Public Transport Options for Small and Medium Cities Alternative solutions to metro Key learnings from AFD s experiences in India and other countries Arnaud Dauphin, Lead transport Specialist Urban Mobility India, Nagpur 2 November 2018 #MondeEnCommun AGENCE FRANÇAISE DE DÉVELOPPEMENT
01. AFD AT A GLANCE AND IN INDIA 108 countries 86 agencies 6% 4% 26% 55% 76 years (1941) 9% Urban Transport Green Energy Biodiversity Smart Cities Water & Sanitation 02.11.18 Urban Mobility India 2018 2
01. CONTENT What solutions for small & medium size cities? The Chandigarh project The Puducherry case LRT, Tram, BRT or BHLS, the AFD experience Working together? 3
What solutions for small and medium size cities? 02. Indian cities between 1 lakh and 15 lakh (100 000 and 1,5 million) inhabitants PPHPD 2,000 and 10,000 BRT 4
03. THE CHANDIGARH PROJECT CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVES 1,4 million (14 lakh) inhabitants (metropolitan area) Heritage preservation and cultural issues 2009 CMP ambitions : o 60 to 70% public transport modal share (20% in 2009) o 90% population coverage by PT o An efficient people friendly transport system minimizing travel time o More safety and comfort o Satellite towns to control population in Chandigarh city 2010: planned Metro but too costly and over dimensioned on denser corridor 2017: Feasibility study to identify appropriate alternative mobility solutions and main mobility corridors 5
03. THE CHANDIGARH PROJECT 3 MAIN CORRIDORS OF TRANSPORT (based on the demand projections with traffic model) AFD financing SAI-SYSTRA engineering 12 month assignment Ongoing study 6
03. THE CHANDIGARH PROJECT A NEED FOR A SEGREGATED SOLUTION Segregated RoW for higher commercial speeds and reliability (20-40km/h depending on ROW fully or partially segregated) High frequency (up to 3 headway) High capacity (from 2,000 to 10,000 pax per hour per direction) Equipment at station (ticket vending machines, real-time info) Priority at intersections Higher comfort for passengers Real-time position of the vehicle Road-level access 7
03. THE CHANDIGARH PROJECT A COMBINATION OF 3 TECHNICAL SOLUTIONS PROPOSED Scenario 1 : BRT only Scenario 2 : LRT on viaduct on corridor 1 + at grade tram on corridor 2, & 3 Scenario 3 : Tram only 8
03. THE CHANDIGARH PROJECT A COMBINATION OF 3 TECHNICAL SOLUTIONS PROPOSED BRT Strengths I Weakness Cost Flexibility Implementation Proven technology Limited constraints High competition Less iconic and disruptive High OPEX/pax Road Investment and Platform cost Noise Shorter life cycle Air pollution Urban frontier TRAM Capacity Urban integration Low noise levels Manufacturer s interoperability LRT City beautification Clean Heritage preservation High quality public space CAPEX Less operating flexibility Fixed routes Important construction works Capacity ++ Iconic and modern solution No interference with road traffic Fully segregated Clean Low noise levels CAPEX ++ Limited operating flexibility Less competition Important construction works Long construction time 9
03. THE CHANDIGARH PROJECT A LONG TERM CHOICE WITH 3 KEY COSTS TO KEEP IN MIND TO FIND THE BEST OPTION 10
04. THE PUDUCHERRY CASE CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVES 9.5 lakhs (950 000) inhabitants (Metropolitan area with 3 lakhs (300 000 for Puducherry city) Old heritage and port issues 2015 CMP ambitions : o Increasing mobility and accessibility o Improving environment quality of city o Improving road safety o Developing cost effective transport system o Social inclusion 2018: AFD technical assistance to prepare a sustainable urban transport master plan with a proposes 1 st phase for implementation 11
04. THE PUDUCHERRY CASE A HAND SHAPED MOBILITY STRUCTURE WITH 5 MAIN CORRIDORS OF TRANSPORT Mobility patterns at long term with multicity organisation 12
04. THE PUDUCHERRY CASE A comprehensive multimodal plan combining different systems Suburban trains (DEMU) Tram-Train BRT Bus route strengthening Multimodal hubs IPT structuring 13
04. THE PUDUCHERRY CASE TRAM-TRAIN SOLUTIONS A Tram-train line to: strengthen the link between Puducherry and other main satellite cities making use of existing under-utilized rail links 14
04. THE PUDUCHERRY CASE A TRANSPORT SOLUTION FOR THE NORTHERN CORRIDOR 15
04. THE PUDUCHERRY CASE INTEGRATING INFORMAL PUBLIC TRANSPORT AS A MAJOR PUBLIC TRANSPORT SOLUTION Specific priorities for IPT to: Structure and club operators Modernize and improve fleet Strengthen with digital app 16
05. LRT, TRAM, BRT OR BHLS, THE AFD EXPERIENCE IN MI-SIZE CITIES A WORLDWIDE EXPERIENCE OF INTERMEDIATE TRANSPORT SOLUTIONS Istanbul LRT and Izmir tram Turkey Rabat & Casablanca Tram Morocco Tunis and Sfax LRT Tunisia Medellin tram Colombia Alexandria LRT Egypt Curitiba BRT - Brazil Nouméa BHLS New Caledonia Dakar BRT Senegal Cayenne BHLS - France 17
06. WORKING TOGETHER IN INDIA AFD S TOOLBOX TO SUPPORT CLEAN AND SUSTAINABLE URBAN MOBILITY MYC (MobiliseYourCity), fund for planning and benchmarking (SUMP, CMP, technical workshop, peer to peer, etc.) AFD trust funds for technical studies (Feasibility studies, technical assistance, etc.) AFD funding to finance projects (Loans to states and local governments) Untied financing and all modes eligible for financing (IPT, BRT, Tram, BHLS, Tram-Train, Metro, train, cable, etc.) Catalyzing green funds and other clean financing (FFEM, GEF, EU, etc.) 18
06. NOW, LET S IDENTIFY THE MOST APPROPRIATE SYSTEM AND IMPLEMENT YOUR PROJECT! 11.08.17 Workshop on Light Rail Transit Systems 19
CONTACT: AGENCE FRANÇAISE DE DÉVELOPPEMENT - FRENCH DEVELOPMENT AGENCY 19A RajdootMarg, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi 110021, INDIA + 91(0)11 42 79 37 87 #WorldInCommon www.afd.fr #MondeEnCommun AGENCE FRANÇAISE DE DÉVELOPPEMENT