Zone 2 Paris’ motorway density is half that of New York’s and about the same as Tokyo’s. London has a low motorway density and, instead, facilitates vehicle 6 - 5 movement from Zone 2 to Zone 1 by enforcing strict parking controls, optimizing signalization on nearly 500 kilometers of roads and introduced pricing system for access to Zone 1. In New York, Zone 2 motorways are generally radial, funneling much regional traffic through New York City, across a limited number of crossings of the waterways that separate all the boroughs of the city. Of the 20 river crossings into Manhattan, 6 crossings are tolled. In Zone 3, New York and Paris have many more motorway kilometers than the other two cities, but when adjusted for area, New York has seven times the motorway density of Paris and Tokyo. Many of the 1,343 kilometers of motorways in New York’s Zone 1, 2 & 3 experience recurring congestion in the morning peak. In Zone 4, New York again has by far the most motorway kilometers, but the density of New York’s motorways is strikingly similar to that of London and Tokyo. Although London has a low density of motorways in Zones 3 and 4, it has a large number of dual carriageway roads. Another significant difference among the four regions is that, while New York and London are not building any significant additions to the motorway system, both Paris and Tokyo are engaged in long-term programs to build significant new routes, either orbital as in Paris or central loops of the urban expressways in Tokyo. 6.1.3 Urban Expressways in Asian Developing Countries The governments of many developing countries in Asia have been keen to develop urban expressway network as well as nation-wide expressway network. Such countries include China, Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia. These governments consider that well developed expressway network is indispensable for socioeconomic development of the nation. Values of GDP per capita of these countries, as indices of economic development, and total length of urban expressway networks are shown in Table 6.1-2, which actually do not show direct relationship. As an example, Figure 6.1-2 shows urban expressway network of Bangkok, Jakarta and Kuala Lumpur. Table 6.1-2 GDP per Capita of Asia of Some Developing Countries and Urban Expressway Network City, Country Bangkok Jakarta Kuala Lumpur (Thailand) (Indonesia) (Malaysia) GDP/Capita (US$) * 2,000 710 3,540 Length of Urban 108.1 75 51 Expressway Network in Operation (km)** (1998) (2000) (2000) Source: *Key Indicators 2004, Asian Development Bank, **Highways of the World, 1999 (Japanese), Express Highway Research Foundation of Japan 6 - 6 Kuala Lumpur Bangkok 5 KM 10 KM 15 KM 0 5 KM 10 KM Jakarta Figure 6.1-2 Urban Expressway Network of Bangkok, Jakarta and Kuala Lumpur 6 - 7 6.2 URBAN EXPRESSWAY PLAN An urban expressway network proposed in CREATS consists of new construction of 7 lines with a total length of 78.3 km in addition to the existing ones. The total project cost for the new construction was preliminarily estimated at approximately EL 9 billion or US$ 1.3 billion. The Cairo Urban Toll Expressway Network planned in CREATS Master Plan was subject first to comprehensive field survey and review in order to verify the engineering feasibility and to establish the basis for the preliminary cost estimates for the economic analysis and preparing the financial plan and other aspects for PPP schemes. No detailed information, such as the configurations of interchanges, the necessity for acquisition of additional land (right-of-way) and road structure to traverse the difficult section, was presented. Information on the probable physical structures of the expressways is necessary in this Study from the following main points of view: (i) To verify the engineering feasibility of the proposed urban expressway network.