SUGGESTING URBAN MASS TRANSIT TECHNOLOGY FOR PAKISTAN A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF RAIL BASED RAPID TRANSIT AND BUS RAPID TRANSIT

SUGGESTING URBAN MASS TRANSIT TECHNOLOGY FOR PAKISTAN A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF RAIL BASED RAPID TRANSIT AND BUS RAPID TRANSIT Intikhab Ahmed QURESHI PhD Candidate Institute of Transportation Engineering Tsinghua University, 100084, Beijing, China Fax: +86-10-6279-5339 E-mail: intikhab_mce@yahoo.com Lu HUAPU Professor Institute of Transportation Engineering Tsinghua University, 100084, Beijing, China Fax: +86-10-6279-5339 E-mail: luhp@mail.tsinghua.edu.cn Abstract: As elsewhere, in Pakistan too, the rapid urbanization, motorization and spatial expansion led to a sharp increase in demand for urban transport facilities and services. Cities in Pakistan are still without mass rapid transit. The existing informal urban public transport system is unable to meet the increasing travel demand. Absence of urban mass rapid transit system has caused acute increase of cars and motorcycles in Pakistan. To meet increasing travel demand and to fight against severe traffic congestion, large cities like Karachi and Lahore have come up with modern rail based rapid transit options in their cities, while other major cities have not yet considered about it. This paper intends to evaluate existing rail based rapid transit projects of Karachi and Lahore with Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) technology to suggest an urban mass rapid transit technology that is financially feasible and affordable for low income developing countries like Pakistan. Keywords: Urbanization, Mass rapid transit, Developing countries. 1. INTRODUCTION Pakistan is a developing country in South Asian region, having a per capita income of US$ 736. In 2005 its estimated population was around 153.45 million. The urban population constitutes about one-third of total population. The structural transformation of economy has stimulated urban growth which is growing at the rate of 2.9 percent annually higher than the total population annual growth rate of 2.1 percent. Table 1 shows the urban population statistics of major cities, whereas figure 1 shows the geographical location of these cities. Pakistan has two large cities having a population of over five million and seven metropolitan cities with a population of over one million. Table 1 Urban Population of Major cities of Pakistan Urban population in (10 000) Cities 1951 1961 1972 1981 1998 2005(estimated) Annual Percentage Growth (1998-2005) Karachi 106.8 191.3 351.5 520.8 926.9 1406 6.46 Lahore 84.9 129.6 217 295 506.3 722.4 5.33 Faisalabad 17.9 42.5 82.3 110.4 197.7 268.7 4.48 Multan 19 35.8 53.9 73.2 118.2 137.5 2.04 Rawalpindi 23.7 34 61.5 79.5 140.6 184.7 3.92 Islamabab 3.6 4.5 7 18.9 106.8 131.2 2.85 Gujaranwala 12.1 19.6 36 60.1 112.5 136.5 2.66 Peshawar 15.2 21.3 27.3 56.6 98.8 117.5 2.36 Hyderabad 24.2 43.5 62.9 75.2 115.1 157.1 4.56 Source: Federal Bureau of Statistics Pakistan, 2001 1931

These cities are growing between 2.04 to 6.46 percent annually. However, the population growth rate in Karachi and Lahore is phenomenal. Figure 1 Geographical location of major cities of Pakistan An increase in urban population leads to a sharp increase in demand for urban transport facilities and services ESCAP (2001). An efficient public transportation system plays an important role in catering to the daily necessities in the lives of the citizens. This includes access to amenities and services that are central to the lives of all individuals, like employment, education, health services and leisure. Lack of affordability and accessibility to adequate transportation system can leave people in social exclusion Kenyon et al. (2002). The mass rapid transit system, with the characteristics of large passenger carrying capacity and little resource consumption per-person has the ability of meeting the intense traffic demand for commuters in peak hours. Moreover, it is one of the most economical and environmentally efficient means of providing transport services. Box 1 defines the different types of mass rapid transit technologies which are capable of providing a transit system with sufficient capacity, comfort and speed. Choosing the optimal mass rapid technologies for the cities is a critical issue. Some of the important aspects in selecting the mass rapid transit system are that the passengers should be able to pay; the system should not operate in deficit, should have financial sustainability and should not require subsidies to operate the system as subsidies are not sustainable in medium and long term. Factors like costs (infrastructure and operation), affordability (passengers ability to pay), development period (planning and implementation time), financing etc must be appreciated while selecting a rapid mass transit technology GTZ (2004). A wrong decision may jeopardize the whole transportation system and financial stability of the city. Therefore, the focus of this paper is to suggest a mass rapid transit technology for Pakistanis cities that is cost effective and balanced without compromising capacity, speed, potential ridership and service quality. The paper is organized as follows. Section two gives an overview of urban transportation situation in Pakistan. 1932

Section three discusses the evolution of rapid mass transit system in Pakistan. Section four evaluates the modern rail based projects of Karachi and Lahore, section 5 suggests the mass rapid technology for Pakistan followed by the conclusion. Box 1 Typologies of Mass Rapid Transit Monorail: It is a modern means of elevated rail transit. However its use as urban transport is rare. Maglev trains: Maglev means magnetic levitation. This type of transit is also a form of elevated rail transit. In this system wheels are replaced by magnetic fields. Maglev vehicles are capable of much higher speeds and acceleration. Light Rail Transit: Light rail transit can best be envisioned as trains of one to three articulated rail vehicles powered by electricity from overhead trolley wires at surface level. However when operates grade-separated infrastructure it blurs with the boundaries of metro. Heavy Rail: This is an urban passenger transportation service that operates on fully grade-separated right of ways i.e. underground or elevated structures. This transit system is a form of metro. Commuter Rail: This is also a form of heavy rail. It is a passenger train transit service that operates on the same right of ways used by intercity railway. It carries passengers from corridors of heavy concentrations of suburban and urban locations therefore also known as suburban rail. Bus Rapid Transit: This is a bus based transit system that operates on segregated right of ways to provide a higher quality of service with attributes similar to modern rail based transit system. 2. OVERVIEW OF URBAN TRANSPORT IN PAKISTAN The importance of public transit is of great significance in socio economic development of a nation. In Pakistan the public transport is a chronic problem and still without mass rapid transit except Karachi. Mainly the public transport in cities is road based and operated by private sector. The low capacity mini-buses and vans are operated by informal sector whereas some good quality bus service is being provided by franchise companies in different cities. The government s failure to provide efficient public transport have resulted in decline of provision of public transport and in some cases operations have to be ceased altogether e.g. Karachi Transportation Corporation jointly operated by Federal and Sind Provincial Government and Punjab Road Transportation Corporation owned by Punjab Provincial Government had to shut down in 1996 and 1998 (Sohail, 2000; Haider and Badami, 2004) respectively due to heavy losses as well as decline in service and vehicle fleet. Moreover, the private transport operators also failed to meet the increasing travel demand and commuter s requirement of convenience, safety and comfort. The failure of timely provision of mass transit system and better mobility opportunities in cities have stimulated the acute increase in ownership and use of private cars and motor cycles. Figure 2 shows that in 2004 the share of cars and motorcycles in registered passenger vehicles fleet was 31 percent and 60 percent respectively. Such trend of motorization particularly, increasingly use of personal vehicles is not sustainable as they are associated with transport related externalities like traffic 1933

congestion, air and noise pollution, depletion of non-renewable resources, traffic accidents as well as social inequity. In order to make a mode shift from cars and motorcycles, there is a need to provide a transit service that is affordable, accessible and some what compatible to personal vehicles in comfort, convenience and speed. 2% 3% 31% 60% 4% Cars Buses/Minibuses Motorcycles Taxis Auto rickshaws Figure 2 Share of registered passenger vehicles in Pakistan - 2004 3. EVOLUTION OF URBAN MASS TRANSIT SYSTEM IN PAKISTAN International practices and standard requires that cities having a population over one million should start planning for mass transit system. In contrast to that only Karachi and Lahore, the two large cities of Pakistan are in the process of providing a rail based rapid transit system while the other major cities mentioned in table 1 have not given the due attention to their urban transport system and still have no planning for mass transit option. However in coming years the mass transit system will be a compelling necessity in these cities and there is an urgent need for perspective planning and to institutionalize the transport planning process in these cities. This section will discuss the existing transportation situation and development process of rail based mass rapid transit system in Karachi and Lahore. 3.1 Karachi Karachi is the biggest city of Pakistan and presently having a population of over 15 million. Better job opportunities being the industrial, commercial and economic hub has stimulated the rapid population growth in the city which is growing with phenomenal pace of over 6 percent annually. This phenomenal increase due to urban migration from different parts of the country put a tremendous pressure on the public transport. Karachi had a very efficient public transport system in the form of state-owned tram service, adequate large capacity buses operated by Karachi Transport Corporation (KTC) and urban-suburban railway service through Karachi Circular Railway (KCR). Instead of upgrading and maintaining these infrastructures, all of them had been shut down one after the other due to various reasons and resulted in the present chaotic traffic condition. The existing public transport system in Karachi is dominated by informal private sector that own and operate low capacity (27/32 passenger carrying capacity) minibuses/coaches to meet the demand but fail to do so. Realizing this situation the local government in year 2004 started an Urban Transportation Bus Schemes by providing large capacity environmentally friendly CNG buses. However, the number of buses planned could not be provided in time and left the city with traffic chaos. 1934

What is required is badly needed mass rapid transit system to accommodate the travel demand. The much needed mass transit system which was first envisaged back in 1952 in view of the projected growth of the city could not be provided till to-date. Though since 1952 number of proposals was made for mass transit in the city but its urgent need and significance was first realized in 1987 through Karachi Mass Transit Study (KMTS). The study figured out that: Acute increase in the ownership and use of cars and motorcycles causing severe road congestion, environmental pollution and increasing number of accidents. Rapid declining in public transport share due to nightmarish traveling in the conventional buses and minibuses due to overcrowded ness, low standard service and abusive behavior of driver and conductor. Karachi Circular Railway (KCR) has failed to play its major role because of negligence and bad management. To meet the travel demand and to improve the public transport in the city, Karachi Mass Transit Authority (KMTA) has come up with the plan of developing 87 kilometers of network through 6 corridors of elevated transit ways in the heavily demanded corridors. Figure 2 shows the alignment and length of each corridor. Corridor 1 has been identified as most severe and would further be crowded in the near future. Moreover, Corridor 1 is the only corridor for which expression of interest has been invited by the government (Box 2). Though number of times contractual agreements have been signed with different companies but due to various reasons the project is yet not finalized for construction. CORRIDOR I (15.2 km) CORRIDOR II (12.0 km) CORRIDOR III (15.4 km) CORRIDOR IV (20.4 km) CORRIDOR V (14.5 km) CORRIDOR VI (09.5 km) Figure 2 Priority corridors of Karachi s rail based rapid transit 1935

Box 2 Project Name: Project Length: Karachi Light Rail Transit Project Priority 1 Corridor (Tower to Sohrab Goth) 15.2 Kilometers Project Cost: Rupees. 35,160 Million (US$ Million 595) Financing: Execution: Duration: Travel Demand: Forecast Through Foreign Investment Transport and Communication Department, City District Government, Karachi Four Years 32,000 Passengers/hour/direction Source: http://www.karachicity.gov.pk/eip-mass-klr.asp Corridor 1 has also come under great criticism by non government organizations (NGOs) and citizens, the major observations are (http://www.urckarachi.org/mass.htm) Revitalization of the existing KCR and main line branch corridors are capable of meeting and covering the travel demand in much larger area, with much lesser cost than corridor 1. 15.2 kilometers of Corridor 1 will be of no use as the remaining five corridors may take more than a decade to complete. Since it will be built by private consortium on BOT basis the affordability of the fare is difficult for greater segment of the population even the system is subsidized by the government. Heritage issue, as the alignment of elevated Corridor 1 is passing through the most historical part of the city which consists most of historic civic buildings and architecture. The obstructions of these buildings are certain which are protected under Karachi Heritage Foundation. 3.2 Lahore Lahore is the second largest city of Pakistan and presently having a population of over 7 million. Better social facilities and expansion in the trade and construction sector created opportunities for the employability of rural migrants that stimulated the rapid population growth in the city which is growing with phenomenal pace of over 5 percent annually. Population growth is the driving force for the increasing demand of urban public transport. The urban public transport system in the city could not be well developed and still under maintained. Like Karachi, the existing public transport is being dominated by informal private operators who provide low capacity 16-seater wagons service. However, some domestic and foreign franchise operators are providing some quality bus service in the city. 1936

The successful operation of franchise operators indicate passengers willingness to pay for better service. Though the franchise operators are providing better service but there speedy flow is restricted due to severe congestion, mixed slow mode of transport, encroachments and parking of vehicles on both sides of roads. This has affected the frequency and reliability of service. The wastage of time in traffic jams, non-flexibility of public transport due to fixed route structures and the rising incomes have stimulated the growth of private cars and motorcycles in the city. Out of 1.4 million of total vehicles, the share of cars and motorcycles is 46 percent and 44 percent respectively. This trend of private motorized mode of ownership and use besides severe congestion has also caused degradation of quality of life and poor environment. To fight against severe congestion and to meet the increasing travel demand the city is in the process of developing rail based mass transit system. The rail based mass rapid transit system was first conceived back in 1990. JICA a Japanese organization has prepared a feasibility report in 1991 for LRT. The same report was reviewed and updated as a part of World Bank funded Lahore Traffic and Transport Studies in 1993. Since then number of attempts have been made to implement the project but in vain. Now the city under Lahore Rapid Mass Transit System (LRMTS) project is planning to connect all its urban and suburban area through an 82 kilometers phased 4-line network. However, until now the feasibility of only one line i.e. Green Line has been completed and recommended for immediate implementation. Figure 3 shows the alignment of 27 kilometers long Green Line that will be operated on the grade separated partially elevated and underground tracks with the estimated cost of about US$ 2 billion. The project is likely to commence in 2007 and estimated to be completed in 2011. The passenger demand is expected to be 210,000 to 220,000 passengers per day in the opening year with ultimate forecasted demand of 30,000 pphpd till 2021 (http://203.215.180.58/portal/docimages/11422lrmts_phase1.pdf). Figure 3 Alignment of Lahore s Green Line rail based mass rapid transit 4. EVALUATING MASS RAPID TRANSIT OPTIONS Urban Mass rapid transit is a public transit system that is capable of carrying large number of passengers thus making them more efficient in terms of cost and environment than private 1937

motorized modes of transportation. Though there are several types of mass rapid transit system, however, it can be seen in table 2 that all are quite similar in some of their attributes. Table 2 Similar characteristics of different mass rapid transit technologies Characteristics BRT LRT Metro (elevated/underground) Greater capacity Yes Yes Yes Exclusive right of ways Yes Yes Yes At level boarding and alighting with multiple doors Yes Yes Yes Free transfer between lines Yes Yes Yes Smart ticketing and pre-boarding fare collection Yes Yes Yes User information system Yes Yes Yes Market (image) Yes Yes Yes Environmental friendly Yes Yes Yes This section intends to evaluate Karachi and Lahore rail based mass rapid transit projects by comparing with BRT on the basis of major factors affecting the choice of urban mass rapid transit system e.g. cost (infrastructure and operation), affordability, financing, development period and fuel technology. In the light of these factors paper will discuss, Karachi s Corridor 1 and Lahore s Green line project only as the information about other corridors and lines for Karachi and Lahore are not available. Table 3 shows the type of technology, length of the line, financing approach, total estimated cost, cost/km and likely implementation time of these projects. Table 3 Details of rail based mass rapid transit projects Cities Technology type Financing Length of line (Km) Project cost (US$ Cost/Km (US$ Million) Construction Period (Years) Million ) Karachi LRT (elevated) BOT 15.2 595 39 4 (Corridor 1) Lahore (Green Line) Metro (elevated/underground) BOT 27 2000 74 3 4.1 Costs (Infrastructure & Operation) Cost is the big factor in choosing the mass rapid transit system especially for developing cities. Based on the international experience of different cities table 4 gives the range of infrastructure cost per kilometer of different mass rapid transit system. Table 4 Infrastructure cost of different mass rapid transit technologies Type of Technology Range* Infrastructure cost per kilometer (US$ Million/km) Bus Rapid Transit 0.5-15 Light Rail Transit (At grade) 13-40 Metro (elevated) 30-100 Metro (under ground) 45-320 Source (GTZ, 2004). *Range depends on the quality of stations, exclusive ROW etc sought within system 1938

Even taking the maximum range of cost per kilometer, BRT is 2.6 times and almost 5 times more economical than LRT and Metro projects planned for Karachi and Lahore respectively. BRT with the maximum range of cost per kilometer can cover almost 50 percent of total 87 kilometers network of Karachi s corridors. Whereas Lahore s 27 kilometers Green Line with BRT system requires only one-fifth of the project cost. As mentioned above that rail based mass rapid transit system was envisaged back in 1952 and 1990 for Karachi and Lahore respectively but due to high capital cost, these projects could not be implemented till to-date. By providing few kilometers in one odd corridor/line will only contribute to that particular corridor/line and not effective on city wide basis, rather it will put more pressure on that particular corridor/line. Lack of network will reduce the usefulness of the system and in view of the present experience; it is visualized that the completion of network in both cities will likely to take more than 10 years. Besides the infrastructure cost, operation cost is also an important factor. Except few exceptions most of the rail based mass rapid transit technologies require ongoing operating subsidies. These subsidies are not sustainable in medium and long term and can harm the financial sustainability of low income developing cities like Karachi and Lahore. In contrast BRT system is self sufficient and usually does not require any subsidies for operation. Porto Alegre, Brazil has both the modern rail based as well as the BRT system and operating with similar terms and conditions. The rail based operation is being heavily subsidized with 69 percent operating subsidy for each passenger trip, whereas the BRT needs no subsidy rather operating in profit, GTZ (2004). 4.2 Affordability Affordability is the ability to bear the travel expenses on making necessary journeys to jobs, school and social services etc without compromising on other essential activities Carruthers et al. (2005). Table 5 shows a higher fare of rail based technologies than BRT in different cities. Table 5 Fare structure of different rapid transit in different cities Cities Type of technology Single trip fare (US$) Beijing Metro 0.38 Bangkok Sky train 0.27-1.092 (depending on distance) Kuala Lumpur LRT 0.20 0.71 (depending on distance) Taipei Metro 0.614 1.99 ( depending on distance) Seoul Metro 0.963 Beijing BRT 0.25 Quito BRT 0.25 Mexico BRT 0.35 Based on household survey of Pakistan carried out in 2001, the affordability of rail based rapid transit for five quintiles have been calculated. The calculation assumed that each household has two earning members and each member carried out 60 one way trips (40 one way work related trips and 20 one way other trips). The average fare is assumed on the basis of per trip cost quoted (US$ 0.2-0.32) around year 2000 for Karachi s Corridor 1. Table 6 shows that travel expenditures with assumed fare could consume from 37 percent to 24 percent of the first four quintiles respectively and 26 percent at an average. Moreover, this transportation expenditure is only incurred by earning members and not on any other members of the household. According to Gwilliam (2001) the transport related expenses of a household is between 8-16 percent. Travel expenditures over 15 percent on making necessary 1939

journeys by a household are not considered equitable and sustainable, Armstrong et al. (1987). Quintiles Table 6 Affordability of rail based transit in Pakistan Assumed average Amount required to one way fare on spent on rail based rail based MRT MRT on 120 (US$) trips/hhld (US$) (b) (c)= (b)*120 Monthly income of an urban household in Year 2001* (US$) (a) % share of income spend on rail transit (d)=(c)/(a)*100 1 st 84 0.26 36 37.14 2 nd 106 0.26 36 29.43 3 rd 119 0.26 36 26.22 4 th 131 0.26 36 23.81 5 th 239 0.26 36 13.05 * Pakistan statistical year book, 2004 4.3 Financing Rail based mass rapid transit system being capital intensive are usually financed through foreign investment in developing cities. Karachi and Lahore too have planned to develop their mass rapid transit system on Built Operate Transfer (BOT) basis. Experience has shown, that such projects being developed by private consortium on BOT basis usually increase the cost to a significant level and, thereby, make it difficult to afford. It was estimated that revitalization of Karachi Circular Railway through Pakistan Railways required an investment of US$ billion 0.092 and would offer a very reasonable and affordable fare of US$ 0.1-0.13 per trip. In contrast if the same project would be constructed on (BOT) basis than the cost of one trip would be US$ 0.27-0.33, Aprodicio (2004) which is beyond the affordability for major segment of population (table 5). Moreover, in BOT approach, though no liability lies with government but financer needs some guarantees from government like development of areas along the corridors, subsidies/loans for operation and ridership guarantee etc Sugawara (1995). Assurance and provision of these guarantees are questionable. First, ridership guarantee is difficult due to affordability problem and lack of networking (as the other corridors and lines may take over a decade time). Second, provision of subsidies is also very difficult as government could not support the operation of state own Punjab Transport Corporation, Karachi Transport Corporation and Karachi Circular Railway. Third, the development along the corridors/lines is also difficult as urban expansion had occurred with no planning and reached to its capacity with no further place for expansion because of physical constraints. These may be one of the reasons that the projects are not yet moved beyond planning and signing of MoU stage in both cities and the agreement could not be reached for financing. In contrast, BRT either can be funded by the government or financed through local public-private partnership due to its cost-effectiveness of capital cost as well as operation cost. 4.4 Development period (Planning and Implementation) The rail based mass rapid transit projects are time intensive and usually take a period of 3-5 years each for planning and construction. In Pakistan, the political period for a government is five years. Unfortunately, since independence, none of the government had completed its five years tenure. The frequent toppling over of governments and every new political change had witnessed the birth of new set of policies, often substantially different from the earlier ones. This is one of the reasons that mass rapid transit envisaged much earlier for Karachi could not be provided till to-date. In contrast BRT is less time intensive and generally requires a period of 1-2 years each for planning and construction. Bogotá, Colombia took only three years 1940

(including planning and construction) to complete its 40 kilometers TransMilenio project GTZ (2004). 4.5 Fuel Technology Fuel technology is an important factor to be considered while selecting a mass rapid transit system as it affects the operation and maintenance costs of the technology used. Moreover, it is also important to ascertain that is the city capable of providing the required energy? The rail based rapid transit system of Karachi and Lahore will be electric driven. No doubt that electric operated transit system is one of the best because of zero emissions and more life of vehicles, almost twice the life as compared to clean diesel and Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) operated vehicles. However, for Karachi the provision of uninterrupted electric supply is questionable. The city which used to be called the city of lights has turned into city of power supply haunt as the consumption is more than the power generating capacity. To meet the short fall the Karachiites had to bear severe load shedding in year 2006. Pakistan is quite self sufficient in CNG fuel which is also an environmentally friendly fuel. Pakistan is among the few countries topping the CNG use and also promotes its use by giving lots of incentives. Thus, Pakistan can well support the operation of CNG operated BRT buses. 5. SUGGESTING MASS RAPID TRANSIT SYSTEM FOR PAKISTAN There is no transit system that is better than the other in all aspects. However, while making an appropriate choice of mass rapid transit system for the cities the local government must take into consideration that is the city financially capable to support the operation and expansion of that transit system? Can majority of the population afford the fare of that transit system? What impacts that project will cause on the city? Is the city capable of providing required fuel energy to operate that transit system? Based on the evaluation and comparison of planned rail based mass transit system with BRT this study suggests BRT technology for low income developing cities of Pakistan and supports with following major reasons. Figure 4 Comparison of capacity and speed vs infrastructure cost Figure 4 shows that BRT technology is compatible to modern rail based rapid transit technologies in capacity and speed at a fraction of infrastructure cost 1941

and without compromising on service quality and other features of rail based technologies shown in table 2. BRT, being cost effective would not require subsidies in construction and operation of the technology. Though BRT operating speed is lower than metro but this deficiency is offset, through BRT at grade stations which besides offering better integration with feeder service also reduce the walking time to access these stations thus reduces the door-to-door travel time as compared to modern rail based transit system. No doubt that metro is best technology for high flow corridors. The ultimate demand forecast of Lahore and Karachi is 30,000 and 32,000 pphpd respectively. Figure 4 shows a greater range of capacity option for BRT (10,000 40,000 pphpd). Passenger flow of 20,000 to 40,000 per hour per direction can be achieved by BRT through appropriate infrastructure design and operational characteristics. This greater range is also well suited to small, medium and large cities of Pakistan that can easily grow and change as city grows. BRT due to relatively better affordability than LRT/metro will attract more passengers and will likely to reverse declining trend of conventional public transport and increasing trend of private cars and motorcycles. In view of the needed urgency of mass rapid transit technologies especially in medium and large cities of Pakistan. BRT technology can immediately be implemented by giving preferential treatment to buses by providing dedicated bus lanes on existing lanes and priority at intersection while developing and upgrading the other components of mass rapid technologies simultaneously (table 2). At grade operation of BRT system relatively saves hassle of shifting services and residents. The elevated and underground structures besides time intensive for planning and construction may also take much time for relocating services and resettling of residents. 6. CONCLUSION In the conventional transport planning, rail based transit used to be preferred wherever it was financially viable to do so and BRT used to be discarded by considering it a low capacity technology. No doubt that metro offers higher capacity but now BRT with high capacity articulated and bi-articulated buses coupled with appropriate infrastructure design and operational characteristics has the ability to compete rail based technologies in capacity and other characteristics at a fraction of cost. The construction and operation of rail based technologies in developing cities like Karachi and Lahore are very costly, moreover it is also faired that expansion of network with rail based technology may not keep pace with the growing city due to obvious high capital and operation cost. Now BRT compatible to rail based technology has the ability to serve the cities equally well and that is why so many cities 1942

in China and India and other Asian countries are planning to have BRT technology in their cities. The realization of BRT technology due to its cost effectiveness, affordability, and lesser development time with better image of buses will make a strong contribution in the development of urban public transport in Pakistani cities. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This research is funded by Higher Education Commission (HEC), Pakistan and National University of Science and Technology (NUST), Pakistan. The authors would like to thank the HEC and NUST for provision of funds. REFERENCES Aprodicio, A. L. (2004) Who are the Poor and How Are They Being Served in Asian Cities? Paper presented at the Forum on Urban Infrastructure and Public Service Delivery for the Urban Poor, Regional Focus: Asia, sponsored by the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and the National Institute of Urban Affairs, India Habitat Centre, New Delhi. Armstrong, W. A., and Thiriez, S. (1987) Bus services: reducing costs, raising standards. Washington, DC, The World Bank. Carruthers, R., Dick, M. and Saurkar, A. (2005) Affordability of public transport in developing countries. World Bank Transport Paper 3. Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (2001) Review of development in transport and communication in the ESCAP Region 1996-2001. New York: United Nations. GTZ. (2004) Sustainable Transport: A Planning guide for Bus Rapid Transit. Gwilliam, K. M. (2001) Cities on the Move: A World Bank Urban Transport Strategy Review. Washington, DC.. Haider, M., and Badami, M. (2004) Public transit for the urban poor of Pakistan: Balancing efficiency and equity. Paper presented at the Forum on Urban Infrastructure and Public Service Delivery for the Urban Poor, Regional Focus: Asia,. Kenyon, S., Lyons, G. and Rafferty, J. (2002) Transport and Social Exclusion: Investigating the possibility of promoting inclusion through virtual mobility. Journal of Transportation Geography 10, 207-219. Sohail, M. (2000) Urban Public Transport and Sustainable Livelihoods for the poor, A Case Study, Karachi, Pakistan. WEDC, Loughborough University, UK. Sugawara, M. (1995) Urban Transportation in Asian Countries. Japan Railway and Transport Review. Web Reference City District Government Karachi http://www.karachicity.gov.pk/eip-mass-klr.asp Urban Resource Centre (http://www.urckarachi.org/mass.htm) Lahore Green Line feasibility (http://203.215.180.58/portal/docimages/11422lrmts_phase1.pdf). 1943