With the available mass transit options in India, Metros are given preference over surface systems. It is believed that the surface systems, such as rad based bus systems, can not have as much capacity as the metros. Adding to that, metros are highly comfortable, have more incredible speed and efficiency than buses. On the other hand, Metro rail systems are capital intensive; they depend upon the government’s financial support, foreign loans, taxes and other subsidies. Therefore, although the metro rail systems serve only a tiny portion of total trip share in the cities of our country, it is promoted on a large scale.
So, on what basis does the metro gets promoted? They claim that metros reduce congestion due to the shift of traffic from road-based systems to metro systems. This shift can also lead to a decrease in air pollution and also fewer accidents.
Now, if we look at some evidence, these claims might take a turn. Today, the demand for motorized vehicles is vast, because of which road spaces get filled up quickly. Even metro rail systems can’t reduce the congestion created or even affect air pollution. The population is increasing. Investment in metro rails in Indian cities is enormous. However, the question is whether metros can cater to the problems of urban mobility in India.
The estimate of ridership for metros is very crucial. It can be exaggerated at times, such as for Phase I of metro corridors in Delhi; the data was exaggerated by 400%. Also, metros in India are primarily stand-alone projects; they haven’t been integrated with other essential feeder systems. Thus, the beneficiaries of the metro rail are significantly less, according to the non-users.
Metros that will never carry most trips in a city will be implemented more, as the government is keen to do so. However, with that being said, no commitment to improve bus systems or improve pedestrian footpaths, or even infrastructure for cyclists have been there.
Compared to road-based systems, metro systems consume a lot of space. The magnitude of energy required for the construction is also enormous. These reasons show that metro rail systems can affect the urban population. The emissions and energy consumption are higher than CNG led bus systems. It leads to fatalities during construction, displacement of low-income households, to name a few.
To improve the coverage of metro systems, there should be a safer infrastructure for the non-motorized modes. We should also remember that metro ridership has minimal effect on bus ridership. However, to access the metros, many people have to move around the station area. So that area should be designed or redesigned well, for the safe dispersal of the commuters.
Metro will serve only a tiny portion of the total trip share. Even implementing public-private partnerships has not been very successful. The tax benefits that Metro gains are not even used for the betterment of other public systems.
So, we can conclude that the present planning pattern of investing in the metro rail systems has not benefited any public transportation systems in the cities of India.
0 Comments