|
|
Traffic & Transport Management
More News
                |
Karachi Mass Transit System: WHAT WE CAN LEARN FROM OTHERS by Arif Hasan Proposal
for a Mass Transit System Proposals for a light rail mass
transit system have been made for Karachi since 1973. The 1977 Plan
consisted of developing the circular railway (built in 1962), and pushing
it into the suburbs by branch lines. In addition, a
part-underground-part-elevated spine that bisected the circle was also
proposed thus linking up the circle with Saddar and other residential and
commercial areas of the city. The proposal had no adverse environmental
impacts but it was never implemented. A mass transit master plan was
prepared by World Bank consultants as part of the Karachi Development Plan
2000. It envisaged 6 corridors of elevated transit ways on the major
corridors of movement in Karachi. The URC raised certain objections to the
Plan and as a result citizen’s groups and NGOs formed the Citizen’s
Forum on Mass Transit (CFMT). They pointed out that many of the corridors
ran parallel to the circular railway. As a result, the plan was changed to
three corridors of which the circular railway was one. Bids on Build,
Operate and Transfer (BOT) were invited for all three corridors and an
agreement was reached for the construction of priority Corridor One with a
Canadian-Pakistani joint venture company. Financial and legal matters
related to building Corridor One are still being sorted out, although, the
agreement was reached in December 1997. A number of professionals and NGOs
have grave concerns regarding the building of Corridor One. They also have
concerns regarding the methodology used for designing the mass transit
system for Karachi. They believe that instead of identifying the present
corridors of movement and increasing their capacity through an elevated
light rail, alternative corridors should have been developed instead of
the already congested ones. The proposed Karachi Mass Transit
Program (KMTP) corridors, their origin to destination, areas served and
costs by rule of thumb, are given in the table below. The table clearly
indicates that the rehabilitation of the Circular Railway and Main Line
Corridor as a rail system should be the government’s first priority
instead of Corridor One. Table
- 12 KMTP
Corridors: Origins, Destinations and Costs
Source: Arif Hasan: KMTP
Citizen’s Concerns and Possible Alternatives (prepared for the CFMT), 1994 The CFMT has pointed out that the
commuters on Corridor Priority One do not live on the corridor but come to
it from various distant locations since the last 5 kilometers of the
corridor pass through major employment zones consisting of Saddar and the
Central Business District. In addition, the port and the old city are also
easily accessible from the downtown part of the corridor. The citizens
have pointed out that alternative access to the corridor can be created,
thus reducing congestion on it. The citizens feel that it is more
than likely that after phase 1 of Corridor One is constructed, there will
be no further progress on the other corridors for maybe over a decade due
to lack of funds. This has happened in other Asian cities and has resulted
in massive congestion of the initial corridor. In addition, the first
corridor will not serve more than 3 to 5 per cent of today’s commuting
public. Also, it will only serve a small portion of Karachi since it is 13
kms out of 750 kms of major transport routes. The CFMT’s main objection to the
building of Corridor One as an elevated transit way is related to
heritage. From Quaid-i-Azam Mazar to Merewether Tower the Corridor
consists of Karachi’s most important artery. This artery contains most
of Karachi’s historic civic buildings and architecture. The area between
Merewether Tower and Saeed Manzil, is where Karachi began as a modern
city. In addition, the road provides a grand vista to the Quaid’s Mazar
and because of its width to many impressive buildings along it. These
buildings include: Merewether Tower, Denso Hall, City Courts, KMC
Building, Khaliqdinna Hall (where Maulana Mohammad Ali Shoukat Ali were
tried during the Khalafat Movement), Mama Parsi Boys School, Old Sindh
Assembly Building (where the Pakistan Resolution was tabled and approved),
Theosophical Hall, Richmond Crawford Hospital, Dow Medical College, and
numerous other institutional and residential buildings. The loop through
Dr. Ziauddin Ahmed Road passes through the narrow road stretch before D.J.
College and Metharam Hostel, both beautiful Karachi monuments where many
of Karachi’s historic personalities have studied and lived. The building of the elevated
transitway will obstruct the views to these buildings and will destroy the
vistas available in M.A. Jinnah Road. The environmental degradation that
always accompanies the building of elevated transitways in comparatively
narrow roads, will bring about land-use changes that will destroy the
potential of developing M.A. Jinnah Road as Karachi’s main artery and
historic area. The CFMT considers the building of Corridor One as an
elevated structure through the historic district of Karachi as an act of
vandalism. The CFMT has also pointed out that
there are many misconceptions regarding the elevated transitway system.
One is that it will reduce congestion. This is not true. Wherever
transitways are built for mass transit purposes, further congestion takes
place on these arteries. In the case of Corridor One, it is estimated that
it will be used by 35 million persons trips per year. This will further
congest this already congested artery. However, if this congestion is
at-grade or underground, its visual impact is minimal. It is also said
that the transitway will solve Karachi’s traffic problems. This is also
not true either. Manila, Cairo and Mexico, all have similar transitways
and they have enormous traffic problems that are constantly increasing.
Karachi’s traffic problems will be solved through better roads, removal
of encroachments on traffic corridors and traffic management. Then there are also financial
issues. If Corridor One is built at-grade then by rule of thumb it should
cost $ 150 million as opposed to $ 665 million for the elevated
alternative. It will also not be a threat to Karachi’s historic
architecture and the environment. In addition, it will be affordable. What
is being quoted as the per trip cost for Corridor One is between Rs 12 and
19. Unless there is a major government subsidy or the system has a much
higher coverage (which is not possible due to financial constraints) the
cost will be much higher. The Kuala Lumpur cost per trip is $ 1.4 or Rs
63. From what one gathers from the press, the Karachi Light Rail
contractors have been allowed a 13 per cent increase in fares per year.
Will the common Karachite use this facility at this cost? If he does not,
then how will he get to Corridor One, since, again according to the press,
the light rail contractor has a monopoly on 1-1/2 kms on either side of
the Corridor. With these travel costs and the monopoly, there is bound to
be civic strife. The CFMT has presented an
alternative conceptual proposal for a mass transit system for Karachi. It
consists of revitalising the existing Karachi Circular Railway (KCR) and
linking it to the suburbs. Simply revitalising it will not bring about a
major improvement to the Karachi transport system. According to the Karachi
Development Plan 2000, 45 per cent of Karachi’s population works in 5
locations. These are: Karachi Port and the CBD, SITE, Landhi-Korangi
Industrial Estate, Pipri and Saddar. The KCR serves the first 4 work
areas. It does not serve Saddar but Saddar is one kilometre away from the
railway line behind Dawn’s office and two kilometres from the Cantonment
Railway Station. The KCR is also one and a half kilometres from Schon
Circle in Clifton and less than one kilometre from the Boat Basin. The
Pakistan Secretariat, High Courts, KMC Building, City Courts, Passport
Office, are all within a 5 to 12 minutes walking distance from it and it
runs along I.I. Chundrigar Road, the major artery of the CBD. It also runs
parallel to Shahrah-e-Faisal which is developing into a major business
area. In addition, it is less than one kilometre from Kharadar and the
Fish Harbour and one and a half kilometres from Lea Market. The KCR also serves important
residential areas. These include Masoom Colony, Chanesar Goth, Sindhi
Muslim Society, PECHS, Mohammad Ali Society, KDA Scheme 1, Baloch Colony,
Mehmoodabad, Shah Faisal Colony, Drigh Colony, Quaidabad, Malir Colony,
Landhi, the high density areas of Gulistan-e-Jauhar, Gulshan-e-Iqbal,
Federal ‘B’ Area, Karimabad, Nazimabad, Paposhnagar and Sher Shah. It
is one and a half kilometres from Pathan and Frontier Colonies, two
kilometres from Baldia Colony and Mohajir Camp, less than one kilometre
from Khadda and the old city and two and a half kilometres from the heart
of Orangi. In addition, major katchi abadis lie on either side of the
track. According to the Karachi
Development Plan 2000 figures, Karachi is suburbanising rapidly and the
periphery of the city is densifying. The 1998 census figures also lend
support to these trends. If these figures are accepted, and there is no
reason why they should not be, then a suburban rail system that can move
people from the periphery to the inner city is extremely important. A
revitalised and expanded circular railway can do this. To this end, an
additional 17 kms of railways at-grade should be built from the circular
railway into dense low and lower middle income suburbs (3.5 km into Orangi
to serve a population of about 1.2 million; 3.2 km into Baldia to serve a
population of about 800,000; 5 km into New Karachi to serve a population
of 2.3 million; and 5.25 km to complete the Landhi-Korangi loop). The cost
of this at today’s rates would be $ 215 million. In addition, the Steel
Mill can also be served by the main line to Pipri. On the basis of the above the CFMT
recommends that the existing circular railway and main line to Pipri be
revitalised and extended into the suburbs. In addition, access from the
railway stations to the roads should be developed so that buses can serve
the stations. Pedestrian ways from the railway track behind Dawn office to
M.A. Jinnah Road and Saddar should be built and a tramway from Cantonment
Station to Saddar (2.5 kms) along Daud Pota Road and from opposite City
Station to Chakiwara (2 kms) along Napier Road should be constructed to
serve Saddar and the inner city. It is also felt by the URC that after the
development of the circular railway and its extensions, movement of
commuters on Corridors One (Tower to Sohrab Goth) and Two (Orangi to
Cantonment Station) will be reduced to such an extent that it will be
possible to build them at-grade as tramways. This will overcome the major
heritage and environment related objections of the CFMT. The URC has also recommended that
the Malir Cantonment line should be extended by 1.5 km to join the Super
Highway and an inter city bus terminal should be located there. From the
bus terminal all of Karachi will be accessible through the circular
railway. Recent
Developments The government has finalised plans
for building the Northern Bye-Pass on a BOT basis. It is offering land
along the bye-pass for real estate development to the BOT contractors so
as to subsidise development costs. Both SHEHRI and the URC along with the
DAP at the Dawood College have expressed their concern at this proposal.
They have insisted that this allocation or sale of land should be done in
a transparent manner and according to an urban design exercise carried out
by the Karachi Master Plan Department. The government has also finalised
proposals for the revitalisation of the circular railway. After
discussions with URC, SHEHRI, DAP and the Commissioner of Karachi, it was
decided to make the construction of the extensions into the suburbs a part
of the overall plan. Again, the government has offered to give the BOT
contractors access to government land at key locations along the circular
railway. The NGOs and the academic institutions have again insisted that
this should be done in a transparent manner and according to an urban
design exercise. A considerable amount of work has also been done on the issue of bus terminals and bus depots. The TEB has identified 32 sites within Karachi for intra-city depots, workshops and terminals. It has also developed designs to build them incrementally. Those sites which did not belong to the KMC have been transferred to it for construction and operation purposes. The sites have been inspected by a team comprising of a representative each of the transporters, KMC, TEB and the URC. Work on two sites has already begun. Sites for inter-city bus terminals have also been identified. These developments have been made possible because of the interest taken in the subject by the Governor’s Task Force for the Improvement of Municipal Services for Karachi which was formed in December 1998. In addition, a traffic management pilot project has been initiated by concerned citizens and their supporters in the bureaucracy. A Karachi Public Transport and Social Education Society (KPTS) has also become functional. Its Governing Body consists of transport related government officials, representatives of transport interest groups and NGOs. The Society, with the involvement of an entrepreneur, has commenced a bus service from Malir Cantt. to Saddar. The service is know as the Metro Bus. In contrast to the anarchic transport system of Karachi, the Metro Bus leaves and arrives at its destination on time, stops at proper bus stops, has no standing passengers in it, and has a uniformed and polite driver and conductor who actually issue tickets to the passengers. The Karachi public has greatly appreciated the Metro Bus and there is pressure on the KPTS to expand the Metro Bus service to other areas. The Metro Bus fares are higher than normal bus fares in Karachi and from the success of this venture, it seems that Karachites are willing to pay for a better service and that there are considerable profits to entrepreneurs in providing a better service.
WHAT
WE CAN LEARN FROM OTHERS
By
Arif Hasan
Recently, a seminar
on rail based mass transit systems was arranged in Karachi by the
Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport Pakistan and the Mass
Transit Cell of the Karachi City Government. In a paper read at the
seminar, the Director of the Karachi Mass Transit Cell presented
construction cost details of rail based mass transit systems in other
cities of the world. These figures were very revealing and welcome. We can
now compare our costs with those of similar cities. However, there is much
more that we can learn from the experience of others and it would have
been good if this too could have been discussed.
Manila, Cairo,
Bangkok, Calcutta and Bombay are cities very similar to ours in
demographic and social terms. All of them have rail based mass transit
systems in operation. Some of them have developed these systems recently.
It is important to understand the repercussions of these systems and how
they have fared.
In the case of
Manila, Cairo and Bangkok, mass transit rail systems have not improved
traffic conditions. In all these cities traffic related problems have
increased and there are enormous traffic jams in which people can be
caught for anything between one to two hours if nor more. This is in spite
of the fact that these cities have also built numerous flyovers and/or
expressways on which millions of dollars have been spent. Traffic moves
fast on the expressways but at the exit to the expressway (except when
leaving the city) increased traffic congestion takes place. The recent
circular road loop constructed in Bangkok has however eased traffic
conditions. Planners feel that if it had been built earlier, some of the
expressways would not have been necessary. It is clear from the experience
of these cities that effective traffic management and planning to
segregate through and local traffic and not inner city expressways,
flyovers and rail mass transit systems alone will improve traffic
conditions.
In both Manila and
Bangkok, there is a continuous increase of bus traffic even on roads where
the light rail systems have been built. Taxis are a major cause of
congestion as they wait below the stations on the roads for customers. The
reason for this is simple. The cost of light rail travel far exceeds that
of bus travel. For instance, the sky train fare in Bangkok is between 10
to 40 Bhat or an average of 29 Bhat (Rs 37.5) whereas the same journey can
be made by bus in 3.5 to 5 Bhat. In Manila, the fare is less, 12 Peso (Rs
19) when I last used it in 2000. Again, the bus fare for the same journey
is less than 25 per cent of the rail fare. Again, neither the Bangkok nor
the Manila systems serve the suburbs of the city whereas the major
movement of commuters is from the suburbs to the city centre.
Both the Manila and
the Bangkok light rail were built on BOT. The fare is cheaper in Manila
because the light rail construction cost much less. In Manila it is a
simple elevated transit way six metre high in the centre of the road. As
such, it is environmentally unfriendly and has degraded the corridors it
passes through. In Bangkok the light rail is a sky train transit way at a
height, in places, of over 15 metres. Its construction cost is about ten
times more expensive than that of the Manila light rail and this explains
its high fare structure as well. However, due a booming tourist industry,
Bangkok was able to afford its sky train and make it environmentally more
friendly by linking it up through well conceived urban design projects
with commercial and shopping plazas. This will not be possible in Karachi
given the locations through which the light rail mass transit will pass.
The lessons for Karachi from the experiences mentioned above are obvious.
Bombay and Calcutta
have suburban railway systems whose travel costs compare favourably with
those of buses and as such there is a disincentive for using other than
the railway system. The reason for low fares is that these systems were
built by the state and with state subsidies. Also, these systems are rail
only corridors and as such do not congest the already congested roads as
in Manila and Bangkok. They carry people from the suburbs to their places
of work and back in better environmental conditions than what polluted
roads can offer. Inner city mass transit systems, by linking up with them,
become far less extensive, intensive and expensive. The Karachi Circular
Railway (KCR), revived and extended into the suburbs, with serve the same
purpose even better since its outreach will be far more extensive than
that of the Calcutta and Bombay suburban rail systems. However, if it is
built on BOT, without a major government subsidy, its travel cost will be
much higher than that of bus transport, defeating the purpose for which it
is being constructed.
All cities who have
built rail based systems have not built elevated transit ways through
their historic areas and through the narrow corridors of the inner city.
This has been a conscious decision on their part. Thus, in Istanbul,
Ankara, Cairo and now Delhi, the light rail systems within the inner city
and historic areas are all underground. In the case of Bangkok and Manila,
building an underground is extremely expensive since both the cities are
built on marshes. As such, it was decided not to build light rail systems
in the historic Pahurat and Bang Lamphu districts of Bangkok although they
are congested and used heavily by commuters. Similarly, in Manila, transit
ways were not built near the historic fort area and major changes were
made to building an elevated light rail through the Macarty district to
address environmental and heritage concerns of the citizens and urban
planners.
Corridor One in the
case of Karachi, passes through Karachi’s historic district where most of
its important monuments and recently listed buildings are located. Karachi
has a wealth of beautiful colonial architecture in its historic core. It
is encouraging to note that in one of its alternative proposals for
Corridor One, the City Government is planning to build an underground
through this area. It is also interesting to note that building an
underground is not at all as expensive as we were led to believe earlier.
The Karachi Mass Transit Programme (KMTP) elevated Corridor One that the
Canadian firm was to build in 1998, was costing us US$ 44 million per
kilometre. In Istanbul, the cost of the elevated system has been US$ 26
million per kilometre and in Delhi (where 23 per cent of the system is
underground) the average cost has worked out to US$ 33 million. And what
is more surprising is that in Madrid, a First World country, the
construction cost for an underground system (through tunnelling which is
the most expensive of all alternatives) has worked out to US$ 53 million
per kilometre! As such, six kilometres of underground on M.A. Jinnah Road
is economically quite feasible. Its technical feasibility on the other
hand was never questioned.
Given what has been
discussed above, a rail based mass transit system for Karachi must be
subsidised by the government so as to make its fares comparable with other
modes of public transport. It must also make maximum use of the rail
corridor and provide protection to our cultural heritage along M.A. Jinnah
Road so that it can be subsequently upgraded and restored. And finally,
if we wish to solve our growing traffic problems, then the rail based mass
transit system has to be a part of a larger city traffic and transport
plan of which land-use planning and protection is the most important
element.
(06 October 2003)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Karachi Post-Partition | Karachi Pre-Partition | Land Is An Issue | Housing | Eviction In Karachi | Transport And Traffic Management | Mass Transit System | Infrastructure Solid Waste Management | Population In Karachi | Karachi Development 2000 | The Orangi Pilot Project | Facts & Figures | Current Issue | Other URC In Asia | Contact Persons | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||